# CPEC: The devil is not in the details



## ravi gupta

*CPEC: The devil is not in the details*

*Herald*


 Perspective | CPEC: The devil is not in the details
Perspective
*CPEC: The devil is not in the details*
Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan







A guard keeps watch at Gwadar Port, Balochistan | AP
The first outgoing shipment of containers carrying Chinese goods departed from Gwadar port on November 13, 2016. The media event was attended by Pakistan’s top policymakers as well as a high-level Chinese delegation. Despite this important first step for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), many people in Pakistan still approach this project with a sense of cautious optimism.

Nearly all will say CPEC is a game-changer, but some will ask for whom? Others will flag that CPEC is the largest foreign investment into Pakistan, but many will question whether the country will be able to bear the debt burden resulting from it. Some will talk up how the various sub-routes could lift under-developed cities and towns, but others will question whether these sub-routes will even materialise as China is really only interested in the direct route from Kashgar to Gwadar.

To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realize that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy

This confusion exists because fresh information on CPEC is mostly anecdotal, rather than from a credible official source. People will highlight the increasing number of Chinese in the country (on flights, hotels, shopping malls, etc); the rapid pace of development at Gwadar port; and how the first Chinese shipment moved through different ports of Pakistan to reach Gwadae. Other than the recent shipment, concrete details are scarce.

Even so, Pakistanis feel the partnership with China is critically important for the country, though they are unsure whether it will materialise fully. On the other hand, the global reaction to China’s One-Belt-One-Road (OBOR) – of which CPEC is a part – falls into one of two categories: those who think the project is simply not feasible in terms of scale, or the resources needed or the timeline; and those who fear that OBOR is China’s master plan for global domination in the 21st century (see map below).

Observers concerned about OBOR’s feasibility flag the sheer scale of this undertaking, and the apparent disconnect with available funding sources. Bankers will highlight the inherent risks in long-term infrastructure projects, which are compounded by the large number of participating countries. They will focus on financial/trade guarantees, regulatory reach/enforcement, and legal cover and recourse.

While none of these misgivings are unreasonable, we believe they fail to consider several key points. But the basic issue raised by sceptics is entirely legitimate.

So the 46 billion dollar question is whether these fine-print concerns could sink the project. Is the devil really in the details?





Map by Essa Taimur
What China seeks from OBOR

To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realise that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy. In fact, if China’s economic growth slows significantly, there are legitimate fears this could spark social unrest and political instability.

In our view, the challenges facing Chinese policymakers could be ranked as follows:


Secure shipping lanes. As the world’s largest importer of oil and gas, China needs to ensure that its shipping routes are not vulnerable at the choke point – the Malacca Straits. Hence, Corridors 1 and 2 of OBOR have immense strategic value for China, not just for fuels and minerals, but also to access Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
Develop Western China. While the coastal areas are largely developed, Western China is somewhat neglected. For political harmony, policymakers need to focus on Western China, which explains why Corridors 1, 2 and 3 of OBOR originate out of the Western provinces.
Use China’s spare capacity. Building physical infrastructure has fueled China’s economic growth. With growing concerns that policymakers may have over-invested, China’s installed capacity in steel, cement, bulk chemicals and heavy machinery, is now under-utilised. Building infrastructure in neighbouring countries would be a convenient way to use this spare capacity.
Create new export markets. China perhaps realises that exports to the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which have been driving its economic growth, may continue to fall. In effect, it needs to cultivate new markets in Africa and Central Asia, which have significant growth potential.
Create goodwill with neighbouring countries. OBOR entails establishing training institutes and schools in participating countries, which should support the project and be mutually beneficial.
While it is clear that China has to be ambitious, OBOR may not be quite as ambitious as it appears. For example, China may not deliver all six corridors, these corridors may not extend as deeply as envisaged, and each corridor may not include roads, railroads and pipelines as currently planned. But even half of the currently planned OBOR network would go a long way towards securing what China needs.

In fact, we believe there is a latent priority within the six OBOR corridors, with Corridor 1 and 2 on top of the list for strategic reasons. This may be why Corridor 1 (CPEC) has been the first order of business for China under OBOR. Taking a staggered approach makes sense, as it limits the resources that have to be committed upfront. Furthermore, negotiating the first two corridors is likely to be less problematic for the Chinese (compared to Corridors 5 and 6) as there are fewer participating countries in Corridors 1 and 2 (Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Iran) -- and some of these countries do not enjoy close ties with the United States.

China’s unique approach to economic reforms

Many third world countries were more developed than China in the 1970s. In light of this, China’s current standing in the global economy clearly reveals why its economic transformation is considered a miracle. After Tiananmen Square in 1989, China embraced economic reforms with even greater fervour.

The architect of this accelerated growth was Deng Xiaoping. In 1978, Deng challenged the Chinese to double China’s economy by 2000 and make China a middle-income country by 2050. China far exceeded his expectations when it overtook Japan to become the second-largest economy in 2010. Deng’s heuristic (learning-by-doing) approach to economic reforms defied the collective wisdom of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, under which the World Bank and IMF operate, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy. Compared to Pakistan, the Chinese were far more practical – and result-oriented – in their approach to economic reforms.

Most importantly, China displayed the political will to change. But political will, while essential for the success of reforms, is not enough. An effective strategy is also needed and China used a novel one that yielded unprecedented results.

Bo Qu, a visiting scholar at Princeton University, highlights two key characteristics of China’s economic reforms since 1978.

It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy.

First, economic reforms do not proceed according to a well-defined blueprint. Qu states that experimentation is a fundamental part of China’s policy formulation, and the process is primarily driven by specific problems encountered during implementation. In effect, the real focus should be on solving practical problems, instead of persisting with ideologically appealing, but ineffective institutional arrangements.

Second, China’s reforms were gradual and incremental, without hard timelines. Qu states that incremental reforms reduce adjustment costs as policymakers are able to balance the pace of reforms with social stability.

Despite starting as an under-developed agrarian economy in the late 1970s, China did not approach the international financial institution (IFIs) for policy advice or financial assistance. The stark contrast between this approach and Pakistan’s experience since the late 1980s cannot go unnoticed. Although Pakistan has been working to restructure its economy for the past 25 years, many would argue that little has been achieved.

China’s Family Production Responsibility System (FPRS) is a good example of the heuristic approach to economic reforms. Before this, China had communal farms with strict production quotas, where even meals were a group activity. The FPRS (which is still in force) allowed individual farmers to rent arable land from the government, in exchange for a specific quota of produce/crops. The rent was paid to the local government.

This simple idea, which effectively permitted farmers to sell surplus produce in village markets, was first implemented in specific provinces in the mid-1970s. When positive results were realised, these experiments were carried out with different crops, and then replicated in other provinces of China.

The FPRS was formalised as policy in 1978 – by 1984, 99 per cent of China’s total agricultural production was incentivised by the private gains of individual farmers. The scale of this change can only be appreciated when one realises that China’s rural population was about 800 million to 850 million people at the time.

This policy alone lifted most of China’s population out of poverty.

China’s success with large-scale economic transformation suggests that it would be an ideal partner to execute CPEC. But even more importantly, China’s tried-and-tested approach to reforms, which is incremental and open to change as the situation evolves, suggests that a lack of concrete details is not cause for alarm. This appears to be how the Chinese prefer to work.





Illustration by Sana Nasir


Is OBOR a plan for global domination?

We disagree with the perception that OBOR aims for global domination. First, the specific focus on Asia (effectively ignoring Africa and Latin America) does not reveal global ambitions; and, secondly, since China is the third-largest country by landmass and the second-largest economy in the world, any of its long-term strategy – by definition – will be on a “global” scale.

What is harder to explain is China’s policy in the South China Sea. For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive. However, changing one’s perspective could explain China’s orientation on this issue.

The Asia Pacific region has a significant US military presence. American bases in Japan and South Korea can be traced back to WWII and the Korean War, but have lost their tactical importance with the end of the Cold War. Furthermore, the continued US presence in Australia, the Philippines, Thailand and the Indian Ocean has the potential to disrupt trade flows destined for – and originating from – China. Since China’s hard power comes from its trade flows, the Chinese are justifiably concerned that a stand off with the US, on any issue, could easily strangle its domestic economy.

The geopolitical dimension of CPEC

While OBOR may not be a plan for global domination, it does seek to change the global status quo. Creating a physical corridor to the Arabian Sea will give China direct access to a deep-sea port that is close to the largest hydrocarbon exporters and a shortcut to Europe, the Middle East and Central Asia.

One must consider how this project challenges the global status quo, the US control of global shipping lanes and India’s ambitions to control the Indian Ocean. The growing tension between the Asian giants (China and India) and the hostility between Pakistan and India explains why CPEC is so strongly opposed by India.

The resistance to Gwadar becoming a fully functioning port is perhaps being reflected by the troubles in some parts of Balochistan — specifically targeting the Pakistan Army and local law enforcement agencies. These terrorist attacks may be an effort to undermine CPEC.

For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive.

Although Pakistan’s support for CPEC is clear from the army’s active role in guaranteeing security and the endorsement by Pakistan’s main political parties, if the placement of the various routes is hampered by bureaucratic red tape and provincial self-interests, the key Gwadar-Kashgar corridor could be the only route that will be built.

This “CPEC-lite” will fulfill China’s needs, but will not create the economic spillovers the other routes promise.

In the context of the geopolitical prize that is Gwadar, the following is a simplistic assessment of CPEC: China finances and builds the project, while Pakistan pays in terms of social and political disruption, and the loss of innocent lives. Given the strategic importance of the Gwadar-Kashgar corridor to China, this component of OBOR will surely be completed because it is motivated by more than just economics.

This is about securing China’s trade routes and allowing it to position itself in the Arabian Sea.

We believe this partnership with China could be the key factor that will place Pakistan’s economy on a more sustainable path forward. As China targets Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa as part of its strategy for the 21st century, it simply cannot afford to have an economically unstable partner in CPEC.
This geopolitical compulsion should generate the political will to undertake tough economic reforms in Pakistan and also ensure that CPEC is sustainable and profitable for the country.

_Mushtaq Khan is Chief Economist at Bank Alfalah and holds a PhD from Stanford University. Danish Hyder is a research associate at Bank Alfalah and holds a degree from Vassar College in New York. These are the views of the authors and not the bank._

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## 艹艹艹

*The India friend needs a beautiful psychological doctor to help him with the treatment.*

Reactions: Like Like:
31


----------



## Hallian_Khan

water with ice cubes and burnoll 8 times a day might help.... stop randi rona plz

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## ravi gupta

long_ said:


> *The India friend needs a beautiful psychological doctor to help him with the treatment.*



The article is not written by me,you can check the source.



Hallian_Khan said:


> water with ice cubes and burnoll 8 times a day might help.... stop randi rona plz


Why dont you have different perspective of CPEC,Read the article and quote the objection you have.


----------



## Well.wisher

Hello ..
Here in quetta it's winter , , can you plz come here so I can heat myself up from your fire ? And since it's a jealous type fire , you can also be used for cooking kebabs.

Reactions: Like Like:
13


----------



## El_Swordsmen

long_ said:


> *The India friend needs a beautiful psychological doctor to help him with the treatment.*



there is no cure for *JEALOUSY* sir

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## salarsikander

Indians and their daily obsession with CPEC

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## Dr Shaheryar

Burnol article.


----------



## 艹艹艹

El_Swordsmen said:


> there is no cure for *JEALOUSY* sir


*India has a lot of generics, and I think he'll find it.*

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## JOEY TRIBIANI

Poor bhaniya and randi rona


----------



## Maxpane

Cpec this cpec that . pakistan is go8ng to destroy. pakistan can lose her local industry. dragon is going to eat pakistan. if its true then why dnt indian silencely watch this process ? why so much care and love for pakistan? if indian think its not good for pakistan then i think its definetly good for pakistan cuz they dnt watch us strong and atqble as a nation

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## Lagay Raho

Here starts the days of anti cpec agenda of enemy


----------



## CHACHA"G"

*lol Indian's and there Paid Loyalist ....................
Some People not only need Burnol , But they also need Hajmola Yes Hajmola to Digest CPEC.








Its like 100th of article , view point , news , etc against CPEC ,,,,,,,,,,, I'm Kinda have enough of this sh**...........*

Reactions: Like Like:
5


----------



## ravi gupta

CHACHA"G" said:


> *lol Indian's and there Paid Loyalist ....................
> Some People not only need Burnol , But they also need Hajmola Yes Hajmola to Digest CPEC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> *


Sir,it was in Dawn newspaper and source is Herald not written by me but by Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan.
Once i read i find it interesting and started a thread,why not a criticism by your own newspaper is taken positively and discuss on it,rather then putting any cartoons,There are many different perspective the OP has mention,if you agree to disagree just move on.If you have reservations and comments on certain thoughts have it.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## -blitzkrieg-



Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ravi gupta

Maxpane said:


> Cpec this cpec that . pakistan is go8ng to destroy. pakistan can lose her local industry. dragon is going to eat pakistan. if its true then why dnt indian silencely watch this process ? why so much care and love for pakistan? if indian think its not good for pakistan then i think its definetly good for pakistan cuz they dnt watch us strong and atqble as a nation


Sir,its good or bad or bad will come to know in future,the post i have not pick from Indian media but from dawn in todays edition.written by Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan.in HERALD i have post the source also.


----------



## Well.wisher

CHACHA"G" said:


> *lol Indian's and there Paid Loyalist ....................
> Some People not only need Burnol , But they also need Hajmola Yes Hajmola to Digest CPEC.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Its like 100th of article , view point , news , etc against CPEC ,,,,,,,,,,, I'm Kinda have enough of this sh**...........*



Plus , gulaab jaaman .
Jealousy is so destructive man , it runs in your veins like fire and destroys your stomach . 
Eating 10 gulab jaamans will make them release their jealousy very easily without any pressure .



ravi gupta said:


> Sir,its good or bad or bad will come to know in future,the post i have not pick from Indian media but from dawn in todays edition.written by Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan.in HERALD i have post the source also.



It's a misleading article . It's only focus is advantages of china , it has completely neglected the advantages that pakistan will get .
Refrain from believing such crap . The writer seems to be impressed by indian propaganda.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ravi gupta

Well.wisher said:


> Plus , gulaab jaaman .
> Jealousy is so destructive man , it runs in your veins like fire and destroys your stomach .
> Eating 10 gulab jaamans will make them release their jealousy very easily without any pressure .
> 
> 
> 
> It's a misleading article . It's only focus is advantages of china , it has completely neglected the advantages that pakistan will get .
> Refrain from believing such crap . The writer seems to be impressed by indian propaganda.


Agree with your point the writer has written with China point of view,however how can it be indian propoganda,if China is the major beneficiary.


----------



## ito

OBOR is project to control vital routes of trade by China. India will never agree for a Chinese dominance.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Star Expedition

India thinkers spend too much time to find the nonexistent dangers from their neighbors' firm working and developing.

Maybe that's why they have no time to find a way for their country to implement railway reforming to avoid the next tragedy.

Reactions: Like Like:
4


----------



## ravi gupta

ito said:


> OBOR is project to control vital routes of trade by China. India will never agree for a Chinese dominance.


Sir,article is written in chinese prospective and there geopolitical advantage of OBOR,CPEC is a part of it.
India will never agree but what options India have.


----------



## ito

ravi gupta said:


> Sir,article is written in chinese prospective and there geopolitical advantage of OBOR,CPEC is a part of it.
> India will never agree but what options India have.



First, I doubt Chinese have the capacity to undertake a project on such scale. Second, if there is only country that can rival China, that is India. I guess India has its own plans on building trade routes though east Asia.


----------



## Vapnope

Whats wrong with you people? The article comes from a Pakistani newspaper, the writer is a Pakistani and why roast @ravi gupta for it. He posted it, just like we post many article presenting other perspectives. Its better to know other perspectives. 

P.S I am sorry @ravi gupta that you had to face this.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ravi gupta

Vapnope said:


> Whats wrong with you people? The article comes from a Pakistani newspaper, the writer is a Pakistani and why roast @ravi gupta for it. He posted it, just like we post many article presenting other perspectives. Its better to know other perspectives.
> 
> P.S I am sorry @ravi gupta that you had to face this.


Thanks for understanding i think i posted first time in this forum and was surprise with the reaction not from troll but also from very senior member of the forum.


----------



## Vapnope

ravi gupta said:


> Thanks for understanding i think i posted first time in this forum and was surprise with the reaction not from troll but also from very senior member of the forum.


The problem to such open forums is that trolls and fanboys derail the thread. The constant trolling has resulted to cast doubt on every poster from across the border, which is true for both Pakistan and Indian Posters. I hope the sanity prevails and people learn to debate even in disagreements.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Nefarious

When your enemy _promotes_ something as bad for you...it's usually good!

When your enemy _promotes_ something as good for you...it's usually bad!

If they're really going out of their way to promote something as bad...it's the best thing ever! And don't forget, there are enemy's within, which are the worst kind.

Reactions: Like Like:
6


----------



## Well.wisher

ravi gupta said:


> Agree with your point the writer has written with China point of view,however how can it be indian propoganda,if China is the major beneficiary.



It's an indian stance mainly that whole profit will fall in the pocket of china and at end pakistan will end as colony of china or its fate will end as Sri Lanka who cannot repay the loans and finally gave lands to china . 
No pakistani or chinese thinks like this . We've been testing chinese and chinese have been testing us , we've not harmed each other like this . 

This article has no positivity for pakistani economy , it has not added the investment of 40 billion in pakistan. It has ignored the projects that gawadar will get in future , it's going to be hub for foreign trade . It can welcome 120 ships at time , we will get new market , our young men will get jobs , hospitals, schools, plus the bunch of railways , roads , transports , airports , solar parks we're getting is not definetly mentioned . Plus, LOC will be more powerful on pakistan side . The list is going to increase with time . 

Masha Allah .. Masha Allah . Masha Allah . All power belongs to Allah swt . May Allah swt protect this cpec from evil eyes . 

The writer lacks optimism . It's not good to be ungrsteful to a blessing .



ravi gupta said:


> Thanks for understanding i think i posted first time in this forum and was surprise with the reaction not from troll but also from very senior member of the forum.



I'm sorry from my side . 
Actually I thought you a troll sabotaging cpec as many indians have done here .



ravi gupta said:


> Thanks for understanding i think i posted first time in this forum and was surprise with the reaction not from troll but also from very senior member of the forum.



I'm sorry from my side . 
Actually I thought you a troll sabotaging cpec as many indians have done here .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ravi gupta

Well.wisher said:


> It's an indian stance mainly that whole profit will fall in the pocket of china and at end pakistan will end as colony of china or its fate will end as Sri Lanka who cannot repay the loans and finally gave lands to china .
> No pakistani or chinese thinks like this . We've been testing chinese and chinese have been testing us , we've not harmed each other like this .
> 
> This article has no positivity for pakistani economy , it has not added the investment of 40 billion in pakistan. It has ignored the projects that gawadar will get in future , it's going to be hub for foreign trade . It can welcome 120 ships at time , we will get new market , our young men will get jobs , hospitals, schools, plus the bunch of railways , roads , transports , airports , solar parks we're getting is not definetly mentioned . Plus, LOC will be more powerful on pakistan side . The list is going to increase with time .
> 
> Masha Allah .. Masha Allah . Masha Allah . All power belongs to Allah swt . May Allah swt protect this cpec from evil eyes .
> 
> The writer lacks optimism . It's not good to be ungrsteful to a blessing .



You have a point buddy,and salute for optimism,Chinese investment is not FDI,but loan at very high rate of interest,you have to make this project successful to repay the loan and not chinese,otherwise you will fall in same trap as of Srilanka.


----------



## Hareeb

All political parties agreed and made consensus on CPEC in APC. Forces are already there, working for construction and security of routes. 
No one should really care what such creepy paid articles propagate against CPEC. Anyone can write articles in newspapers especially Tribune and Dawn, and for rating, these newspapers will publish each and every content which creates sensationalization.


----------



## cocomo

ito said:


> OBOR is project to control vital routes of trade by China. India will never agree for a Chinese dominance.


And how will that affect OBOR? What can India do? India's neighbors are aligning with China and India can do nothing. Stop living in your fantasies of Akhand bharat.


----------



## Well.wisher

ravi gupta said:


> You have a point buddy,and salute for optimism,Chinese investment is not FDI,but loan at very high rate of interest,you have to make this project successful to repay the loan and not chinese,otherwise you will fall in same trap as of Srilanka.



Bro, worry about your country . . ; ) 
Cpec will have a very long future , in this project china and pakistan have common benefits and harms so with time loan's issue will also be solved wisely . It's good to do something rather than nothing . 
Cpec has attracted europe , afghanistan, iran , Turkey and more are expected . 

Don't know why but indians seems to be active advisors when it comes to Pakistan economy.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## SMC

Vapnope said:


> Whats wrong with you people? The article comes from a Pakistani newspaper, the writer is a Pakistani and why roast @ravi gupta for it. He posted it, just like we post many article presenting other perspectives. Its better to know other perspectives.
> 
> P.S I am sorry @ravi gupta that you had to face this.



The problem isn't so much that the writer of the article is a Pakistani. It is that half the people that take these articles seriously are bharatis that plaster it all over the web. Pakistan has had glass half empty detractors since the beginning. They will find a way to complain no matter what. Bharatis are half the reason why they find so many views and following.


----------



## ravi gupta

Well.wisher said:


> Bro, worry about your country . . ; )
> Cpec will have a very long future , in this project china and pakistan have common benefits and harms so with time loan's issue will also be solved wisely . It's good to do something rather than nothing .
> Cpec has attracted europe , afghanistan, iran , Turkey and more are expected .
> 
> Don't know why but indians seems to be active advisors when it comes to Pakistan economy.


You have not address the loan issue and return i have mention.
and also we are facing huge Chinese import and our own industry is facing stiff competition from cheap Chinese product.
becoz of this road project dont you think the cheap chinese product will hit your market and ultimately effect your own production and industry,if you are OK with chinese import and product,no issue.


