What's new

Pakistan and China: Sweet as can be?

Renegade

FULL MEMBER
Joined
Jun 13, 2009
Messages
551
Reaction score
0
Pakistan and China: Sweet as can be?



PAKISTAN’S ambassador to Beijing, Masood Kahn, was this week fully armed with metaphors to describe the robust friendship between the two countries. “We say it is higher than the mountains, deeper than the oceans, stronger than steel, dearer than eyesight, sweeter than honey, and so on.”

The relationship is indeed a geopolitical keystone for both countries. Pakistan serves as China’s closest friend both in South Asia and among Islamic countries. So close, indeed, that many suspect China has asked Pakistan for the valuable remains of the American stealth helicopter abandoned during the bin Laden raid. Meanwhile, China can help counterbalance Pakistan’s arch-rival, India, including in Afghanistan.

Pakistan seems keen to foster the impression that new tensions with America might nudge it even closer towards China. In his blustery speech to parliament on May 9th Prime Minister Yusuf Raza Gilani struck out on an odd tangent to praise China as an “all-weather friend”, providing Pakistan with strength and inspiration. Not to be outdone, President Asif Zardari issued an effusive statement of his own about a friendship “not matched by any other relationship between two sovereign countries”.

But if Islamabad is worried about falling out with Washington and hopes to get more out of Beijing, it may be in for disappointment. According to Zhu Feng of Peking University, such calculations based on “the traditional mentality of power politics” are misplaced. China’s robust, longstanding ties with Pakistan stand on their own merits, he says, and owe nothing to America’s standing in Pakistan. Both China and America want a stable Pakistan.

For all that, China’s dealings with Pakistan have always been conducted with one eye on India. Last year Beijing chose to supply Pakistan with two new civilian nuclear reactors, even though the deal appeared to violate Chinese non-proliferation commitments. It was a boon not only for Pakistan’s energy-starved economy. It was, as Mr Zhu points out, also a way for China to counterbalance a controversial nuclear deal reached earlier between America and India.

China and Pakistan have a lustily growing trade relationship, worth almost $9 billion last year. China provides military gear, including fighter jets and frigates. Some Chinese infrastructure projects in Pakistan have strategic implications. They include ports on the Arabian Sea and a proposed rail project which has yet to be approved, but which would arouse controversy, and Indian ire, by running through contested territory in Kashmir.

Still, China’s commitment to Pakistan has its limits. After devastating floods last year, America gave Pakistan $690m, 28% of all international aid. China’s contribution was a mere $18m. According to Andrew Small of the German Marshall Fund, an American policy institute, Pakistan may be “talking up the ‘China option’ beyond where the Chinese are willing to go.” China, he reckons, will be reluctant to tilt too far towards what might look like an anti-India alliance”. Despite border disagreements, China wants to keep its relations with India in reasonable order.

What is more, Pakistan’s chronic instability and its failure, whether by design or incompetence, to suppress extremism make Pakistan as hard a partner for China to trust as for America. “Sweeter than honey” may be plenty sweet enough.


Pakistan and China: Sweet as can be? | The Economist
 
After devastating floods last year, America gave Pakistan $690m, 28% of all international aid. China’s contribution was a mere $18m.
Pakistan and China: Sweet as can be? | The Economist

America also have given around 238 drone and missile atacks to Pakistan. China here too failed to give even one.

Indeed China-Pakistan friendship isn't that sweet either.:D

What a clownish article.
 
What surprises me is that China just offered $ 18m for flood relief. Heck!! we had offerd Pakistan $ 25m.
 
After devastating floods last year, America gave Pakistan $690m, 28% of all international aid. China’s contribution was a mere $18m

You can update your news?
 
After devastating floods last year, America gave Pakistan $690m, 28% of all international aid. China’s contribution was a mere $18m

You can update your news?


No offence mate, but thats what 'The Economist' says. Do ask them to update it.

I will myself be happy to note that Islamabad's all wether friend had given it (or offered) more money than it's arch rival India.
 
if you cut down the american aid no less than 75% went to their own people involved, and 25% went to flood victims.. I think it is often discussed.

pity attempt by Indian yet again.
 
Please point that out to 'The Economist', i am sure they will be happy to correct it.

Usually they do proper research befor printing facts & figures like that.

I do not think I am interested to do, but I am interested to tell you that it is a wrong fact, it is enough.
 
I do not think I am interested to do, but I am interested to tell you that it is a wrong fact, it is enough.

Alright. Feel at peace then.

But your word against an reputed international magazine published in a country that guarantees freedom of press, is simply not good enough.
 
Alright. Feel at peace then.

But your word against an reputed international magazine published in a country that guarantees freedom of press, is simply not good enough.

And what about ur words...............you are trying to make evil......between two countries........and you are still on same troll..........i thing once you got the correct information you must keep close your mouht.
 
Alright. Feel at peace then.

But your word against an reputed international magazine published in a country that guarantees freedom of press, is simply not good enough.

the economist is indeed the reputable magazines, it is specialized in publishing finance and general economy articles, however when it comes to international affairs and politics they are not very different from Fox news and CNN, I have been subscribing it for many years as it was one of the 'required' readings from my MA lists....

and it is the magazine published some articles about China's economy bubble and it is going to collapse in 2008 theories which were so funded by some people to use as the professional sources for their rather bizarre understanding of China. and the more ludicruos part was that the economist alomst and always quoted the 'democratic' government was the real cure for 'any' China problems``come on, we dont expect such naivities from such reputable publishers`
 
that guarantees freedom of press, is simply not good enough.

gulible people believe that``I dont see any course & effect in this```and freedom of press doesnt mean you can publish anything, look what happend to Wikileaks?
 
Alright. Feel at peace then.

But your word against an reputed international magazine published in a country that guarantees freedom of press, is simply not good enough.

Even if the PDF also have this information, it is Pakistan's news, you can look for yourself.

Incidentally, since you later, I decided to withdraw the "thank"
 
gulible people believe that``I dont see any course & effect in this```and freedom of press doesnt mean you can publish anything, look what happend to Wikileaks?

If you take a moment to think, as what could have happened to Wikileaks had they been in China, in comparison to that nothing has happened to wikileaks.

Julian Assange is still a free man, while Ai Wie Wie has disappeared for much less & even his family has not been told where he is being held, forget even informing them about his arrest.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom