Pakistan - News & Discussion

News and Discussions about politics, current affairs, international relations, economy, elections, state level politics etc.
This forum is strictly moderated.
Post Reply
KJo
Forum Moderator
Posts: 324
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:36 pm

Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by KJo » Fri Oct 13, 2017 3:37 am

Post Pakistan related news here.

KJo
Forum Moderator
Posts: 324
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:36 pm

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by KJo » Fri Oct 13, 2017 4:18 am

Pakistan starts to cave in to US pressure, ready to throw Haqqanis under the bus
WASHINGTON: In a validation of long-held suspicion that Pakistan uses terror groups as proxies to further state objectives, Islamabad has managed the release of an American-Canadian couple from terrorist custody, ingratiating itself to Washington in the process, following intense pressure from the Trump administration.

US President Donald Trump himself disclosed on Thursday that his administration had secured the release of an American citizen and her Canadian husband who had been taken captive in 2012 and held hostage by the Haqqani network, a terrorist organization the US had once described as a veritable ''fighting arm of the Pakistani intelligence agency ISI.''

''Yesterday, the United States government, working in conjunction with the Government of Pakistan, secured the release of the Boyle-Coleman family from captivity in Pakistan,'' Trump said in a statement on Thursday, referring to Caitlan Coleman and Joshua Boyle who were kidnapped near the Pak-Afghan border, without details as to how they were released. The statement disclosed that Ms. Coleman gave birth to the couple's three children while they were in captivity.

Gus
Forum Moderator
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 7:59 pm

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by Gus » Sat Oct 14, 2017 10:50 am

Starting to develop a much better relationship with Pakistan and its leaders. I want to thank them for their cooperation on many fronts. -:::: pakis have tamed yet another.

KJo
Forum Moderator
Posts: 324
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:36 pm

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by KJo » Sat Oct 14, 2017 10:41 pm

Modi will be foolish to trust Trump and the US on anything.

Trump shows Modi how to take an about-turn on Pakistan
As @MadamSecretary will tell you again and again, the name of the game is leverage. And Pakistan has dollops of it. Even though the world’s most powerful leader, Donald Trump, told the world only a few weeks ago that US policy towards Pakistan was going to change – and India crowed delightedly when he did – fact is that the US isn’t doing what it is in the badlands of Afghanistan-Pakistan for India’s national interest, but its own.

Only a month ago, Trump had accused Pakistan of “housing the very terrorists that we are fighting. But that will have to change, and that will change immediately,” he had said. The Pakistanis reacted badly to the Trump speech and even cancelled a scheduled visit by Lisa Curtis, Trump’s top official on South Asia in the White House.


Peregrine
BGR Newbie
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:54 pm

Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by Peregrine » Sun Oct 15, 2017 9:15 am

Economic security - Capital suggestion

Pakistan’s economic security is by far the most neglected element of our national security. For way too long, we remained focus on Pakistan’s military security. For way too long, we remained focus on Pakistan’s nuclear security. For us, national security has been all about military security. For us, national security has long been uni-dimensional. For us, national security has long been uni-organisational.

Some eleven years ago, the US Army War College, the Canadian Land Forces Doctrine and Training System along with Queen’s University, Canada’s premier public research university, co-sponsored an academic conference. The conference concluded that: “War has changed. New organising principles require a new paradigm that facilitates change from a singular military approach to a multidimensional, multi-organizational... approach to deal more effectively with the contemporary global security reality.” Furthermore, “Time-honoured concepts of national security and the classical military means to attain it, while still necessary, are no longer sufficient.”

Yes, Pakistan’s economy and Pakistan’s national security are – as a matter of fact – deeply, deeply interlinked. To be certain, Pakistan’s economy is vulnerable like never before. The four major threats are: external account (the trade deficit is at a historical high of $32.6 billion); fiscal deficit (the budgetary deficit is approaching a colossal Rs2 trillion); circular debt approaching Rs600 billion and an unsustainable debt of Rs25 trillion.

John Perkins in ‘Confessions of an Economic Hit Man’ wrote, “We (economic hitmen) work very much like some of the hitmen for the mafia-because like them, we are looking for a favour, except we do it on a large level with governments and countries”.

The School of International Studies at Jawaharlal Nehru University has made the following prescription: “On the strategic side, it is in India’s interests to ensure economic instability in Pakistan”. The New Delhi-based Institute of Defense Studies and Analysis has opined, Pakistan’s “water problems, when combined with poverty, social tension, environmental degradation, ineffectual leadership, and weak political institutions; contribute to growing disruptions that can result in state failure”. Now consider this: Pakistan is the 2nd largest pea producer in the world; 4th largest cotton producer; 4th largest sugarcane producer; 4th largest peach producer; 5th largest milk producer; 5th largest onion producer; 6th largest date producer; 8th largest rice producer; 9th largest wheat producer and 10th largest orange producer.

Now consider this: Pakistan’s median age of 21.2 years – with a global range of 48.9 for Monaco and 15 for Uganda – makes Pakistan one of the youngest countries in the world. Between 2017 and 2040, Pakistan’s working age population is expected to expand rapidly. Yes, “Empirical evidence suggests that a large part of East Asia’s spectacular economic growth derives from demographic transition, i.e. from working age population bulge…”

Here’s what the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars stated: “Pakistan’s population promises to remain youthful over the next few decades. In the 2020s, the 15-24 age bracket is expected to swell by 20 percent. Pakistan’s under-24 population will still be in the majority come 2030. And as late as 2050, the median age is expected to be only 33.” Europe’s demographic transition opened up the demographic window that remained open for some five decades. The Chinese window opened up in 1990 and is expected to remain open till 2015

Pakistan’s deteriorating external account has a cure. Pakistan’s budgetary deficit has a cure. Pakistan’s circular debt has a cure. Pakistan’s burgeoning debt has a cure. Is anyone seriously looking for a cure? Pakistan needs to take corrective measures on four counts: exports, imports, the international value of the rupee and debt servicing. Is anyone seriously looking to undertake corrective measure?

Cheers Image

sbajwa
BGR Member
Posts: 213
Joined: Sun Oct 01, 2017 4:49 pm
Location: Chandigarh

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by sbajwa » Mon Oct 16, 2017 6:15 pm


chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Wed Jan 03, 2018 4:30 am

Where else but in the toilet "news" paper. ??

whatever this guy is smoking, its really powerful stuff.

Pakistan, a rising power



Pakistan, a rising power

December 23, 2017,

Sunil Sharan in Strategic Insights

Visit the two countries. There is hardly any difference. The same bustling bazaars. The same chockablock traffic, screeching until one’s ears go mad. The same apparent, abysmal poverty. The same top five percent lording over everyone else.

The same corruption. Over the same things, be it bribing traffic cops or receiving cuts on imported fighter jets. The same contempt for politicians, militaries held in the same high esteem. The same looks, the same stuff being watched and listened to, the same flanneled fool’s sport being obsessed over, in which none of the countries is the world champion, nor will ever be, at least in the foreseeable future (World champion means you gotta win in Australia and South Africa.)

The only differences between the two nations seem that one’s currency is plastered with one father of the nation, and the other’s with the other’s father of the nation. Both fathers of the nation and their teachings forgotten in only seventy years, and whose memory is invoked by the powers that be to burnish their own images. The fathers would go mad if they were to come and see how their names are being misused and by whom. And the other difference is that signs are in different languages, which sound the same though.

Yet, one nation is a rising power, ready to take its rightful place in the comity of nations, while the other is deemed a global pariah, a jelly state if not a failed state. Huh? How did this happen?

