Our Announcements

Not Found

Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.

Posts Tagged CPEC

Sabotaging the Gwadar and CPEC Project by Nasurullah Brohi

 

The external infiltration has always been a major reason for the instability in Pakistan and despite huge diplomatic efforts and raising voices at various international forums; the issue has never been resolved. Particularly, right from the proclamation of the China’s investment plans for the development of Gawadar port and CPEC projects with an announcement of $46 billion development projects for Pakistan, the regional rogue powers never sat with ease. Since, with its immense trade potential, the Gwadar Port provides the shortest trade route and serves as a corridor between the Persian Gulf and Western China.

Notably, China provides over 80 percent of the $248 million for the development of the Gwadar Port. The decision to invest on Gwadar Port, allows the regional states and the trade partners to benefit through a short, safe and convenient trade route that effectively passes through the South China Sea, Pacific Rim, Malacca Strait and Sri Lanka and effectively connects the entire region with the European markets.

Pakistan has always shown serious concerns over the Indian efforts to sabotage the China-Pakistan-Economic-Corridor (CPC) by possible terror attacks aimed at making the CPEC a failure. The issue of sabotaging the projects through the clandestine nexuses against the Pakistan as revealed after the recent apprehension of Indian spy Kulbhushan Yadav with a series of his confessions about the tasks and operations yet were in the pipeline to carry out in Pakistan.

Such motives do not seem merely confined with the objectives to put a single target in chaos but in fact, reflect the eager pursuits of creating muddle the situations that ultimately delay the completion of the development projects particularly those underway with the friendly states and predominantly that aim at boosting Pakistani economy.

At the diplomatic fronts, ambitious efforts also try to isolate Pakistan by creating a typical sense of bitterness amidst the relations of Pakistan with its friendly states like China but fortunately, the time-tested friendship

a typical sense of bitterness amidst the relations of Pakistan with its friendly states like China but fortunately, the time-tested friendship between the two countries, and the wisdom of their leaderships never let such immoral tactics to become successful. Many analysts believe, since, India considers China as a regional competitor, therefore; it frequently tries overcoming the China rise that greatly diminishes the chances of Indian ambitions of becoming a regional and later on a global power.

With over 46 billion dollars investment, the project would greatly increase the political and economic influence of China in the region, therefore; the Indian side always attempted through the despicable means to creating law and order situation in the region. Such tactics often used as a tool to compel the Chinese to vacate the Gawadar port and eventually lose interest in the completion of the CPEC and Gwadar projects. Though India poured an initial investment of $150 million for the development of Iranian Port of Chah Bahar but such strives could not undermine the significance of the Gwadar Port.

Comparatively, the Gwadar port enables the regional countries to carry out the trade activities much easier access than Chah Bahar. In addition, the Port also provides landlocked Afghanistan and the Central Asian states with much cheaper opportunity than the Chah Bahar. The Gwadar Port also reduces the trade distances of regional partners from 10,000 km to 2,500 km. moreover; the regional trade partners will effectively save the cost and time as well.

However, the firmness Chinese and Pakistani government is always obvious for making the long cherished dream a resounding success. For the reasons of security and the timely completion of the CPEC project additionally with the successful functioning of the Gwadar Free Trade Zone, Pakistan has allocated a special security division of over 8, 000 military personnel. In addition, an estimated number of 90,000 security personnel comprising the paramilitary and other security services of Pakistan also vigilantly monitor and ready to curb all the Indian secret activities for sabotaging the Chinese investment plans in Pakistan.

Reference

, , ,

No Comments

Pak-India Water Dispute Accelerates By Sajjad Shaukat

Pak-India Water Dispute Accelerates

Sajjad Shaukat

 

Pakistan is a grave victim of water scarcity, because of being on lower riparian in relation to the rivers emanating from the Indian-Held Kashmir (IHK). India has never missed an opportunity to harm Pakistan since its inception; it is creating deliberate water shortages for Pakistan with the aim to impair Pakistan agriculturally. Historically, India has been trying to establish her hegemony in the region by controlling water sources and damaging agricultural economies of her neighbouring states. India has water disputes with Pakistan, Nepal and Bangladesh. Indian extremist Prime Minister Narendra Modi who has given the concerned departments to continue construction of dams has ordered diverting water of Chenab River to Beas, which is a serious violation of the Indus Water Treaty of 1960. Therefore Pak-India water dispute has accelerated.

 

 

 

 

 

In this regard, an article By: Zofeen T. Ebrahim, Joydeep Gupta (Co-Authors) under the caption, “India resists World Bank move to resolve Indus Water Treaty dispute”, published in The Third Pole and reproduced-updated by a Pakistan’s renowned daily on January 6, 2017 is notable.

 

Zofeen T. Ebrahim and Joydeep Gupta wrote, “India has asked the World Bank not to rush in to resolve a dispute with Pakistan over the Kishanganga and Ratle hydropower projects. Indian officials told a World Bank representative in New Delhi on January 5 that any differences over the projects can be resolved bilaterally or through a neutral expert. Pakistan has objected to the projects–being built by India in Jammu and Kashmir–on the grounds that they violate the 1960 Indus Waters Treaty (IWT) between the two countries. After India rejected the charge, Pakistan has gone to the World Bank–the designated IWT mediator.”

 

 

1 The Indus Waters Treaty was signed on September 19, 1960 by the then Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Pakistan’s President Ayub Khan.

 

They indicated, “Islamabad has also asked the United States (US) government to intervene, and has added the component of water security to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) agreement. Of the rivers in the Indus basin, the Indus and the Sutlej start in China and flow through India before reaching Pakistan. The other four rivers–Jhelum, Chenab, Ravi and Beas – start in India and flow to Pakistan”.

 

The writers pointed out, “The Kishanganga project is on a tributary of the Jhelum, while the Ratle project is on the Chenab. The State Department in Washington has already said it wants India and Pakistan to resolve all outstanding issues bilaterally, a route favoured by India.”

 

Zofeen T. Ebrahim and Joydeep Gupta elaborated, “As the dispute flared up, the World Bank had recently suspended all proceedings–the setting up of a court of arbitration or the appointment of a neutral expert. On January 5, World Bank representative Ian H Solomon met officials of India’s External Affairs and Water Resources ministries in New Delhi in an effort to break the deadlock.The Indian delegation, led by Gopal Baglay, Joint secretary in the Ministry of External Affairs, made a detailed a presentation on the two projects to support their argument that neither project violated the IWT. After the meeting, a government official told journalists that the Indian side had described the objections raised by Pakistan as “technical”, and therefore they would be best resolved by a neutral expert.”

 

They wrote, “Pakistan has dismissed this suggestion earlier, and is seeking a full court of arbitration. The World Bank had agreed to a court of arbitration and then to the appointment of a neutral expert, leading to objections by both countries. That was when both processes were suspended. Explore: World Bank pauses dam arbitration to ‘protect Indus Waters Treaty.’ At the January 5 meeting, Solomon did not raise any question on the designs of the two projects, according to the Press Trust of India news agency. Instead, he explored ways to resolve the dispute. With nothing decided, the World Bank official is going from New Delhi to Islamabad to continue this effort. The official added that India is fully conscious of its international obligations and is ready to engage in further consultations to resolve the differences regarding the two projects. Under the IWT, India is allowed only non-consumptive use of water from the three western rivers in the Indus basin–Indus, Jhelum and Chenab.”

 

The co-authors mentioned, “The Kishanganga and Ratle projects are on the western rivers. They are run-of-the-river hydropower projects that do not hold back any water, though Pakistan’s objection is about the height of the gates in the dams from which water is allowed to flow downstream. The three eastern rivers–Ravi, Beas and Sutlej–are reserved for the use of India. Meanwhile, in Pakistan. The Pakistani government approached the World Bank last September, saying the design of the Kishanganga project was not in line with the criteria laid down under IWT, and sought the appointment of a court of arbitration. Since the Kishanganga project has been going on for years, the “inordinate” delay by Islamabad to approach the World Bank would give India more time to complete its projects, Jamait Ali Shah, former Indus Water Commissioner on behalf of the Pakistani government, told thethirdpole.net”.

