Comment by Riaz Haq on November 22, 2019 at 10:30am

WASHINGTON: The Trump administration on Thursday sought to bring
Pakistan back into its sphere of influence by offering new business
opportunities with US for Islamabad alongside a lengthy critique of the
country’s engagement with Beijing through the China-Pakistan Economic
Corridor.


https://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/world/pakistan/us-warns-pakista...


The US push to regain ground it has lost to China came on the heels of
President Trump’s phone call to Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan,
ostensibly to thank him for Islamabad’s efforts in facilitating the release of
two Western hostages in Afghanistan. A White House statement said the
two leaders also reaffirmed their commitment to strengthening the USPakistan trade relationship as well as investment and people-to-people “potentially at an unsustainable cost to Pakistan.”
“Inflated pricing of power & development projects isn’t good for the Pakistani people. CPEC almost always takes the form of
burdensome loans or financing with Chinese state-owned enterprises and the Chinese government profiting. This is hardly the
'peace and win-win cooperation' OBOR is supposed to facilitate,” US Assistant Secretary of State for South Central Asia Alice
Wells tweeted ahead of a speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars, where she said Pakistan faced longterm economic damage with little return if China keeps pursuing its giant infrastructure push.
“While the world’s economies certainly benefit from initiatives that promote sustainable global investment & trade, OBOR is far
from responsible in its economic practices. OBOR lacks transparent financing practices. Failure to repay can lead to
unsustainable debt burdens, which can result in surrendering of assets and diminishing sovereignty,” Wells warned.
Wells also argued that CPEC also relies primarily on Chinese workers and supplies rather than giving that business to Pakistani
companies and workers. She contrasted CPEC with the US-Pakistan business partnership which she said "contributes to
sustainable growth and expertise that builds capacity for local communities and by bringing superior quality & technology,
drives productivity gains in Pakistan."
“Unlike the Chinese government, the US doesn’t tell businesses where to go; they go where they see the greatest
opportunities. There are countless commercial connections between US & #Pakistan leading to thousands of jobs for
Pakistanis,” Wells said, adding that the US culture of corporate social responsibility also provides models for creating jobs and
opportunities.
Pakistan though remains in thrall of Beijing, even though the Trump administration has twitted it by highlighting China’s poor
treatment of Muslims in Xinjiang province to prick its conscience. China though is reported to be unhappy with the pace of
implementation of CPEC projects, resulting in a recent ministerial reshuffle by Prime Minister Imran Khan to address Beijing’sies between the two countries.
Trump had earlier cut off aid to Pakistan in keeping with his distaste for doling out American freebies, but he has repeatedly
said he is in favor of greater trade with all countries as long as it is on a level playing field. Pakistan too has come around to
saying it prefers to grow through trade rather than aid.
Trump’s phone call came even as a senior US official critiqued Pakistan’s economic engagement with China under the One Belt
One Road (OBOR) rubric, warning that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), the main initiative under OBOR, comes

Comment by Riaz Haq on November 22, 2019 at 10:32am

Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Deng Xiaoping's comments in Beijing to Albanian Communist Party's visiting delegation in 1962 (as quoted in China’s India War, 1962 as quoted in"Bulletin: Inside China's Cold War" 2007:

"During the last two years it is clear that the American imperialists are helping two forces in Asia: Japan and India. These two forces have yet to form completely. The attempts by the American imperialists to increase the power of India are due to the fact that India is very populous, while Japan is both populous and technologically advanced. Of course, lesser countries of South Asia and Indochina are also included in this plan. Their specific measures are intended to help India become a great power, but its body is very weak. In other words, they are trying to shift India from a policy of neutrality to the side of the American imperialists. Should something like this come to fruition, it would be a blow not only to China, but to the Soviet Union as well. When they help India, they offend Pakistan. The public opinion in Pakistan is now on the side of a change in the government policy, and now Pakistan has a good position towards us. This has yet to be achieved completely. It would take a long time to achieve it."

https://books.google.com/books?id=7mgRckgFXoUC&pg=PA240&lpg...

 

Comment by Riaz Haq on November 22, 2019 at 10:52am

US Ambassador Wells said there was potential for “ever deeper” relationship with Pakistan.

https://tolonews.com/afghanistan/china-not-%E2%80%98real-player%E2%...

Wells also spoke about the US relationship with Pakistan, saying as “Pakistan takes steps to move away and to restrict the ability of non-state terrorist proxies, the potential for our relationship to grow ever-deeper is there.”

Comment by Riaz Haq on November 22, 2019 at 10:55am

Steve Coll quoted Ex Vice President Joe Biden as saying: "Pakistan is 50 times more important to US than Afghanistan"

Later in the interview, Coll acknowledged that there are several ungoverned areas like Somalia and weak states elsewhere from where Al Qaeda and other Islamic militants operate. However, he said Afghanistan is different because it's next door to Pakistan which has nuclear weapons. It's important to US because Islamic militants in Afghanistan threaten Pakistan's stability and security of its nuclear weapons that could fall into the hands of terrorists.

Coll's statements beg the following question: Are the US actions contributing to Pakistan's stability?

He answered it partly when he volunteered that Pakistan was a safe place when he traveled extensively throughout the country and covered Pakistan for Washington Post before 911.

He also said the Tehrik-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) cam close to marching to Islamabad in 2009 after they took over Swat.

Coll also said that Pakistan will not be persuaded by Trump's argument that the US is prepared to stay in Afghanistan for as long as it takes to "win" .

https://ww2.kqed.org/forum/2018/02/09/steve-coll-on-american-military-involvement-in-afghanistan-and-pakistan/

Comment by Riaz Haq on November 27, 2019 at 10:21pm

#US sending 15 #trade delegations to #Pakistan next year: says Sec Alice Wells after her speech critical of #China and #CPEC - Newspaper - http://DAWN.COM

https://www.dawn.com/news/1519260


The paper, now posted at the US State Department’s official site, says that the US Commerce Department has “already stepped up its activity in Pakistan with 15 trade delegations planned for the next year”.

And once the new expanded Deve­lopment Finance Corporation (DFC) is up and running, “Pakistan is going to be a country of great interest”.

According to the paper, the DFC will have more than double the investment cap than the Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), increasing from $29 billion to $60bn. OPIC is a US government agency which mobilises private capital for overseas investments.

Document suggests US-Pakistan ties are going to expand

The paper argues that doubling the cap would enable investment in projects that have high standards and are financially sustainable over the long haul.

While urging Pakistan to benefit from these additional US resources, Ms Wells reminded Islamabad last week that “true sustainable development is really a marathon and not a sprint. It requires the development of effective regulatory framework, strong rule of law, fiscal health, and an enabling business climate”.

She recalled that during Prime Minister Imran Khan’s visit to the United States in July, President Donald Trump was “extremely enthusiastic about the potential for increasing and expanding our US-Pakistan trade and investment relationship. And both our governments are working very hard to find practical ways to do that. We commend Pakistan for surging 28 slots on the World Bank’s 2020 Ease of Doing Business ranking and being highlighted as one of the top ten reformers globally,” she added.

The paper also highlights some commercial connections between the United States and Pakistan such as, the US firm Excelerate is prepared to potentially invest more than $300 million to upgrade a floating storage regasification unit in Pakistan’s first LNG terminal.

ExxonMobil has been working to support Pakistan’s ambitious effort to access new LNG supplies.

Over the last five years PepsiCo has invested $800m to expand its infrastructure and diversify products, and Coca-Cola has invested $500m in the last couple of years, providing thousands of jobs for Pakistanis.

Uber Technologies entered the Pakistani market in 2016 and currently operates across nine cities, providing employment opportunities for thousands of Pakistanis.

The paper argues that US corporate social models are outstanding vehicles that create jobs and opportunities for communities associated with these foreign investments.

So, the US-Pakistan Women’s Council, for instance, fosters cooperation between American and private sector, Pakistani private sector, to mentor women and girls. Another American brand, KFC, supports the education of children with hearing disabilities and other underprivileged young people, partnering with schools throughout Pakistan.

Proctor & Gamble’s Children’s Safe Drinking Water Programme has provided 875m litres of clean drinking water to Pakistani communities in need.

Noting that US companies bring superior quality and technology, the paper points out that Pakistani leaders often praise US companies like Cargill and Corteva, that are passing critical technology and driving “enormous productivity gains in Pakistan’s huge agricultural sector”.

The US has also helped establish some of Pakistan’s most prestigious educational institutions and centres including Lums, IBA, JPMC and the Centre for Advanced Studies in Energy at Nust.

“And just to be crystal clear, the US-Pakistan development partnership has primarily taken the form of grants — not loans,” said Ms Wells while adding that such links “offer a sense of the direction that we envision”.

Comment by Riaz Haq on December 10, 2019 at 8:03pm

Pakistan revives Belt-and-Road projects under Chinese pressure 

https://www.ft.com/content/ab809f2c-1101-11ea-a7e6-62bf4f9e548a

Islamabad calls in senior military official after economic crisis stalled investments Share on Twitter (opens new window) Share on Facebook (opens new window) 

 Save Stephanie Findlay in New Delhi and Farhan Bokhari in Islamabad 3 HOURS AGO

Pakistan has bowed to pressure from China to revive a string of Beijing-backed infrastructure projects that have run aground, appointing a senior Pakistani military official to streamline decision-making over the multi-billion-dollar investments.  

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is a key part of the Belt and Road Initiative, which Beijing sees as a 21st century Silk Road to connect Asia, Africa and Europe. But only half of the announced $62bn-worth of projects in Pakistan are under way as Islamabad scales back its financial commitments while it implements a $6bn IMF bailout package. 

 Beijing is frustrated with the slow pace of the initiative, which is supposed to be a shining example of China’s economically transformative investments, and has put pressure on Islamabad to put the military in charge. 

 Last month retired lieutenant general Asim Saleem Bajwa was appointed chairman of a new CPEC authority, reinforcing the military’s grip on the project and insulating it from prime minister Imran Khan’s fractious government. 

 “The job of the CPEC authority will bring focus to this vast project,” said a senior government official in Mr Khan’s office. “General Bajwa will also take care of the security aspects.” 

But even though the military is assuming greater control, analysts said Pakistan’s economic crisis will continue to constrain work on CPEC. 

 Islamabad has slashed imports, depreciated the rupee, decreased development spending and raised taxes in an effort to cut its substantial fiscal and current account deficits. Gross domestic product growth has tumbled from 5.8 per cent last year to a forecast 2.4 per cent this year. Exports are flatlining. 

Large-scale manufacturing production fell 5.9 per cent year on year in the three months from July to September, with some industries, including cars and pharmaceuticals, suffering double-digit decreases in production. Pakistan is now worried about falling into a debt trap Husain Haqqani, the Hudson Institute © Bloomberg 

China has long faced criticism that its BRI projects burden fiscally weak countries with unsustainable debt. Islamabad is expected to pay $40bn in debt repayments and dividends to China over the next two decades. 

Sakib Sherani, former adviser to the Pakistani finance minister, told the Financial Times that CPEC-related debt is “not unmanageable” but cautioned that Pakistan’s ability to meet its debt obligations hinges on increasing exports. “There is a disconnect. CPEC-related debt eventually must generate enough exports to be able to deal with the repayments,” he said. 

Last month US ambassador Alice Wells warned that “China is going to take a growing toll on the Pakistan economy”. She added: “Even if loan payments are deferred, they’re going to hang over Pakistan’s economic development potential, hamstringing prime minister Khan’s reform agenda.” 

Beijing dismissed these fears. “Debt incurred from CPEC stands at $4.9bn, less than one-tenth of Pakistan’s total debt. I’m afraid US is not bad at math, but rather misguided by evil calculations,” a Chinese spokesman said on Twitter. “Whatever the US says or does to sabotage our co-operation, China will work with Pakistan for steady progress in CPEC.” Recommended Special ReportChina’s Belt & Road Initiative Beijing insists BRI is no Marshall plan Pakistani officials have already said that CPEC would move away from grand infrastructure projects into the copper, gold, oil and gas sectors. It is unclear if a major railway project, the $9bn ML-I scheme which has already been delayed by four years, will go ahead. “Pakistan is now worried about falling into a debt trap,” said Husain Haqqani, a former Pakistan ambassador to the US and South Asia expert at the Hudson Institute. For its part, China fears it has heavily invested in the country “with little prospect of return, both strategic and economic”, Mr Haqqani said. The bigger concern for Beijing is CPEC’s image, some said. We’ll send you the news Explore our curated emails with crucial insights on global trade, M&A, tech and more. View our newsletters 

“The big battle at the moment is about CPEC’s reputation, and Beijing cares about salvaging that,” said Andrew Small, author of The China-Pakistan Axis. “They need to show BRI has been a success, that it hasn’t put Pakistan’s economy in trouble and that there isn’t a backlash.” The project’s performance in Pakistan, a close ally of China, could be a harbinger for BRI success elsewhere. “If they can’t do it in a context like this, it suggests that there is something flawed in the model,” said Mr Small. Beijing is already recalibrating, said Mr Small. On his first trip to China after assuming office, Mr Khan had asked for a bailout. 

