Recently, quite a few stories have appeared on the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in both local and international publications. A lot of traction was gained by the cynics of CPEC by reporting factually incorrect information. Consequently, myth spurring on CPEC is on the rise. I am going to take this opportunity to debunk these myths by stating the facts.
A pointless controversy was created on the Long Term Plan (LTP) by a recent article featured in a local English-language newspaper. The report published as ‘LTP’ in that article was an initial draft by the China Development Bank (CDB) and not a part of the agreed LTP. That article basically cherry-picked information from different sources to present a distorted picture of the LTP. The fact is that the government of Pakistan has prepared its own plan after multiple stages of consultation with provinces, federal ministries and their respective technical groups. The LTP has been prepared to develop Pakistan in line with the seven pillars of Vision 2025 which are predicated on the notion of inclusive and sustainable development. The main pillars of LTP are connectivity, energy, industries and industrial parks, agricultural development and poverty alleviation, tourism, cooperation in areas concerning people’s livelihood and financial cooperation. It was shared with the Chinese authorities following approval by the cabinet.
The Chinese side has given its approval in principle, however, its formal approval is expected by the end of this month, as our Chinese counterparts were occupied by the Belt Road Forum. As soon as we get the official approval from the Chinese side, we will put the LTP on the CPEC website.
One of the biggest myths propagated on CPEC is that Pakistan might become a colony/province of China. Any historian would tell you that colonialism and imperialism are legacies of countries of the global north. China has never invaded any country nor harboured any imperial designs. Cynics point out towards rising trade deficit with China as a reason to show concern on CPEC. The reality is that China’s competitiveness in exports is universal and not idiosyncratic to Pakistan. Pakistan’s current trade deficit with China is $6.2 billion. In comparison, India’s trade deficit with China stands at $47 billion. The US trade deficit with China is $347 billion. Based on these trade deficit numbers, is it appropriate to infer that the US or India are becoming colonies/provinces of China? Certainly not. Similarly, it is ludicrous to make such claims about the Pakistan-China relationship. Both countries respect the sovereignty of each other and CPEC is based on the shared vision of both countries: Vision 2025 and OBOR.
At present, only a few thousand Chinese nationals are living in Pakistan and making a positive contribution towards our economy, the majority of them fall in the category of temporary labour migrants who will return back upon completion of the projects. In contrast, around 8 million Chinese are living in Malaysia, 400,000 in France; 600,000 in Japan; 900,000 in Canada and over 2.5 million are living in the US. Therefore, to say that Chinese are overtaking Pakistani society is nothing but a farce. Chinese nationals working in Pakistan are our national guests as they are helping us to build a developed Pakistan.
Another myth spread on CPEC is that China is dictating terms to Pakistan and the federal government is not consulting the provinces. The reality is quite the opposite. China and Pakistan work jointly in making an overall planning for a unified development of CPEC projects. In this regard, the Long Term Plan, Transport Monographic Study and respective MoUs guide the policy for CPEC.
All provinces have been consulted and invited to all meetings within Pakistan and abroad for their recommendations and review of CPEC projects. Earlier this month, the chief ministers of all four provinces under the leadership of PM Sharif attended OBOR Summit in China. On 29th December 2016, all CMs participated in the 6th JCC meeting which was held in Beijing. For institutional arrangement and development of CPEC, the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) of China along with the Planning, Development & Reform Ministry of Pakistan have constituted subsidiary working groups of the Joint Cooperation Committee (JCC) on planning, transport infrastructure, energy, Gwadar and industry cooperation.
Since the signing of the MoU in July 2013, six meetings of the JCC have been held. The highest officials of every provincial government are represented in JCC meetings. It is impossible to hide or misrepresent any information on CPEC from provinces. Information on ongoing and agreed CPEC projects is available on the official website of CPEC. Moreover, the planning ministry is always available to address any queries regarding CPEC. All the Chinese companies involved in CPEC projects are nominated by their government. Therefore, there is no question of favouritism on the part of the government of Pakistan.
Another myth propagated around is that Pakistan is not going to gain any economic benefits from CPEC and it is tantamount to the 2006 Free Trade agreement (FTA) with China. First of all, let me explain that an FTA works out on the basis of demand and supply of market forces. China enjoys a competitive edge in exports vis-à-vis all other economies of the world, including Pakistan, whereas CPEC is qualitatively different from an FTA. It provides necessary stimulus to kickstart the processes of industrialisation in Pakistan. Without sufficient electricity and adequate infrastructure, it is not possible to carry out industrialisation.
CPEC brings $35 billion investments in energy projects. Alongside coal, clean and renewable energy projects are part of the CPEC energy portfolio. The existing energy policy was made before the CPEC MoU was signed between China and Pakistan. Prior to CPEC, nobody was interested in making investments in our energy sector. At that crucial time, China took a lead and demonstrated to the world that Pakistan is a reliable and secure destination for foreign investments. Energy investments under CPEC will remove a major bottleneck that is in the way of realising high economic growth. It will reinforce the main grid structure, power transmission, distribution network, and improve power supply. Currently, 14 energy projects are in the implementation stage. Through CPEC projects, 10,000MW of electricity will be added to the national grid. Only 16,000MW was added to the national grid from 1947 to 2013. Moreover, energy projects under CPEC are not funded by Chinese loans instead they are undertaken in the IPP mode regulated as per NEPRA tariffs. Average cost of these projects is lower than the current cost of production of energy.