The reality is different. The world pays lip service to India for its large middle class and its ability to buy arms on a large scale. India seems to consider this courting as its emergence on the world stage.

Scratch the surface, and you will find something else. The US is denying Indians H1-B visas. The US has delinked the Haqqanis, who they want, from Hafiz Saeed, who they couldn’t care less about, so that they can give dollops of aid to the Pakistanis.

Today the Yanks hector the Pakistanis, but that is empty bluster. The Pakistanis have trumped them; the Yanks’ wails appear like crocodile tears. The Yanks forgot when they invaded Afghanistan and enlisted the Pakistanis’ help by threatening to bomb them into the stone age that the Pakistanis had been there once before.

That time they trumped the Russians, with significant money and arms from the Americans and the Saudis. But the Americans never took to battle in Afghanistan the first time round. Sure they had read that Afghanistan was a graveyard for empires, from the British to the Soviet, but they believed, foolishly, that they themselves would win out.

They struck a Faustian bargain with the Pakistanis, without ever realizing that they were dealing with the devil. In the nineties, the Pakistanis used Afghanistan to hijack Indian planes and launch jihad in Kashmir. Afghanistan had become both strategic depth as well as a launching pad for them. How were they expected to give up this twin treat?

Once the Yanks entered Kabul, the Taliban vanished. Into thin air? Oh no, many of them disappeared into Pakistan. The Yanks forgot about Afghanistan, until first the Iraqis, and then the Taliban, started knocking their teeth out. One by one their Nato brethren fled Afghanistan, until the Yanks realized that they had to flee as well.

Go to Kabul today, and you will find disdain for Pakistan everywhere. But the Pakistanis don’t care. The real people who matter in Afghanistan are the Taliban, and you don’t find many of them in Kabul. The writ of the government of Afghanistan extends over only Kabul, much as the later-day Mughals were derided as the mayors of Delhi.

The Taliban control over sixty percent of the country. The Talibs don’t like the Pakistanis, referring to them often as blacklegs. But the Talibs need Pakistan to capture Kabul, much as the Pakistanis need the Taliban to capture Afghanistan.

The Pakistanis are disdainful of the threats emanating from the Yanks. The Yanks need Pakistani territory to transport supplies to their legionaries in Afghanistan. The Pakistanis blocked their land routes once, and all hell broke loose then. It’s almost impossible to transport goods from the west of Afghanistan.

In courting China, Pakistan has been shrewd. India cannot win a two-front war, and the whole world knows that. As the Chinese and the Pakistanis together wear out India in any conventional conflict, India would have to resort to strategic weapons. But that is a big ask, for it would risk making India an international pariah. Just at that stage, Pakistan would unveil its Kashmir card.

Second, by making India have two enemies instead of one, Pakistan forces India to up its defence budget, while lowering its own earmarks to levels much lower than they would have been in case India did not have to consider China. Its sad how Indian policymakers have been taken in by Pakistan’s love affair with China. They have tried to ween China away from Pakistan, but to no avail.

Today Pakistan stands on the cusp of victory in Afghanistan. It spurns the Americans for the Chinese, and lo and behold, the Russians, the very people it had helped kick out of Afghanistan. Politics, or rather realpolitik, sure does make for strange bedfellows.

Pakistan is able to stymie India at every international forum, be it the UN or the nuclear suppliers group. There have even been strong rumours about the Obama administration offering the Pakistanis their own nuclear deal. Trump yells and curses at the Pakistanis, but is the first one to give it gobs of military aid.

Pakistan sure doesn’t seem like a loser. It appears to have come out of Afghanistan smelling of roses. It can blackmail America to its heart’s content, and what is more, happily get away with it. Does it seem like a failed state? A terrorist state? A terrorized state? At least not now. For now it seems that Pakistan’s star, that star in their beloved crescent, is rising. And rising.

Peregrine
BGR Newbie
Posts: 78
Joined: Mon Oct 09, 2017 8:54 pm

Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by Peregrine » Sun Feb 25, 2018 7:07 pm

Democracy on steady decline in Pakistan: Economist Intelligence Unit

ISLAMABAD: The fragile democracy is on a steady retreat in Pakistan despite the fact that the political government is nearing the completion of its term, says a fresh democracy index released by one of the most reputed publications in the world.

According to 10th edition of The Economist Intelligence Unit's Democracy Index, Pakistan has witnessed a consistent decline in democratic health for the last three years as the country’s score kept declining after 2014 when incidentally a sit-in was staged outside Pakistani Parliament for over four months.

The reputed British publication ranked 167 countries based on their score on a scale of 0 to 10 where 10 represents full democracy and 0 represents authoritarian regime. Pakistan which scored 4.26 last year is classified as hybrid democracy in the index. The Economist index comprises 60 indicators across five broad categories—electoral process and pluralism, functioning of government, political participation, democratic political culture and civil liberties.

After 2013 elections, Pakistan obtained 4.64 but the democracy score started declining after 2014. In 2015, the score dropped to 4.40 followed by a further decline in 2016 to 4.33. Last year, witnessed the lowest score for Pakistan with 4.26 which was only better than 2006 under the dictatorship of General (retd) Pervez Musharraf when the country obtained 3.92 scores.

Within Pakistan, political observers are also complaining that the space for democratic government is shrinking with increasingly assertive establishment and judiciary. The latest verdict by the Supreme Court of Pakistan barring former prime minister Nawaz Sharif from heading his ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz is also being considered a blow to democracy.

“The immediate implications may centre on the political future of one individual, but the judgment has the potential to be hugely disruptive to the democratic process itself,” writes a daily newspaper in its editorial on Friday.

Sharif, who was ousted in July last year through the Supreme Court verdict in the Panama Paper case, continuously complains of conspiracy against the democratic rule. Sharif, a three-time prime minister says efforts are being made to exclude him and his family from Pakistani politics in the guise of corruption cases. Sharif and his family are currently facing three corruption references in an accountability court where they have to appear almost on a daily basis.

He claims that anti-democratic forces are not willing to accept Parliament's supremacy even after the restoration of “democracy” in 2008. Soon after his decisive victory in 2013 elections, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif had to face a massive movement launched jointly by Pakistan Tehreek-e-Insaf (PTI) chief Imran Khan and Pakistan Awami Tehrik (PAT) leader Allama Tahirul Qadri which culminated at 126-day sit-in at D-Chowk, demanding Prime Minister’s resignation.

Sharif’s close aides claimed that the move was supported by anti-democratic elements who were not happy with an assertive political government. The sit-in only ended after the APS terror attack in Peshawar which claimed lives of 132 schoolchildren. But the anti-Sharif movement continued after the sit-in and he had to fight a battle in the Supreme Court to prove that the 2013 vote was not rigged. The trial of former military ruler General (retd) Musharraf also became a point of contention. Finally the issue was resolved when Musharraf was allowed to leave the country.

After the emergence of Panama Papers in April 2015, the PTI again launched a move to overthrow Nawaz Sharif whose offshore companies were mentioned in the leaked papers. The case ended up in the Supreme Court which announced its verdict in July 2017. Sharif was disqualified by the apex court for not declaring his receivable salary in a Dubai based company Capital FZE, owned by his son. The verdict was hailed as landmark by Imran Khan and other opposition parties but the ruling party complained that a democratic prime minister has been shown the door through a “judicial coup”. A Joint Investigation Team (JIT) formed by the apex court to probe allegations of corruption against Nawaz Sharif was also criticised for political victimisation.

Even before the Sharif disqualification, democratic government did not have a smooth sailing as it had to sacrifice its minister for information over Dawn NewsLeak which refers to a story published in a newspaper. A strong notice was taken of the publication of the story and under immense pressure PML-N had to sack its minister Pervaiz Rashid for his “failure” to stop publication of the story. Adviser to Prime Minister on Foreign Affairs Tariq Fatemi was also sacked for his alleged role in Dawn NewsLeak. Earlier, another Senator Mushahidullah Khan was also dismissed by Sharif for his controversial interview.

The Economist Intelligence Unit’s index of democracy

INDIAN REPUBLIC : Flawed Democracy : No. 35 - OVERALL SCORE : 7.68

TERRORISTAN : Authoritarian regimes : No 113 - OVERALL SCORE : 3.92

Cheers Image

Supratik
Forum Moderator
Posts: 590
Joined: Wed Oct 04, 2017 5:50 pm

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by Supratik » Wed Apr 25, 2018 2:57 pm

Wiki update. Hindu population in Pak 2017 census up to about 4.5 million (2.12%). In Sindh about 4.2 million. 8.9% in Sindh. 14% in Sindh minus Karachi division (Mohajir dominated). Up 9 times from 1951. Reference link not working. Have to confirm later.

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Mon May 28, 2018 7:35 am

As convenient a narrative as any and one that is also fairly economical with the truth.

Their capacity for fooling themselves is almost infinite.

and yet again, the gratuitous reference to "the ever-present danger of a war between two nuclear weapons states".

and, haven't they completely flayed the skin off this poor dead horse by constantly flogging it for decades without any tangible returns or is it just the de rigueur dirge of "a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN" who just cannot divest himself of useless and decades old paki rhetoric of trying to panic the white skins.

Normalising ties with India
Normalising ties with India

Munir Akram May 27, 2018

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

EVEN as Indian and Pakistani guns continue to thunder along the Line of Control in Kashmir, there are several signals of a desire on both sides to improve relations.

Most notably, Pakistan’s army chief has on several occasions articulated an openness to evolving a modus vivendi with India, dubbed the ‘Bajwa doctrine’. Recently, the Indian defence minister stated that such peace overtures from Pakistan will be reciprocated.

The Indian military attaché was invited to the Pakistan Day parade and accepted. Pakistan hosted India with other Shanghai Cooperation Organisa­tion members to discuss regional terrorism. In September, Pakistan and India will participate in SCO joint counterterrorism exercises in Russia. Last month, Pakistan hosted a Track II dialogue with India.

For its part, Pakistan has consistently advocated resumption of the Composite (now Comprehensive) Dialogue with India. And while it was preoccupied with fighting terrorism within its territory and from across its western border, it made strategic sense for Pakistan to seek a calm eastern frontier.

A shift in India’s strategic posture could open the door to addressing, if not fully resolving, the major issues.

Unfortunately, since its inception, Narendra Modi’s BJP government made normalisation conditional on Pakistan’s disavowal of support to the Kashmiri freedom struggle and acceptance of culpability for Mumbai and other terrorist incidents in India. It evolved an enveloping strategy to destabilise Pakistan domestically, through sponsorship of Tehreek-i-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) terrorists and Baloch insurgents, and to isolate it internationally as a sponsor of terrorism.

Several developments may have shifted Indian calculations.

First, a significant convergence has emerged between Pakistan and major regional powers, Russia, China and Iran, on the need for a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan with the Afghan Taliban. India and the US were seen as spoilers.

Second, despite Donald Trump’s anti-Pakistan rhetoric and insults, a US confrontation with Pakistan and its designation as a state sponsor of terrorism, widely anticipated by India, have not happened and appear highly unlikely. On the contrary, the US continues to rely on Pakistan’s cooperation to sustain its presence in Afghanistan and promote a political settlement with the Afghan Taliban.

Third, after the Doklam stand-off last year, China offered India several olive branches — larger trade and investment, access to CPEC and, through it, to Central Asia and beyond, an intimate Xi-Modi summit. Afghan developments, American unpredictability and Chinese flexibility, appear to have inspired a policy recalibration in New Delhi to balance its vaunted strategic partnership with the US through more positive relations with China and Russia.

Fourth, India failed in its quest to destabilise or isolate Pakistan.

Pakistan’s several military operations in Fata and actions in Balochistan have succeeded in containing cross-border terrorism sponsored by India from Afghanistan. Cross-border attacks will be further restricted once Pakistan fully fences the Pak-Afghan border. Likewise, India has little hope now of isolating Pakistan given the central role it is expected to play in promoting a negotiated settlement in Afghanistan and the political convergence that has emerged among Pakistan, Russia, China and Iran on Afghanistan and terrorism.

Finally, India has been unable to suppress the ongoing popular revolt of the Kashmiri people for over two years. It may calculate that opening a dialogue with Pakistan could help to end the revolt.

For Pakistan, the most critical issue in any normalisation process will be (and has always been) Kashmir. No government or leader in Pakistan will be able to normalise relations with India while it continues a campaign of brutal suppression in India-held Kashmir (IHK).

If the past is any guide, India’s effort will be to focus any dialogue with Pakistan on terrorism and press for the elimination of pro-Kashmiri militant groups in Pakistan (Lashkar-e-Taiba, Jaish-e-Mohammad, Hizbul Mujahideen) and the incarceration of their leaders. Islamabad would find it difficult to act against these groups, especially the Hizb, which is not internationally outlawed, while Indian suppression continues in IHK. In the context of terrorism, Pakistan would obviously raise India’s sponsorship of the TTP and Baloch insurgents.

Contrary to simplistic analyses, India’s capacity to impose terrorist pressure on Pakistan is not unlimited. Pakistan can substantially neutralise India’s sponsorship of the TTP and the Balochistan Liberation Army through pressure on Kabul, negotiations with the US, fencing the border, political accommodation of Baloch grievances, Fata reforms and, if needed, direct action against terrorist bases. Pakistan does not need Indian concessions to eliminate cross-border terrorism from Afghanistan. Nor does it need to compromise its position on Kashmir to do so.

However, despite the false starts of the past, it is possible that in the midst of the current global strategic flux, India may have decided that its national interests would be better served by playing a positive role in the emerging Eurasian security and economic structures, epitomised by the SCO, rather than serving as America’s cat’s paw. If there is indeed such a shift in India’s strategic posture, it could open the door to addressing, if not fully resolving, the major issues between Pakistan and India.

Reciprocal assurances can be negotiated on terrorism, the non-use of force and the pacific settlement of disputes. Some issues, such as Siachen and Sir Creek, can be quickly resolved. Existing confidence-building measures could be enlarged, eg by agreeing to limits on force and weapons deployments and elimination of the possibility of surprise attacks and preemptive strikes.

India’s participation in CPEC could be agreed without prejudice to Pakistan or India’s positions on the Jammu and Kashmir dispute. However, India would need to extend Pakistan reciprocal transit rights to Nepal and Bangladesh.

Expansion of bilateral trade could be mutually beneficial so long as Pakistan is provided assurances against deindustrialisation by subsidised Indian exports.

Water scarcity is a critical threat to both countries; they need to build on the Indus Waters Treaty to avert a water crisis that may become the spark of a future conflict.

It remains to be seen if the initial Pakistan-India overtures will lead to dialogue and whether this can be sustained. The endeavour to normalise Pakistan-India relations is like a second marriage: a triumph of hope over experience. But no one can be resigned to accept the alternative: continued turmoil in South Asia and the ever-present danger of a war between two nuclear weapons states.

The writer is a former Pakistan ambassador to the UN.

Published in Dawn, May 27th, 2018

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Fri Jun 29, 2018 1:13 pm

These phata pajama paki abduls cannot get over their shortsighted view of Indo pak relations, constantly couched in words like "need", treat us with respect", "relationship of respect", "Pakistan has a central role in the emerging geo-economic order of South Asia", “bitterness of the past should be overcome”, all betraying a deep sense of jealousy, outright greed and a long standing inferiority complex that has dragged their schitthole of a country that paki is today, right into the filthiest of gutters.

NOT A SINGLE WORD spoken NOR ANY MENTION OF the word TERRORISM and the JEHADI COHORTS that are being pushed into India on a daily basis by a wretched country, now piously offering TRADE and CONNECTIVITY to India.

chabahar has further buggered their happiness and India's presence in afghanistan has played havoc with their idea of strategic depth.

Hemmed in as they are by India, not entirely sure of "boots on the ground" support by the hans when the schitt hits the usually power cut non working paki fan, abandoned by trump's america and shunned by the rest of the world, their buggered economy in the crapper and their record as one of the world's most troublesome and hated country, their islamic cup of woe surely runneth over.

Their ex paki army general NSA nasser-janjua, comes across as delusional, demented and stupid.

India needs Pakistan for accessing European market: former National Security Advisor Nasser Janjua


India needs Pakistan for accessing European market: former National Security Advisor Nasser Janjua

Janjua said India's burgeoning economy needed access to the rich markets of Europe via Central Asia. Pakistan, he said, is the only country which could provide India with the access it truly desired.

Islamabad | June 29, 2018

India needs Pakistan for accessing European market: ex National Security Advisor Nasser Janjua Nasser Khan Janjua.

India must maintain a relationship of respect with Pakistan as its burgeoning economy needs access to the markets of Europe via Central Asia and Pakistan is the only country which could provide this, former National Security Advisor Nasser Janjua has said.

Speaking at a regional conference on ‘Connectivity and Geo-Economics in South Asia’, Janjua, who stepped down this week after spending nearly three years in the office, said economy and security are two sides of the same coin with one having a causative relationship with the other, the Express Tribune reported.

Noting that stability in South Asia is a pre-requisite for its connectivity, he said it is only through connectivity economic growth and stability can be brought about.

The conference, organised by the Pakistan Institute for Peace Studies (PIPS), an Islamabad-based think tank, was attended by prominent scholars from both the countries.

Janjua said India’s burgeoning economy needed access to the rich markets of Europe via Central Asia. Pakistan, he said, is the only country which could provide India with the access it truly desired. He acknowledged that without involving India in the multibillion-dollar China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), free trade in the region is “quite difficult”.

Participants at the conference explored how to achieve connectivity in a region that is beset with old rivalries and instabilities.

Asked if China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), to which countries like Pakistan have already signed, can help achieve that connectivity, the former NSA said Pakistan has a central role in the emerging geo-economic order of South Asia, as it can help connect the countries economically.

“Even India cannot trade with this part of the world without Pakistan on board,” he said, adding that the “bitterness of the past should be overcome”.

Indian scholar Sudheendhra Kulkarni said that South Asia is the most populated, least integrated and one of the poorest regions of the world. The trade amongst South Asian countries often circumvents each other, passing through third countries.

Speakers at the conference pointed out that rivalries and stereotypical perceptions about each other have been hampering connectivity and trade.

They discussed the policy implications of projects like the BRI and the CPEC and what would be the impact of supplementing these efforts with enhanced cultural contacts and cross-border economy.

Another Indian scholar, Shanthie D’Souza, said that for connecting the region, small confidence-building steps were required.

Other participants said India and Pakistan must establish linkages for trade to flow in the region

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:58 pm

Wary of debt trap, govt rethinks Silk Road projects.
Wary of debt trap, govt rethinks Silk Road projects.

October 01, 2018

ISLAMABAD: After lengthy delays, an $8.2 billion revamp of a colonial-era rail line snaking from the Arabian Sea to the foothills of the Hindu Kush has become a test of Pakistan’s ability to rethink the signature Chinese ‘Silk Road’ projects due to debt concerns.

The rail project linking Karachi to Peshawar is China’s biggest Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) project in Pakistan, but Islamabad has balked at the cost and financing terms.

Take a look: CPEC projects — status, cost and benefits

Resistance has stiffened under the new government of Prime Minister Imran Khan, who has voiced alarm about rising debt levels and says the country must wean itself off foreign loans.

ARTICLE CONTINUES AFTER AD

Chinese envoy says Beijing will only proceed with projects that Islamabad wants

“We are seeing how to develop a model so the government of Pakistan wouldn’t have all the risk,” Minister for Planning, Development and Reforms Khusro Bakhtyar said at a recent press briefing.

The cooling of enthusiasm for China’s investments mirrors the unease of incoming governments in Sri Lanka, Malaysia and the Maldives, where new administrations have come to power wary of Chinese deals struck by their predecessors.

The new government in Pakistan had wanted to review all BRI contracts. Officials say there are concerns the deals were badly negotiated, too expensive or overly favoured China.

But to Islamabad’s frustration, Beijing is only willing to review projects that have not yet begun, three senior government officials have told Reuters.

China’s foreign ministry said, in a statement in response to questions faxed by Reuters, that both sides were committed to pressing forward with BRI projects, “to ensure those projects that are already built operate as normal, and those which are being built proceed smoothly”.

CPEC 2018 Summit: Is Pakistan ready to make the right choices?

Pakistani officials say they remain committed to Chinese investment but want to push harder on price and affordability, while re-orientating the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) — for which Beijing has pledged about $60 billion in infrastructure funds — to focus on projects that deliver social development in line with PM Khan’s election promises.

China’s Ambassador to Pakistan Yao Jing told Reuters that Beijing was open to changes proposed by the new government and “we will definitely follow their agenda to work out a roadmap for BRI projects based on ‘mutual consultation’”.

“It constitutes a process of discussion with each other about this kind of model, about this kind of roadmap for the future,” Mr Yao said.

Beijing would only proceed with projects that Pakistan wanted, he added. “This is Pakistan’s economy, this is their society,” he said.

Islamabad’s efforts to recalibrate CPEC are made trickier by its dependence on Chinese loans to prop up its vulnerable economy.

Growing fissures in relations with Pakistan’s historic ally the United States have also weakened the country’s negotiating hand, as has a current account crisis likely to lead to a bailout by the International Monetary Fund, which may demand spending cuts.

“We have reservations, but no other country is investing in Pakistan. What can we do?” one Pakistani minister told Reuters.

Crumbling railways
The ML-1 rail line is the spine of the country’s dilapidated rail network, which has in recent years been struggling to survive as passenger numbers plunge and the vital freight business nosedives.

The Khan-led government has vowed to make the 1,872km line a priority CPEC project, saying it will help the poor travel across the country. But Islamabad is exploring funding options for CPEC projects that depart from the traditional BRI lending model — whereby host nations take on Chinese debt to finance construction of infrastructure — and has invited Saudi Arabia and other countries to invest.

One option for ML-1, according to Pakistani officials, is the build-operate-transfer (BOT) model, which would see investors or companies finance and build the project and recoup their investment from cash-flows generated mainly by the rail freight business, before returning it to Pakistan in a few decades time.

Ambassador Yao said Beijing was open to BOT and would “encourage” its companies to invest.

Rail mega-projects under the BRI umbrella have run into problems elsewhere in Asia. A line linking Thailand and Laos has been beset by delays over financing, while Malaysia’s new Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad outright cancelled the Chinese-funded $20bn East Coast Rail Link (ECRL).

Beijing is happy to offer loans, but reticent to invest in the Pakistan venture as such projects are seldom profitable, according to Andrew Small, author of a book on China-Pakistan relations.

