Braith
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2016
- Messages
- 320
- Reaction score
- 0
- Country
- Location
By Rafiullah Kakar
Many friends have tagged me in the CPEC-related tweets issued by an official of the Chinese Embassy. There is absolutely nothing in the tweets that disproves or invalidates the concerns we have been raising over the past two years. Instead, these tweets substantiate most of our concerns.
1) In March 2015, I had argued that there is little investment in Balochistan barring Gwadar (http://www.laaltain.com/pml-n-a-reluctant-convert-to-feder…/). Of the 16 Balochistan-based projects mentioned by the Chinese official, only three projects are based out of Gwadar. The remaining 13 projects are based in Gwadar. Now, the Gwadar projects are aimed at augmenting the extractive capacity of Beijing and Islamabad and won't do any good to people of Balochistan.
2) Secondly, Ahsan Iqbal vehemently maintained that Orange Line Train Project was not part of CPEC (see: http://tribune.com.pk/…/transport-facility-iqbal-says-oran…/) whereas we were adamant that it was a part of CPEC. Tweets of the Chinese official confirm and validate our position.
Here is a summary of our main concerns regarding CPEC. Tweets issued by the Chinese official address/invalidate none of these concerns.
1) The idea of three routes is nothing but political chicanery aimed at concealing the position of eastern route (Gwadar-Khuzdar-Multan-Lahore-Islamabad) as the primary and main route of CPEC. The government's claims about having prioritised the western route are without basis and cannot be backed up by evidence.Few important points to remember in this regard:
a) Eastern route had natural advantages over western route on account of the former's better existing condition and geographical proximity to major urban centres and developed regions of the country.
b) Ideally, the government should have allocated more resources to the western route to ensure a level-playing field and offset the eastern route's superior position. On the contrary, the government's preferences and choices not only reinforced the eastern route's superior position but also ensured that the western route at best plays a second fiddle to the eastern route. The fact that eastern route is a 8 lane motorway whereas the western route is a single lane road suffices.
(For further details, see: http://tribune.com.pk/…/making-sense-of-the-cpec-controver…/)
2) The argument that China prefers the eastern route and is providing loans only for upgrading existing infrastructure is untenable. The argument about respecting investors’ preferences only applies to the $35 billion worth of FDI. It does not apply to the approximately $20-25 billion concessionary and commerical loans (CPECloans + non-CPEC loans) taken for infrastructure projects.
Decisions regarding the utilisation of loans can be made by the Pakistan government independent of the Chinese and other donors. And the government clearly prioritised building highly costly motorways in Punjab and Sindh over developing the western route.For details see: (http://tribune.com.pk/…/making-sense-of-the-cpec-controver…/)
4) Railway track and LNG pipelines run parallel to eastern route.
5) Government maintained that the debate on the installation of energy projects in any specific province is futile as electricity generated anywhere will be injected into the national grid and will be available for all the provinces without any discrimination. This would be true only if all provinces were fully connected to the national grid. At present, large swathes of rural Balochistan, Fata and K-P are not connected to the national grid. So even if the national grid has surplus electricity, large areas of Balochistan, owing to non-connectivity to the national grid, are unlikely to benefit from it.
6) Finally, the argument about poor security along the western route is flawed and based on a lack of understanding of the militant landscape in Balochistan. The areas where insurgency is strong are the ones where the common alignment of CPEC (Gwadar-Turbat-Hoshab-Basima-Khuzdar) passes through. Western route passes through some of the most peaceful areas of Balochistan.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/1031850/making-sense-of-the-cpec-controversy/
Many friends have tagged me in the CPEC-related tweets issued by an official of the Chinese Embassy. There is absolutely nothing in the tweets that disproves or invalidates the concerns we have been raising over the past two years. Instead, these tweets substantiate most of our concerns.
1) In March 2015, I had argued that there is little investment in Balochistan barring Gwadar (http://www.laaltain.com/pml-n-a-reluctant-convert-to-feder…/). Of the 16 Balochistan-based projects mentioned by the Chinese official, only three projects are based out of Gwadar. The remaining 13 projects are based in Gwadar. Now, the Gwadar projects are aimed at augmenting the extractive capacity of Beijing and Islamabad and won't do any good to people of Balochistan.
2) Secondly, Ahsan Iqbal vehemently maintained that Orange Line Train Project was not part of CPEC (see: http://tribune.com.pk/…/transport-facility-iqbal-says-oran…/) whereas we were adamant that it was a part of CPEC. Tweets of the Chinese official confirm and validate our position.
Here is a summary of our main concerns regarding CPEC. Tweets issued by the Chinese official address/invalidate none of these concerns.
1) The idea of three routes is nothing but political chicanery aimed at concealing the position of eastern route (Gwadar-Khuzdar-Multan-Lahore-Islamabad) as the primary and main route of CPEC. The government's claims about having prioritised the western route are without basis and cannot be backed up by evidence.Few important points to remember in this regard:
a) Eastern route had natural advantages over western route on account of the former's better existing condition and geographical proximity to major urban centres and developed regions of the country.
b) Ideally, the government should have allocated more resources to the western route to ensure a level-playing field and offset the eastern route's superior position. On the contrary, the government's preferences and choices not only reinforced the eastern route's superior position but also ensured that the western route at best plays a second fiddle to the eastern route. The fact that eastern route is a 8 lane motorway whereas the western route is a single lane road suffices.
(For further details, see: http://tribune.com.pk/…/making-sense-of-the-cpec-controver…/)
2) The argument that China prefers the eastern route and is providing loans only for upgrading existing infrastructure is untenable. The argument about respecting investors’ preferences only applies to the $35 billion worth of FDI. It does not apply to the approximately $20-25 billion concessionary and commerical loans (CPECloans + non-CPEC loans) taken for infrastructure projects.
Decisions regarding the utilisation of loans can be made by the Pakistan government independent of the Chinese and other donors. And the government clearly prioritised building highly costly motorways in Punjab and Sindh over developing the western route.For details see: (http://tribune.com.pk/…/making-sense-of-the-cpec-controver…/)
4) Railway track and LNG pipelines run parallel to eastern route.
5) Government maintained that the debate on the installation of energy projects in any specific province is futile as electricity generated anywhere will be injected into the national grid and will be available for all the provinces without any discrimination. This would be true only if all provinces were fully connected to the national grid. At present, large swathes of rural Balochistan, Fata and K-P are not connected to the national grid. So even if the national grid has surplus electricity, large areas of Balochistan, owing to non-connectivity to the national grid, are unlikely to benefit from it.
6) Finally, the argument about poor security along the western route is flawed and based on a lack of understanding of the militant landscape in Balochistan. The areas where insurgency is strong are the ones where the common alignment of CPEC (Gwadar-Turbat-Hoshab-Basima-Khuzdar) passes through. Western route passes through some of the most peaceful areas of Balochistan.
http://tribune.com.pk/story/1031850/making-sense-of-the-cpec-controversy/