Under CPEC, new road and rail networks are to be built in all four provinces to enhance and improve connectivity within Pakistan. In addition to economic benefits of connectivity, social and regional cohesion will increase within Pakistan and in the region. Once energy and infrastructure bottlenecks are addressed, it is estimated that GDP will at least increase by more than 2 per cent from its current trend.
Similarly, one of the important components of the CPEC framework is industrial cooperation. Nine industrial zones were included in it with equal representation of all provinces. The cost of production is steadily increasing for many industries in China due to increase in wages. It is estimated that 85 million jobs will be relocated and countries in the Far East, Asia and Africa are competing for these jobs. Pakistan wants to secure a big share of the relocation of these industries and jobs. Once relocated, this will create a huge demand for labour in Pakistan and enormous employment opportunities will be available for Pakistanis.
In the current projects of CPEC, two thirds of the workforce is Pakistani and only a critical mass of labour force comes from China. This is a great opportunity for the Pakistani workforce to learn and update their skills from their Chinese counterparts. Already a boom in steel, cement and construction industries has created multiplier effects in the overall economy.
Economic benefits of CPEC are net positive for Pakistan. CPEC is a golden opportunity for Pakistan to undo the mistakes of the past and we, as a nation, cannot afford to be complacent about it.
Published in The Express Tribune, May 25th, 2017.
Jointly Shoulder Responsibility of Our Times,
Promote Global Growth
Keynote Speech by H.E. Xi Jinping
President of the People’s Republic of China
At the Opening Session
Of the World Economic Forum Annual Meeting 2017
Davos, 17 January 2017
President Doris Leuthard and Mr. Roland Hausin,
Heads of State and Government, Deputy Heads of State and Your Spouses,
Heads of International Organizations,
Dr. Klaus Schwab and Mrs. Hilde Schwab,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Friends,
I’m delighted to come to beautiful Davos. Though just a small town in the Alps, Davos is an important window for taking the pulse of the global economy. People from around the world come here to exchange ideas and insights, which broaden their vision. This makes the WEF annual meeting a cost-effective brainstorming event, which I would call “Schwab economics”.
“It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” These are the words used by the English writer Charles Dickens to describe the world after the Industrial Revolution. Today, we also live in a world of contradictions. On the one hand, with growing material wealth and advances in science and technology, human civilization has developed as never before. On the other hand, frequent regional conflicts, global challenges like terrorism and refugees, as well as poverty, unemployment and widening income gap have all added to the uncertainties of the world.
Many people feel bewildered and wonder: What has gone wrong with the world?
To answer this question, one must first track the source of the problem. Some blame economic globalization for the chaos in the world. Economic globalization was once viewed as the treasure cave found by Ali Baba in The Arabian Nights, but it has now become the Pandora’s box in the eyes of many. The international community finds itself in a heated debate on economic globalization.
Today, I wish to address the global economy in the context of economic globalization.
The point I want to make is that many of the problems troubling the world are not caused by economic globalization. For instance, the refugee waves from the Middle East and North Africa in recent years have become a global concern. Several million people have been displaced, and some small children lost their lives while crossing the rough sea. This is indeed heartbreaking. It is war, conflict and regional turbulence that have created this problem, and its solution lies in making peace, promoting reconciliation and restoring stability. The international financial crisis is another example. It is not an inevitable outcome of economic globalization; rather, it is the consequence of excessive chase of profit by financial capital and grave failure of financial regulation. Just blaming economic globalization for the world’s problems is inconsistent with reality, and it will not help solve the problems.
From the historical perspective, economic globalization resulted from growing social productivity, and is a natural outcome of scientific and technological progress, not something created by any individuals or any countries. Economic globalization has powered global growth and facilitated movement of goods and capital, advances in science, technology and civilization, and interactions among peoples.
But we should also recognize that economic globalization is a double-edged sword. When the global economy is under downward pressure, it is hard to make the cake of global economy bigger. It may even shrink, which will strain the relations between growth and distribution, between capital and labor, and between efficiency and equity. Both developed and developing countries have felt the punch. Voices against globalization have laid bare pitfalls in the process of economic globalization that we need to take seriously.
As a line in an old Chinese poem goes, “Honey melons hang on bitter vines; sweet dates grow on thistles and thorns.” In a philosophical sense, nothing is perfect in the world. One would fail to see the full picture if he claims something is perfect because of its merits, or if he views something as useless just because of its defects. It is true that economic globalization has created new problems, but this is no justification to write economic globalization off completely. Rather, we should adapt to and guide economic globalization, cushion its negative impact, and deliver its benefits to all countries and all nations.
There was a time when China also had doubts about economic globalization, and was not sure whether it should join the World Trade Organization. But we came to the conclusion that integration into the global economy is a historical trend. To grow its economy, China must have the courage to swim in the vast ocean of the global market. If one is always afraid of bracing the storm and exploring the new world, he will sooner or later get drowned in the ocean. Therefore, China took a brave step to embrace the global market. We have had our fair share of choking in the water and encountered whirlpools and choppy waves, but we have learned how to swim in this process. It has proved to be a right strategic choice.