----------



## danger007

salarsikander said:


> Indians and thedaily obsession with CPEC




Why don't you stick to the topic instead of targeting op.. Funny thing is, Iit was you guys who troll in most of threads at blame others.. get well.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## xyxmt

Akhill said:


> wow.... The delusion in this thread is too huge.



one would expect and reaction like, shhhh CPEC will destroy Pakistan, but dont tell anyone.
instead we getting all the warnings from well wishers and mostly from our eastern neighbor, the same neighbor who wants Pakistan destroyed and gives a monthly dose of Pakistan destruction deadline.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Darth Vader

I have a really simple question
Since Pakistan is the enemy of India 
And CEPC will destroy Pakistan from inside-out
Why arnt Indians going gaga on it , they should be spreading sweets and warm wishes because there worst enemy is on path of self destruction 

Instead of supporting those who are against it,

Or they are just trying to support negative image , so Pakistani Avam further boost the whole deal and time frame


----------



## Star Expedition

CPEC is more than a oil pipeline, it is for everything from Africa, Mediterranean Sea, Red Sea...

The transportation cost will be left here for local people to benefit from, and soon spread to its both sides.

It is also worthy for those factories to move there to shorten the supply chain. Because Pak and China will keep on working to get all infrastructures ready for demands. There is AIIB behind.

China will connect directly to these areas bypassing India ocean.
And Pak will be sitting in the middle of this new Silk Road.

Even the south East Of Indian will take part in and connect to this Blood vessel of Asia-Africa-Europe

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## CHD

ravi gupta said:


> *CPEC: The devil is not in the details*
> 
> *Herald*
> 
> 
> Perspective | CPEC: The devil is not in the details
> Perspective
> *CPEC: The devil is not in the details*
> Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A guard keeps watch at Gwadar Port, Balochistan | AP
> The first outgoing shipment of containers carrying Chinese goods departed from Gwadar port on November 13, 2016. The media event was attended by Pakistan’s top policymakers as well as a high-level Chinese delegation. Despite this important first step for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), many people in Pakistan still approach this project with a sense of cautious optimism.
> 
> Nearly all will say CPEC is a game-changer, but some will ask for whom? Others will flag that CPEC is the largest foreign investment into Pakistan, but many will question whether the country will be able to bear the debt burden resulting from it. Some will talk up how the various sub-routes could lift under-developed cities and towns, but others will question whether these sub-routes will even materialise as China is really only interested in the direct route from Kashgar to Gwadar.
> 
> To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realize that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy
> 
> This confusion exists because fresh information on CPEC is mostly anecdotal, rather than from a credible official source. People will highlight the increasing number of Chinese in the country (on flights, hotels, shopping malls, etc); the rapid pace of development at Gwadar port; and how the first Chinese shipment moved through different ports of Pakistan to reach Gwadae. Other than the recent shipment, concrete details are scarce.
> 
> Even so, Pakistanis feel the partnership with China is critically important for the country, though they are unsure whether it will materialise fully. On the other hand, the global reaction to China’s One-Belt-One-Road (OBOR) – of which CPEC is a part – falls into one of two categories: those who think the project is simply not feasible in terms of scale, or the resources needed or the timeline; and those who fear that OBOR is China’s master plan for global domination in the 21st century (see map below).
> 
> Observers concerned about OBOR’s feasibility flag the sheer scale of this undertaking, and the apparent disconnect with available funding sources. Bankers will highlight the inherent risks in long-term infrastructure projects, which are compounded by the large number of participating countries. They will focus on financial/trade guarantees, regulatory reach/enforcement, and legal cover and recourse.
> 
> While none of these misgivings are unreasonable, we believe they fail to consider several key points. But the basic issue raised by sceptics is entirely legitimate.
> 
> So the 46 billion dollar question is whether these fine-print concerns could sink the project. Is the devil really in the details?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Map by Essa Taimur
> What China seeks from OBOR
> 
> To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realise that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy. In fact, if China’s economic growth slows significantly, there are legitimate fears this could spark social unrest and political instability.
> 
> In our view, the challenges facing Chinese policymakers could be ranked as follows:
> 
> 
> Secure shipping lanes. As the world’s largest importer of oil and gas, China needs to ensure that its shipping routes are not vulnerable at the choke point – the Malacca Straits. Hence, Corridors 1 and 2 of OBOR have immense strategic value for China, not just for fuels and minerals, but also to access Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
> Develop Western China. While the coastal areas are largely developed, Western China is somewhat neglected. For political harmony, policymakers need to focus on Western China, which explains why Corridors 1, 2 and 3 of OBOR originate out of the Western provinces.
> Use China’s spare capacity. Building physical infrastructure has fueled China’s economic growth. With growing concerns that policymakers may have over-invested, China’s installed capacity in steel, cement, bulk chemicals and heavy machinery, is now under-utilised. Building infrastructure in neighbouring countries would be a convenient way to use this spare capacity.
> Create new export markets. China perhaps realises that exports to the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which have been driving its economic growth, may continue to fall. In effect, it needs to cultivate new markets in Africa and Central Asia, which have significant growth potential.
> Create goodwill with neighbouring countries. OBOR entails establishing training institutes and schools in participating countries, which should support the project and be mutually beneficial.
> While it is clear that China has to be ambitious, OBOR may not be quite as ambitious as it appears. For example, China may not deliver all six corridors, these corridors may not extend as deeply as envisaged, and each corridor may not include roads, railroads and pipelines as currently planned. But even half of the currently planned OBOR network would go a long way towards securing what China needs.
> 
> In fact, we believe there is a latent priority within the six OBOR corridors, with Corridor 1 and 2 on top of the list for strategic reasons. This may be why Corridor 1 (CPEC) has been the first order of business for China under OBOR. Taking a staggered approach makes sense, as it limits the resources that have to be committed upfront. Furthermore, negotiating the first two corridors is likely to be less problematic for the Chinese (compared to Corridors 5 and 6) as there are fewer participating countries in Corridors 1 and 2 (Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Iran) -- and some of these countries do not enjoy close ties with the United States.
> 
> China’s unique approach to economic reforms
> 
> Many third world countries were more developed than China in the 1970s. In light of this, China’s current standing in the global economy clearly reveals why its economic transformation is considered a miracle. After Tiananmen Square in 1989, China embraced economic reforms with even greater fervour.
> 
> The architect of this accelerated growth was Deng Xiaoping. In 1978, Deng challenged the Chinese to double China’s economy by 2000 and make China a middle-income country by 2050. China far exceeded his expectations when it overtook Japan to become the second-largest economy in 2010. Deng’s heuristic (learning-by-doing) approach to economic reforms defied the collective wisdom of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
> 
> It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, under which the World Bank and IMF operate, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy. Compared to Pakistan, the Chinese were far more practical – and result-oriented – in their approach to economic reforms.
> 
> Most importantly, China displayed the political will to change. But political will, while essential for the success of reforms, is not enough. An effective strategy is also needed and China used a novel one that yielded unprecedented results.
> 
> Bo Qu, a visiting scholar at Princeton University, highlights two key characteristics of China’s economic reforms since 1978.
> 
> It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy.
> 
> First, economic reforms do not proceed according to a well-defined blueprint. Qu states that experimentation is a fundamental part of China’s policy formulation, and the process is primarily driven by specific problems encountered during implementation. In effect, the real focus should be on solving practical problems, instead of persisting with ideologically appealing, but ineffective institutional arrangements.
> 
> Second, China’s reforms were gradual and incremental, without hard timelines. Qu states that incremental reforms reduce adjustment costs as policymakers are able to balance the pace of reforms with social stability.
> 
> Despite starting as an under-developed agrarian economy in the late 1970s, China did not approach the international financial institution (IFIs) for policy advice or financial assistance. The stark contrast between this approach and Pakistan’s experience since the late 1980s cannot go unnoticed. Although Pakistan has been working to restructure its economy for the past 25 years, many would argue that little has been achieved.
> 
> China’s Family Production Responsibility System (FPRS) is a good example of the heuristic approach to economic reforms. Before this, China had communal farms with strict production quotas, where even meals were a group activity. The FPRS (which is still in force) allowed individual farmers to rent arable land from the government, in exchange for a specific quota of produce/crops. The rent was paid to the local government.
> 
> This simple idea, which effectively permitted farmers to sell surplus produce in village markets, was first implemented in specific provinces in the mid-1970s. When positive results were realised, these experiments were carried out with different crops, and then replicated in other provinces of China.
> 
> The FPRS was formalised as policy in 1978 – by 1984, 99 per cent of China’s total agricultural production was incentivised by the private gains of individual farmers. The scale of this change can only be appreciated when one realises that China’s rural population was about 800 million to 850 million people at the time.
> 
> This policy alone lifted most of China’s population out of poverty.
> 
> China’s success with large-scale economic transformation suggests that it would be an ideal partner to execute CPEC. But even more importantly, China’s tried-and-tested approach to reforms, which is incremental and open to change as the situation evolves, suggests that a lack of concrete details is not cause for alarm. This appears to be how the Chinese prefer to work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Illustration by Sana Nasir
> 
> 
> Is OBOR a plan for global domination?
> 
> We disagree with the perception that OBOR aims for global domination. First, the specific focus on Asia (effectively ignoring Africa and Latin America) does not reveal global ambitions; and, secondly, since China is the third-largest country by landmass and the second-largest economy in the world, any of its long-term strategy – by definition – will be on a “global” scale.
> 
> What is harder to explain is China’s policy in the South China Sea. For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive. However, changing one’s perspective could explain China’s orientation on this issue.
> 
> The Asia Pacific region has a significant US military presence. American bases in Japan and South Korea can be traced back to WWII and the Korean War, but have lost their tactical importance with the end of the Cold War. Furthermore, the continued US presence in Australia, the Philippines, Thailand and the Indian Ocean has the potential to disrupt trade flows destined for – and originating from – China. Since China’s hard power comes from its trade flows, the Chinese are justifiably concerned that a stand off with the US, on any issue, could easily strangle its domestic economy.
> 
> The geopolitical dimension of CPEC
> 
> While OBOR may not be a plan for global domination, it does seek to change the global status quo. Creating a physical corridor to the Arabian Sea will give China direct access to a deep-sea port that is close to the largest hydrocarbon exporters and a shortcut to Europe, the Middle East and Central Asia.
> 
> One must consider how this project challenges the global status quo, the US control of global shipping lanes and India’s ambitions to control the Indian Ocean. The growing tension between the Asian giants (China and India) and the hostility between Pakistan and India explains why CPEC is so strongly opposed by India.
> 
> The resistance to Gwadar becoming a fully functioning port is perhaps being reflected by the troubles in some parts of Balochistan — specifically targeting the Pakistan Army and local law enforcement agencies. These terrorist attacks may be an effort to undermine CPEC.
> 
> For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive.
> 
> Although Pakistan’s support for CPEC is clear from the army’s active role in guaranteeing security and the endorsement by Pakistan’s main political parties, if the placement of the various routes is hampered by bureaucratic red tape and provincial self-interests, the key Gwadar-Kashgar corridor could be the only route that will be built.
> 
> This “CPEC-lite” will fulfill China’s needs, but will not create the economic spillovers the other routes promise.
> 
> In the context of the geopolitical prize that is Gwadar, the following is a simplistic assessment of CPEC: China finances and builds the project, while Pakistan pays in terms of social and political disruption, and the loss of innocent lives. Given the strategic importance of the Gwadar-Kashgar corridor to China, this component of OBOR will surely be completed because it is motivated by more than just economics.
> 
> This is about securing China’s trade routes and allowing it to position itself in the Arabian Sea.
> 
> We believe this partnership with China could be the key factor that will place Pakistan’s economy on a more sustainable path forward. As China targets Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa as part of its strategy for the 21st century, it simply cannot afford to have an economically unstable partner in CPEC.
> This geopolitical compulsion should generate the political will to undertake tough economic reforms in Pakistan and also ensure that CPEC is sustainable and profitable for the country.
> 
> _Mushtaq Khan is Chief Economist at Bank Alfalah and holds a PhD from Stanford University. Danish Hyder is a research associate at Bank Alfalah and holds a degree from Vassar College in New York. These are the views of the authors and not the bank._


The one simple all the indiots don't understand, you don't get loan if the lender is not sure that you will be able to repay it. Plus Loans are not bad if you can get higher returns in future. Plus they should first check their own loans and then become the seldom bite Dog.


----------



## Trisonics

Darth Vader said:


> I have a really simple question
> Since Pakistan is the enemy of India
> And CEPC will destroy Pakistan from inside-out
> Why arnt Indians going gaga on it , they should be spreading sweets and warm wishes because there worst enemy is on path of self destruction
> 
> Instead of supporting those who are against it,
> 
> Or they are just trying to support negative image , so Pakistani Avam further boost the whole deal and time frame



3 simple reasons:

1) Regardless of enmity and all, Indians are confused. Us Indians are always used to questioning the Government when things are hush-hush or if one nation is favored more than the others. I am not talking about intellectuals or analysts, I'm talking of a common Indian, we are very inquisitive lot. That same trait is showed here. It's not about how CPEC is a game changer tell us how and why. After all we love numbers.

2) Although we know the Pakistani society is vulnerable and don't think much about anything when something is cloaked under India's enmity, it's still amusing when Pakistanis here talk about the next Dubai and better than Dubai. Hey! we have to dig deeper.

3) It's fun when nobody here can explain the questions posed by Indians with logic. I will not be surprised if another "Burnol" picture is posted here as reply. It's immense fun to see people being extremely stupid and not knowing it.


----------



## 90ArsalanLeo

ravi gupta said:


> Sir,it was in Dawn newspaper and source is Herald not written by me but by Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan.
> Once i read i find it interesting and started a thread,why not a criticism by your own newspaper is taken positively and discuss on it,rather then putting any cartoons,There are many different perspective the OP has mention,if you agree to disagree just move on.If you have reservations and comments on certain thoughts have it.



Dawn is not a reliable source a merely stooge of foreign media & their propaganda


----------



## Well.wisher

Trisonics said:


> 3 simple reasons:
> 
> 1) Regardless of enmity and all, Indians are confused. Us Indians are always used to questioning the Government when things are hush-hush or if one nation is favored more than the others. I am not talking about intellectuals or analysts, I'm talking of a common Indian, we are very inquisitive lot. That same trait is showed here. .



Daz! Where Was your this questioning trait when your minister spent 75 million dollars on his daughter's wedding ? Did you question him as much as you're questioning cpec which isn't even your thing ?


----------



## Salza

Forget Indians, they are obviously jealous of CPEC immense popularity. Its totally Pakistan China economic affair.

Now coming to DAWN's yet another anti-CPEC write up well, I have said earlier here and is saying again that DAWN is deliberately running an anti CPEC campaign for the last few months. I haven't noticed a single day where they have not published a topic showing CPEC into a bad light. Just google CPEC and DAWN and you will find a flurry of such news. I know opinions are like a$$hole, everybody has one but one needs to figure out why such opinions are been given deliberate lame light.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Trisonics

Well.wisher said:


> Daz! Where Was your this questioning trait when your minister spent 75 million dollars on his daughter's wedding ? Did you question him as much as you're questioning cpec which isn't even your thing ?


This happened around the same time when our beloved PM took extreme measures to arrest black money. Didn't Pakistan wish for her own Anna Hazare at one time?


----------



## Well.wisher

ravi gupta said:


> You have not address the loan issue and return i have mention.
> and also we are facing huge Chinese import and our own industry is facing stiff competition from cheap Chinese product.
> becoz of this road project dont you think the cheap chinese product will hit your market and ultimately effect your own production and industry,if you are OK with chinese import and product,no issue.



Man , we've took the responsibility of cpec with proper planing and plan , it's not a five or four year project . It's all whether project . So obviously we are capable to repay the loans with equal consideration with chinese . 
Our GDP will rise due to cpec and it will also affect our economy and region .


----------



## 90ArsalanLeo

ravi gupta said:


> Perspective | CPEC: The devil is not in the details
> Perspective
> *CPEC: The devil is not in the details*
> Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A guard keeps watch at Gwadar Port, Balochistan | AP
> The first outgoing shipment of containers carrying Chinese goods departed from Gwadar port on November 13, 2016. The media event was attended by Pakistan’s top policymakers as well as a high-level Chinese delegation. Despite this important first step for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), many people in Pakistan still approach this project with a sense of cautious optimism.
> 
> Nearly all will say CPEC is a game-changer, but some will ask for whom? Others will flag that CPEC is the largest foreign investment into Pakistan, but many will question whether the country will be able to bear the debt burden resulting from it. Some will talk up how the various sub-routes could lift under-developed cities and towns, but others will question whether these sub-routes will even materialise as China is really only interested in the direct route from Kashgar to Gwadar.
> 
> To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realize that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy
> 
> This confusion exists because fresh information on CPEC is mostly anecdotal, rather than from a credible official source. People will highlight the increasing number of Chinese in the country (on flights, hotels, shopping malls, etc); the rapid pace of development at Gwadar port; and how the first Chinese shipment moved through different ports of Pakistan to reach Gwadae. Other than the recent shipment, concrete details are scarce.
> 
> Even so, Pakistanis feel the partnership with China is critically important for the country, though they are unsure whether it will materialise fully. On the other hand, the global reaction to China’s One-Belt-One-Road (OBOR) – of which CPEC is a part – falls into one of two categories: those who think the project is simply not feasible in terms of scale, or the resources needed or the timeline; and those who fear that OBOR is China’s master plan for global domination in the 21st century (see map below).
> 
> Observers concerned about OBOR’s feasibility flag the sheer scale of this undertaking, and the apparent disconnect with available funding sources. Bankers will highlight the inherent risks in long-term infrastructure projects, which are compounded by the large number of participating countries. They will focus on financial/trade guarantees, regulatory reach/enforcement, and legal cover and recourse.
> 
> While none of these misgivings are unreasonable, we believe they fail to consider several key points. But the basic issue raised by sceptics is entirely legitimate.
> 
> So the 46 billion dollar question is whether these fine-print concerns could sink the project. Is the devil really in the details?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Map by Essa Taimur
> What China seeks from OBOR
> 
> To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realise that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy. In fact, if China’s economic growth slows significantly, there are legitimate fears this could spark social unrest and political instability.
> 
> In our view, the challenges facing Chinese policymakers could be ranked as follows:
> 
> 
> Secure shipping lanes. As the world’s largest importer of oil and gas, China needs to ensure that its shipping routes are not vulnerable at the choke point – the Malacca Straits. Hence, Corridors 1 and 2 of OBOR have immense strategic value for China, not just for fuels and minerals, but also to access Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
> Develop Western China. While the coastal areas are largely developed, Western China is somewhat neglected. For political harmony, policymakers need to focus on Western China, which explains why Corridors 1, 2 and 3 of OBOR originate out of the Western provinces.
> Use China’s spare capacity. Building physical infrastructure has fueled China’s economic growth. With growing concerns that policymakers may have over-invested, China’s installed capacity in steel, cement, bulk chemicals and heavy machinery, is now under-utilised. Building infrastructure in neighbouring countries would be a convenient way to use this spare capacity.
> Create new export markets. China perhaps realises that exports to the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which have been driving its economic growth, may continue to fall. In effect, it needs to cultivate new markets in Africa and Central Asia, which have significant growth potential.
> Create goodwill with neighbouring countries. OBOR entails establishing training institutes and schools in participating countries, which should support the project and be mutually beneficial.
> While it is clear that China has to be ambitious, OBOR may not be quite as ambitious as it appears. For example, China may not deliver all six corridors, these corridors may not extend as deeply as envisaged, and each corridor may not include roads, railroads and pipelines as currently planned. But even half of the currently planned OBOR network would go a long way towards securing what China needs.
> 
> In fact, we believe there is a latent priority within the six OBOR corridors, with Corridor 1 and 2 on top of the list for strategic reasons. This may be why Corridor 1 (CPEC) has been the first order of business for China under OBOR. Taking a staggered approach makes sense, as it limits the resources that have to be committed upfront. Furthermore, negotiating the first two corridors is likely to be less problematic for the Chinese (compared to Corridors 5 and 6) as there are fewer participating countries in Corridors 1 and 2 (Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Iran) -- and some of these countries do not enjoy close ties with the United States.
> 
> China’s unique approach to economic reforms
> 
> Many third world countries were more developed than China in the 1970s. In light of this, China’s current standing in the global economy clearly reveals why its economic transformation is considered a miracle. After Tiananmen Square in 1989, China embraced economic reforms with even greater fervour.
> 
> The architect of this accelerated growth was Deng Xiaoping. In 1978, Deng challenged the Chinese to double China’s economy by 2000 and make China a middle-income country by 2050. China far exceeded his expectations when it overtook Japan to become the second-largest economy in 2010. Deng’s heuristic (learning-by-doing) approach to economic reforms defied the collective wisdom of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
> 
> It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, under which the World Bank and IMF operate, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy. Compared to Pakistan, the Chinese were far more practical – and result-oriented – in their approach to economic reforms.
> 
> Most importantly, China displayed the political will to change. But political will, while essential for the success of reforms, is not enough. An effective strategy is also needed and China used a novel one that yielded unprecedented results.
> 
> Bo Qu, a visiting scholar at Princeton University, highlights two key characteristics of China’s economic reforms since 1978.
> 
> It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy.
> 
> First, economic reforms do not proceed according to a well-defined blueprint. Qu states that experimentation is a fundamental part of China’s policy formulation, and the process is primarily driven by specific problems encountered during implementation. In effect, the real focus should be on solving practical problems, instead of persisting with ideologically appealing, but ineffective institutional arrangements.
> 
> Second, China’s reforms were gradual and incremental, without hard timelines. Qu states that incremental reforms reduce adjustment costs as policymakers are able to balance the pace of reforms with social stability.
> 
> Despite starting as an under-developed agrarian economy in the late 1970s, China did not approach the international financial institution (IFIs) for policy advice or financial assistance. The stark contrast between this approach and Pakistan’s experience since the late 1980s cannot go unnoticed. Although Pakistan has been working to restructure its economy for the past 25 years, many would argue that little has been achieved.
> 
> China’s Family Production Responsibility System (FPRS) is a good example of the heuristic approach to economic reforms. Before this, China had communal farms with strict production quotas, where even meals were a group activity. The FPRS (which is still in force) allowed individual farmers to rent arable land from the government, in exchange for a specific quota of produce/crops. The rent was paid to the local government.
> 
> This simple idea, which effectively permitted farmers to sell surplus produce in village markets, was first implemented in specific provinces in the mid-1970s. When positive results were realised, these experiments were carried out with different crops, and then replicated in other provinces of China.
> 
> The FPRS was formalised as policy in 1978 – by 1984, 99 per cent of China’s total agricultural production was incentivised by the private gains of individual farmers. The scale of this change can only be appreciated when one realises that China’s rural population was about 800 million to 850 million people at the time.
> 
> This policy alone lifted most of China’s population out of poverty.
> 
> China’s success with large-scale economic transformation suggests that it would be an ideal partner to execute CPEC. But even more importantly, China’s tried-and-tested approach to reforms, which is incremental and open to change as the situation evolves, suggests that a lack of concrete details is not cause for alarm. This appears to be how the Chinese prefer to work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Illustration by Sana Nasir
> 
> 
> Is OBOR a plan for global domination?
> 
> We disagree with the perception that OBOR aims for global domination. First, the specific focus on Asia (effectively ignoring Africa and Latin America) does not reveal global ambitions; and, secondly, since China is the third-largest country by landmass and the second-largest economy in the world, any of its long-term strategy – by definition – will be on a “global” scale.
> 
> What is harder to explain is China’s policy in the South China Sea. For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive. However, changing one’s perspective could explain China’s orientation on this issue.
> 
> The Asia Pacific region has a significant US military presence. American bases in Japan and South Korea can be traced back to WWII and the Korean War, but have lost their tactical importance with the end of the Cold War. Furthermore, the continued US presence in Australia, the Philippines, Thailand and the Indian Ocean has the potential to disrupt trade flows destined for – and originating from – China. Since China’s hard power comes from its trade flows, the Chinese are justifiably concerned that a stand off with the US, on any issue, could easily strangle its domestic economy.
> 
> The geopolitical dimension of CPEC
> 
> While OBOR may not be a plan for global domination, it does seek to change the global status quo. Creating a physical corridor to the Arabian Sea will give China direct access to a deep-sea port that is close to the largest hydrocarbon exporters and a shortcut to Europe, the Middle East and Central Asia.
> 
> One must consider how this project challenges the global status quo, the US control of global shipping lanes and India’s ambitions to control the Indian Ocean. The growing tension between the Asian giants (China and India) and the hostility between Pakistan and India explains why CPEC is so strongly opposed by India.
> 
> The resistance to Gwadar becoming a fully functioning port is perhaps being reflected by the troubles in some parts of Balochistan — specifically targeting the Pakistan Army and local law enforcement agencies. These terrorist attacks may be an effort to undermine CPEC.
> 
> For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive.
> 
> Although Pakistan’s support for CPEC is clear from the army’s active role in guaranteeing security and the endorsement by Pakistan’s main political parties, if the placement of the various routes is hampered by bureaucratic red tape and provincial self-interests, the key Gwadar-Kashgar corridor could be the only route that will be built.
> 
> This “CPEC-lite” will fulfill China’s needs, but will not create the economic spillovers the other routes promise.
> 
> In the context of the geopolitical prize that is Gwadar, the following is a simplistic assessment of CPEC: China finances and builds the project, while Pakistan pays in terms of social and political disruption, and the loss of innocent lives. Given the strategic importance of the Gwadar-Kashgar corridor to China, this component of OBOR will surely be completed because it is motivated by more than just economics.
> 
> This is about securing China’s trade routes and allowing it to position itself in the Arabian Sea.
> 
> We believe this partnership with China could be the key factor that will place Pakistan’s economy on a more sustainable path forward. As China targets Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa as part of its strategy for the 21st century, it simply cannot afford to have an economically unstable partner in CPEC.
> This geopolitical compulsion should generate the political will to undertake tough economic reforms in Pakistan and also ensure that CPEC is sustainable and profitable for the country.
> 
> _Mushtaq Khan is Chief Economist at Bank Alfalah and holds a PhD from Stanford University. Danish Hyder is a research associate at Bank Alfalah and holds a degree from Vassar College in New York. These are the views of the authors and not the bank._




Indians are very worried about financial well being of Pakistan that they are actually doing more research on this matter than Pakistanis Lol. Well from this logic why india is financing and building chabahar port in iran is that also wrong will it also put iran in debt? This all is propaganda initiated from modi in desperate attempt to try to sabotage cpec. well here's the news flash for indians its our land, our money, our resources that are going to be used in cpec so u dont have to loose ur sleep worrying for us.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ravi gupta

CHD said:


> The one simple all the indiots don't understand, you don't get loan if the lender is not sure that you will be able to repay it. Plus Loans are not bad if you can get higher returns in future. Plus they should first check their own loans and then become the seldom bite Dog.


For your information i have not written this article,please put blame on dawn newspaper and the Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan for this,according to you they are simply idiots.
Dont you worry about our loans,our GDP is covering it and also we are growing at 7.5% every year.



90ArsalanLeo said:


> Indians are very worried about financial well being of Pakistan that they are actually doing more research on this matter than Pakistanis Lol. Well from this logic why india is financing and building chabahar port in iran is that also wrong will it also put iran in debt? This all is propaganda initiated from modi in desperate attempt to try to sabotage cpec. well here's the news flash for indians its our land, our money, our resources that are going to be used in cpec so u dont have to loose ur sleep worrying for us.


We are financing IRAN chahabahar port,we have not given any loan to IRAN at high rate of interest.


----------



## Dungeness

ito said:


> First, I doubt Chinese have the capacity to undertake a project on such scale.* Second, if there is only country that can rival China, that is India. I guess India has its own plans on building trade routes though east Asia*.



India may need to build few "*trade routes*" through India first before thinking about building through East Asia.


----------



## Moonlight

Well.wisher said:


> Hello ..
> Here in quetta it's winter , , can you plz come here so I can heat myself up from your fire ? And since it's a jealous type fire , you can also be used for cooking kebabs.




Lmooooo.  

But kabab Main Indian taste chale jaye ga. Won't taste good.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## somebozo

CPEC will facilitate the trade of Burnol..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## salarsikander

danger007 said:


> Why don't you stick to the topic instead of targeting op.. Funny thing is, Iit was you guys who troll in most of threads at blame others.. get well.


Stick with cheap Indian Obsession ? This is not some Cheap indian media, got it ! 

Funny thing is, prove it before generalising everyone, NOOB !


----------



## danger007

salarsikander said:


> Stick with cheap Indian Obsession ? This is not some Cheap indian media, got it !
> 
> Funny thing is, prove it before generalising everyone, NOOB !




Mutual feeling.


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> Stick with cheap Indian Obsession ? This is not some Cheap indian media, got it !
> 
> Funny thing is, prove it before generalising everyone, NOOB !


That is the point i want to make,this article is not from cheap indian media but from reliable pakistani media with reliable pakistani writer


----------



## salarsikander

danger007 said:


> Why don't you stick to the topic instead of targeting op.. Funny thing is, Iit was you guys who troll in most of threads at blame others.. get well.


Stick with cheap Indian Obsession ? This is not some Cheap indian media, got it ! 

Funny thing is, prove it before generalising everyone, NOOB !



ravi gupta said:


> That is the point i want to make,this article is not from cheap indian media but from reliable pakistani media with reliable pakistani writer


Oh hOw reliable do tell me ? Secondly That still doesnt negate cheap Indian obsession with CPEC. 
IF it help in making you ( indians) burn any better. The CPEC is now 55 Bn dollar


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> Stick with cheap Indian Obsession ? This is not some Cheap indian media, got it !
> 
> Funny thing is, prove it before generalising everyone, NOOB !
> 
> 
> Oh hOw reliable do tell me ? Secondly That still doesnt negate cheap Indian obsession with CPEC.
> IF it help in making you ( indians) burn any better. The CPEC is now 55 Bn dollar


Kudos to 55 bn dollars,apart from obsession related issue,why dont you point out the limitation and the catch of the article.
i have not seen you have raised any objection to certain point or perspective.i do understand its written on chinese point of view and chinese advantage of CPEC.


----------



## danger007

ravi gupta said:


> Kudos to 55 bn dollars,apart from obsession related issue,why dont you point out the limitation and the catch of the article.
> i have not seen you have raised any objection to certain point or perspective.i do understand its written on chinese point of view and chinese advantage of CPEC.




I can see your obsession with Indians even though pak media reporting it. Got it


----------



## ravi gupta

somebozo said:


> CPEC will facilitate the trade of Burnol..


Off course yes sir,looking at demand,chinese will happy to export some low quality cheap Burnol through CPEC.


----------



## salarsikander

ravi gupta said:


> Kudos to 55 bn dollars,apart from obsession related issue,why dont you point out the limitation and the catch of the article.
> i have not seen you have raised any objection to certain point or perspective.i do understand its written on chinese point of view and chinese advantage of CPEC.


Because certainly AN Indian is arguing over it. Ever Since the Cpec started Indians have all become angels and are telling us what is best for us. Hillarious, no ?


----------



## ravi gupta

danger007 said:


> I can see yiur obsession with Indians even though pak media reporting it. Got it


I dont think this message is for me or you wrongly quoted me.



salarsikander said:


> Because certainly AN Indian is arguing over it. Ever Since the Cpec started Indians have all become angels and are telling us what is best for us. Hillarious, no ?


have seen this forum many pakistani discussing about indians related thread there economy,there weapons,obsession etc,
Why its wrong for us to discuss CPEC,y dont the MOD apply the rule that Indians will not discuss CPEC or post CPEC related thread.
Why dont you raise your objection for Author and newspaper who has a valid point,which you are unable to digest.


----------



## Cookie Monster

Akhill said:


> wow.... The delusion in this thread is too huge.


Shouldn't all Indians be happy if Pakistan is going to be somehow ruined by CPEC? We r after all ur enemy and hated by u lot. So why such concern? Let us live in our "delusion" and "destroy ourselves". I'm very curious to find the reason for such warnings and concern. That's something u do for a friend when they r about to make a bad choice. Would u plz enlighten us?

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## salarsikander

ravi gupta said:


> Why dont you raise your objection for Author and newspaper who has a valid point,which you are unable to digest.


Listen Dont let me start what Happens in Bharat rakshak forum. Secondly What happens in others forums is not the benchmarak that it should happene everywhere ! 

Please do tell the Valid points that A Non Pkaistani citizen such as you (out of pure blind hattred for pakistan) is endorsing

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## danger007

ravi gupta said:


> I dont think this message is for me or you wrongly quoted me.
> 
> 
> have seen this forum many pakistani discussing about indians related thread there economy,there weapons,obsession etc,
> Why its wrong for us to discuss CPEC,y dont the MOD apply the rule that Indians will not discuss CPEC or post CPEC related thread.
> Why dont you raise your objection for Author and newspaper who has a valid point,which you are unable to digest.




It was for salar. Mistakenly quoted you.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> Listen Dont let me start what Happens in Bharat rakshak forum. Secondly What happens in others forums is not the benchmarak that it should happene everywhere !
> 
> Please do tell the Valid points that A Non Pkaistani citizen such as you (out of pure blind hattred for pakistan) is endorsing


U are assuming too many things in one go.
I have never visited Bharat Rakshak neither i am member,may be you are misquoting me with some one else.

I know i am Indian a non pakistani for you,and have not a blind hattred toward pakistani and pakistani,infact i have some very close friend,we eat and play together,

as a new member in the forum i have posted first time and have seen the fun,infact i was very surprise initially did i kill someone by posting thread,later i realise since its CPEC related as its has started.

Am thinking that,What if some pakistani took this from DAWN newspaper and posted did he get the same response.


----------



## salarsikander

danger007 said:


> I can see your obsession with Indians even though pak media reporting it. Got it


Pak Media Or LOL. Some Newspaper that nobody even reads much



ravi gupta said:


> Am thinking that,What if some pakistani took this from DAWN newspaper and posted did he get the same response.


Again, I wondr why You guys dont give so much of a though to Ajai shukla ?


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> Pak Media Or LOL. Some Newspaper that nobody even reads much
> 
> 
> Again, I wondr why You guys dont give so much of a though to Ajai shukla ?



Who is Ajay Shukla,what is his revelance to the thread,is he has some views on thread/CPEC,Y dont you share for our information and the other forum readers.


----------



## bzxcup

All Chinese want is other contry get richer,have better economy,so we can sell more goods，do more bussiness.

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## salarsikander

ravi gupta said:


> Who is Ajay Shukla,what is his revelance to the thread,is he has some views on thread/CPEC,Y dont you share for our information and the other forum readers.


WHo is ajay shukla ? LOl than perhaps you need to spend a little more time in Indian subject rather than all day obsessing on pakistani developments. 
Perhaps you can share the info as to why you are having the sleepless night over this CPEC issue, I am sure the readers including will be very pleased

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lil Mathew

salarsikander said:


> Because certainly AN Indian is arguing over it. Ever Since the Cpec started Indians have all become angels and are telling us what is best for us. Hillarious, no ?


You are right here.. we will try to prove cpec is a flawed project.. 
Supporters only see advantages of any projects.. Haters will try to find flaws of that project.. But in a debate who will gain more?? Absolutely the supporters will emerge as the only beneficiary.. Because they can easily improve their project more.. 
In democracy the importance of opposition is as much as that of govt because of this reason.. Discuss as much as you can & make it flawless (not only this but anything).. you will never get this opportunity afterwards..
For example look at Pakistan itself for last 5 years..
Gadani Power Park of 6,600-MW cumulative capacity was launched in July 2013 on fast track.
*The mega project however was shelved within a year’s time after losing valuable time, resources and opportunity*. Likewise, Punjab had initiated in January 2014 development of six coal-based projects using imported coal each of 1,000-MW capacity, but only one project is now coming up. *Progress on the remaining projects was stalled after lot of work was done.* Ironically, projects to be located in Rahim Yar Khan and Muzaffargarh have been abandoned, while those planned in Sheikhupura, Jhang and Kasur districts are being developed as R-LNG projects instead.

The situation not only r*eflects on the government’s uncertain and half-baked policy but also on its implausibility*. The 425-MW Nandipur thermal power project is another example of lack of vision and planning and mismanagement, whereas the Quaid-e-Azam Solar Power Project of 100-MW has already invited lot of criticism on various accounts.

https://www.thenews.com.pk/magazine/money-matters/77445-the-true-cost-of-r-lng

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> WHo is ajay shukla ? LOl than perhaps you need to spend a little more time in Indian subject rather than all day obsessing on pakistani developments.
> Perhaps you can share the info as to why you are having the sleepless night over this CPEC issue, I am sure the readers including will be very pleased


Probably you have a point,to know Ajai Shukla who is defence analyst i have to spend more time in Bharat Rakshak.
What is the point of Ajay Shulka in this CPEC related thread i am unable to understand,I usually have have a good sound sleep and why will i lose sleep becoz of CPEC,LOL


----------



## salarsikander

Lil Mathew said:


> You are right here.. we will try to prove cpec is a flawed project..
> Supporters only see advantages of any projects.. Haters will try to find flaws of that project.. But in a debate who will gain more?? Absolutely the supporters will emerge as the only beneficiary.. Because they can easily improve their project more..
> In democracy the importance of opposition is as much as that of govt because of this reason.. Discuss as much as you can & make it flawless (not only this but anything).. you will never get this opportunity afterwards..
> For example look at Pakistan itself for last 5 years..
> Gadani Power Park of 6,600-MW cumulative capacity was launched in July 2013 on fast track.
> *The mega project however was shelved within a year’s time after losing valuable time, resources and opportunity*. Likewise, Punjab had initiated in January 2014 development of six coal-based projects using imported coal each of 1,000-MW capacity, but only one project is now coming up. *Progress on the remaining projects was stalled after lot of work was done.* Ironically, projects to be located in Rahim Yar Khan and Muzaffargarh have been abandoned, while those planned in Sheikhupura, Jhang and Kasur districts are being developed as R-LNG projects instead.
> 
> The situation not only r*eflects on the government’s uncertain and half-baked policy but also on its implausibility*. The 425-MW Nandipur thermal power project is another example of lack of vision and planning and mismanagement, whereas the Quaid-e-Azam Solar Power Project of 100-MW has already invited lot of criticism on various accounts.
> 
> https://www.thenews.com.pk/magazine/money-matters/77445-the-true-cost-of-r-lng


And I wonder how if any of those projects were conected to CPEC ?



ravi gupta said:


> Probably you have a point,to know Ajai Shukla who is defence analyst i have to spend more time in Bharat Rakshak.
> What is the point of Ajay Shulka in this CPEC related thread i am unable to understand,I usually have have a good sound sleep and why will i lose sleep becoz of CPEC,LOL


Same thing So you know who is Ajay shukla and what is Bharat Rakshak. But I wonder why were you lying before then


----------



## friendly_troll96

*Dear dragon please enslave me, eat me!!! 'Cause it makes haters jealous.*


----------



## salarsikander

Lil Mathew said:


> You are right here.. we will try to prove cpec is a flawed project..
> Supporters only see advantages of any projects.. Haters will try to find flaws of that project.. But in a debate who will gain more?? Absolutely the supporters will emerge as the only beneficiary.. Because they can easily improve their project more..
> In democracy the importance of opposition is as much as that of govt because of this reason.. Discuss as much as you can & make it flawless (not only this but anything).. you will never get this opportunity afterwards..
> For example look at Pakistan itself for last 5 years..
> Gadani Power Park of 6,600-MW cumulative capacity was launched in July 2013 on fast track.
> *The mega project however was shelved within a year’s time after losing valuable time, resources and opportunity*. Likewise, Punjab had initiated in January 2014 development of six coal-based projects using imported coal each of 1,000-MW capacity, but only one project is now coming up. *Progress on the remaining projects was stalled after lot of work was done.* Ironically, projects to be located in Rahim Yar Khan and Muzaffargarh have been abandoned, while those planned in Sheikhupura, Jhang and Kasur districts are being developed as R-LNG projects instead.
> 
> The situation not only r*eflects on the government’s uncertain and half-baked policy but also on its implausibility*. The 425-MW Nandipur thermal power project is another example of lack of vision and planning and mismanagement, whereas the Quaid-e-Azam Solar Power Project of 100-MW has already invited lot of criticism on various accounts.
> 
> https://www.thenews.com.pk/magazine/money-matters/77445-the-true-cost-of-r-lng


Indian trying to prove anything will not make any difference, Trust me No one gives a shit in Pakistan about India or what it has to say. 

The project is well on swing. It is no wonder that Audi and BMW are coming to pakistan along with Renault's looking to assemble in Karachi by 2018. For a country that is in State of war with Terroism, this indeed is a good start

Reactions: Like Like:
3


----------



## Lil Mathew

friendly_troll96 said:


> *Dear dragon please enslave me, eat me!!! 'Cause it makes haters jealous.*


If you are a Pakistani.. It is a shame for your country and countrymen.. Begging for chinese slavery..
You behaviour reminds me a saying.. you people are like a mother pray for her son's death to see her daughter of law crying..

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## salarsikander

Lil Mathew said:


> If you are a Pakistani.. It is a shame for your country and countrymen


Indian find it too hard to digest the sarcasm that for sure

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## friendly_troll96

Lil Mathew said:


> If you are a Pakistani.. It is a shame for your country and countrymen.. Begging for chinese slavery..
> You behaviour reminds me a saying.. you people are like a mother pray for her son's death to see her daughter of law crying..








Edit: And look at your name my @Lil Mathew , Hindus seem to have run out of Kumhars, Chaddas and Dickshits.

Reactions: Like Like:
2


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> And I wonder how if any of those projects were conected to CPEC ?
> 
> 
> Same thing So you know who is Ajay shukla and what is Bharat Rakshak. But I wonder why were you lying before then


Once you quote him i google it and find out,however still i am unable to understand then and now what is his relevance to CPEC thread,may be i am again missing something,you are a senior member and i am relatively very new in forum,can you shed light on it.Thanks in advance.



friendly_troll96 said:


> View attachment 355082


I can see your id as TROLL,so never mind.


----------



## salarsikander

ravi gupta said:


> am relatively very new in forum,can you shed light on it.Thanks in advance.


Yes, I can very see that youre a newbie. You will learn the "hard way'' 

On Topic- So what were the concerns of Cpec that as An Non Pakistani citizen you were having or tried to share ?


----------



## friendly_troll96

ravi gupta said:


> I can see your id as TROLL,so never mind.


Can't you see the word "friendly"?


----------



## saddam bhatti

ito said:


> First, I doubt Chinese have the capacity to undertake a project on such scale. Second, if there is only country that can rival China, that is India. I guess India has its own plans on building trade routes though east Asia.



HAHAHAHAHAHA


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> Yes, I can very see that youre a newbie. You will learn the "hard way''
> 
> On Topic- So what were the concerns of Cpec that as An Non Pakistani citizen you were having or tried to share ?


Frankly for me the curiosity of post thread in the forum,which infact after six month i have not done yet.

Infact even if you notice any thread either defence related or economy related you will see Pakistani poster mentioning CPEC in each and every thread,infact there comments never finish if they have not mention CPEC,GWADAR,etc.

Also you can read from the first page the bashing to me just CPEC mention by an Indian and i doubt how many of those have read the complete article.But i can see they are very sensitive about it.Honestly i cannot claim either it will be huge success or failure that is matter of debate,what my concern is huge loan taken and there rate of interest,even if it done well require many years to cover the cost,what i understand from the article its a win win proposition for chinese in terms of there exports,business and geopolitical situation.May be i am wrong who knows.


----------



## salarsikander

ravi gupta said:


> Frankly for me the curiosity of post thread in the forum,which infact after six month i have not done yet.
> 
> Infact even if you notice any thread either defence related or economy related you will see Pakistani poster mentioning CPEC in each and every thread,infact there comments never finish if they have not mention CPEC,GWADAR,etc.
> 
> Also you can read from the first page the bashing to me just CPEC mention by an Indian and i doubt how many of those have read the complete article.But i can see they are very sensitive about it.Honestly i cannot claim either it will be huge success or failure that is matter of debate,what my concern is huge loan taken and there rate of interest,even if it done well require many years to cover the cost,what i understand from the article its a win win proposition for chinese in terms of there exports,business and geopolitical situation.May be i am wrong who knows.


Ok, So Lets go back in time and see how things run shall we ?

Chinese have usually avoid giving us grants and AID. Following their own famous saying, " Give a man a fish and you will feed him for the day, teach him how to fish and you will feed him for the rest of his life.''

Going through that in time, due to our inability Chinese have generously restricted those loans when we were unable to pay. 

Now ofc that comes when this project becomes epic failure ( A Hard possibility, but a wishful thinking on part of citizens from a tri colour flag) Giving Pakistan loan will ensure that The projects are completed on time
( If it were Aid, Corruption would have eaten it already) and there is a huge incentive in doing so. The effects can already be felt already with moodys credit rating improved alread form B- to B and then desirous foreign investors willing to look forward. Turkish acquisition of Dawlance ( home appliance maker) With Renault looking to assemble cars in Pakistan from 2018. MAn A german truck manufacturer company has already been granted permission. Every country is in deep debt, but its ability of that country economic resilience that enables them to pay it back. And If you look, mostly all projects of CPEC are of power generation and to upgrade and built infrastructure, A very basic foundations for a sound economy

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Lil Mathew

friendly_troll96 said:


> View attachment 355082
> 
> 
> Edit: And look at your name my @Lil Mathew , Hindus seem to have run out of Kumhars, Chaddas and Dickshits.


