There is never a doubt that Western media are full of sham commenters lacking basic analytical skills and resulting in self-conflicting and idiotic comments.
“…but is Pakistan important for China in economic and political terms as well?”
Perhaps not. “
Not? What a standard inane western commenter.
1) As long as India remains hostile to China, as long as Nato occupies central Asia, Pakistan will always be of vital importance to China. China is the country that borders the most neighbors via land. In fact it connects with 14 countries via land. If sea border is considered, there are even more countries connected to China. China’s focus on East, doesn’t mean it can ignore its security in its west and else.
2) Even India is friendly to China, and Nato is not in central Asia, Pakistan is also important to China. China’s linking to oil-rich Iran through Pakistan is one example; enjoying diversification of market and promoting healthy competition is another; achieving stability in Xinjiang via suppressing religious extremists abroad is yet the third. The list goes on and on…
Taking the trade issue. This funny commenter said Sino-India trade is 61billion but Sino-Pakistan trade is only 9 billion, and she attempted to shore up her theory of Pakistan no importance. Her lack of analytical capability renders her not able to dig further into the fact that India has a population of 1,203,710,000 and Pakistan 177,444,000, and India has 6.8 times the population of that of Pakistan. 6.8 multiplied by 9 is also 61 billion. This means trade wise, Pakistan is no less important than India.
Granted that there are religious extremists and fanatic factions in Pakistan, but that are hardly foreigner specific. In fact, Pakistan as a country is also a victim of those extremists and fanatics. Just as domestic fanatics within India, China and USA inflict damages on their respective home countries. And of course, all those factors are being calculated in by foreign investors…
Internationally, of course China is concerned with Xinjiang security with extremists active in Pakistan. This lady forgets why USA was so worried when Quebec independence was on the rise earlier. Did she make any hilarious comments on this then?
This lady is not digging into the core truth but flirting on superficial data to (inadvertently?) mislead readers. She just quotes the words to fit her specific agenda.
“…but is Pakistan important for China in economic and political terms as well?”
Perhaps not. “
Not? What a standard inane western commenter.
1) As long as India remains hostile to China, as long as Nato occupies central Asia, Pakistan will always be of vital importance to China. China is the country that borders the most neighbors via land. In fact it connects with 14 countries via land. If sea border is considered, there are even more countries connected to China. China’s focus on East, doesn’t mean it can ignore its security in its west and else.
2) Even India is friendly to China, and Nato is not in central Asia, Pakistan is also important to China. China’s linking to oil-rich Iran through Pakistan is one example; enjoying diversification of market and promoting healthy competition is another; achieving stability in Xinjiang via suppressing religious extremists abroad is yet the third. The list goes on and on…
Taking the trade issue. This funny commenter said Sino-India trade is 61billion but Sino-Pakistan trade is only 9 billion, and she attempted to shore up her theory of Pakistan no importance. Her lack of analytical capability renders her not able to dig further into the fact that India has a population of 1,203,710,000 and Pakistan 177,444,000, and India has 6.8 times the population of that of Pakistan. 6.8 multiplied by 9 is also 61 billion. This means trade wise, Pakistan is no less important than India.
Granted that there are religious extremists and fanatic factions in Pakistan, but that are hardly foreigner specific. In fact, Pakistan as a country is also a victim of those extremists and fanatics. Just as domestic fanatics within India, China and USA inflict damages on their respective home countries. And of course, all those factors are being calculated in by foreign investors…
Internationally, of course China is concerned with Xinjiang security with extremists active in Pakistan. This lady forgets why USA was so worried when Quebec independence was on the rise earlier. Did she make any hilarious comments on this then?
This lady is not digging into the core truth but flirting on superficial data to (inadvertently?) mislead readers. She just quotes the words to fit her specific agenda.