“China has always wanted to avoid just handing out money,” said Mr Small. “CPEC was supposed to be the antithesis of this.”

Comment by Riaz Haq on December 11, 2019 at 11:16am

The West is competing with #China and #Russia for influence in #Afghanistan & Pakistan while #India’s case against #Pakistan is being viewed as having become weaker thanks to the many controversial decisions by #Modi . #Kashmir #CAB2019 http://www.ecoti.in/eTwNia via @economictimes

While Moody’s Investors Service lowered India’s credit rating from stable to negative last month, it raised Pakistan’s rating from negative to stable last week. ‘The rating affirmation,’ said Moody’s, ‘reflects Pakistan’s relativelylarge economy and robust long-term growth potential, coupled with ongoing institutional enhancements that raise policy credibility and effectiveness, albeit from a low starting point.’

-------------

It shows a poor understanding of global geopolitics for any one to imagine that western powers — not to mention China that now chairs FATF — are prepared to put Pakistan in the same box as Iran and North Korea.

The US, in particular, has vehemently opposed the latter and their nuclear capability while happily doing business with nuclear-armed Pakistan. The world seems to have come around to the view that after the Mumbai terror attacks of November 2008, there has been no major cross-border terror attack on any civilian target in India, and that the cross-border attacks on military installations are part of an ongoing undeclared war between the two neighbours.

Given recent developments in Jammu and Kashmir terror attacks, they will increasingly be viewed by world opinion as ‘locally staged’, if incontrovertible evidence to the contrary is not provided. All this will reduce the pressure on Pakistan to improve its behaviour.

Comment by Riaz Haq on December 17, 2019 at 8:14am

#CPEC has strategic implications for #China-#Pakistan, China-#India, India-#US, and US-China relations. #Washington's targeted support to Pakistan could prevent Pakistan’s dependence on China, mitigating some of the most negative effects https://carnegieendowment.org/2019/12/16/strategic-implications-of-... via @CarnegieEndow

by JAMES SCHWEMLEIN

Great power politics is resurgent in South Asia today. China’s growing military ambition in the region is matched in financial terms by its Belt and Road Initiative, the largest and most advanced component of which is the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. What remains unclear is how the United States should navigate the new dynamic. This report, which is based on research and consultations with experts worldwide, addresses the question of how the India-Pakistan rivalry will play into the emerging great power competition.

SUMMARY
China’s changing role in Pakistan offers an opportunity to examine China in a learning mode, in a challenging environment, and as an actor in the decades-long rivalry between Pakistan and India.
China’s long-term investments in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) can be explained in at least three ways: to demonstrate China’s attractiveness as a partner; to prove that China’s development model can be exported; and to use Pakistan as an element of its strategic competition with the United States and India.
Pakistan’s hopes for CPEC are mitigated by China’s apparent lack of interest in establishing an overland transit corridor and counterterrorism concerns, which are likely to be a persistent liability in the years ahead.
There is a growing potential that China’s surge into Pakistan could increase the threat that Pakistan poses to India, particularly if China expands its military position there and if Pakistan does not curtail its use of militant proxies. The resulting dynamic could prove a further impetus toward deepening the U.S.-India partnership in the face of a common threat from China and Pakistan.
The ultimate success of China’s investments will continue to be threatened by political and economic instability in Pakistan and the country’s ongoing support for terrorism.
The United States could offer targeted support to help Pakistan determine how best to use Chinese infrastructure to grow its economy, which could contribute to improving and stabilizing Pakistan.

Comment by Riaz Haq on January 24, 2020 at 8:28am

CPEC and Beyond: China and the US Fight For Influence In Pakistan
Beijing and Washington tussle to have their way with Islamabad’s foreign policy decisions.


https://thediplomat.com/2020/01/cpec-and-beyond-china-and-the-us-fi...



On Monday, the U.S. principal deputy assistant secretary of state for South and Central Asia, Alice Wells, in a statement said that a number of firms blacklisted by the World Bank had received contracts in the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC).

In her renewed criticism, Wells, who is on a four-day visit to Pakistan, noted that the lack of transparency in the existing deals and the financial conditions imposed by China have increased Pakistan’s overall debt.

This not the first time that Wells has criticized the CPEC. In November last year, Wells warned that the Chinese loans are “going to hang over Pakistan’s economic development potential, hamstringing Prime Minister [Imran] Khan’s reform agenda.”