I'll not use a cream that others used.. Keep that cream back in your dad's shelf..
This name lil Mathew is fake only for pdf.... Also I have no religion..


----------



## friendly_troll96

Lil Mathew said:


> I'll not use a cream that others used.. Keep that cream back in *your dad's shelf*..
> This name lil Mathew is fake only for pdf.... Also I have no religion..


trust me it won't look bad in your mom's cupboard either


----------



## Lil Mathew

friendly_troll96 said:


> trust me it won't look bad in your mom's cupboard either


No no no.. Keep that in your dad's shelf... He needs that badly..


----------



## ravi gupta

salarsikander said:


> Ok, So Lets go back in time and see how things run shall we ?
> 
> Chinese have usually avoid giving us grants and AID. Following their own famous saying, " Give a man a fish and you will feed him for the day, teach him how to fish and you will feed him for the rest of his life.''
> 
> Going through that in time, due to our inability Chinese have generously restricted those loans when we were unable to pay.
> 
> Now ofc that comes when this project becomes epic failure ( A Hard possibility, but a wishful thinking on part of citizens from a tri colour flag) Giving Pakistan loan will ensure that The projects are completed on time
> ( If it were Aid, Corruption would have eaten it already) and there is a huge incentive in doing so. The effects can already be felt already with moodys credit rating improved alread form B- to B and then desirous foreign investors willing to look forward. Turkish acquisition of Dawlance ( home appliance maker) With Renault looking to assemble cars in Pakistan from 2018. MAn A german truck manufacturer company has already been granted permission. Every country is in deep debt, but its ability of that country economic resilience that enables them to pay it back. And If you look, mostly all projects of CPEC are of power generation and to upgrade and built infrastructure, A very basic foundations for a sound economy



I 100% agree with you and also wish you best of luck,however do read the article which also have rational view of that.


----------



## friendly_troll96

Lil Mathew said:


> No no no.. Keep that in your dad's shelf... He needs that badly..


Nope, i'd rather in you mom's cupboard.


----------



## salarsikander

ravi gupta said:


> I 100% agree with you and also wish you best of luck,however do read the article which also have rational view of that.


Other than being pessimistic I dont find anything else. Youre are more than welcome to point out the specifics and we can discuss on that


----------



## Lil Mathew

friendly_troll96 said:


> Nope, i'd rather in you mom's cupboard.


No man.. It must be kept in your dad's shelf.. It belongs there only.. ..By the by What is your mom's opinion about this after using??



salarsikander said:


> Indian find it too hard to digest the sarcasm that for sure


Every sarcasm is not fun..
What if I make a sarcastic comment about you religion, Islam?? I'm sure everybody here will burn.. I think sarcasm about nationality also not fun...


----------



## salarsikander

Lil Mathew said:


> What if I make a sarcastic comment about you religion, Islam?


Then you will get banned for sure

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## friendly_troll96

Lil Mathew said:


> No man.. It must be kept in your dad's shelf.. It belongs there only.. ..By the by What is your mom's opinion about this after using??


ask your sister


----------



## Lil Mathew

friendly_troll96 said:


> ask your sister


I have no sister.... Pls do me a favour, ask your sister instead...


----------



## ravi gupta

Lil Mathew said:


> I have no sister.... Pls do me a favour, ask your sister instead...


Sir,i saw your message in this thread which was faar better and quality,you seems very intelligent man with good grasp of current knowledge,
why to indulge with troller who have nothing to add but to derails the threads,he is just pulling you down.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## friendly_troll96

Lil Mathew said:


> I have no sister.... .


I knew you'd say this, I really did know. Your sister (chhoti wali) keeps telling me she's been abandoned by her siblings. I never took it for real but I'm starting to believe her now. Poor hindni kaali boojo. 



ravi gupta said:


> Sir,i saw your message in this thread which was faar better and quality,*you seems* very intelligent man with good grasp of current knowledge,
> *why to indulge with troller who have* nothing to add *but to derails* the threads,he is just pulling you down.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Well.wisher

Moonlight said:


> Lmooooo.
> 
> But kabab Main Indian taste chale jaye ga. Won't taste good.



No problem , we'll add pakistani ketchup in it to give it a good taste .


----------



## Mugwop

The article is written by some overseas uncle tom Pakistanis. 
indians don't get so happy every race has their uncle toms even yours


----------



## zenglanmu

It is just me or some other members here found it is difficult to catch the writers idea?
The author quote: 
"It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy."

The writer might want to express that China sometimes made investment into so-called "dictatship", "corrupt" country or any other country that is not in uncle Sam's favor. So the political change in PK would destroy the CPEC? China has witnessed many goverment changes in PK. Each time China-PK always maintain good relationships no matter what changes. So even if current elected goverment lost its power, i believe the new goverment will continue to push CPEC projects.

"To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realize that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy"
It's true China need foreign market for its economy, but the other side also benefits from Chinese goods and investment. It's a win-win situation. So what's wrong with it?

"For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive."
The so-called" aggression" of China is not using military forces, but economic ties. Economic ties is a much strong force the military. If the leader of the country in Asia gets full understanding of what US can offer and what China can offer, he would make his wise choice like the President of Philippines did recently.

All in All, the whole article is crab. And by looking into the backgroud of the authors: _Mushtaq Khan is Chief Economist at Bank Alfalah and holds a PhD from Stanford University. Danish Hyder is a research associate at Bank Alfalah and holds a degree from Vassar College in New York. 

It is not a surprise that they would make a such westernized point of view._

While it is true we might face certain challenges in CPEC. For example, the spread of terrorism could pose essentail threat along the road. The different way of religious between China and PK might cause trouble during cooperation. What type of bussiness can be found to get good profit in CPEC? 
But we believe that with the brotherhood of China and PK, all the problems could be solved.


----------



## ravi gupta

Mugwop said:


> The article is written by some overseas uncle tom Pakistanis.
> indians don't get so happy every race has their uncle toms even yours


So according to you,This kind of tom uncles are not suppose to have views and can write articles on CPEC.
Somebody living in foreign land is not patriotic enough.


----------



## Mugwop

ravi gupta said:


> So according to you,This kind of tom uncles are not suppose to have views and can write articles on CPEC.
> Somebody living in foreign land is not patriotic enough.



Posting an article by Pakistani uncle toms to instigate between Chinese and Pakistanis, Man you played it smart unlike the other indians here who oppose CPEC.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## ravi gupta

Mugwop said:


> Posting an article by Pakistani uncle toms to instigate between Chinese and Pakistanis, Man you played it smart unlike the other indians here who oppose CPEC.


Sir,who am i to instigate between Chinse and Pakistani posters,i found this article interesting and posted in PDF to start another journey,you still think i played smart,i will take this as a compliment.
However i firmly believe chinese will not let this project failed in any circumstances too much is on the ground,however it may not be a game changer but yes you need 3 or 4 huge projects like this to make some visible difference to your economy.
Thats my thought.


----------



## Mugwop

ravi gupta said:


> Sir,who am i to instigate between Chinse and Pakistani posters,i found this article interesting and posted in PDF to start another journey,you still think i played smart,i will take this as a compliment.
> However i firmly believe chinese will not let this project failed in any circumstances too much is on the ground,however it may not be a game changer *but yes you need 3 or 4 huge projects like this to make some visible difference to your economy.*
> Thats my thought.



See even you are admitting it but the Pakistani uncle tom is not!

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## 90ArsalanLeo

ravi gupta said:


> We are financing IRAN chahabahar port,we have not given any loan to IRAN at high rate of interest.



China is also financing large amount of projects in CPEC specially that on gawader port only few projects are loaned like powerplants, lahore orange line metro etc. I am again imploring u don't worry about our well being we will be fabulous on our one.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Saifullah Sani

if CPEC is a flawed project then why U.K., France, Russia Want To Join Pakistan-China’s CPEC


----------



## ravi gupta

Saifullah Sani said:


> if CPEC is a flawed project then why U.K., France, Russia Want To Join Pakistan-China’s CPEC


You have a point its seem whole world is looking to profit from CPEC.


----------



## Well.wisher

ravi gupta said:


> You have a point its seem whole world is looking to profit from CPEC.



Yes . Alhamdulillah 
Because everyone wants economic prosperity , the world has become mature now .

I think india should also appreciate this rather than pleading for Burnol. But we're really unhappy to see disparaging comments from indians .

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## khanmubashir

ravi gupta said:


> *CPEC: The devil is not in the details*
> 
> *Herald*
> 
> 
> Perspective | CPEC: The devil is not in the details
> Perspective
> *CPEC: The devil is not in the details*
> Danish Hyder | Mushtaq Khan
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> A guard keeps watch at Gwadar Port, Balochistan | AP
> The first outgoing shipment of containers carrying Chinese goods departed from Gwadar port on November 13, 2016. The media event was attended by Pakistan’s top policymakers as well as a high-level Chinese delegation. Despite this important first step for the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), many people in Pakistan still approach this project with a sense of cautious optimism.
> 
> Nearly all will say CPEC is a game-changer, but some will ask for whom? Others will flag that CPEC is the largest foreign investment into Pakistan, but many will question whether the country will be able to bear the debt burden resulting from it. Some will talk up how the various sub-routes could lift under-developed cities and towns, but others will question whether these sub-routes will even materialise as China is really only interested in the direct route from Kashgar to Gwadar.
> 
> To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realize that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy
> 
> This confusion exists because fresh information on CPEC is mostly anecdotal, rather than from a credible official source. People will highlight the increasing number of Chinese in the country (on flights, hotels, shopping malls, etc); the rapid pace of development at Gwadar port; and how the first Chinese shipment moved through different ports of Pakistan to reach Gwadae. Other than the recent shipment, concrete details are scarce.
> 
> Even so, Pakistanis feel the partnership with China is critically important for the country, though they are unsure whether it will materialise fully. On the other hand, the global reaction to China’s One-Belt-One-Road (OBOR) – of which CPEC is a part – falls into one of two categories: those who think the project is simply not feasible in terms of scale, or the resources needed or the timeline; and those who fear that OBOR is China’s master plan for global domination in the 21st century (see map below).
> 
> Observers concerned about OBOR’s feasibility flag the sheer scale of this undertaking, and the apparent disconnect with available funding sources. Bankers will highlight the inherent risks in long-term infrastructure projects, which are compounded by the large number of participating countries. They will focus on financial/trade guarantees, regulatory reach/enforcement, and legal cover and recourse.
> 
> While none of these misgivings are unreasonable, we believe they fail to consider several key points. But the basic issue raised by sceptics is entirely legitimate.
> 
> So the 46 billion dollar question is whether these fine-print concerns could sink the project. Is the devil really in the details?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Map by Essa Taimur
> What China seeks from OBOR
> 
> To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realise that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy. In fact, if China’s economic growth slows significantly, there are legitimate fears this could spark social unrest and political instability.
> 
> In our view, the challenges facing Chinese policymakers could be ranked as follows:
> 
> 
> Secure shipping lanes. As the world’s largest importer of oil and gas, China needs to ensure that its shipping routes are not vulnerable at the choke point – the Malacca Straits. Hence, Corridors 1 and 2 of OBOR have immense strategic value for China, not just for fuels and minerals, but also to access Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa.
> Develop Western China. While the coastal areas are largely developed, Western China is somewhat neglected. For political harmony, policymakers need to focus on Western China, which explains why Corridors 1, 2 and 3 of OBOR originate out of the Western provinces.
> Use China’s spare capacity. Building physical infrastructure has fueled China’s economic growth. With growing concerns that policymakers may have over-invested, China’s installed capacity in steel, cement, bulk chemicals and heavy machinery, is now under-utilised. Building infrastructure in neighbouring countries would be a convenient way to use this spare capacity.
> Create new export markets. China perhaps realises that exports to the member countries of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which have been driving its economic growth, may continue to fall. In effect, it needs to cultivate new markets in Africa and Central Asia, which have significant growth potential.
> Create goodwill with neighbouring countries. OBOR entails establishing training institutes and schools in participating countries, which should support the project and be mutually beneficial.
> While it is clear that China has to be ambitious, OBOR may not be quite as ambitious as it appears. For example, China may not deliver all six corridors, these corridors may not extend as deeply as envisaged, and each corridor may not include roads, railroads and pipelines as currently planned. But even half of the currently planned OBOR network would go a long way towards securing what China needs.
> 
> In fact, we believe there is a latent priority within the six OBOR corridors, with Corridor 1 and 2 on top of the list for strategic reasons. This may be why Corridor 1 (CPEC) has been the first order of business for China under OBOR. Taking a staggered approach makes sense, as it limits the resources that have to be committed upfront. Furthermore, negotiating the first two corridors is likely to be less problematic for the Chinese (compared to Corridors 5 and 6) as there are fewer participating countries in Corridors 1 and 2 (Pakistan, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan and Iran) -- and some of these countries do not enjoy close ties with the United States.
> 
> China’s unique approach to economic reforms
> 
> Many third world countries were more developed than China in the 1970s. In light of this, China’s current standing in the global economy clearly reveals why its economic transformation is considered a miracle. After Tiananmen Square in 1989, China embraced economic reforms with even greater fervour.
> 
> The architect of this accelerated growth was Deng Xiaoping. In 1978, Deng challenged the Chinese to double China’s economy by 2000 and make China a middle-income country by 2050. China far exceeded his expectations when it overtook Japan to become the second-largest economy in 2010. Deng’s heuristic (learning-by-doing) approach to economic reforms defied the collective wisdom of the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
> 
> It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, under which the World Bank and IMF operate, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy. Compared to Pakistan, the Chinese were far more practical – and result-oriented – in their approach to economic reforms.
> 
> Most importantly, China displayed the political will to change. But political will, while essential for the success of reforms, is not enough. An effective strategy is also needed and China used a novel one that yielded unprecedented results.
> 
> Bo Qu, a visiting scholar at Princeton University, highlights two key characteristics of China’s economic reforms since 1978.
> 
> It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy.
> 
> First, economic reforms do not proceed according to a well-defined blueprint. Qu states that experimentation is a fundamental part of China’s policy formulation, and the process is primarily driven by specific problems encountered during implementation. In effect, the real focus should be on solving practical problems, instead of persisting with ideologically appealing, but ineffective institutional arrangements.
> 
> Second, China’s reforms were gradual and incremental, without hard timelines. Qu states that incremental reforms reduce adjustment costs as policymakers are able to balance the pace of reforms with social stability.
> 
> Despite starting as an under-developed agrarian economy in the late 1970s, China did not approach the international financial institution (IFIs) for policy advice or financial assistance. The stark contrast between this approach and Pakistan’s experience since the late 1980s cannot go unnoticed. Although Pakistan has been working to restructure its economy for the past 25 years, many would argue that little has been achieved.
> 
> China’s Family Production Responsibility System (FPRS) is a good example of the heuristic approach to economic reforms. Before this, China had communal farms with strict production quotas, where even meals were a group activity. The FPRS (which is still in force) allowed individual farmers to rent arable land from the government, in exchange for a specific quota of produce/crops. The rent was paid to the local government.
> 
> This simple idea, which effectively permitted farmers to sell surplus produce in village markets, was first implemented in specific provinces in the mid-1970s. When positive results were realised, these experiments were carried out with different crops, and then replicated in other provinces of China.
> 
> The FPRS was formalised as policy in 1978 – by 1984, 99 per cent of China’s total agricultural production was incentivised by the private gains of individual farmers. The scale of this change can only be appreciated when one realises that China’s rural population was about 800 million to 850 million people at the time.
> 
> This policy alone lifted most of China’s population out of poverty.
> 
> China’s success with large-scale economic transformation suggests that it would be an ideal partner to execute CPEC. But even more importantly, China’s tried-and-tested approach to reforms, which is incremental and open to change as the situation evolves, suggests that a lack of concrete details is not cause for alarm. This appears to be how the Chinese prefer to work.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Illustration by Sana Nasir
> 
> 
> Is OBOR a plan for global domination?
> 
> We disagree with the perception that OBOR aims for global domination. First, the specific focus on Asia (effectively ignoring Africa and Latin America) does not reveal global ambitions; and, secondly, since China is the third-largest country by landmass and the second-largest economy in the world, any of its long-term strategy – by definition – will be on a “global” scale.
> 
> What is harder to explain is China’s policy in the South China Sea. For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive. However, changing one’s perspective could explain China’s orientation on this issue.
> 
> The Asia Pacific region has a significant US military presence. American bases in Japan and South Korea can be traced back to WWII and the Korean War, but have lost their tactical importance with the end of the Cold War. Furthermore, the continued US presence in Australia, the Philippines, Thailand and the Indian Ocean has the potential to disrupt trade flows destined for – and originating from – China. Since China’s hard power comes from its trade flows, the Chinese are justifiably concerned that a stand off with the US, on any issue, could easily strangle its domestic economy.
> 
> The geopolitical dimension of CPEC
> 
> While OBOR may not be a plan for global domination, it does seek to change the global status quo. Creating a physical corridor to the Arabian Sea will give China direct access to a deep-sea port that is close to the largest hydrocarbon exporters and a shortcut to Europe, the Middle East and Central Asia.
> 
> One must consider how this project challenges the global status quo, the US control of global shipping lanes and India’s ambitions to control the Indian Ocean. The growing tension between the Asian giants (China and India) and the hostility between Pakistan and India explains why CPEC is so strongly opposed by India.
> 
> The resistance to Gwadar becoming a fully functioning port is perhaps being reflected by the troubles in some parts of Balochistan — specifically targeting the Pakistan Army and local law enforcement agencies. These terrorist attacks may be an effort to undermine CPEC.
> 
> For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive.
> 
> Although Pakistan’s support for CPEC is clear from the army’s active role in guaranteeing security and the endorsement by Pakistan’s main political parties, if the placement of the various routes is hampered by bureaucratic red tape and provincial self-interests, the key Gwadar-Kashgar corridor could be the only route that will be built.
> 
> This “CPEC-lite” will fulfill China’s needs, but will not create the economic spillovers the other routes promise.
> 
> In the context of the geopolitical prize that is Gwadar, the following is a simplistic assessment of CPEC: China finances and builds the project, while Pakistan pays in terms of social and political disruption, and the loss of innocent lives. Given the strategic importance of the Gwadar-Kashgar corridor to China, this component of OBOR will surely be completed because it is motivated by more than just economics.
> 
> This is about securing China’s trade routes and allowing it to position itself in the Arabian Sea.
> 
> We believe this partnership with China could be the key factor that will place Pakistan’s economy on a more sustainable path forward. As China targets Central Asia, the Middle East and Africa as part of its strategy for the 21st century, it simply cannot afford to have an economically unstable partner in CPEC.
> This geopolitical compulsion should generate the political will to undertake tough economic reforms in Pakistan and also ensure that CPEC is sustainable and profitable for the country.
> 
> _Mushtaq Khan is Chief Economist at Bank Alfalah and holds a PhD from Stanford University. Danish Hyder is a research associate at Bank Alfalah and holds a degree from Vassar College in New York. These are the views of the authors and not the bank._


paste link of orginal source this excript looks manipulated


----------



## ravi gupta

khanmubashir said:


> paste link of orginal source this excript looks manipulated



CPEC: The devil is not in the details

Source: https://defence.pk/threads/cpec-the-devil-is-not-in-the-details.462662/#ixzz4RNwN3R5x

http://herald.dawn.com/news/1153597/cpec-the-devil-is-not-in-the-details


----------



## Zaem

zenglanmu said:


> It is just me or some other members here found it is difficult to catch the writers idea?
> The author quote:
> "It is somewhat ironic that the development strategy advocated by the Washington Consensus, is far more ideologically burdened than the one used by Communist China to reform its own economy."
> 
> The writer might want to express that China sometimes made investment into so-called "dictatship", "corrupt" country or any other country that is not in uncle Sam's favor. So the political change in PK would destroy the CPEC? China has witnessed many goverment changes in PK. Each time China-PK always maintain good relationships no matter what changes. So even if current elected goverment lost its power, i believe the new goverment will continue to push CPEC projects.
> 
> "To understand the policy motivation behind OBOR, one must realize that China is desperate to maintain its growth momentum, especially with the uncertain outlook for the global economy"
> It's true China need foreign market for its economy, but the other side also benefits from Chinese goods and investment. It's a win-win situation. So what's wrong with it?
> 
> "For a country trying to downplay the perception that it seeks to challenge the US for global domination, China’s strategy in Asia Pacific is surprisingly aggressive."
> The so-called" aggression" of China is not using military forces, but economic ties. Economic ties is a much strong force the military. If the leader of the country in Asia gets full understanding of what US can offer and what China can offer, he would make his wise choice like the President of Philippines did recently.
> 
> All in All, the whole article is crab. And by looking into the backgroud of the authors: _Mushtaq Khan is Chief Economist at Bank Alfalah and holds a PhD from Stanford University. Danish Hyder is a research associate at Bank Alfalah and holds a degree from Vassar College in New York.
> 
> It is not a surprise that they would make a such westernized point of view._
> 
> While it is true we might face certain challenges in CPEC. For example, the spread of terrorism could pose essentail threat along the road. The different way of religious between China and PK might cause trouble during cooperation. What type of bussiness can be found to get good profit in CPEC?
> But we believe that with the brotherhood of China and PK, all the problems could be solved.


There is no "Brotherhood". If you think China invests in Pakistan just because Pakistan is its "brother", you should wake up. Im sure its China who got the jackpot with CPEC, yes it also has some good effects on Pakistan, but China profits most from it. 

Pakistan is geopoliticallyc in Chinas interest, they get the access to Arabian Sea through one country that is quite underdeveloped and in need of investments. Pakistan should be cautious to not let China get too big of a share from Pakistans economy, since it would give China huge leverage in Pakistan politics and foreign relations. 

China as an ally isnt bad, but keep in mind that they too care most about China.

Reactions: Like Like:
1


----------



## Mentee

ito said:


> OBOR is project to control vital routes of trade by China. India will never agree for a Chinese dominance.


Who needs India's permission btw? Only if you guys do a lil introspection you'll come to know why every country around India hates you and that hate sentiment is at public level!


----------