“The problem is that the Chinese don’t think they can make money on this project and are not keen on BOT,” said the author.

Published in Dawn, October 1st, 2018

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Wed Oct 03, 2018 12:59 pm

Fitch warns of CPEC ‘curtailment’ under IMF programme

Fitch warns of CPEC ‘curtailment’ under IMF programme
Khaleeq Kiani
August 17, 2018

ISLAMABAD: The US pressure could lead to ‘stricter’ conditions by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to bailout Pakistan, including curtailment of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and greater transparency in its financing, according to Fitch Rating.

The “US pressure could lead to stricter programme conditionality, including the curtailment of CPEC projects and greater transparency in CPEC financing”, said the New York-based rating agency. It said US backing was not strictly required to secure an IMF programme, but the IMF board emphasised consensus decision-making.

It said Pakistan’s incoming PTI-led coalition government will be under immediate pressure to arrest the deterioration in external finances and address fiscal challenges, as well as to attract the external funding necessary to meet its financing gap.

“The new government has more political capital to take positive though difficult policy actions, but it has a thin majority in parliament and faces a strong opposition, which could complicate policymaking,” Fitch said.

The rating agency expects Pakistan to seek potential financing from several sources including China and multilateral development banks, and possibly the IMF. Pakistan has been a repeated user of IMF financing, entering 12 programmes since 1980.

The IMF would probably require further fiscal and monetary tightening, greater exchange-rate flexibility, and wide-ranging structural reforms, which could also help attract other sources of financing.

Moreover, the IMF has unique monitoring mechanisms to implement corrective policies, without which there will continue to be significant uncertainty over the medium-term sustainability of Pakistan’s finances.

Negotiations over an IMF agreement could be complicated by loans linked to the CPEC, part of China’s Belt Road Initiative (BRI), particularly amid rising global geopolitical tensions. Recent statements from US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo suggest the US administration does not want IMF financing used to bail out Chinese lenders.

The $62bn CPEC project makes Pakistan one of the largest recipients of BRI financing. These loans have financed imports of capital goods, which have in turn inflated the current account deficit. The loans will eventually need to be repaid or refinanced.

The rating agency said PTI founder Imran Khan, outlined a broad economic agenda for a “New Pakistan” during his campaign, with a focus on confronting corruption, reducing inequality and expanding social services. However, advancement of this policy agenda is likely to be limited in the short term, with external and fiscal problems taking priority.

The current account deficit reached 5.6pc of GDP in the fiscal year ended June 2018, up from 4.7pc in FY17, while liquid foreign-exchange reserves fell by almost $4bn from end-December 2017 to end-July 2018 to just over $10bn.

The sharp rise in global risk aversion towards emerging markets, and a projected pickup in Pakistan’s external debt obligations in 2019 are adding to financing pressures. The fiscal deficit has also widened and is likely to well exceed previous estimate of 6pc of GDP in FY18, up from 5.8pc a year earlier.

Fitch revised the outlook on Pakistan’s ‘B’ rating to ‘negative’ from ‘stable’ in January to reflect these rising external and fiscal pressures.

The State Bank of Pakistan has already taken some steps, raising its policy rate by 175bps since January and introducing greater flexibility in the heavily managed rupee by allowing four separate depreciations since mid-December 2017, which resulted in a cumulative 17pc decline against the dollar.

These measures have so far not been enough to prevent the widening of the large external financing gap, which has been bridged with support from China, including an agreement to provide $2bn in additional bilateral lending in July. The Saudi-backed Islamic Development Bank has also reportedly extended a $4bn loan, the rating agency claimed.

The new government appeared to recognise the urgency of the situation, with the likely incoming finance minister, Asad Umar, stating that “all options are on the table” and that the government will formulate a policy and financing path within six weeks.

Published in Dawn, August 17th, 2018

vishvak
BGR Member
Posts: 103
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 2:53 pm
Location: Mumbai

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by vishvak » Wed Oct 03, 2018 2:36 pm

“The problem is that the Chinese don’t think they can make money on this project and are ...
Now that has come out, it shows what the Chinese big talk on big projects is about. People here have been clear about it all along. Curious to see that Paki political decision making, US oversight, Saudi funding, etc will have any affect on Chinese plans for the same.

The Indian stand on OBOR that it has sovereignty issues seems too granular for such grand Chinese plans, though this is prolly correct.

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Thu Oct 11, 2018 5:00 pm

Naila Inayat Verified account @nailainayat Oct 3

Hindu thermometer, Muslim thermometer. Photo that explains how Pakistan is an inherently discriminatory society.

via @Mukesh_Meghwar from rural Sindh.


Image

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Wed Nov 07, 2018 2:04 pm

Meanwhile, back at the motheaten ranch, imran khan niazi slinks back home with his tail between his legs, conspicuously empty handed and in dire need of plenty of burnol application in well known and much favored paki places.

The prospect of confronting trump for the "facilitation" of a new IMF loan can only be so much more daunting than xi's fairly gentle rap on the knuckles.

Wonder what the bajwa doctrine has to say about such situations.

The baloon has well and truly been punctured so they will simply ratchet up their "diplomatic" support to the savages in cashmere to salvage their wounded pride


imran khan returns empty-handed from China: Xi Jinping forced to extend minimal aid to ally amid US trade war

imran khan returns empty-handed from China: Xi Jinping forced to extend minimal aid to ally amid US trade war


Nov 05, 2018

Imran Khan is back from his first official visit to China. Imran's nervousness was apparent in his first interview to the Chinese media in which he repeated himself several times over, and he certainly did not come across as the head of a sovereign state. For a person of Imran Khan’s temperament, a visit primarily structured around a begging bowl couldn't have been all that pleasant. For that is what it was in reality. Worse still, it was something which could hardly be hidden from the public gaze.

First, in the matter of the urgent need to get financial assistance, his meeting with Premier Li Keqiang was not propitious. Xinhua quoted him at a press conference as saying that China was willing to provide assistance to Pakistan “within our capability”, a statement unlikely to provide any relief to his guest. The same tone echoed in the following meeting with vice-foreign minister Kong Xuanyou where it was said that China had “made it clear in principle that (it) will provide necessary support and assistance to Pakistan in tiding over the current economic difficulties".


It was also made clear that the actual amount of "assistance" will be discussed in subsequent meetings. Not a word about the rumoured $6 billion package, which was doing the rounds in the Pakistan media.

The mood in Beijing was well encapsulated by Cheng Xiaohe, deputy director of the Centre for International Strategic Studies at Renmin University in the South China Morning Post. He rather tartly noted while China was willing to assist Pakistan, it was finally Islamabad’s responsibility to take care of its own people. Coming to the crux of the matter, he observed that China had a liquidity problem due to its trade war with the US. Therefore Pakistan “must seek all kinds of assistance”. That’s as crisp as it gets.


Second is the issue of the nature and goals of Chinese loans and project assistance. Imran is no fool, and even before his election to the top post, the newly-elected prime minister had been stressing that Chinese assistance must also address the basic concerns of the people in terms of cheap housing, basic utilities and other aspects. In this he may get some reprieve.

The joint statement stated "Chinese assistance will also be directed towards agriculture, education, health, poverty alleviation, safe drinking water, and vocational training". Even that quote has unwieldy strings attached. The "agriculture" aspect is entirely aimed at achieving Chinese goals. Remember the "CPEC Master Plan" leaked mid last year, which indicated that Chinese enterprises would operate their own farms across thousands of acres in Pakistan, with an end to end plan ranging from seeds, logistics and market. That's not assistance. That's a take over.

Third, is the most ticklish aspect of a "re-negotiation" of Chinese loans that Imran and his team have been batting for. Nothing at all emerged on that front, and presumably, is going to be part of future discussions. The boiler plate joint statement did have some effusive language on Pakistan’s search for peace, and appreciated Pakistan’s “engagement” and “adherence” to the guidelines of the Nuclear Suppliers Group. No promise of membership as claimed by Indian media. Worse, the rest of the statement essentially commits Pakistan to the Chinese view on the Iran-US nuclear deal, and demanded ( as before ) a greater Chinese role in SAARC. None of this addresses Pakistan’s immediate concerns.

In conclusion therefore, Imran returned home empty handed. As the The Dawn observed, it is surprising that a prime minister should visit an important ally with expectations that were clearly belied by reality. Normally, a dozen preparatory meetings should have laid the ground for such a visit and its expected outcomes. Instead, it appeared that the prime minister was negotiating his own way out of debt, that too at a time when his country was virtually on fire due to the antics of an extreme right wing group bent on violence. Somewhere, somebody blundered.

For India or for anyone with an interest in South Asian stability, there are some aspects of interest. One aspect is that US-China trade confrontation has led to a state where China is reluctant to extend even minimal aid ( not assistance, which has conditions) to a valuable ally. Trade sanctions are therefore clearly biting. That’s interesting to say the least.

A second aspect is that Pakistan will have now have to rely on the IMF for its largest ever loan package. While this is certain to bite, it is less dangerous than a Pakistan virtually bought up by China. That’s not in anyone’s best interests, least of all Islamabad itself. A third aspect is that the “higher than a mountain, and deeper than the seas” friendship between the two countries seems to have come up against the earthy taste of reality.

Beijing is clearly not falling over itself to oblige Pakistan in terms of generous aid or social projects to any great degree. That last aspect will play itself out to the full only in the coming months. Wait and watch. This is only likely to get more interesting.


Updated Date: Nov 05, 2018 15:34 PM

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Mon Nov 19, 2018 9:26 am

twitter
Ali Arif @i_aliarif

China: Pakistani student Osama(University: Shanyang) killed in public by the father and brother of the girl he was dating. This is 2nd such case, foreigners are definitely not safe in China. Any word on it ? @ImranKhanPTI @ShireenMazari1 @fawadchaudhry @omar_quraishi @ChinaDaily



watch the video

https://twitter.com/i_aliarif/status/10 ... 2006674433

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Mon Nov 19, 2018 10:20 am

Both are devious snakes, each in their own way.

Nationalists, they certainly are not.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wg1M891xMRU

GREAT Example of How to DESTROY a Pseudo-Secular, Biased "journalist"


chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Mon Nov 19, 2018 11:42 am

is this what the twitter CEO is supposed to be doing in India??

BIF has become very brazen. Not even the figleaf cover of impartiality

and our very own desh drohi burka butt is simpering away.


Twitter CEO during his visit in India Poster in his hand: *'Smash Brahminical Patriarchy'.* Tutored by #Left. Defining #unbiased approach? No wonder that nonLeft accounts are targeted. *India deserves better @Twitter! Can govt be serious about replacement? @reliancejio ready?



Image

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Sun Dec 23, 2018 9:15 am

China’s ‘Belt and Road’ plan in Pakistan takes a military turn

China’s ‘Belt and Road’ plan in Pakistan takes a military turn

New York Times, Dec 21, 2018,
By Maria Abi Habib
ISLAMABAD:

When President Donald Trump started the new
year by suspending billions of dollars of security aid to Pakistan,
one theory was that it would scare the Pakistani military into
cooperating better with its U.S. allies.

The reality was that Pakistan already had a replacement sponsor
lined up.

Just two weeks later, the Pakistani air force and Chinese officials
were putting the final touches on a secret proposal to expand
Pakistan’s building of Chinese military jets, weaponry and other
hardware. The confidential plan, reviewed by The New York
Times, would also deepen the cooperation between China and
Pakistan in space, a frontier the Pentagon recently said Beijing
was trying to militarize after decades of playing catch-up.
All those military projects were designated as part of China’s Belt
and Road Initiative a $1 trillion chain of infrastructure
China and Pakistan are putting the final touches on a
secret proposal to expand Pakistan's building of Chinese military equipment.
It has come to light that in the hindsight of the Belt and Road Initiative, China is fulfilling its military ambitions

Belt and Road Initiative, a $1 trillion chain of infrastructure
development programs stretching across some 70 countries, built
and financed by Beijing.

Chinese officials have repeatedly said the Belt and Road is purely
an economic project with peaceful intent. But with its plan for
Pakistan, China is for the first time explicitly tying a Belt and Road
proposal to its military ambitions — and confirming the concerns
of a host of nations who suspect the infrastructure initiative is
really about helping China project armed might.

As China’s strategically located and nuclear-armed neighbor,
Pakistan has been the leading example of how the Chinese
projects are being used to give Beijing both favor and leverage
among its clients.

Since the beginning of the Belt and Road Initiative in 2013,
Pakistan has been the program’s flagship site, with some $62
billion in projects planned in the so-called China-Pakistan
Economic Corridor. In the process, China has lent more and more
money to Pakistan at a time of economic desperation there,
binding the two countries ever closer.

For the most part, Pakistan has eagerly turned more toward
China as the chill with the United States has deepened. Some
Pakistani officials are growing concerned about losing sovereignty
to their deep-pocketed Asian ally, but the host of ways the two
countries are now bound together may leave Pakistan with little
choice but to go along.

Even before the revelation of the new Chinese-Pakistani military
cooperation, some of China’s biggest projects in Pakistan had
clear strategic implications.

A Chinese-built seaport and special economic zone in the
Pakistani town of Gwadar is rooted in trade, giving China a
quicker route to get goods to the Arabian Sea. But it also gives
Beijing a strategic card to play against India and the United States
if tensions worsen to the point of naval blockades as the two
powers increasingly confront each other at sea.

A less scrutinized component of Belt and Road is the central role
Pakistan plays in China’s Beidou satellite navigation system.
Pakistan is the only other country that has been granted access
to the system’s military service, allowing more precise guidance
for missiles, ships and aircraft.

The cooperation is meant to be a blueprint for Beidou’s expansion
to other Belt and Road nations, however, ostensibly ending its
clients’ reliance on the U.S. military-run GPS network that
Chinese officials fear is monitored and manipulated by the United
States.

In Pakistan, China has found an amenable ally with much to
recommend it: shared borders and a long history of cooperation;
a hedge in South Asia against India; a large market for arms
sales and trade with potential for growth; a wealth of natural
resources.

Now, China is also finding a better showcase for its security and
surveillance technology in a place once defined by its close
military relationship with the United States.

“The focus of Belt and Road is on roads and bridges and ports,
because those are the concrete construction projects that people
can easily see. But it’s the technologies of the future and
technologies of future security systems that could be the biggest
security threat in the Belt and Road project,” said Priscilla
Moriuchi, director of strategic threat development at Recorded
Future, a cyberthreat intelligence monitoring company based in
Massachusetts.

An Asset on the Sea

The tightening China-Pakistan security alliance has gained
momentum on a long road to the Arabian Sea.

In 2015, under Belt and Road, China took a nascent port in the
Pakistani coastal town of Gwadar and supercharged the project
with an estimated $800 million development plan that included a
large special economic zone for Chinese companies.

Linking the port to western China would be a new 2,000-mile
network of highways and rails through the most forbidding stretch
of Pakistan: Baluchistan province, a resource-rich region plagued
by militancy.

The public vision for the project was that it would allow Chinese
goods to bypass much longer and more expensive shipping
routes through the Indian Ocean and avoid the territorial waters of
several U.S. allies in Asia.