Broadly, CPEC has come under U.S. criticism due to its wider linkage to China’s global Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) Project. While Washington’s overt criticism of the project continues, it has also continued to insisted that Pakistan is a sovereign state that can make any trade deals that the country’s leadership finds suited to its interests. After Wells’ recent criticism of the project, U.S. Ambassador to Pakistan Paul W. Jones explained that Wells’ “remarks were meant to generate a debate.”

------------------

it’s unlikely that Washington’s criticism of CPEC will wear out in the coming months or years. Arguably, policymakers in Pakistan are wary of Islamabad’s growing financial reliance on China but at the same time they have been unable to win any significant financial support from Washington. Khan’s government demanded a major review to CPEC projects when it came to power in 2018. However, to Khan’s frustration, Beijing was only willing to review projects that had not started yet. Reportedly, the matters were settled after Pakistan’s top military leadership intervened and assured China of Islamabad’s commitment.

Arguably, CPEC has emerged as the next battleground for the United States and China’s economic rivalry. Both countries’ warnings and counterwarnings are coming at a time when Pakistan is looking for financial assistance from both countries. Pakistan may not like China’s financial terms, but there is no other major investor willing to assist Islamabad at a time when the country is stuck in a major financial crisis.

Moreover, while the United States has assured Pakistan that it is greatly enhancing trade with the country, it’s unlikely that Islamabad will win Washington’s economic support at a level even close to Beijing’s financial commitments. However, it remains to be seen if Washington can allow Beijing to completely wipe out its ability to influence Pakistan’s policymakers.

It’s unlikely that Islamabad is going to be able to balance its relationship between China and the United States in the coming months or perhaps years as both countries compete for influence in Pakistan.

Comment by Riaz Haq on April 4, 2020 at 8:56pm

What Would #US-#Pakistan War Look Like?
One word: Hell! #India could help with runways for US warplanes. US would assume some #Pakistani #nuclear weapons would survive sustained air campaign to destroy them & then used against #American forces or targets. https://nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/what-would-hypothetical-us-p...

In the U.S. television series Homeland, the United States and Pakistan are brought to the brink of war. In real life, the two countries are allies, albeit strained ones at that, and many Americans believe Islamabad often actively works against Washington’s interests. If the relationship turned poisonous, how would the United States prosecute a war against Pakistan?
--------

A U.S. war with Pakistan would be extremely difficult to wage and fraught with difficulty. It would also be forced to proceed under the assumption that some Pakistani nuclear weapons would survive a sustained effort to destroy them, to be used against U.S. forces or targets in some way later in the campaign. This is the sort of uncertainty that can veto military action and makes a war between Washington and Islamabad an absolute conflict of last resort.

------------------

Of course, there is one regional power that can provide everything the U.S. needs, including local air bases and a large army, navy, and air force, already positioned in the theater with well-sketched battle plans: India. India could help with an air campaign, providing runways for U.S. fighter bombers to operate from, or even contribute its own airpower. Indian ground forces have a far shorter route to Islamabad and overmatch Pakistani forces on the ground.-----------


In order to proceed, let’s sketch out two war scenarios. In one, we’ll assume that the United States is pursuing an air-only campaign, in order to punish the country or strip it of some vital capability—nuclear weapons being a prime example. In the second scenario, the United States seeks to topple the country’s government entirely, including the occupation of the capital, Islamabad.
----------------

An air campaign against Pakistan would be slower and more fraught with difficulty than past campaigns. Pakistan’s Air Force has nearly four hundred fighters, including American F-16 Fighting Falcons, and would need to be quickly destroyed. U.S. Navy and Air Force aircraft could see their first significant air to air combat since the 1991 Persian Gulf War.

An all-out invasion of Pakistan would be much more difficult, bordering on impractical. An invasion would require securing the city of Karachi, a coastal city of 14 million, then a march upcountry of approximately 700 miles. Securing Karachi alone would be an immense effort dwarfing efforts to secure Baghdad in the late 2000s, one that required more than 100,000 U.S. troops and the cooperation of local militias.

----------------

Another power that could join such a conflict is China. China and Pakistan enjoy warm relations, and the rhetoric between the two countries suggests a relationship nearing that of a mutual defense pact. But it isn’t, and it’s not clear that China would risk direct conflict with the United States if Pakistan in some way overreached. China might, on the assumption that a U.S. puppet state in neighboring Pakistan would diminish China’s power and influence abroad. It’s worth remembering that the last time Chinese forces fought Americans was after the U.S.-led United Nations forces advanced into a state neighboring Beijing.

Comment

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• …
• 8
• Next ›
• Page