What's new

China signs $35bn in deals with Pakistan

False hopes about the Chinese visit

False hopes about the Chinese visit Zafar Hilaly

Some would call it double dealing or hypocrisy, but let’s just call it pretending. That way it becomes less emotive and more palatable. Why do we pretend as much as we do when in the end we end up fooling no one but ourselves? Worse, the pretence of yesterday becomes the facts of the next day when those acting the charade are not around to confirm that what was being reported as genuine was merely posturing, and actually a hoax. It’s important because if the past never really happened, how can it form the basis of formulating present policy? After all, the past is not just a package that you can lay away, and, besides, if we do not really know the past, how can we understand the present?

Consider the very, very recent past and the hoax perpetrated by this government about the $35 billion worth of MOUs concluded during the visit of the Chinese prime minister last week. A businessman summoned from Karachi tells a hilarious story of how he and some other businessman were rushed to Islamabad and made to conclude an agreement, the subject of which he has only a faint idea, but enough to know that it was as doable as walking on water.

Half of the so-called $35-billion deals are about more than doubling our annual trade with China. That’s not only ambitious but absurdly unrealistic. Actually, it’s impossible in our present circumstances when factories are closing due to power shortages and the costs of production have soared. Nor do we have a sufficient selection of items of interest to China. There are just so many carpets, leather goods, surgical instruments and footballs that the Chinese require or can kick around; and their textile products are cheaper. In any case, two-thirds of our bilateral trade is made up of Chinese exports to Pakistan and there is nothing to suggest that this imbalance will change in our favour.

The other half of the $35 billion concerns Chinese investments in infrastructure, and given the instability in the country these are not likely to be invested soon, if at all. The Chinese know our internal situation better than other foreign investors having been exposed to its dangers more than others. In other words, it was a disservice to our profound friendship with China to knowingly set unrealistic targets, raise bogus hopes and make pious commitments.

I recall a similar situation in 1995. Benazir Bhutto had sent Mr Zardari to South Korea at the head of a business delegation and he had returned with a sheaf of MOUs amounting to several billion dollars. BB was pleased at her husband’s success and proud of what he had achieved. Our ambassador to South Korea had sent the inevitably glowing report on the “success” of the visit which was essentially an exercise in self-praise, as he was the one responsible for organising it. Sensing my silence as a sign that I did not share her enthusiasm at the outcome, BB asked, “Isn’t it great?”

“Well, let’s put it this way, Prime Minister,” I replied. “If even 1 per cent of the agreements concluded actually happen, that will be exactly 100 per cent more than what I expect.” She gave a wry smile and we heard no more of the MOUs, although later she remembered to give the ambassador an out of turn, and thoroughly undeserved, promotion.

It is a pity that we had to go through the charade last week merely to show that our relations with China are as warm as we pretend they are. Actually, they are not only warm, but hot and glowing, but for reasons that are rooted in the national interests of both. The fake MOUs were not necessary; as usual we overdid the pretence.

You don’t have to be an economic expert to know that one of the principal tasks of a government is to make it harder for the rich to get richer, while keeping the poor from getting poorer. Instead, this policy has been stood on its head in Pakistan and implemented with such gusto that in some car showrooms Land Cruisers are in greater demand than smaller cars. As the people sink into penury wedding receptions grow more lavish and suicides more common. A local vendor recalled the story of the father with his son in his arms threatening to jump off a roof. When told that suicide is illegal and forbidden, he cried out, “Then why does He not feed us?” and jumped.

Another show of pretence-in-the-making is the supposed satisfaction by all the players on the Pakistani domestic scene that democracy is working and that, left to find its way through the shoals, it will eventually reach its destination, battered and bruised but somehow intact. In fact, the opposite is true. Democracy is not working. From the corruption index, to crime, to bad governance, everything has gone up. What has gone down, actually plummeted, is the morale and hope of the people, faith in their leaders and, more recently and alarmingly, a belief in the continued existence of this country. Sadly, the present system is not working; it’s floundering, although no one is certain what will work.