From the beginning, though, key details of the project were kept
from the public and lawmakers, officials say, including the terms
of its loan structure and the length of the lease, more than 40
years, that a Chinese state-owned company secured to operate
the port.

If there was concern within Pakistan about the hidden costs of the
China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, also known as CPEC, there
was growing suspicion abroad about a hidden military aspect, as
well.

In recent years, Chinese state-owned companies have built or
begun constructing seaports at strategic spots around the Indian
Ocean, including places in Sri Lanka, Bangladesh and Malaysia.
Chinese officials insisted that the ports would not be militarized.
But analysts began wondering whether China’s endgame was to
muscle its way onto coastal territories that could become prime
military assets — much as it did when it started militarizing
contested islands in the South China Sea.

Then, Sri Lanka, unable to repay its ballooning debt with China,
handed over the Chinese-built port at Hambantota in a 99-year
lease agreement last year. Indian and American officials
expressed a growing conviction that taking control of the port had
been China’s intent all along.

In October, Vice President Mike Pence said Sri Lanka was a
warning for all Belt and Road countries that China was luring
them into debt traps.

“China uses so-called debt diplomacy to expand its influence,”
Pence said in a speech.

“Just ask Sri Lanka, which took on massive debt to let Chinese
state companies build a port of questionable commercial value,”
Pence added. “It may soon become a forward military base for
China’s growing blue-water navy.”

Military analysts predict that China could use Gwadar to expand
the naval footprint of its attack submarines, after agreeing in 2015
to sell eight submarines to Pakistan in a deal worth up to $6
billion. China could use the equipment it sells to the South Asian
country to refuel its own submarines, extending its navy’s global
reach.

Deepening Debt

When China inaugurated Belt and Road, in 2013, Prime Minister
Nawaz Sharif’s new government in Pakistan saw it as the answer
for a host of problems.

Foreign investment in Pakistan was scant, driven away by
terrorist attacks and the country’s enduring reputation for
corruption. And Pakistan desperately needed a modern power
grid to help ease persistent electricity shortages.

Pakistani officials say that Beijing first proposed the highway from
China’s western Xinjiang region through Pakistan that connected
to Gwadar port. But Pakistani officials insisted that new coal
power plants be built. China agreed.

With CPEC under fresh scrutiny, Chinese and Pakistani officials in
recent weeks have contended that Pakistan has a debt problem,
but not a Chinese debt problem. In October, the country’s central
bank revealed an overall debt and liability burden of about $215
billion, with $95 billion externally held. With nearly half of CPEC’s
projects completed — in terms of worth — Pakistan currently
owes China $23 billion.

But the country stands to owe $62 billion to China — before
interest balloons the figure to some $90 billion — under the plan
for Belt and Road’s expansion there in coming years.
Pakistan’s central bank governor, Ashraf Wathra, said publicly in
2015 that he had no clarity on Chinese investments in Pakistan
and was concerned about rising debt levels . It still took him
months after that to secure a briefing from Cabinet officials.
“My main question was, ‘Do we have any feasibility studies of
these projects and a cost-benefit analysis?’ Their answers were
all evasive,” recalled Wathra, who has since retired.

Ahsan Iqbal, a Cabinet minister and the main architect for CPEC
in the previous government, said the project was well thoughtthrough
and dismissed Wathra’s account.

“No one wanted to invest here — the Chinese took a chance,”
Iqbal said in an interview.

But the bill is coming due. Pakistan’s first debt repayments to
China are set for next year, starting at about $300 million and
gradually increasing to reach about $3.2 billion by 2026,
according to officials. And Pakistan is already having trouble
paying what it owes to Chinese companies.

Fighter Jets and Satellites

According to the undisclosed proposal drawn up by the Pakistani
air force and Chinese officials at the start of the year, a special
economic zone under CPEC would be created in Pakistan to
produce a new generation of fighter jets. For the first time,
navigation systems, radar systems and onboard weapons would
be built jointly by the countries at factories in Pakistan.

The proposal, confirmed by officials at the Ministry of Planning
and Development, would expand China and Pakistan’s current
cooperation on the JF-17 fighter jet, which is assembled at
Pakistan’s military-run Kamra Aeronautical Complex in Punjab
province. The Chinese-designed jets have given Pakistan an
alternative to the U.S.-built F-16 fighters.

The plans are in the final stages of approval, but the current
government is expected to rubber-stamp the project, officials in
Islamabad say.

For China, Pakistan could become a showcase for other countries
seeking to shift their militaries away from U.S. equipment and
toward Chinese arms, Western diplomats said. And because
China is not averse to selling such advanced weaponry as
ballistic missiles — which the United States will not sell to allies
like Saudi Arabia — the deal with Pakistan could be a
steppingstone to a bigger market for Chinese weapons in the
Muslim world.

For years, some of the most important military coordination
between China and Pakistan has been going on in space.
Just months before Beijing unveiled the Belt and Road project in
2013, it signed an agreement with Pakistan to build a network of
satellite stations inside the South Asian country to establish the
Beidou Navigation System as an alternative to the American GPS
network.

Beidou quickly became a core component of Belt and Road, with
the Chinese government calling the satellite network part of an
“information Silk Road” in a 2015 white paper.

Like GPS, Beidou has a civilian function and a military one. If its
trial with Pakistan goes well, Beijing could offer Beidou’s military
service to other countries, creating a bloc of nations whose
military actions would be more difficult for the United States to
monitor.

By 2020, all 35 satellites for the system will be launched in
collaboration with other Belt and Road countries, completing
Beidou.

“Beidou, whatever any users use it for — whether it’s a civilian
navigating their way to the grocery store or a government using it
to coordinate their rocket launches — those are all things that
China can track,” said Moriuchi, of the research group Recorded
Future. “And that’s what is most striking: that this authoritarian
government will be a major technology provider for numerous
countries in Asia, Africa and Europe.”

For the Pentagon, China’s satellite launches are ominous.
“The PLA continues to strengthen its military space capabilities
despite its public stance against the militarization of space,”
including developing Beidou and new weaponry, according to a
Pentagon report issued to Congress in May, using a common
abbreviation for China’s military.

In October, Pakistan’s information minister, Fawad Chaudhry, said
that by 2022, Pakistan would send its own astronaut into space
with China’s help.

“We are close to China, and we are getting more close,” he said
in a later interview. “It’s time for the West to wake up and
recognize our importance.”

Wooing Pakistan’s Military

Though the relationship between China and Pakistan has clearly
grown closer, it has not been without tension. CPEC could still be
vulnerable to political shifts in Pakistan — as happened this year
in Malaysia, which shelved three big projects by Chinese
companies.

Campaigning during the parliamentary elections that made him
prime minister in July, Imran Khan vowed to review CPEC
projects and renegotiate them if he won. In September, after
meeting in Saudi Arabia with the crown prince, Khan said that the
kingdom had agreed to invest in CPEC, too.
Pakistan’s new commerce minister then proposed pausing all
CPEC projects while the government


The moves by Pakistan’s new government angered Beijing, which
was concerned they could set back Belt and Road globally.
But in Pakistan, China has a steady ally it can approach to
smooth things over: the country’s powerful military establishment,
which stands to fill its coffers with millions of dollars through
CPEC as the military’s construction companies win infrastructure
bids.

Shortly after the commerce minister’s comments, the Pakistani
army’s top commander, Gen. Qamar Javed Bajwa, hurried to
Beijing for an unannounced visit with President Xi Jinping. The
meeting came six weeks before Khan made his first official visit
with the Chinese president.