 

Their article pointed out, “However, Pakistan’s Finance Minister Ishaq Dar wrote to the World Bank on December 23, stressing that it was not withdrawing its request to set up a court of arbitration. This was followed by a call from the outgoing US Secretary of State John Kerry to Dar, saying that the US would like to see an amicable solution to the transboundary water row. Karachi-based newspaper…quoted diplomatic observers in Washington to say, “seriousness of this dispute, particularly the fear that it may harm the treaty, forced Mr. Kerry to make this call.”

 

The writers explained, “For a while now Pakistan has also wanted to bring China into the picture. At the sixth meeting of the Joint Cooperation Committee (JCC) of the CPEC which was held in Beijing on December 29, a special group on water storage was formed to pre-empt any “severe water crisis” impacting economic and food security of Pakistan, an official statement said. After a Chinese delegation visits Pakistan later this month, the JCC – the highest policy-making forum of the CPEC – may consider including the Diamer-Bhasha dam into the CPEC agreement. Planned at an estimated cost of around USD 15 billion, if Pakistan succeeds in getting the dam financed under CPEC, planning and development minister Ahsan Iqbal would consider it a “landmark achievement”. Both the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank have refused to lend money to Pakistan for this hydropower project. Pakistani experts react leading lawyer and former federal law minister, Ahmer Bilal Soofi termed the inclusion of water security into CPEC essentially a |political choice for Pakistan and China” though the issue does not “squarely fall within the otherwise commercial mandate of CPEC”.

 

Zofeen T. Ebrahim and Joydeep Gupta wrote, “Speaking to thethirdpole.net, Soofi said Pakistan and China need to exchange notes on a “contradicting state practice of India as an upper riparian to Pakistan and a lower riparian to China, that will help both the states to confront India.” He further added that Pakistan should raise its voice at an international level that “India’s building of reservoir and fully utilising the water storage capacity under the treaty poses a serious threat to Pakistan in particular backdrop of India’s present posturing as it improves India’s capability to manipulate water flows into Pakistan.” This was echoed by former commissioner Shah who said the international community should be duly briefed about the “dilution of the violation of the provisions of the treaty” by India. At the same time, he said both countries should continue to work closely and quietly to resolve the grievances and find a middle ground”.

 

They added, “The recent stance by India where it “lobbied aggressively and influenced” the World Bank, he feared, had further undermined the already “fragile” treaty. “The WB needs to take the right action–which is to act as arbitrator in this matter, as it has done before,” pointed out water expert Simi Kamal.The reason why the IWT, 74 pages long with 12 articles and 8 annexures and has no expiry date, has worked so far, she said was partly because the Bank acted as a third party. “The Bank needs to maintain this role and not back off now, when its arbitration role is most required in the face of a belligerent Indian government.”

 

According to the writers, “Kamal further said the solution lay not in the pause by the Bank “or for hawks to call for dismantling the treaty”, but for both governments to act responsibly and for the Bank to play its role in “containing adventurism by either government–in this matter the Indian government”. Shah also felt when Pakistan plans to proceed with such cases, it never does its homework thoroughly and therefore always appears the weaker party. The same was endorsed by noted economist Kaiser Bengali when he told thethirdpole.net that he found “the intellectually deficient and politically inane manner in which Pakistan has been pursuing the matter”, criminal. Bengali had little confidence in the Pakistan IWT team. He said, “It has no strategy on dealing with water issues with India. Pakistan’s chief negotiator for more than a decade and a half had limited intellectual capacity to lead on such a strategically life and death issue,” he said”.

 

They indicated, “He said Pakistan keeps harping on the “spirit” of the agreement. “Four decades after a treaty is signed, what matters is the letter of the print, not the spirit of the time when the document was signed.” Bengali believed India was not violating the letter of the agreement. “India has been building power plants on western rivers, but not diverting any water”. Nor, he said, were Pakistan’s contentions on the design “substantive enough to warrant a full scale confrontation”. He also observed, like Shah, that differences can and should be resolved in a more “low key” manner. He feared that since India was not violating the treaty per se, if Pakistan does take the latter to court, it will meet the same fate as the Baglihar Dam case of 2007”.

 

Zofeen T. Ebrahim and Joydeep Gupta maintained, “While Indian officials maintain that they are sticking to the IWT, the government has hardened its stand in recent months after attacks on Indian Army camps in Kashmir by suspected militants. (Read: South Kashmir’s role in anti-India struggle) New Delhi had earlier said it was setting up a task force to examine what projects it could undertake in the three western rivers of the Indus basin under the ambit of the IWT. In the last week of 2016, the government announced that the task force would be headed by Nripendra Mishra, principal secretary to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi.”

 

Nevertheless in light of the above article, it is mentionable that since the 9/11 tragedy, international community has been taking war against terrorism seriously, while there are also other forms of bloodless wars, being waged in the world and the same are like terrorism. Political experts opine that modern terrorism has many meanings like violent acts, economic terrorism etc., but its main aim is to achieve political, economic and social ends. Judging in these terms, Pak-India water dispute which has become serious needs special attention of the US and other major powers, as India remains stern on her illegitimate stand in this respect.

 

, , , , ,

No Comments

Game On Ha

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Game On Ha

Correct with the news that Orange Train is not part of CPEC.
Sharif brothers tried hard in getting it connected to CPEC, to hijack credit for this part of CPEC, however, the Chinese Govt. did not approve a loan to Sharif Govt and cleverly they offered a soft loan, as the Chinese knew there was no way to recover the money. 
 
Right now this project is in a lot of trouble. Originally project awarded to 2 parties. Maqbool/Calson and Habib construction.
 
Exim bank had released $300 million and when they released the next $30 million they sent their experts to check progress. Turns out that on M/C side some of the pile foundations are not even half the required depth and there is a FIR against 3 Nespak site engineers. Maqbool/Calson guarantee of 980 million was encashed however they have been overpaid Rs.3 billion so no loss to them.
 
Now the contract is awarded to ZKB/Reliable…however Exim bank has refused to make any additional payments. 
The Punjab govt. acquired some short-term financing from Bank of Punjab and paid a markup of Rs392 million plus payments of Rs. 217 million was to be paid in Oct and so on.
Workaround heritage sites have been stopped by the High Court and case is now pending in Supreme Court.
 
Work is at a snail’s pace and the whole thing stinks to high heaven.
 
Just think what the govt. could have achieved with $2 billion. But then we’re not the thinking type…can cause brain cancer.

, ,

No Comments

Russia throws its weight behind China-Pakistan corridor, keeps India on tenterhooks By Sachin Parashar| TNN | 

Long Live ChinaPakistan Friendship

Russia throws its weight behind China-Pakistan corridor,

keeps India on tenterhooks

 

 

 

 

By Sachin Parashar| TNN | 

 

 

President Xi Jinping of China & President Mamnoon Hussain of Pakistan: Handshakes Among Brothers

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CPEC.’s nebulous public position on its growing ties with Pakistan continues to give sleepless nights to Indian policymakers who have sought to isolate Islamabad on the issue of terrorism.

After it officially denied reports+ that it had shown any interest in China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC), Moscow has not just declared strong support for the China-funded project but also announced its intention to link its own Eurasian Economic Union project withCPEC.

CPEC, which will link Gwadar in Pakistan’s restive Balochistan province to Xinjiang in China, remains a major bugbear for Indian foreign policy as it passes through the Gilgit-Baltistan region in Pakistan-administered Kashmir claimed by India. Beijing has shown scant regard for India’s concerns despite PM Narendra Modi himself having taken up the issue of Chinese involvement in the disputed territory with President Xi Jinping.

Moscow last month emphatically denied Pakistan media reports that it was looking to involve itself in CPEC by acquiring access to the port built by China at Gwadar+ . Russia’s ambassador to PakistanAlexey Y Dedov has now been quoted as saying that Russia and Pakistan have held discussions to merge Moscow’s Eurasian Economic Union project with the CPEC.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dedov said Russia “strongly” supported CPEC as it was important for Pakistan’s economy and also regional connectivity.

The mixed signals emanating from Moscow, as strategic affairs expert Brahma Chellaney said, are injecting uncertainty in the direction of the Russia-India relationship whose trajectory long epitomized constancy and stability.

“It is as if Moscow no longer sees India as a reliable friend or partner. Indeed, by seeking common cause with India’s regional adversaries — including by supporting the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor through internationally disputed territory and engaging with the Pakistan-backed Taliban — Russia is challenging India’s core interests,” said Chellaney.

 

India in a Panic Mode with a Goofball PM Narendra Modi

 

 

What Balochi’s Think of India and Narendra Modi, who destabilized the development of CPEC Highway Through Terrorism in Balochistan

 

 

 

 

India continues to officially maintain that it doesn’t see any “downward trend” in relations with Russia even as it works behind the scenes to convince Moscow that Pakistan remained the fountainhead of terrorism in the region. For India though, Russia further queered the situation in Afghanistan by declaring that it regarded Afghan Taliban as a national military-political movement. Russia is looking to engage the Taliban apparently to defeat IS but, as the MEA spokesperson warned last week, India wants any engagement with Taliban to respect the internationally recognized red lines, including giving up violence and severing ties with al-Qaida.
 
Moscow is set to link its Eurasian Economic Union project with CPEC (TOI File Photo)
 

The comments made by Dedov are only the latest in a series of Russian doublespeak on Pakistan this year. As it officially conveyed to Moscow, India was disturbed by Russia’s decision to hold its first ever joint military exercise with Pakistan days after Uri terror strike which left 19 Indian soldiers dead. The Russians justified it by saying that the exercise was meant to help Pakistan deal with terrorism.

Top Comment by an Indian

We have to fight our war ourselves only.Chandra Sekhar Das: ” You bet  Chandra Sekhar Das, your chickens are coming to roost.” Pakistan Think Tank Editor’s Comment

At the BRICS Goa summit in October, Russia chose not to help India publicly name Pakistan-based terrorist outfits like Lashkar and Jaish in the official declaration in the face of Chinese resistance.

Russia continues to insist that its ties with Pakistan will not come at India’s cost. Asked about the Russia-Pakistan military exercise, though, at the recent Heart of Asia conference, Russia’s presidential envoy to Pakistan Zamir Kabulov said Moscow didn’t complain about India’s close cooperation with the US and so India also shouldn’t complain about “much low level” of cooperation between Russia and Pakistan. India may or may not complain, but it’s certainly watching with eyes wide open.

 

, , ,

No Comments

The Army, the Government, and the CPEC Chinese Corridor. By Saeed A.Malik

 

 

10629806_677041282399926_4496328569578673310_n

 

Map Courtesy Mehwish Zia

 

 

 

<

p style=”text-align: center;”> 

 

 

 

 

 The Army, the Government, and the Chinese Corridor.

By 

Saeed A.Malik

 
That the CPEC is very important for China, goes without saying. That it is vital for Pakistan, would be an understatement.
 
This corridor will help China to whittle down, to a considerable extent, the effects of the containment being implemented against it by the U.S. For Pakistan it will mean a vital economic fillip which, if exploited for the national good, will buy it time for a turn around, and hopefully, comparative prosperity. And this, in and of itself, can help ease many of the problems we are faced with today.
 
Thus for Pakistan the CPEC is germane not just to national security but it is vitally essential to our future.
 
Whether or not therefore, the plans of the CPEC are successfully implemented, should be of major concern to both Pakistan and China.
 
For precisely the opposite reasons they are bound to be of equal concern to countries which have a vested interest in a weak Pakistan and a weak China. And these countries will work in tandem to ensure that the CPEC is wrecked before it ever takes off.
 
The main driver of Israeli foreign policy objectives in the region is the Oded Yinon Plan i.e to break into small principalities, all Arab states which have the potential of being a threat to Israel any time in the future. Because of the incredible influence which Israel exercises on U.S policies, the Yinon Plan was infused into U.S policy for this region. Thus whatever the U.S objectives in the region, the play of the Yinon Plan can plainly be seen behind the U.S destruction of Iraq, Libya, and Syria. Even a fool could have foreseen that the de-baathification of Iraq, and the dismemberment of its army would lead to the dismemberment of the state itself. Indeed Gen Shinseki advocated that the invasion force should be half a million U.S troops so that post-invasion stability of governance would be ensured, as did Colin Powell. The former was forcibly retired, while the latter was marginalized, and we see Iraq precisely in a state as Yinon had advocated. The same is true of Libya, and the same is the aim for Syria.
 
