Daily Times

Pakistan’s geostrategic position is unique and, hence, significant. On the one hand, the country carries geographical proximity with Central Asia, South Asia and even China, and, on the other hand, its territorial fault lines are realised in the Persian Gulf and the Middle East. In the past, many lucrative opportunities were visited upon this land but, due to the extreme dismay of this hapless nation, each time the incumbent rulers not only missed them, their handling turned those opportunities into liabilities. Pakistan’s joining military pacts with the US during the Cold War, fighting against the Soviet Union during the 1980s along with the US and again joining the war on terror post-9/11 on the behest of Washington are only a few cases in point.
At present, Pakistan’s geographical proximity has offered a historic opportunity in the form of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Under this plan, Pakistan can act as a conduit for China giving it the shortest and safest access to the Indian Ocean for the export of goods to the outside world and import of energy from the energy-rich regions of the Middle East and Africa. Some even argue that the Pakistani Gwadar Port, which is at the heart of this project, could benefit the People’s Liberation Navy in the long run although such a possibility at this stage is remote.
In return, China has shown a generous (rather out of proportion) offer, which was obvious during Chinese President Xi Jinping’s visit to Pakistan. During the visit, Beijing committed $ 46 billion to Pakistan for the next 10 to 15 years. The agreements covered the areas of most pressing need such as energy, infrastructure development and economic growth. This is the single largest deal in the history of Sino-Pakistan relations, in Pakistan’s history and, importantly, in the history of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). In view of the foregoing, certain questions come to mind. For example, is Pakistan ready to grab this opportunity? Will this be an equal relationship? Can we term it a win-win situation for the two states?
To begin with, an opportunity only looks big if and when there is an equal calibre leadership available that can transform it into socio-economic capabilities that impact the masses positively. Given Pakistan’s conservative and non-charismatic leadership, it is too early to assess the impact of the CPEC but, thus far, the handling pf the corridor by the incumbent government is disappointing. The following will make it clearer.
President Xi’s visit had not yet been finalised and a controversy over the change in the route of the corridor had already started. Politicians from smaller provinces, especially Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, accused the government of amending the original route design to favour the Punjab. In the wake of the said controversy, some analysts stressed upon the planning commission led by Ahsen Iqbal, who spearheads the CPEC, to see to raised concerns. Instead of building much-needed consensus before Xi’s visit, the honourable minister presented clumsy explanations. For example, he stated that under a systematic plan, wrong maps had been circulated on the internet. In other words, there was no change in the route of the corridor. How amazing was it for him to state this in a digitalised world where it is easier to find the original map for comparative purposes. Interestingly, till the writing of this article, the concerned ministry had not taken the pain to put up the map it considers is the correct version on its website.
Regardless, the fact of the matter is that the corridor route has been changed from its original plan since Musharraf’s years. This probably was commissioned due to security rather than the ethnicity factor. Nevertheless, it is always desirable to consult with the provincial governments and their people to avoid intra-provincial misunderstandings. Secondly, the CPEC is not just one road; rather, it is a web of roads, railways, pipelines and fibre optics that will pass through different parts of the country. The government has not been able to communicate such simple facts to its own people properly.
The issue of the change in the route was still unresolved when a new controversy over the nature of the agreements surfaced. Before the departure of China’s president, the co-chairman of the PPP called in a meeting with the representatives of various political parties during which he demanded fairness in all agreements signed with China and to bring the issue to parliament for debate. The other day, Imran Kahn and Asad Umar ofthe PTI, in separate press conferences, stated that they were unaware of the terms and conditions of the agreements. Similar concerns were aired by some other parties too.
The mentioned stakeholders, among others, demand documented clarification from the government on whether the sum of $ 46 billion is aid, assistance, investment or loans. If it is a loan, what is the markup rate? Thirdly, as none of the agreements signed were of a sensitive nature, why then were their texts not made public? This makes a layman point towards something fishy. Moreover, though the prime minister has promised to address the concerns of smaller provinces, he does not seem to have such a mindset. His recent visit to the UK is a case in point.
What can be concluded in view of the foregoing is the mess that is ours has its pitfalls for China. The ambiguity has given rise to doubts and cynics have already started questioning China’s intentions. “China has a hidden agenda. It wants to exploit Pakistani resources. It has strategic motives and has thus asked Pakistan to keep the contents of the agreements secret” are just some of the speculations in the air.
Across the border, China, with its hands tied to its policy of non-interference, is watching the situation in Pakistan painfully. Those who are familiar with its diplomatic style will agree that China deals with governments leaving the money at the disposal of recipients and never imposes conditions on how to use it. In this case, it is up to Islamabad to identify areas of investment (whether coal or hydropower) and the route map of the corridor (either it passes through Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan or Punjab and/or Sindh). Beijing will not ask Islamabad why chief ministers from non-Punjab provinces were not included in past visits to Beijing during which the guidelines of these agreements were finalised.
Hence, in order to sustain economic and strategic relations with China, Pakistan has to be clear in its approach and policy. Provincial people and governments should be taken on board. Moreover, transparency in agreements and relationship should be the cornerstone of foreign policy in both Islamabad and Beijing. This will help sustain and strengthen the CPEC and mutual friendship.

Dr Ghulam Ali has specialised in Pakistan-China foreign policy from Monash University, Australia and is currently a postdoctoral fellow at Peking University. He can be reached at ghulamali74@yahoo.com. Dr Ejaz Hussain is an independent political scientist with an interest in China’s politics, foreign policy and culture. He tweets at ejazbhatty.