Some disagree with such a pessimistic depiction of the state we are in and recall the adage that “hope springs eternal in the human breast.” But that’s hardly a good thing. “He who lives on hope will die fasting” is what many here have come to believe. In Pakistan today the tantalising properties of hope have no appeal. It’s not a case of viewing the glass being half empty or half full. We don’t even have a glass. Moreover, in the end hope must be satisfied to become worthwhile, and that’s doesn’t look like happening here, and few believe that it ever will.

The purpose is not to convey an “all is lost” message, but rather to shed the lies and shibboleths by which governments have operated thus far and which have proved so harmful and self-deluding. To bring about the change that is so needed, we have to confess what is wrong and bad in us, to ourselves, rather than hide them in the hope of earning cheap plaudits. When all is said and done, we owe our friends, and ourselves, the truth.

The writer is a former ambassador. Email: charles123it@hotmail.com
 
Yes but it's not indian media. And plus why would he say that? He's pakistani himself? :)

Because here in Pakistan we have a free press :pakistan: who have the right to interpret news according to their own philosophy. People have and will criticize all and sundry.

What is really interesting is that indians watch Pakistani media so religiously to find dissenting media, wow - by the way while searching for Mr Sethi, you must have viewed the dozens and dozens of media personalities who were positive.
:pakistan::china:
 
Because here in Pakistan we have a free press :pakistan: who have the right to interpret news according to their own philosophy. People have and will criticize all and sundry.

What is really interesting is that indians watch Pakistani media so religiously to find dissenting media, wow - by the way while searching for Mr Sethi, you must have viewed the dozens and dozens of media personalities who were positive.
:pakistan::china:

What about the Article False hopes about the Chinese visit by Zafar Hilaly?

He is a former ambassador of Pakistan and in nearly all his Articles is a Staunch supporter of Pakistan’s Government Leadership as well as that of Pakistan’s Army.

As such I would agree with His Excellency Hilaly and I am sure Najam Sethi’s views are in the same vein.
 
What about the Article False hopes about the Chinese visit by Zafar Hilaly?

He is a former ambassador of Pakistan and in nearly all his Articles is a Staunch supporter of Pakistan’s Government Leadership as well as that of Pakistan’s Army.

And I know many other former ambassadors who have supported these deals overwhelmingly on different news channels. Dozens of analysts and experts have shown support and gratitude towards these deals. They are also former ambassidors, journalists, politicians, economists etc etc.

So leave ranting about one or two articles because their are dozens other who contradict your wishes. :pakistan::china:
 
What about the Article False hopes about the Chinese visit by Zafar Hilaly?

He is a former ambassador of Pakistan and in nearly all his Articles is a Staunch supporter of Pakistan’s Government Leadership as well as that of Pakistan’s Army.

As such I would agree with His Excellency Hilaly and I am sure Najam Sethi’s views are in the same vein.

Wow, someone disagrees with government policy - breaking news, it's free media - it makes our society dynamic.

Don't worry about Pak-China friendship it is higher than the Himalayas and deeper than the Ocean :pakistan::china:

In fact our two strongest bilateral relationships are with China and Turkey. :yahoo:
 
Why am I not surprised that indians would want to post negative news in a positive thread?
 
Because here in Pakistan we have a free press :pakistan: who have the right to interpret news according to their own philosophy. People have and will criticize all and sundry.

What is really interesting is that indians watch Pakistani media so religiously to find dissenting media, wow - by the way while searching for Mr Sethi, you must have viewed the dozens and dozens of media personalities who were positive.
:pakistan::china:

Free press [although TECHNICALLY this would come in free MEDIA, because PRESS only means newspapers. :)] and democracy? Look who's talking? LoooL!
Democracy Index - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Maybe this will brush your facts up. :)

I didn't search for this. This was already in one of the threads on the forum. I didn't want spread any negativity either I just thought it would be good to hear both the sides.
 
Dumping ground

Will our exporters gain anything from the $35bn Pak-China trade deals?

By Shahzada Irfan Ahmed

The recent visit of Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao to Pakistan and signing of economic deals worth $35 billion are being widely discussed at different forums. The deals include 17 agreements and four memorandums of understanding (MoUs). There is also an agreement between a Chinese company and the Alternative Energy Development Board (AEDB) of Pakistan for setting up wind power and solar energy projects in the country.

The figure seems highly appealing to the eye but in press reports there is hardly a mention of the respective share of both the countries in this trade. An analysis of mutual trade statistics reveals that since the signing of Free Trade Agreement (FTA) between the two countries in Nov 2006, China has exported goods worth around $ 11 billion whereas Pakistan’s exports could hardly reach $ 0.25 billion.

Another misbalance in this respect is that Pakistan imports about 1,000 items from China while the latter’s export-basket is limited to hardly 50 items.
Pakistan exports items like seafood, cotton yarn, leather, marble, fruits, sports goods, rice, raw hides and vegetables. On the other hand, China exports almost every thing available under the sun to Pakistan and that also at very low prices. Mass availability of these goods at low rates has pushed local industry out of competition.

Pakistan’s local industry alleges that the absence of government patronage and lack of supporting infrastructure, like energy, water, roads, has spurred import of cheap Chinese goods into Pakistan. Industrialists say China dumps a lot of goods into Pakistan but no action is taken for various reasons. The biggest of these is that Pakistan does not want to take even a symbolic step that harms friendly relations between the two, they add.

Complaints about dumping have to be filed with the World Trade Organisation (WTO) which inquires into them. "Dumping means export of goods by a country at prices lower than those at which these goods are being sold in the exporting country’s local market," says Tahir Fayyaz, a garment importer based in Karachi. He says such countries manufacture products in excess of their local demand to benefit from economies of scale and dispose off the surplus in countries where similar industry is in a stage of infancy or on a decline.

The countries dumping goods in other countries are not worried about the price at which they are exporting them as they earn sufficient revenues from collective sales. Tahir adds that many industrialists have shut down their units and turned to imports. "This is a hassle-free business where you do not have to tackle officials of dozens of departments, as is the case with industry," he says.

The question that arises here is how Pakistan can increase its share in mutual trade and boost its industrial sector’s contribution to exports to China. Critics say Pakistan should not shy away from raising dumping issues with China. However, this is something difficult, keeping in view the dependence of Pakistan on China in almost every field of life, ranging from education, technical assistance and engineering to defence, energy, and what not.

India, on the other hand, has still not signed free trade agreement with China and imposed anti-dumping import duties on yarn, fabric, nylon being imported from China. The country even has a Directorate General of Anti-dumping and Allied Duties (DGAD) which functions under the Commerce Ministry. The fact that India has filed a record number of anti-dumping cases against China at the World Trade Organization (WTO) also explains how protectionist the former is of its industry.

According to the WTO, a company can be charged with dumping if it exports a product at a price lower than what it normally charges in its own home market or if the import volume grows to an extent that leaves domestic manufacturers at a disadvantage.

Pakistan’s local industries have launched reports that call for taking up of this matter with WTO but so far nothing concrete has been done. For example, a report prepared by the Lahore Chamber of Commerce and Industry (LCCI) reveals that due to the dumping of China clay crockery from China, the pottery industry of Pakistan has disappeared from centers like Gujranwala and Gujrat.

The report says out of a total of five units, four have closed their commercial operations. These are Prey China, Dada Bhoy, Pakpur, and Regal China while the last one -- Lone China -- is on the verge of collapse. It adds the price of imported Chinese crockery has gone down drastically during the last one year, despite the fact that there has been no significant change in the cost of inputs.

Another major objection of Pakistani industrialists is that the system of export refinancing by the Chinese government falls under the definition of dumping under the World Trade Organisation (WTO) regime. Their claim is that Chinese exporters, who secure orders from foreign buyers, are given interest free loans equivalent to the amount of export orders. "Besides, different other subsidies like those in freight, etc, put other countries at a disadvantage," they say.
Despite all these contentious issue, there is no denying the fact that China is Pakistan’s major ally when it comes to strategic international alliances in the world. But this must not translate into death of Pakistan’s local industry which gives employment and sustenance to millions of its citizens. In this scenario, Pakistan government must ensure that the matter is taken up with China in a friendly manner and a solution found.
 
congratulations to pakistan
$35 billion is huge amount (as good as 10 % o)so pakistani economy should be able to bounce back on track with this deals.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom