☆Kashmir Rise☆ @kashmir_rise
Cricket was his life.We buried him with two cricket balls.” Farooq Ahmad (Father)
Our Announcements
Sorry, but you are looking for something that isn't here.
Posted by Dr. Salman in KASHMIR IS BURNING on October 28th, 2016
Kashmir Lobby Group @KashmirLobby
kashmir-black-day-conference-speakers-declared-india-responsible-to-resolve-kashmir-conflict …
At the #Kashmir conference today.
#KashmirSOS The enemy of Quaid is a man who betrays the Kashmir cause
We’ll remind the world at every forum the injustices prevalant in Jannat nazeer valley of Kashmir :
Although 27th of October is celebrated every year as the “Black Day” by the Pakistanis and the Kashmiris all over the world as a protest against Indian illegal occupation of Kashmir on October 27, 1947, yet this time, this very day has come at time when the people of Kashmir have accelerated their legitimate struggle in the aftermath of the martyrdom of the young Kashmir leader Burhan Wani by the Indian security forces in the Indian Occupied Kashmir (IOK) in wake of continued sieges and prolonged curfew. Since July 8, 2016, Indian forces have martyred more than 100 innocent persons who have been protesting against the martyrdom of Burhan Wani.
By manipulating the false flag terror attacks at a military base in Uri and Baramulla, the BJP-led Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has intensified war-hysteria against Pakistan. After deployment of heavy arms and weapons at the Line of Control (LoC), Indian forces have increased troops and continue shelling in Pakistani side of Azad Kashmir. New Delhi’s main aim is to deflect the attention of the international community from the new phase of Kashmiri Intifada, while in this regard; pressure has been mounting on the Modi government both domestically and internationally.
However, during the partition of the Sub-continent, the people of the state of Jammu and Kashmir (J&K) which comprised Muslim majority decided to join Pakistan according to the British-led formula. But, Dogra Raja, Sir Hari Singh, a Hindu who was ruling over the J&K, in connivance with the Indian Prime Minister Jawaharlal Nehru and Governor General Lord Mountbatten joined India.
The design to forcibly wrest Kashmir began to unfold on August 16, 1947, with the announcement of the Radcliffe Boundary Award. It gave the Gurdaspur District—a majority Muslim area to India to provide a land route to the Indian armed forces to move into Kashmir. There was a rebellion in the state forces, which revolted against the Maharaja and were joined by Pathan tribesmen. Lord Mountbatten ordered armed forces to land in Srinagar.
When Pakistan responded militarily against the Indian aggression, on December 31, 1947, India made an appeal to the UN Security Council to intervene and a ceasefire ultimately came into effect on January 01, 1949, following UN resolutions calling for a plebiscite in Kashmir to enable the people of Jammu and Kashmir to determine whether they wish to join Pakistan or India. On February 5, 1964, India backed out of its promise of holding plebiscite. Instead, in March 1965, the Indian Parliament passed a bill, declaring Kashmir a province of India-an integral part of the Indian union.
The very tragedy of Kashmiris had started after 1947 when they were denied their genuine right of self-determination. They organized themselves against the injustices of India and launched a war of liberation which New Delhi tried to crush through various forms of brutalities.
It is notable that since 1947, in order to maintain its illegal control, India has continued its repressive regime in the Occupied Kashmir through various machinations.
Nevertheless, various forms of state terrorism have been part of a deliberate campaign by the Indian army and paramilitary forces against Muslim Kashmiris, especially since 1989. It has been manifested in brutal tactics like crackdowns, curfews, illegal detentions, massacre, targeted killings, sieges, burning the houses, torture, disappearances, rape, breaking the legs, molestation of Muslim women and killing of persons through fake encounter.
According to a report on human rights violations in the Indian Occupied Kashmir, since 1989, there have been deaths of 1,00000 innocent Kashmiris, 7,023 custodial killings, 1,22,771 arrests, 1,05,996 destruction of houses or buildings, 22,776 women widowed, 1,07,466 children orphaned and 10,086 women gang-raped/molested. Indian brutal securities forces have continue these atrocities.
In fact, Indian forces have employed various draconian laws like the Jammu and Kashmir Disturbed Areas Act, and the Armed Forces (Jammu and Kashmir) Special Powers Act and Public Safety Act in killing the Kashmiri people, and for the arbitrarily arrest of any individual for an indefinite period.
Besides Human Rights Watch, in its various reports, Amnesty International has also pointed out grave human rights violations in the Indian controlled Kashmir, indicating, “The Muslim majority population in the Kashmir Valley suffers from the repressive tactics of the security forces.
In its report on July 2, 2015, the Amnesty International has highlighted extrajudicial killings of the innocent persons at the hands of Indian security forces in the Indian Held Kashmir. The report points out, “Tens of thousands of security forces are deployed in Indian-administered Kashmir…the Armed Forces Special Powers Act allows troops to shoot to kill suspected militants or arrest them without a warrant…not a single member of the armed forces has been tried in a civilian court for violating human rights in Kashmir…this lack of accountability has in turn facilitated other serious abuses…India has martyred one 100,000 people. More than 8,000 disappeared (while) in the custody of army and state police.”
In this respect, European Union has passed a resolution about human rights abuses committed by Indian forces in the Indian held Kashmir.
It is of particular attention that in 2008, a rights group reported unmarked graves in 55 villages across the northern regions of the Indian-held Kashmir. Then researchers and other groups reported finding thousands of mass graves without markers. In this respect, in August, 2011, Indian Jammu and Kashmir State Human Rights Commission officially acknowledged in its report that innocent civilians killed in the two-decade conflict have been buried in unmarked graves.
Notably, foreign sources and human rights organisations have revealed that unnamed graves include those innocent persons, killed by the Indian military and paramilitary troops in the fake encounters including those who were tortured to death by the Indian secret agency RAW.
Indian authorities are not willing to talk with Kashmiri people on political grounds. New Delhi reached to a conclusion that only bullet is the right way of dealing with Kashmiris, demanding their right of self-determination. Surprisingly, Indian successive governments are trying to ignore the dynamics of the freedom movement of Kashmiris for the sake of their alien rule.
But, New Delhi is still showing its intransigence in order to resolve Kashmir dispute with Pakistan by neglecting the fact that Kashmir remains a nuclear flashpoint between both the neighbouring countries.
In this context, Egbert Jahn in his book, “Kashmir: Flashpoint for a Nuclear War or Even a Third World War?” has pointed out, “The Kashmir conflict is embedded in the wider conflict over the incomplete creation of nations and states on the Indian subcontinent, which during the east-west conflict even threatened at times to escalate into a nuclear world war between Pakistan and the USA on the one side and India and the USSR on the other. Until now, there have been three wars between India and Pakistan over the Jammu and Kashmir: in 1947–49, 1965 and 1999… finally, the Indo-Chinese border war of 1962…after these wars…and could unexpectedly again lead to a regional and under certain circumstances…even a major nuclear war or a Third World War.”
Meanwhile, like the previous year, Pakistan’s recent serious and sincere effort at the annual session of the United Nations—the recent speech of Pakistan’s prime minister, highlighting Indian atrocities, the Kashmir dispute and demanding its solution has infused a new spirit among the Kashmiri people.
Nonetheless, Kashmiris, living both sides of the LoC observe “Black Day” on October 27 to protest against the Indian illegal occupation of Jammu and Kashmir. On this very day, Pakistanis and Kashmiris across the globe express solidarity with the freedom fighters of Kashmir, demanding their legitimate right of self-determination from India which continues various forms of state terrorism in order to suppress their popular movement.
Sajjad Shaukat writes on international affairs and is author of the book: US vs Islamic Militants, Invisible Balance of Power: Dangerous Shift in International Relations
Email: [email protected]
Posted by farrukh in " RIAZ THE SHAITAN OF PAKISTAN, Asif Zardari Crook Par Excellance, BILAWAL ZARDARI BAMBINO KINGS OF CORRUPTION, Economic Hitmen, Economic Terrorists of Pakistan, ISHAQ DAR:THIEF OF PUNJAB, Nawaz & Shahbaz Sharif's Business Scams, NAWAZ SHARIF THIEF, PIA Destruction By Nawaz Sharif, Sugar Industry Corruption By Nawaz Sharif & Asif Zardari & Bilawal Zardari on October 25th, 2016
Dr. Ashfaque H. Khan, Dr. Hafiz A. Pasha and Dr. Salman Shah, who have served on key posts in Finance Ministry and Planning Division have written an open letter to the IMF, exposing wrong picture presented by the Dar-led economic team about Pakistan’s economy. Dr Khan send this article to the Editor of Corporate Ambassador, Javed Mahmood today.
The three year program under the IMF’s Extended Fund Facility (EFF), has now come to an end. Pakistan has received $6.1 billion loan from the IMF under this program. During the tenure of the program, Pakistan was required to undertake wide – ranging structural reforms and implement the type of macroeconomic policy that would restore macroeconomic stability, gradually promote economic growth and build foreign exchange reserves to bolster external buffers.
After the completion of the twelfth and the final Review, the IMF Staff Mission Report has declared ‘victory’ and stated that “the Fund Supported Program has helped the country restore macroeconomic stability, reduce vulnerabilities and make progress in tackling key structural challenges. Economic growth has gradually increased and inflation has declined. External buffers have been bolstered, financial sector resilience has been reinforced, and the fiscal deficit has been reduced while social safety nets have been strengthened”.
On the reform side, the Report stated that “tax policy and administration reforms allowed for further revenue mobilization.Steps have been taken to strengthen the State Bank of Pakistan’s autonomy. Energy sector reform allowed a reduction of power outages, energy subsidies, and accumulation of power sector arrears. A country – wide strategy to improve the business climate was adopted”.
The Staff Report contains the views of the IMF on the “success” of the program. We, the three independent economists, through this open letter would like to present the other side of the picture. In particular, we identify the extent of the success, how these “successes” have been achieved and express our disappointment with the failure to implement reforms that are critical for achieving higher economic growth. Needless to mention, the three authors of this open letter have all dealt in the past with the IMF in senior management capacity at the ministry of finance, either as Federal Ministers or Advisor.
Firstly, building foreign exchange reserves to bolster the external buffer was the main pillar of the hurriedly put together IMF Program. The idea was to build reserves and repay the then IMF loan on time. That is why many independent economists including the ones who remained associated with the IMF for a long time termed the program as ‘Self-Serving Program’.
Such an objective of the program forced the government to borrow extensively to build foreign exchange reserves and in the process accumulate net external debt of over $12 billion during the program period. Incidentally, Pakistan added exactly the same amount to its foreign exchange reserves, that is, from $6 billion in end-June 2013 to $18.0 billion in end-June 2016. The above facts clearly suggest that we improved the external buffer entirely through adding external debt. Isn’t it simply postponing the current problem of insolvency to a future date?
Secondly, in a three year program, the IMF has extended sixteen waivers. Perhaps never in the history of the IMF did Pakistan receive such a large number of waivers. This diluted the purpose of the program and also reflected on the lack of emphasis towards implementing and achieving the stated goals of the program.
Sadly, the IMF Staff Mission has selectively highlighted the improvement in some economic indicators from 2012-13 to 2015-16. This includes rising economic growth, falling rate of inflation, rising tax-to-GDP ratio, higher spending under BISP and private sector credit and falling subsidies as percentage of GDP.
The rate of economic growth achieved in the last three years remains contentious. The Pakistan Bureau of Statistics (PBS) has estimated the GDP growth rate as 4 percent or above each year, reaching 4.7 percent in 2015-16. The authors have presented contrary evidence that the growth rate has been exaggerated each year, and it has ranged between 3.1 to 3.7 percent during the program periods. The Data Quality Assessment Framework (DQAF) of the IMF should have been used to check the reliability of the national income estimates.
We would like to quote the recent statement of the Managing Director of the IMF as posted on September 1, 2016 by iMF direct. In her words “The longer demand weakness lasts, the more it threatens to harm long-term growth as firms reduce production capacity and unemployed workers are leaving the labor force and critical skills are eroding. Weak demand also depresses trade, which adds to disappointing productivity growth”.
This statement clearly depicts the current state of economic growth and unemployment in Pakistan in terms of the social costs of the excessive focus on stabilization policy. The persistence of lower economic growth has failed to create enough jobs. People in general and youth in particular, are finding difficulties to get jobs. People remaining unemployed for a longer duration are becoming unemployable, with all its social and economic consequences. Not only that the unemployment rate has surged to a 13 years high at over 8.0 percent (including the ‘discouraged worker’ effect), youth unemployment rate has also increased to over 11 percent in 2014-15. Furthermore, between 2012-13 and 2014-15, the annual number of entrants into the labour force has been approximately 650,000 as against 1.3 million during 2008-13.
A particularly worrying feature of the current employment situation is the extremely high unemployment rate of 20 percent of workers with either graduate or post graduate degrees. There are 2.4 million educated workers with bad employment prospects. This is the unfortunate outcomeof the IMF Program
On the size of the fiscal deficit, the IMF Report claims that this has been reduced from 8.5 percent to 4.6 percent of the GDP. A number of steps have been taken to report smaller deficits. For example, holding back refunds and forcing commercial entities to pay taxes in advance to jack up revenue, privatization proceeds and foreign grants treated as non-tax revenue to inflate overall revenue rather than treating them as financing items, engaging in quasi-fiscal operations outside the budget, allowing for large statistical discrepancy each year (cumulatively Rs. 600 billion in three years) to show lower expenditures, exaggerating the size of the Provincial cash surplus, retaining earmarked revenues in the Federal consolidated Fund and building up large contingent liabilities (over Rs. 1400 billion of power sector circular debt, accumulation of debt in commodity financing and pending tax refunds). The IMF staff has either been blissfully unaware of or has condoned this creative accounting. Adjusting for these practices implies a fiscal deficit each year in the range of 7.0 to 8.0 percent of the GDP.
Other areas, where serious distortions exist, are: the estimates of the GDP deflator; investment and saving rates and rate of inflation, especially for poor households. A case ought to have been made for complete operational autonomy of the PBS.
Yet another “success” of the program as stated by the IMF Staff Mission is the sharp reduction in inflation rate. It has declined from 7.4 percent in 2012-13 to 2.9 percent in 2015-16. Does this decline owe to the ‘prudent’ fiscal and monetary policy pursued during the program period? The answer appears to be in the negative. The international oil and commodity prices started collapsing since June 2014. Such a collapse in the oil and commodities prices led to a worldwide decline in inflation, including in Pakistan. Furthermore, as stated above, the pursuance of stabilization policy for a prolonged period weakened the domestic demand, resulting into deceleration of prices. Thus, the sharp decline in inflation during the program period owes to the weakening of domestic demand, as well as a collapse in the international prices of oil and commodities and not to the prudent use of monetary and fiscal policy. In fact, when inflation rate was rapidly on the decline, the SBP was pursing an easy monetary policy.
The quarterly reviews have ignored the deterioration in key economic indicators. They failed to discuss big decline in exports – to – GDP ratio, stagnation in the overall and private investment – to – GDP ratio, fall in FDI, rise in external debt and public debt – to – GDP ratios, fall in total PRSP pro-poor expenditure to GDP and very importantly, a rise in the rate of unemployment especially among young, educated, and female workforce. Only 750,000 jobs were created annually in 2013-14 and 2014-15 as against 1.1 million jobs annually earlier.
As stated above, Pakistan was asked to implement a wide-ranging reforms under the IMF Program. What has been the performance on the reform side?
The glaring failure of the Fund program is in the implementation of power sector reforms. The 12thReview Report declares victory primarily by demonstrating that the subsidy to the sector has fallen massively from 2percent of the GDP in 2012-13 to only 0.6percent of the GDP in 2015-16.
How has this been achieved? The answer is not by any major improvements in efficiency through big reduction in losses. Instead, the policy has been to raise the power tariffs to generate more revenues and thereby reduce the need for subsidies. From 2012-13 to 2015-16, the average electricity tariff (including surcharges) has been enhanced by 40percent, leading to extra revenues of distribution companies of over Rs 250 billion. The tariffs have been increased at the time when the fuel costs have fallen by over 49 percent.
On top of this, contingent liabilities have increased exponentially in the sector. Today, the circular debt of the sector stands at almost Rs 630 billion, over 2percent of the GDP. Sooner or later, this debt will have to be retired, as happened in 2012-13, if a breakdown is to be avoided in supplies due to liquidity problems in the sector.
IMF also claims on behalf of the Government, that power load-shedding has been substantially reduced, especially in industry. Evidence to the contrary is the large continuing demand-supply gap according to NEPRA, and the fact that electricity consumption per industrial consumer has fallen in nine out of ten distribution companies, in comparison to the level achieved in the pre-load-shedding years.
The IMF Twelfth Review has highlighted, as one of the key successes of the Program, the over two percent points increase in the tax-to-GDP ratio. Much of the improvement has come in 2015-16. How has this been achieved? The main contribution is actually from enhancement in effective tax rates and not by broadening of the various tax bases. The tax structure has become more regressive and created more distortions in economic activity. Furthermore, various levies which used to be the part of non-tax revenues prior to the IMF Program were renamed as ‘other taxes’ and added to the tax revenue collected by the FBR to arrive at ‘new’ tax – to – GDP ratio. Such a practice has made the ‘new tax – to – GDP ratio non-comparable with the pre-IMF Program period.
The biggest failure is in lack of development of the direct tax system. The elite continues to enjoy wide ranging tax exemptions and concessions like the virtually no or low taxation of global income, profits of private companies, agricultural income and unearned capital incomes. The IMF clearly prefers not to antagonize the ruling elite through its reform agenda.
Contrary to the claims by the IMF, living standards have probably fallen in Pakistan during the tenure of the Program. A number of reforms undertaken have contributed to rising unemployment and poverty.
The anti-poor actions include, firstly, the rise in input costs of fertilizer and electricity in agriculture due to hike in power and gas tariffs and additional taxation in the form of the GIDC. The result is that food prices have risen faster than the overall CPI and wages of unskilled workers. Today, Pakistan has the extremely serious problem of malnutrition. In the 2016 ranking of the Global Hunger Index, Pakistan has the 11th lowest position, even below Bangladesh, out of 118 countries. The non-implementation of the PMs agricultural package of September 2015 under the IMF pressure has contributed to the recent debacle in the sector.
Secondly, the primary adjustment mechanism for achieving the fiscal deficit targets in the Program has been large cut backs of up to 30percent in budgeted development spending by the Federal and Provincial governments. In 2015-16 alone these cuts have implied less employment generation of almost 300,000 jobs.Thirdly, hikes in indirect taxes have affected the cost of living adversely. This includes the levy of minimum import tariffs on basic food and other items and jump in GST rates on petroleum products, especially HSD oil.Fourthly, the decline in exports has contributed to loss of employment in labor-intensive sectors like SMEs and textiles. Consequently, as highlighted earlier, the underlying unemployment rate has gone beyond 8 percent. Fifthly, social indicators have shown only minor improvement in three years. This is due particularly to the pressure on Provincial governments to spend less on social and other sectors so as to generate large cash surpluses.
According to the original Program projections, exports were expected to show a steady annual growth rate of 8 percent and reach $30 billion by 2015-16. Instead, they have been falling since 2012-13 to below $22 billion last year, a short fall of over 23percent. This is perhaps one of the single most important failures of the Program. It has adversely impacted on growth and employment in the country and frustrated the achievement of greater self-reliance.
How did the Program reinforce the anti-export bias? The record level of external borrowings during the last three years has led to a form of ‘Dutch Disease’. Larger reserves, based completely on external borrowing, have created artificial stability in the value of the rupee, thereby reducing competitiveness. Enhancement of electricity tariffs by over 40percent and gas price to industry by 64percent, further affected competitiveness. In an effort to meet the Program revenue targets, FBR has held back over Rs 200 billion of refunds, leading to liquidity problems for exporters. Further, levy of a minimum import duty on raw materials and intermediate goods has added to costs.
Today, the decline in ability to service external debt obligations, including those to the IMF, is clearly demonstrated by the phenomenal increase in the external debt to exports ratio. It was 193percent in 2012-13 and has risen to 266percent by the end of 2015-16. It is likely to continue rising and go beyond 300percent by 2017-18. There is no other option now in the post-Program scenario but to present a strong export incentive package, including significant depreciation of the Rupee.
The original Program projections were that external financing requirements, consisting of external debt amortization and the current account deficit, would reach $9.2 billion by 2016-17 and fall to $8 billion in 2017-18. However, following the much larger build up of external debt, the latest estimates of the financing requirement in the 12th Review is $ 10.9 billion in 2016-17, rising to $13.2 billion in 2017-18.
However, these estimates are based on significant positive growth in remittances and exports and a big jump in FDI. This is highly unlikely given the current trends. A more realistic estimate of external financing requirement is $15 billion in 2016-17 and $18 billion in 2017-18. This is more than 5percent of the GDP, which is considered the danger point. Part of this requirement will have to be met by a sizeable depletion of foreign exchange reserves. There is a high likelihood that by June 2018, reserves may fall to about half of the present level.
Where is the sustainability of our external position? Has the IMF Program reduced our vulnerabilities? Are we doomed to go back once again to the IMF? Will conditionalities next time go beyond the usual prior actions? Already, two weeks after the end of the IMF Program, Pakistan has been forced to float relatively high cost bonds externally of $1 billion. This indicates a lack of confidence in the sustainability of reserves in coming months and years.
Finally, in the immediate aftermath of the IMF Program, the economy has begun to unravel. Agricultural growth was negative last year and the prospects for the current cotton crop are not much better. Growth of the large-scale manufacturing sector has also turned negative in the last four months for which data is available. Seven out of the twelve industrial groups are showing declining output. The fall in exports continues and the trade deficit has risen sharply. Remittances are also contracting, along with a sharp reduction in FDI. FBR tax revenue growth has plummeted and large borrowing has been resorted to by the Federal Government from SBP. Development releases of funds have been relatively small and the process of implementation of CPEC infrastructure projects is very slow. Contingent liabilities have reached alarming levels and the bleeding of public sector enterprises/utilities continues. Can we still say that the reforms implemented during the tenure of the Fund Program have left the economy in a ‘sustainable position’? The answer, unfortunately, is an unambiguous no.
* The authors have worked for the Ministry of Finance and dealt with the IMF at the highest level for a long time.
Posted by kisakhani in China- Global Security, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, China-Pakistan Friendship & Brotherhood on October 20th, 2016
Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf Chairman Imran Khan, at a meeting with the Chinese ambassador yesterday, made it clear that their anti-government protest over the Panama leaks was not meant to derail the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor project.