Whether you like it or not, the global economy is the big ocean that you cannot escape from. Any attempt to cut off the flow of capital, technologies, products, industries and people between economies, and channel the waters in the ocean back into isolated lakes and creeks is simply not possible. Indeed, it runs counter to the historical trend.
The history of mankind tells us that problems are not to be feared. What should concern us is refusing to face up to problems and not knowing what to do about them. In the face of both opportunities and challenges of economic globalization, the right thing to do is to seize every opportunity, jointly meet challenges and chart the right course for economic globalization.
At the APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in late 2016, I spoke about the necessity to make the process of economic globalization more invigorated, more inclusive and more sustainable. We should act pro-actively and manage economic globalization as appropriate so as to release its positive impact and rebalance the process of economic globalization. We should follow the general trend, proceed from our respective national conditions and embark on the right pathway of integrating into economic globalization with the right pace. We should strike a balance between efficiency and equity to ensure that different countries, different social strata and different groups of people all share in the benefits of economic globalization. The people of all countries expect nothing less from us, and this is our unshirkable responsibility as leaders of our times.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Friends,
At present, the most pressing task before us is to steer the global economy out of difficulty. The global economy has remained sluggish for quite some time. The gap between the poor and the rich and between the South and the North is widening. The root cause is that the three critical issues in the economic sphere have not been effectively addressed.
First, lack of robust driving forces for global growth makes it difficult to sustain the steady growth of the global economy. The growth of the global economy is now at its slowest pace in seven years. Growth of global trade has been slower than global GDP growth. Short-term policy stimuli are ineffective. Fundamental structural reform is just unfolding. The global economy is now in a period of moving toward new growth drivers, and the role of traditional engines to drive growth has weakened. Despite the emergence of new technologies such as artificial intelligence and 3-D printing, new sources of growth are yet to emerge. A new path for the global economy remains elusive.
Second, inadequate global economic governance makes it difficult to adapt to new developments in the global economy. Madame Christine Lagarde recently told me that emerging markets and developing countries already contribute to 80 percent of the growth of the global economy. The global economic landscape has changed profoundly in the past few decades. However, the global governance system has not embraced those new changes and is therefore inadequate in terms of representation and inclusiveness. The global industrial landscape is changing and new industrial chains, value chains and supply chains are taking shape. However, trade and investment rules have not kept pace with these developments, resulting in acute problems such as closed mechanisms and fragmentation of rules. The global financial market needs to be more resilient against risks, but the global financial governance mechanism fails to meet the new requirement and is thus unable to effectively resolve problems such as frequent international financial market volatility and the build-up of asset bubbles.
Third, uneven global development makes it difficult to meet people’s expectations for better lives. Dr. Schwab has observed in his book The Fourth Industrial Revolution that this round of industrial revolution will produce extensive and far-reaching impacts such as growing inequality, particularly the possible widening gap between return on capital and return on labor. The richest one percent of the world’s population own more wealth than the remaining 99 percent. Inequality in income distribution and uneven development space are worrying. Over 700 million people in the world are still living in extreme poverty. For many families, to have warm houses, enough food and secure jobs is still a distant dream. This is the biggest challenge facing the world today. It is also what is behind the social turmoil in some countries.
All this shows that there are indeed problems with world economic growth, governance and development models, and they must be resolved. The founder of the Red Cross Henry Dunant once said, “Our real enemy is not the neighboring country; it is hunger, poverty, ignorance, superstition and prejudice.” We need to have the vision to dissect these problems; more importantly, we need to have the courage to take actions to address them.
First, we should develop a dynamic, innovation-driven growth model. The fundamental issue plaguing the global economy is the lack of driving force for growth. Innovation is the primary force guiding development. Unlike the previous industrial revolutions, the fourth industrial revolution is unfolding at an exponential rather than linear pace. We need to relentlessly pursue innovation. Only with the courage to innovate and reform can we remove bottlenecks blocking global growth and development.
With this in mind, G-20 leaders reached an important consensus at the Hangzhou Summit, which is to take innovation as a key driver and foster new driving force of growth for both individual countries and the global economy. We should develop a new development philosophy and rise above the debate about whether there should be more fiscal stimulus or more monetary easing. We should adopt a multipronged approach to address both the symptoms and the underlying problems. We should adopt new policy instruments and advance structural reform to create more space for growth and sustain its momentum. We should develop new growth models and seize opportunities presented by the new round of industrial revolution and digital economy. We should meet the challenges of climate change and aging population. We should address the negative impact of IT application and automation on jobs. When cultivating new industries and new forms models of business models, we should create new jobs and restore confidence and hope to our peoples.
Second, we should pursue a well-coordinated and inter-connected approach to develop a model of open and win-win cooperation. Today, mankind has become a close-knit community of shared future. Countries have extensive converging interests and are mutually dependent. All countries enjoy the right to development. At the same time, they should view their own interests in a broader context and refrain from pursuing them at the expense of others.
We should commit ourselves to growing an open global economy to share opportunities and interests through opening-up and achieve win-win outcomes. One should not just retreat to the harbor when encountering a storm, for this will never get us to the other shore of the ocean. We must redouble efforts to develop global connectivity to enable all countries to achieve inter-connected growth and share prosperity. We must remain committed to developing global free trade and investment, promote trade and investment liberalization and facilitation through opening-up and say no to protectionism. Pursuing protectionism is like locking oneself in a dark room. While wind and rain may be kept outside, that dark room will also block light and air. No one will emerge as a winner in a trade war.
Third, we should develop a model of fair and equitable governance in keeping with the trend of the times. As the Chinese saying goes, people with petty shrewdness attend to trivial matters, while people with vision attend to governance of institutions. There is a growing call from the international community for reforming the global economic governance system, which is a pressing task for us. Only when it adapts to new dynamics in the international economic architecture can the global governance system sustain global growth.
Countries, big or small, strong or weak, rich or poor, are all equal members of the international community. As such, they are entitled to participate in decision-making, enjoy rights and fulfill obligations on an equal basis. Emerging markets and developing countries deserve greater representation and voice. The 2010 IMF quota reform has entered into force, and its momentum should be sustained. We should adhere to multilateralism to uphold the authority and efficacy of multilateral institutions. We should honor promises and abide by rules. One should not select or bend rules as he sees fit. The Paris Agreement is a hard-won achievement which is in keeping with the underlying trend of global development. All signatories should stick to it instead of walking away from it as this is a responsibility we must assume for future generations.
Fourth, we should develop a balanced, equitable and inclusive development model. As the Chinese saying goes, “A just cause should be pursued for common good.” Development is ultimately for the people. To achieve more balanced development and ensure that the people have equal access to opportunities and share in the benefits of development, it is crucial to have a sound development philosophy and model and make development equitable, effective and balanced.
We should foster a culture that values diligence, frugality and enterprise and respects the fruits of hard work of all. Priority should be given to addressing poverty, unemployment, the widening income gap and the concerns of the disadvantaged to promote social equity and justice. It is important to protect the environment while pursuing economic and social progress so as to achieve harmony between man and nature and between man and society. The 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development should be implemented to realize balanced development across the world.
A Chinese adage reads, “Victory is ensured when people pool their strength; success is secured when people put their heads together.” As long as we keep to the goal of building a community of shared future for mankind and work hand in hand to fulfill our responsibilities and overcome difficulties, we will be able to create a better world and deliver better lives for our peoples.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Friends,
China has become the world’s second largest economy thanks to 38 years of reform and opening-up. A right path leads to a bright future. China has come this far because the Chinese people have, under the leadership of the Communist Party of China, blazed a development path that suits China’s actual conditions.
This is a path based on China’s realities. China has in the past years succeeded in embarking on a development path that suits itself by drawing on both the wisdom of its civilization and the practices of other countries in both East and West. In exploring this path, China refuses to stay insensitive to the changing times or to blindly follow in others’ footsteps. All roads lead to Rome. No country should view its own development path as the only viable one, still less should it impose its own development path on others.
This is a path that puts people’s interests first. China follows a people-oriented development philosophy and is committed to bettering the lives of its people. Development is of the people, by the people and for the people. China pursues the goal of common prosperity. We have taken major steps to alleviate poverty and lifted over 700 million people out of poverty, and good progress is being made in our efforts to finish building a society of initial prosperity in all respects.
This is a path of pursuing reform and innovation. China has tackled difficulties and met challenges on its way forward through reform. China has demonstrated its courage to take on difficult issues, navigate treacherous rapids and remove institutional hurdles standing in the way of development. These efforts have enabled us to unleash productivity and social vitality. Building on progress of 30-odd years of reform, we have introduced more than 1,200 reform measures over the past four years, injecting powerful impetus into China’s development.
This is a path of pursuing common development through opening-up. China is committed to a fundamental policy of opening-up and pursues a win-win opening-up strategy. China’s development is both domestic and external oriented; while developing itself, China also shares more of its development outcomes with other countries and peoples.
China’s outstanding development achievements and the vastly improved living standards of the Chinese people are a blessing to both China and the world. Such achievements in development over the past decades owe themselves to the hard work and perseverance of the Chinese people, a quality that has defined the Chinese nation for several thousand years. We Chinese know only too well that there is no such thing as a free lunch in the world. For a big country with over 1.3 billion people, development can be achieved only with the dedication and tireless efforts of its own people. We cannot expect others to deliver development to China, and no one is in a position to do so. When assessing China’s development, one should not only see what benefits the Chinese people have gained, but also how much hard effort they have put in, not just what achievements China has made, but also what contribution China has made to the world. Then one will reach a balanced conclusion about China’s development.
Between 1950 and 2016, despite its modest level of development and living standard, China provided more than 400 billion yuan of foreign assistance, undertook over 5,000 foreign assistance projects, including nearly 3,000 complete projects, and held over 11,000 training workshops in China for over 260,000 personnel from other developing countries. Since it launched reform and opening-up, China has attracted over $1.7 trillion of foreign investment and made over $1.2 trillion of direct outbound investment, making huge contribution to global economic development. In the years following the outbreak of the international financial crisis, China contributed to over 30 percent of global growth every year on average. All these figures are among the highest in the world.
The figures speak for themselves. China’s development is an opportunity for the world; China has not only benefited from economic globalization but also contributed to it. Rapid growth in China has been a sustained, powerful engine for global economic stability and expansion. The inter-connected development of China and a large number of other countries has made the world economy more balanced. China’s remarkable achievement in poverty reduction has contributed to more inclusive global growth. And China’s continuous progress in reform and opening-up has lent much momentum to an open world economy.
We Chinese know only too well what it takes to achieve prosperity, so we applaud the achievements made by others and wish them a better future. We are not jealous of others’ success; and we will not complain about others who have benefited so much from the great opportunities presented by China’s development. We will open our arms to the people of other countries and welcome them aboard the express train of China’s development.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Friends,
I know you are all closely following China’s economic development, and let me give you an update on the state of China’s economy. China’s economy has entered what we call a new normal, in which major changes are taking place in terms of growth rate, development model, economic structure and drivers of growth. But the economic fundamentals sustaining sound development remain unchanged.
Despite a sluggish global economy, China’s economy is expected to grow by 6.7 percent in 2016, still one of the highest in the world. China’s economy is far bigger in size than in the past, and it now generates more output than it did with double-digit growth in the past. Household consumption and the services sector have become the main drivers of growth. In the first three quarters of 2016, added value of the tertiary industry took up 52.8 percent of the GDP and domestic consumption contributed to 71 percent of economic growth. Household income and employment have steadily risen, while per unit GDP energy consumption continues to drop. Our efforts to pursue green development are paying off.
The Chinese economy faces downward pressure and many difficulties, including acute mismatch between excess capacity and an upgrading demand structure, lack of internal driving force for growth, accumulation of financial risks, and growing challenges in certain regions. We see these as temporary hardships that occur on the way forward. And the measures we have taken to address these problems are producing good results. We are firm in our resolve to forge ahead. China is the world’s largest developing country with over 1.3 billion people, and their living standards are not yet high. But this reality also means China has enormous potential and space for development. Guided by the vision of innovative, coordinated, green, open and shared development, we will adapt to the new normal, stay ahead of the curve, and make coordinated efforts to maintain steady growth, accelerate reform, adjust economic structure, improve people’s living standards and fend off risks. With these efforts, we aim to achieve medium-high rate of growth and upgrade the economy to higher end of the value chain.
— China will strive to enhance the performance of economic growth. We will pursue supply-side structural reform as the general goal, shift the growth model and upgrade the economic structure. We will continue to cut overcapacity, reduce inventory, deleverage financing, reduce cost and strengthen weak links. We will foster new drivers of growth, develop an advanced manufacturing sector and upgrade the real economy. We will implement the Internet Plus action plan to boost effective demand and better meet the individualized and diverse needs of consumers. And we will do more to protect the ecosystem.
— China will boost market vitality to add new impetus to growth. We will intensify reform efforts in priority areas and key links and enable the market to play a decisive role in resources allocation. Innovation will continue to feature prominently on our growth agenda. In pursuing the strategy of innovation-driven development, we will bolster the strategic emerging industries, apply new technologies and foster new business models to upgrade traditional industries; and we will boost new drivers of growth and revitalize traditional ones.
— China will foster an enabling and orderly environment for investment. We will expand market access for foreign investors, build high-standard pilot free trade zones, strengthen protection of property rights, and level the playing field to make China’s market more transparent and better regulated. In the coming five years, China is expected to import $8 trillion of goods, attract $600 billion of foreign investment and make $750 billion of outbound investment. Chinese tourists will make 700 million overseas visits. All this will create a bigger market, more capital, more products and more business opportunities for other countries. China’s development will continue to offer opportunities to business communities in other countries. China will keep its door wide open and not close it. An open door allows both other countries to access the Chinese market and China itself to integrate with the world. And we hope that other countries will also keep their door open to Chinese investors and keep the playing field level for us.
— China will vigorously foster an external environment of opening-up for common development. We will advance the building of the Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific and negotiations of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership to form a global network of free trade arrangements. China stands for concluding open, transparent and win-win regional free trade arrangements and opposes forming exclusive groups that are fragmented in nature. China has no intention to boost its trade competitiveness by devaluing the RMB, still less will it launch a currency war.
Over three years ago, I put forward the “Belt and Road” initiative. Since then, over 100 countries and international organizations have given warm responses and support to the initiative. More than 40 countries and international organizations have signed cooperation agreements with China, and our circle of friends along the “Belt and Road” is growing bigger. Chinese companies have made over $50 billion of investment and launched a number of major projects in the countries along the routes, spurring the economic development of these countries and creating many local jobs. The “Belt and Road” initiative originated in China, but it has delivered benefits well beyond its borders.
In May this year, China will host in Beijing the Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation, which aims to discuss ways to boost cooperation, build cooperation platforms and share cooperation outcomes. The forum will also explore ways to address problems facing global and regional economy, create fresh energy for pursuing inter-connected development and make the “Belt and Road” initiative deliver greater benefits to people of countries involved.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear Friends,
World history shows that the road of human civilization has never been a smooth one, and that mankind has made progress by surmounting difficulties. No difficulty, however daunting, will stop mankind from advancing. When encountering difficulties, we should not complain about ourselves, blame others, lose confidence or run away from responsibilities. We should join hands and rise to the challenge. History is created by the brave. Let us boost confidence, take actions and march arm-in-arm toward a bright future.
Thank you!
CHINA-PAKISTAN ECONOMIC CORRIDOR MAPS & STRATEGIC IMPORTANCE
Rejoinder to Imtiaz Alam By Brig Asif H. Raja
Posted by admin in Asif Haroon Raja (Retd):Pakistan Army, Brig, Commentary on June 4th, 2016
Rejoinder to Imtiaz Alam
By
Brig Asif H. Raja
on
May 20, 2016
by
Asif Haroon Raja
Imtiaz Alam is a senior journalist who writes articles and hosts programs on TV channels. He also heads SAFMA, a dubious organization which reportedly is sponsored by RAW. SAFMA in league with Aman ki Asha, another shady organization co-hosted by Jang-Geo Group and Indian media group is also patronized by RAW.
The two have been working in tandem to improve Indo-Pakistan relations and to promote peace and friendship between the two arch rivals.
Notwithstanding the apparent noble intentions, in practical terms the duo has always been espousing the cause of India and undermining Pakistan. In a subtle manner a message conveyed that it is futile for Pakistan to stand up against the military might of India, which is five times superior and its economy is shining.
Alam says India has more than eight times bigger economy in terms of GDP and will become 3rd largest economy in next three decades. Its defence spending is 1.8% of its GDP and defence budget now stands at $50 billion a year. In contrast, Pakistan in his view is out in the cold.
The message given by him and his ilk is to accept the ground reality and succumb to India’s demand of accepting its regional hegemony and to forget about Kashmir by accepting the Line of Control (LoC) as a permanent border between the two Kashmirs. Only then will the two can live as peaceful and friendly neighbors and peace will help the two to prosper economically.
The two groups have all along blamed Pakistan for maintaining an aggressive posture on Kashmir and promoting Jihadi culture in Kashmir by supporting non-state actors to bleed India. Alam says that successive governments of Pakistan have been taking a cyclic course of an arms race with India. He has advised Pakistani leaders to say no to arms race to avoid self-immolation. The two suspicious outfits have gone underground ever since extremist BJP under a terrorist Narendra Modi has gained power in India and embarrassed India’s farce of secularism, which had kept the world fascinated and impressed for a very long time.
Imtiaz Alam is a committed Indian fan and being a secular has derided Islamists in Pakistan, dubbing all of them as extremists and terrorists.
In the past, he always criticised Pak Army and ISI, saying they have been using Jihadis as their strategic assets. He also criticises government’s policies on Kashmir, defence, nuclear, or its dealings with India. His write-ups in newspapers and stance on electronic media testifies his bent of mind.
In his recent article “When will we say no to the arms race” dated May 19, 2016 in ‘The News’, he has twisted facts of Indo-Pak history to berate Pakistan’s military rulers in particular and to project India in good light.
He contends that Pakistan joined western military blocks to counter balance India but doesn’t highlight the distressing circumstances under which Pakistan was created and the plethora of problems loaded upon newly born state by India to ensure its death in the crib.
He didn’t mention about India gobbling up 565 princely states including two-thirds Kashmir and the states wanting to join Pakistan, annexation of Sikkim, Diu and Goa after 1947 and its threatening posture against Pakistan which impelled Pakistan to seek security under the umbrella of western pacts.
He callously mentions that Pakistan relied upon non-state actors from the beginning and used them in 1948 war in Kashmir. This is travesty of truth.
Going by Partition plan, Kashmir was to become part of Pakistan, but it was annexed by Indian military in October 1947. But for the voluntary dash of tribesmen from FATA, whole of Kashmir would have been seized by India. Pakistan government had no role or control over the tribesmen who had gone there to save the Muslim Kashmiris getting massacred by Dogra Army.
Ever since Kashmir has become the bone of contention between the two neighbors and the two have gone to war in 1965 and in 1971.
Alam contends that Indian military’s drubbing at the hands of Chinese in 1962 conflict encouraged Ayub Khan to launch Operation Gibraltar in August 1965, which then triggered 1965 war. Why he hesitates to write that Ayub Khan didn’t exploit the precarious condition of India in 1962 and went to the extent of proposing joint defence to India against communism?
Why he overlooked the fact that despite series of UN resolutions and Nehru’s pledge to grant right of self-determination to Kashmiris and holding a plebiscite under the auspices of the UN, India didn’t honor. India’s u turn and its expansion and modernization of armed forces with the help of Soviet, western and American military assistance after 1962, which had begun to tilt the military balance in favor of India had impelled Pakistan to launch Operation Gibraltar. Alam didn’t say anything that while Operation Gibraltar was in a disputed territory which was in India’s illegal occupation, India stealthily crossed the international border on 6th September 1965 without declaring war with the aim of destroying Pakistan’s armed forces but failed.
While describing the 1971 crisis in erstwhile East Pakistan, Alam brazenly twists historical facts by saying that rather than transferring power to Mujibur Rahman led Awami League that had won the elections, Gen Yahya opted for a military action in March 1971 in East Pakistan with the support of non-state actors Al-Shams and Al-Badr which resulted in over one million civilian casualties. By saying this at a time when Hasina Wajid’s regime is busy hanging aged Jamaat-e-Islami leaders on account of so-called 1971 war crimes, he has further sprinkled salt on the wounds of Islamists in Bangladesh but delighted India and Bangladesh rulers.
Rather than paying tributes to them, who had fought the rebels along with Pak Army to save the motherland, he declared them as non-state actors (rebels) and ignored brutal Mukti Bahinis.
Either he has no clue of history or he has published the dictated script given by his patrons. Why does he forget that for almost 15 days Gen Yahya and his team sat with Mujib and his team in Dacca and gave in to all his six points and much more and announced him as PM of Pakistan.
This he did at a time when Mujib had rebelled against the state on 01 March 1971 and his goons had massacred over 1, 50, 000 non-Bengalis and pro-Pakistan Bengalis (Biharis) and raped women with utmost ferocity and barbarity. A state within state had been created and people of East Pakistan (mostly terrorised by Mukti Bahinis) had defied central authority.
The Indian and western media had remained tight-lipped over their atrocities, (and so is Alam even after learning the whole truth about 1971 conspiracy). When Yahya learnt that Mujib and his henchmen had made up their mind to break away from Pakistan and any solution within the concept of united Pakistan was unacceptable to them, he ordered the military action on the night of 25 March 1971 to save Pakistan from disintegrating. At that time Al-Shams and Al-Badar were not in existence.
The rebellion was suppressed by the lone 14 Infantry Division and by May 1971 order was restored in the entire province and a civilian Bengali governor Malik was installed. Casualties were in few thousands and not a million as claimed by Alam.
Mujib and his stalwarts after creation of Bangladesh had bloated the figure of casualties to 3 million and rape of 300,000 women. Alam must be agreeing to these bizarre figures. Al-Badr and Al-Shams were created as Razaqars essentially for village defences during the counter insurgency operations and for rear areas security during war because of paucity of troops. Once order was restored, general amnesty was announced for all the Awami League leaders based in India and the refugees but India blocked them.
All attempts made by Pakistan to find a political settlement were turned down by haughty Indira Gandhi. Indian leaders were smelling blood and they didn’t want to miss a chance of century (as stated by Subramanian). Pakistan internal matter was made into Indian issue. Mukti Bahinis were eulogized and Pak military demonized as human eating monsters and rapists by Indian media as well as western media.
Alam in his article has put the entire blame on Field Marshal Ayub Khan and Gen Yahya Khan and skipped role of ZA Bhutto and that of Mujib in the 1971 tragedy. Thereafter, in a way he holds a grudge against Bhutto for rebuilding a defeated Army and putting up a confrontationist national security paradigm despite signing Simla agreement.
He forgets that soon after creating Bangladesh, India embarked upon an ambitious force modernization program with the help of USSR and also carried out nuclear explosion in August 1974. At the same time, Sindh and Baluchistan were given as new targets for subversion to RAW in 1973. We all know that RAW in league with KGB and KHAD had fully supported Baloch insurgency from 1973 to 1978 and had also supported Sindhu Desh movement in Sindh. So what should have Bhutto done and why should he not have laid the foundation of nuclear program when India had expansionist designs and had not reconciled to existence of Pakistan? Kashmir issue was virtually frozen after Simla agreement and flawed policy of bilateralism introduced to bar third party intervention.
Alam then picks up his stick against Gen Ziaul Haq accusing him of creating non-state jihadi actors and making Pakistan an undeclared nuclear weapon power. He skips the role of US which in actuality brought in Jihadis from 70 Muslim countries, funded and militarized madrassas and funded the proxy war in Afghanistan. He fails to mention that Zia’s strategy was a 100% success story.
He also fails to mention that the US abandonment of Afghanistan in haste had led to civil war and Pakistan had to suffer the consequences. Another point which he missed was the Pressler Amendment which became a cause for rise in debts and political instability. Consequently the democratic era failed to pay any heed to ill effects of Afghan imbroglio. So to say that the erstwhile western patrons subjected Pakistan to sanctions in the aftermath of nuclear explosions in 1998 will not be correct. Those were additional sanctions.
Rather than condemning India’s nuclear explosions, he sees Pakistan’s response negatively. In his view Pakistan under Nawaz should have pursued Gen Zia’s strategy of nuclear ambiguity rather than putting the bomb in the open shelf. In his view Pakistan’s nuclear response led to nuclear arms race. He intentionally overlooked Zia’s series of proposals to make South Asia Nuclear Free Zone which were out rightly rejected by India. Pakistan didn’t want to sign NPT and CTBT unilaterally when India refused to sign.
Yet, India was awarded civil nuclear deal by USA in 2008 and then made member of Nuclear Suppliers Group to enable India to give fillip to its weaponized nuclear program. Conversely, Pakistan’s nuclear program became an eyesore for India, Israel and USA and all sorts of objections were raised.
Alam then dwells on India’s future grandiose plans of becoming a big power and a bulwark against China. He rightly highlights that in partnership with USA, India under Maritime security and joint strategic vision for Asia-Pacific, and naval cooperation in Indian Ocean is leaving Pakistan far behind and creating unbridgeable asymmetry on conventional plane. At the same time he adds that Pakistan’s nuclear weapons and war heads are more than India’s stocks and is geared towards becoming the fifth largest nuclear power by 2025. (Stolen from biased western analysts). He then subtly makes a mention of Pakistan’s tactical nukes and their use on its own soil to thwart Indian intrusion, and Pakistan’s preference for first-strike option.
After describing the horrors of nuclear war and relating it to Mutually Assured Destruction, Alam belittles concept of deterrence saying it’s a flawed doctrine. He then dwells upon Pakistan’s minimum nuclear deterrence now jumping to full spectrum nuclear deterrence and lists out the types of missiles Pakistan has to counter India’s Cold Start doctrine and continental triad nuclear doctrine. He then delivers the best punch by asserting that in response to Pakistan’s use of non-state actors (strategic assets), Ajit Doval’s passive-aggressive and aggressive doctrine is in full play by co-opting proxies from within and from Afghanistan.
One wonders why Alam is shy of making a mention that the main reasons of arms race and nuclearisation of South Asia are unresolved Kashmir issue, India’s intransigence and belligerent attitude. Why doesn’t he say that India has always aspired for Akhand Bharat and wants to become a regional hegemon in South Asia, Indian Ocean including Arabian Sea? He looks the other way to Pakistan’s military strategy which is defensive in nature and its nuclear program which is meant to safeguard its territorial integrity and sovereignty. Pakistan has no territorial claims with any neighbor and has desired peaceful relations with all. India’s military strategy on the other hand is offensive in nature and imperialist in design and has disputes with all its neighbors. India uses proxy war, Chankyan tactics and propaganda as tools to achieve its sinister objectives.
Since 1989, India is constantly raising its defence budget which now totals $50 billion annually and is feverishly buying sophisticated war machines for the three services of Indian military and testing new range of nuclear tipped missiles to disable Pakistan’s nuclear deterrence.
It will be too simplistic and naïve to think that India’s conventional and nuclear build up is meant to confront China. After the 1962 humiliating defeat, India will never ever try to flex its military muscles against China. More so, Great Himalayas stand as a barrier between the two neighbors which prevent classical invasion by any side.
Over 70% of India’s strike formations and air bases are deployed against Pakistan. The latter cannot match Indian military superiority which is 5:1, but Pakistan strives to maintain strategic balance of 3:1 and reinforces it with nuclear deterrence. Big powers have always played a role in tilting the military balance in favor of India and currently the US is going out of the way to help its strategic partner India in expanding and upgrading its conventional and nuclear capabilities.
This process has been going on since 1993. At the same time the US has been objecting to Pakistan’s acquisitions from China and denying its bare minimum defence needs. Blockage of F-16s and close support fund are the recent examples.
In the 1980s, Russia helped India to build its navy. Nuclear powered Chakra submarine and Talwar Frigates fitted with nuclear tipped Brahmo missiles were provided by Russia. Now the US in its bid to dominate Indian Ocean is helping Indian Navy to become a blue water navy. India has developed intermediate range K-4 nuclear ballistic missiles which will be fitted on Arihant submarines. K-5 missiles are also being built.
This will nuclearise Indian Ocean and jeopardise the security of 32 littoral states situated around it. Pakistan will be faced with land based and sea based nuclear and missile threats which will further exacerbate its security. On May 15, India conducted an interceptor missile test of its advanced air defence Ashwin and Israel has provided the technology. These developments have altered the strategic balance and forced Pakistan to counter the newly emerged threat.
Alam is reinforcing Indo-US unjust stance by advising Pakistan not to upgrade its defence capabilities.
It is utterly unfair on part of Alam to equate Pakistan with India by saying both are indulging in arms race and in nuclearisation of the region. His claim that Pakistan is solely responsible for making use of non-state actors is untrue. I am sure he must be knowing who created and supported Mukti Bahini and LTTE, and now who is supporting TTP, BLA, BRA, BLF, and MQM.
I will advise my friend to go through articles written by Indians, or see Pakistan specific programs aired by Indian TV channels. None has ever advised Indian rulers to cut down defence budget, or to show restraint, or to solve Kashmir issue. Jingoism in India against Pakistan is at its peak and so are covert operations in Balochistan, FATA and Karachi by RAW. Arrested Indian naval officer Kal Bhushan Yadav, working for RAW has spilled the beans and reconfirmed Pakistan’s stated position that RAW is deeply involved in destabilizing Pakistan.
RAW agents in dozens are being rounded up and the figure has crossed 400. Combing operation is going on in urban centres to demolish all sorts of foreign networks.
The writer is defence analyst, columnist, author of five books, Director Measac Research Centre, Director Board of Governors Thinkers Forum [email protected]
BhaRAT Infiltration of Journalists, BhaRAT=CPEC ENEMY, Imtiaz Alam, RAW Bribery, Raw-Mossad Axis, SAFMA-RAW Front, Stealth Enemy Journalist
No Comments