View from McLeod Road: Why the Sino-Pak alliance is economically worthless

[Parul]

@Parul will have peaceful sleep tonight

I have peaceful sleep every night

 

[OrionHunter]

This piece of trash is already debunked.

http://www.defence.pk/forums/strate...kistan-chinas-iron-brother-9.html#post4321574

Developereo bhai, I know it's tough accepting the facts if they fail to paint a rosy picture. You haven't brought out any substantial issues backed by facts in your link. What has been written in the The Express Tribune is mostly spot on.

Isn't it a fact that Sino Pak trade is a measly $13 billion - the maximum since 1955? We're not just talking about the period 2000-2013, but the last many decades when there was no WOT.

Isn't it a fact that China's investments in Pakistan are less than $1 billion? How come you have a trade surplus with the US of A as well as the EU but the opposite with China which you claim a relationship which is 'higher than the mountains, deeper than........' etc etc?

Why is China building the Gwadar Port? Not only for the ultimate expansion by the Chinese Navy in the region but also as part of the energy/commercial corridor. Gwadar offers a shorter route to western China—via the recently expanded Karakoram highway across Gilgit-Baltistan in northern Pakistan, and an alternative route to vulnerable sea lanes through the Strait of Malacca.

Moreover, the building of road and railway infrastructures in Gilgit Baltistan seems indispensable to connect Xinjiang to the port of Gwadar, which is at the mouth of the Karakorum highway.

Only the crumbs in the form of spin-offs will be passed on to the Pakistanis - some infrastructure development like roads, bridges etc. But Pakistan will be left out of this great game that China is playing for its own strategic interests.

The only assistance that China is giving to Pakistan is in the military sphere. This is primarily to keep India's attention diverted. The bottom line is that China is using Pakistan as its proxy to protect its Southern flank.

For Pakistan, the objective was to prove to the Obama administration that China could replace the United States as the country’s main financial patron and military ally. However, the importance of this relationship, as well as the prospect of seeing China taking the United States’ Place in South Asia, have to be tempered by several regional and global developments.

First, the traditional importance of the Pakistani alliance has declined in recent years due to the improving diplomatic and commercial relations between China and India. Moreover, the increase of the Chinese military, political and economic strength makes the country less reliant on allies like Pakistan in case of a very unlikely military conflict with India.

Secondly, although Beijing has appeared as a far less demanding ally than the United States, it has not replaced Washington has an aid-provider. Despite the fact that China has become Pakistan’s main military supplier it has indeed refused to give a bail-out package expected by Pakistan to overcome the economic crisis in 2008, hence highlighting the enduring role of the United States and of the international financial institution as guarantors of Pakistan’s survival in the short-term.


Behind the military aspect, an increased Chinese presence in Gilgit Baltistan might be essential to ensure the realization of its development plans for the Xinjiang autonomous region. Although the local economy has badly suffered from the Pakistani bureaucratic inflexibility over the last few decades, it is said to be rich in many natural resources, including uranium, copper, gems and gold that might be used for implementing Chinese economic objectives in its Far West.

Gigilt-Baltistan is today presently an impoverished region suffering from its physical isolation and from the harsh Himalayan environmental conditions. However, its geographical position has increased its strategic importance, mainly for China, who could use it as an asset in its balance of power regarding South and Central Asia. Moreover, the withdrawal of the western armies from Afghanistan could offer China the opportunity to exploit the vacuum of power to affirm its position as the main actor in the region.

So where does Pakistan figure in the great geo-strategic game that China is playing for advancing its own national interests? Not much except providing territory for building this infrastructure.

 

[Developereo]

Developereo bhai, I know it's tough accepting the facts if they fail to paint a rosy picture. You haven't brought out any substantial issues backed by facts in your link. What has been written in the The Express Tribune is mostly spot on.

On the contrary, as I indicated, most of the article is blatantly false propaganda or intellectually dishonest.

We prefer to deal with facts rather than propaganda, although I can understand why Indians and some Pakistanis would wish to believe the propaganda instead.

Isn't it a fact that Sino Pak trade is a measly $13 billion - the maximum since 1955? We're not just talking about the period 2000-2013, but the last many decades when there was no WOT.

The Chinese market is hard to crack and its up to Pakistani businessmen to find a niche to exploit. The Indians, gloating about their $68 billion trade, silently ignore the fact that India runs a $40 billion trade deficit with China and the only thing India sells to China are basic raw materials.

Isn't it a fact that China's investments in Pakistan are less than $1 billion?

According to the Forbes article, Chinese investments may well exceed $20 billion.

Also, as I mentioned, much of Chinese investment in Baluchistan was short-circuited by the WoT and Baluchistan insurgency. The leaders of these Baluch terrorists live in the UK and US -- go figure!

How come you have a trade surplus with the US of A as well as the EU but the opposite with China which you claim a relationship which is 'higher than the mountains, deeper than........' etc etc?

Because we don't expect anyone, including China, to run a charity. As has been noted, the Western aid, including special economic status, comes with strings attached.

Why is China building the Gwadar Port?

Gwadar is a win-win for both Pakistan and China. It is the short-sightedness, ineptness and downright treason of the Pakistani government which has failed to capitalize on this opportunity.

There is nothing sinister in the fact that Gwadar satisfies Chinese as well as Pakistani interests. Once again, the Pak-China relationship is mutually beneficial -- this little fact is continually ignored by the Indians and Pakistani western wannabes.

The only assistance that China is giving to Pakistan is in the military sphere. This is primarily to keep India's attention diverted. The bottom line is that China is using Pakistan as its proxy to protect its Southern flank.

Just because some people keep repeating this lie doesn't make it true. Chinese help to Pakistan extends to nuclear and civil arenas. Of course, we fully expect that you guys will keep repeating this lie over and over.

improving diplomatic and commercial relations between China and India.

As I mentioned, India runs a $40 billion trade deficit with China -- there is nothing from India, other than raw materials, that China wants in terms of trade. China's trade with the US and Japan dwarfs its trade with India, yet China does not hesitate to put its national interests above trade.

Secondly, although Beijing has appeared as a far less demanding ally than the United States, it has not replaced Washington has an aid-provider.

Again, as I mentioned, China is not interested in running Pakistan through remote control by buying Pakistani politicians. This is a GOOD thing. The aid is like a drug to keep the Pakistani nation in a narcoleptic haze.

Teach a man how to fish, don't give him handouts.

So where does Pakistan figure in the great geo-strategic game that China is playing for advancing its own national interests? Not much except providing territory for building this infrastructure.

China is doing what it needs for its national interests. Chinese expansion into South Asia and beyond coincides with Pakistan's national interests because, among other things, it provides a counter to Indian attempts at hegemony.

Thus, my dear friend, Chinese expansion fits into Pakistan's national interests.

Once again, mutual interests: it's really not that hard to understand if one discards the agenda and looks at facts.

 

[Markus]

Because it is factually inaccurate. Its only use is to soothe Indian and certain Western egos.

I dont think so.

The article focuses on economic cooperation between China and Pakistan, the article correctly pointed out that US beats CHina when it comes to investing money. However, ofcourse, when it comes to geopolitics, China is a bigger support than the US.

 

[Developereo]

The article focuses on economic cooperation between China and Pakistan, the article correctly pointed out that US beats CHina when it comes to investing money.

Besides the wildly inaccurate claims about Chinese investment, what the article fails to acknowledge is that China was in the midst of a heavy investment boom in Baluchistan, especially.

Those Chinese investments were cancelled because of terrorists actively promoted by the US and UK.

However, ofcourse, when it comes to geopolitics, China is a bigger support than the US.

The US is not a supporter - it is downright hostile to Pakistan's geopolitical goals. The whole idea behind destabilizing Baluchistan is to damage Pakistani and Chinese geopolitical interests.

 

[raazh]

What the article fails to mention is that out of that total $29 Billion FDI .. all or majority of that did not help any sector of the Pak economy. They all went into the pockets of the corrupt leaders and bureaucracy. Chinese did play smart by not kneeling to stupid commission demands of Zardari & co.

 

[SEAL]

I think writer misunderstood US-AID as FDI in Pakistan.

 

[my2cents]

I think writer misunderstood US-AID as FDI in Pakistan.

Actually the figure are acurate. Here is the historical chart.......

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/pakistan/foreign-direct-investment-net-bop-us-dollar-wb-data.html

 

[Vinod2070]

Nothing new. It is a one sided relationship with more rhetoric than substance.

 

[shuttler]

indians, you have been given one extra day of visit by our Premier Li, why you people are still bitter over the Chinese-Pakistan relationship?

I dont think so.

The article focuses on economic cooperation between China and Pakistan, the article correctly pointed out that US beats CHina when it comes to investing money. However, ofcourse, when it comes to geopolitics, China is a bigger support than the US.

who have killed more Pakistanis in history:

1. indians
2. americans or talibans

Which foreign country's people have sacrificed their lives for a joint project with Pakistan?

Chinese

 

[muse]

It is genuinely unfortunate that some of us continue to think that pointing out that this or that is an enemy will or does suffice - it's simply an excuse for more failure -- What Pakistanis (some who should and do know better, you know who you are) should be focusing on is WHY does Pakistan refuse to take the opportunity to increase trade and compete with India, and HOW Pakistan can better trade with China/

Increased volume of trade between China and India, allows each to have a greater stake in the promotion of that relationship and to secure what they already have - this is what the large volume of trade enables. In this way, powerful lobbies with a vested interest in the relationship are created -- Should Pakistan not have this kind of "breadth" to her relationship with China, or will simply saying this or that press outlet is associated with NYT be enough to sulk and suck on thumbs?

This is what Mcleoud road is saying - it is saying add real value to this relationship, the participation of Chinese and Pakistani banks in each other and in their societies can greatly benefit both, but particularly Pakistan - one hopes Pakistani government officials will re-engage Chinese officials to ensure that this becomes reality.

 

[Abingdonboy]

Pakistanis should be pleased about any sort of investment and should be pleased China is standing by them. However what I find odd is the hero worship of many Pakistanis towards the Chinese- they make out the Chinese are Gods and their best ever ever freinds. They calim there is some sort of special bond between Paksitan and China-it is just weird and pathetic.



Ever heard:



“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests.”


China is meeting their own interests- that is all.

 

[Developereo]

...

So, yet another post full of the usual arrogant pontification without any actual substance...

I am still waiting to you to defend the specific points in this trash article which I pointed out were blatantly false. Your personal attacks only confirm the fact that you are unable to respond factually.

The reference to the NYT is warranted because YOU quite obviously missed the irony that the author praises US investment while berating Chinese investment. Meanwhile, he ignores the fact that US sponsored instability in Baluchistan caused the Chinese to abort their investments.

 

[muse]

So, yet another post full of the usual arrogant pontification without any actual substance...

I am still waiting to you to defend the specific points in this trash article which I pointed out were blatantly false. Your personal attacks only confirm the fact that you are unable to respond factually.

The reference to the NYT is warranted because YOU quite obviously missed the irony that the author praises US investment while berating Chinese investment. Meanwhile, he ignores the fact that US sponsored instability in Baluchistan caused the Chinese to abort their investments.

You sound angry - No personal attack was intended and you should not take it as one - Regardless of who is sponsoring what in B'stan, fact remains that US is the biggest market for Pakistani exports and that US is the biggest investor in Pakistan -- now I agree that this fact is unpleasant, but it is what it is.

The substance of the message from Mcleoud road is that if you want a genuinely deep and broad relationship with China, you have to get serious about trade, and since it's from Mcleoud road, they want pakistani bank representation in China, be sure of that one.

 

[Developereo]

You sound angry - No personal attack was intended and you should not take it as one - Regardless of who is sponsoring what in B'stan, fact remains that US is the biggest market for Pakistani exports and that US is the biggest investor in Pakistan -- now I agree that this fact is unpleasant, but it is what it is.

There is nothing pleasant or unpleasant about genuine investment by any country. It is what it is.

The issue, when discussing Chinese investment in Pakistan, is the 800lb gorilla in the room, which is that the US (and GCC) are determined to sabotage all development in Baluchistan -- even to the point of Balkanizing Pakistan -- and that this geopolitical game is intimately tied to the Pak-China relationship.

Now, one might hope that the Pakistani government would be able to safeguard Pakistan's national interests -- which happen to coincide with China's interests in this case -- and ensure security to foreign (Chinese) investors, but the evidence all these decades is that the government is unwilling to do so. Whether this is due to ineptness or downright treason (read: bribery) is up for debate.

The substance of the message from Mcleoud road is that if you want a genuinely deep and broad relationship with China, you have to get serious about trade, and since it's from Mcleoud road, they want pakistani bank representation in China, be sure of that one.

Wrong.

The substance of the article is that China is only using Pakistan and Pakistan should dump China in favor of the US. Nowhere in the article is there any exhortation for Pakistanis to exploit the Chinese market or relationship.

Aside from the blatant falsehoods, the article completely misses the broader geopolitical game at play, including the US sabotage of Chinese investments, which is why I call it a trash article.