The PTI chief also conveyed reservations of the Khyber Pakhtunkhwa government to the Chinese ambassador over the western route of the CPEC.
Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan Sun Weidong met PTI Chairman Imran Khan at his residence in Bani Gala. Senior PTI leaders, including Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Naeemul Haq and Shireen Mazari, also participated in the meeting.
A PTI leader, wishing anonymity, said the meeting was arranged on the request of PTI and the party chairman made it clear to the ambassador that his party was not against the CPEC project. “The government is trying to build up a narrative that our anti-government protest is meant to derail the CPEC. We have made it clear to the ambassador that the Panama leaks was a national issue and it has nothing to do away with the CPEC. We have conveyed that our agenda is not against the project,” he said
“Secondly, PTI conveyed its reservations to the ambassador over delay in the construction of the western route of the CPEC. The western route is being built without allied facilities, including rail and economic zones. The PTI chairman also mentioned the resolution passed by the KP Assembly with regard to the western route and said the legislators of the ruling PML-N have also signed it,” he said.
Imran Khan with Chinese envoy on CPEC
According to the PTI leader, the ambassador said the CPEC project was a government-to-government agreement and China was adopting a holistic approach over it. He advised PTI to covey these reservations to the federal government as this was their internal matter, the PTI leader affirmed.
Earlier, the resolution passed by the KP Assembly urged the federal government to ensure that the western route was part of the CPEC and would be completed on priority basis.
Earlier this month, KP Chief Minister Pervaiz Khattak warned the federal government that no road of the CPEC would be allowed to pass through the province if the western route was not declared a part of the CPEC and all facilities were not provided to it. He had alleged the centre had kept them in the dark. “We do not need any ordinary road as we ourselves can make metros and motorways. We should be provided with an economic corridor with all facilities,” he had said.
INP adds: Imran Khan assured Chinese Ambassador to Pakistan Sun Weidong that his party supported the government over the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.
Expressing good wishes for the completion of the project, the PTI chairman appreciated the CPEC and called it a game changer.
Sun Weidong, on the occasion, said the CPEC was an important part of ‘One Road, One Region Vision’ work on which was rapidly in progress. He said all the provinces of Pakistan would benefit from the corridor. The western highway leading towards Gwadar was also a part of the CPEC, he added. He hoped a new era of development in the regions would start after completion of the mega project.
The CPEC is a collection of projects currently under construction at a cost of over 45 billion dollars, intended to rapidly expand and upgrade Pakistani infrastructure, besides deepening and broadening economic links between Islamabad and Beijing.
Courtesy: The Nation,Pakistan
Posted by admin in Pakistan Super Power on October 19th, 2016
China, Russia and Pakistan may have just formed an unofficial alliance to counter America’s global dominance. China, Russia, Pakistan and other authoritarian counties in Central Asia could join their forces to try and take away Washington’s dominance.
The U.S., meanwhile, is not twiddling its thumbs either. Washington has a number of allies in Asia, including Japan, all of whom are ready to jump into the fire and die for the Americans on the battlefield.
If that happens and China, Russia and Pakistan would go to war against the U.S., Japan, the European Union and their allies, one way or another, either side would put its nuclear weapons to work.
And given the fact that Russia, China and Pakistan have about 7,620 nuclear warheads combined, the United States would lose that nuclear war even before some guy in Pentagon would open his mouth to say, ‘Look, it’s a nuc…’
Bipolar nuclear world: China, Russia and Pakistan vs. U.S. and allies
First, Russia has been actively strengthening its military ties with both China and Pakistan. In fact, Russia has just received a crucial support from China on the most important global issue of our time: Syria.
But what’s even more concerning is that Russia has been strengthening its diplomatic and military ties with Pakistan, its Cold War rival. Having both China and Pakistan on their side would get Russia a serious advantage in an imminent nuclear war against the U.S.