Statements from the military said Bajwa and Xi spoke extensively
about Belt and Road projects, though economic talks are usually
the purview of civilian officials.

Bajwa “said that the Belt and Road initiative with CPEC as its
flagship is destined to succeed despite all odds, and Pakistan’s
Army shall ensure security of CPEC at all costs,” read a
statement from the Pakistani military.

Shortly after the Beijing meeting, Pakistan’s government rolled
back its invitation to Saudi Arabia to join CPEC, and all talk of
pausing or canceling Chinese projects has stopped.

But China could face another challenge to its investments: a
Pakistani financial crisis that has forced Khan’s government to
seek loans from international lenders that require transparency.
Throughout September, international delegations traveled to
Islamabad carrying the same message: Reveal the extent of
Chinese loans if you want financial assistance.

In a late September meeting with visiting officials from the
International Monetary Fund, Pakistan’s government asked for a
bailout of up to $12 billion. The fund’s representatives pressed
Pakistan to share all existing agreements with the Chinese
government and demanded IMF input during any future CPEC
negotiations. The fund also sought assurances that Pakistan
would not use a bailout to repay CPEC loans.

But the Chinese Embassy in Islamabad stepped up its
engagement as well, demanding that CPEC deals be kept secret
and promising to shore up Pakistan’s finances with bilateral loans,
Pakistani officials say.

Three months after taking office, Khan still has not made good on
his campaign promises to reveal the nature of the $62 billion
investment Beijing has committed to Pakistan, and his
government has backtracked on an IMF deal.

In early November, Khan visited Xi in Beijing, a trip during which
he was expected to clinch bilateral loans and grants to ease Pakistans financial crisis. Instead, his government walked away with vague promises of a deal “in principle,” but refused to disclose any details.

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Thu Jan 31, 2019 7:39 am

old but still relevant as it shows the paki permanent anti India mindset and the vast difference between what the paki says and what the paki actually does


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iZKX53gA4g

पाक Ret. Marshal :: भारत ने कभी पाक का बुरा नही चाहा हमेशा हमने भारत को धोका दिया


chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Sun Feb 10, 2019 3:08 pm

India’s confused and contradictory signals are only emboldening Pakistan


India’s confused and contradictory signals are only emboldening Pakistan

Pakistan even uses the Indus Waters Treaty, the world's most generous water-sharing pact, as a stick to beat us with. Why does India put up with this stinging rogue behaviour?

Consider two developments in recent days that speak volumes about India’s Pakistan policy: Just as the United States moved to unilaterally withdraw from a major arms-control pact (the Intermediate-Range Forces, or INF Treaty), “Incredible India” — as it calls itself in international tourism-promotion ads — welcomed an inspection team from a terrorist state to scrutinise Indian hydropower projects that are being built under the terms of the Indus Waters Treaty (IWT).

And, as if to mock the Indian foreign secretary’s formal protest over his call to separatist Umar Farooq four days earlier, Pakistani Foreign Minister Shah Mohammad Qureshi on Saturday telephoned another secessionist leader in Kashmir Valley, Ali Shah Geelani.

Qureshi and Pakistan’s all-powerful military generals think they can get away by provoking India.

In the absence of a clear-headed Pakistan policy backed by political resolve, India continues to send confusing and contradictory signals, encouraging Pakistan’s continuing roguish conduct.

India’s welcoming of the three-member Pakistani inspection team, led by that country’s Indus commissioner, illustrated how its incoherent approach to Pakistan has spawned even appeasement.

In 1960, in the naïve hope that water largesse would yield peace, India entered into the IWT by giving away the Indus system’s largest rivers as gifts to Pakistan. Since then, the congenitally hostile Pakistan, while drawing the full benefits from the treaty, has waged overt or covert aggression almost continuously — and is now using the IWT itself as a stick to beat India with, including by contriving water disputes and internationalising them.

Whereas the US has ditched the INF Treaty over an alleged Russian violation of its terms, India clings to the IWT’s finer details — even though Pakistan is waging proxy war by terror against it. Like the IWT, the INF Treaty is of indefinite duration.

Pakistan’s use of state-reared terrorist groups to inflict upon India death by a thousand cuts can be invoked by New Delhi as constituting reasonable grounds for an Indian withdrawal from the IWT. The International Court of Justice has upheld the principle that a treaty, including one of indefinite duration, may be dissolved by reason of a fundamental change of circumstances.

Still, India not only adheres to the IWT’s finer details, it even goes beyond. For example, under the IWT’s Article VIII, the Permanent Indus Commission (PIC) is to meet once a year. Its next meeting was due in March 2019. But, thanks to India’s zealousness, the PIC met much earlier in August 2018, just five months after its previous meeting.

It was at that meeting that India agreed to advance Pakistan’s inspection tour to October 2018. The last such tour occurred in 2014 and the next one, in keeping with the IWT provision for a tour “once every five years”, was due by the end of 2019. The local bodies’ elections in Jammu and Kashmir forced the October tour to be deferred to January-end.

Before returning home on February 1, the Pakistani team examined three Indian hydropower projects currently under construction — the Pakal Dul, which will generate up to 1,000 megawatts of electricity, Ratle (850 megawatts), and Lower Kalnai (48 megawatts).

The team also visited the already operational 900-megawatt Baglihar — a project that Pakistan tried earlier to stop by invoking the IWT’s dispute-settlement provisions.

But the international neutral expert appointed to resolve the dispute ultimately ruled in India’s favour.

Pakistan, however, could seek international intercession again by using the information its inspection team collected last week to mount technical objections to the Indian projects under construction. Even before the team visited India, Pakistani officials publicly raised objections to the spillway or freeboard of these projects.

Pakistan’s interest lies in sustaining a unique treaty that incorporates water generosity to the lower riparian on a scale unmatched by any other pact in the world. That interest arms India with significant leverage to link the IWT’s future to Pakistan’s observance of basic international norms.

Yet, India is letting go of the opportunity to reframe the terms of the Indus engagement.

India’s pusillanimity is apparent from yet another development last week. After the Indian foreign secretary summoned the Pakistani high commissioner to lodge a protest over Qureshi’s call to Umar Farooq, the Pakistani foreign office the next day summoned the Indian high commissioner in Islamabad.

This raises the question as to why India does not downgrade its diplomatic relations with Pakistan — why maintain full diplomatic ties with a country that New Delhi branded “Terroristan” in 2017?

There is no reason for India to keep diplomatic relations with a terrorist state at the high commissioner level. Downsizing diplomatic missions and doing away with high commissioners should be part of an Indian strategy to employ peaceful tools, including diplomatic, economic and riparian pressures, to reform Pakistan’s behaviour.


Sadly, India is all talk when it comes to imposing costs on the next-door terrorist state. Indian policymakers do not seem to realise that words not backed by action carry major costs. They not only affect India’s credibility but also undermine its deterrent posture by emboldening the enemy.

Isn’t it telling that Pakistan continues to gore India, although it is much smaller in economic, military and demographic terms? Such aggression is the bitter fruit of India’s present approach — which essentially has remained the same under successive governments.

However, it is still not too late to reverse course.

India ought to talk less and act more. To tame a rogue neighbour, India must emphasise deeds, not words.

For starters, it must discard the fiction that it can have normal diplomatic relations with a sponsor of terrorism.

BRAHMA CHELLANEY

chetak
BGR Oldie
Posts: 1446
Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2017 5:08 am

Re: Pakistan - News & Discussion

Post by chetak » Tue Apr 09, 2019 8:18 pm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9NJbHJh9YlI



General pervez musharraf house - inside view of pervaiz musharaf's house




Post Reply