Israel tried its very best that Iran too should be destroyed and split into small principalities, but the sheer exhaustion visited on the U.S by the Iraqis who decided to fight back, foreclosed this option. This being the situation, how can Israel countenance a strong and thriving Pakistan, which not only has the bomb, but also varied delivery systems, and which Israel sees as an enemy? Logically therefore a failed Pakistan, which international powers would be obliged to de-nuclify would be much more in Israel’s interests–and by extension, those of the U.S as well.
 
Apart from the Israeli-U.S policy nexus vis a vis a Pakistan whose nuclear wings must be clipped, the U.S has other concerns about a strong Pakistan which is averse to taking dictation from the U.S. One of these concerns is that Pakistan is refusing subservience to the U.S Afghan policy objectives where such objectives are seen as undermining Pakistan’s perception of its own national interest. Another U.S concern is that whereas the U.S would like to see India built up as a credible counter-weight to China, Pakistan, by constantly snapping at India’s heels is a constant distraction in the way of the achievement of this U.S aim. And most importantly, Pakistan, by allowing China an opening onto the Arabian Sea, is directly undermining the most important driver of the U.S foreign policy i.e the containment of China, which it sees as the premier challenge to U.S hegemony around the world.
 
The third country which would like the CPEC initiative nipped in the bud is India, which sees Pakistan as a nuisance in the way of its becoming the unchallenged regional hegemon of the area; and this is quite apart from the ideological view that India’s independence from colonial rule cannot be considered complete till such time as it is ” akhund” [complete] again.
 
Pakistan should therefore have absolutely no doubt that these three countries [ plus their allies] will strain every sinew of their power towards sabotaging the CPEC.
 
And what are the tools they will employ to undermine Pakistan? These tools are already deployed and are in operation for all to see, except for those of us who are willfully blind:
–Aiding the terrorist onslaught against Pakistan. Don’t we already know this,  and the names of countries involved?
–Burdening Pakistan with a volume of debt which it will never be able to repay. Why is it after all that IMF obliges Ishaq Dar each time he goes to them, begging bowl in hand? Does anyone, anywhere in the world, freely extend credit to a country or entity which is a bad credit risk? Cant we see through this easy credit? Cant we see that in less than 5 years we will have reached a debt ceiling which it will be beyond our capacity to repay? And what happens then? Is this not a road to default and sanctions, which will lead to Pakistan giving up its nuclear assets?
–And the most potent tool of all–key members of our national “leadership”, both here and in Dubai, willfully undermining the very foundations of the state by both hollowing out the country financially, and also selling it out to those bidding for its ultimate demise! Does anyone not see this happening already? Which one of our top leaders is not a billionaire? And which of these has made his billions through honest sweat? And will such people, who can sell their grandmothers for a pittance, not sell off their country when the time comes? The problem is that the time is already here and the sale is going on day and night.
 
 Unfortunately, it is said to be very expensive loan facility from China i.e  @ $4.5 + Libor
 
It is not for nothing that as the Chinese unfolded their plans for the CPEC, they went to the Army Chief for guarantees of security. This was not just a comment on the power the Army enjoys, but more so a comment on the lack of trust which may credibly be imposed in our civilian leadership.
 
But with the politicians now haggling over the route of the CPEC, the Chinese have issued statements of concern which have been released to the press. This is not the way the Chinese function. They eschew press statements and use them only as a last resort. The level of Chinese concern should make it clear that the enemy sleeper cells among our national leadership have been activated to sabotage the project. This has been the standard operating procedure to undermine third world countries by the first world for decades.
 
If it is not the case already, the Army should wake up to what is happening. It should also include mega corruption, which has undermined the country and taken it to the very brink, as a national security imperative. If the Army refuses to see the writing on the wall, it must know that its days of glory and power cannot be extended to beyond five years, because then it may not have a country to defend. And then all the Generals will be like the rest of us. It is my bet that in five years or less the IMF will call in our debts, and we will not be able to repay. The Last Post will then be sounded.
 
Saeed A. Malik.
 
 
 
 
Editor’s Note: Pakistanis Must Close Ranks on CPEC,like we did on the Nuclear Program: India and its Western Allies Are Trying Every Trick in the Book to Sabotage CPEC. Inshallah, we will make it happen
 
 
 

, ,

No Comments


Skip to toolbar