Second, China has been very supportive of not only Russia, but also Pakistan lately. In fact, Pakistan has always been China’s traditional ally and Beijing has always protected Islamabad against its historical rival, India.
Third, Beijing, Moscow and Islamabad see the need to form the China-Russia-Pakistan triangle, because it would finally allow them to put an end to U.S. global dominance.
Presidential Election makes U.S. Weak
And the U.S. is particularly weak right now, as the country is divided over its upcoming presidential election. The Donald Trump vs. Hillary Clinton polls clearly indicate that the country has never been so divided before, and it makes it look weak from the outside.
And since Russian President Vladimir Putin is known for his sophisticated plans to attack enemies at the most inopportune times for them, there is a high chance Russia would seek China’s military support to strike their mutual enemy.
A few weeks back, Russia sent a contingent of its soldiers to hold Pak-Russian military drills. The move was interpreted as Putin’s excuse to send his ground forces into Pakistan to protect his ally against India.
The drills came at a time when tensions between Pakistan and India reached its peak level following an attack on the Uri military camp in India-held Kashmir.
Nuclear-powered India with or against U.S.?
India, which has nuclear weapons on its own, is actually a crucial player in the imminent bipolar world. While India has previously slammed Russia for its ever-growing ties to Pakistan, it’s still not so quick to jump into the bed with the United States.
Earlier this year, India rejected an offer from the U.S. to join naval patrols in the South-China Sea alongside Japan and Australia. Patrolling the South-China Sea alongside Japan would mean the end of India’s diplomatic relations with China, the move that India is definitely not prepared to do.
Even though India has been criticizing Russia for its military cooperation with Pakistan, New Delhi has a number of joint military projects with Russia of its own.
So India is sort of torn apart between China-Russia and the United States. But Pakistan has surely already made up its mind which bed is cozier, and it went with China and Russia.
Pakistan: ‘U.S. is NOT superpower anymore’
Last week, Mushahid Hussain Syed, the Pakistani PM’s special envoy to Kashmir, threatened to break ties with Washington and officially cozy up to Russia and China, because America is “a declining world power.”
“[The] US is no longer a world power. It is a declining power. Forget about it,” Syed said, reiterating one of Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif’s diplomats’ recent comments, in which he said Pakistan would make a deal with China and Russia if the U.S. stays neutral on the Pak-India conflict in Kashmir.
Interestingly, China supplies Pakistan with more weapons than any other country in the world. But more importantly, Beijing is actively building nuclear reactors in Pakistan, which means China wants to strengthen its allies and prepare them for a possible war with the West.
When the U.S. and many other countries signed the NPT Treaty in 1996, neither India nor Pakistan signed it. And as tensions on the India-Pakistan border continue to grow every week, one of the sides could actually resort to nuclear weapons.
And it’s more likely that Pakistan would make its nuclear move first, because it knows it has the military support from China and Russia. In fact, Beijing has already pledged to help Pakistan in the case of any foreign aggression.
Can U.S. survive China’s alliance with Russia?
While the Russians haven’t made those pledges to Pakistan yet, it doesn’t take a Sherlock Holmes to predict that Russia would side with China in any international conflict.
China, Pakistan and India all possess ballistic missiles, cruise missiles, and sea-based nuclear weapons, which means it would be interesting if India could side with China and its historical rival Pakistan after all.
India has no idea whether it can or cannot rely on receiving any sort of help from the U.S. And while the country is stronger than Pakistan in terms of its army power, Pakistan has more nuclear weaponry than India, which means A LOT in any global conflict.
And the thing is that the U.S. has no idea if India would side with them in an international conflict either. So if there will be a nuclear confrontation between the U.S. on one side, and the China-Russia-Pakistan triangle on the other side, there is a high probability that the U.S. would be the defeated side.
© 2024, All Rights Reserved by Pakistan Think Tank.
