A conference of this title was held in Brussels on March 1, hosted by Members of the European Parliament and the Balochistan House. According to the Balochistan House, the event was aimed at highlighting “the deep-seated antipathy to the project among residents of Gilgit-Baltistan (G-B), Sindh and Balochistan.” Obviously, the speakers selected, whether from the EU parliament or locals, were those who were in opposition to the conception of this project. According to the news report issued by the Balochistan House, the conference began with the screening of a documentary on how CPEC impacted “negatively on the lives” of the people, due to “loss of jobs, environmental degradation, forced displacements, and increase in army deployment and control”. A Baloch spokesman began the post-documentary discussion with the spurious questioning of the legality of CPEC since Balochistan was “occupied by Pakistan and G-B was disputed territory”, and then harped on how the Baloch identity was under threat by the intention of bringing about a “demographic change” in the region. Other speakers dwelt on human rights’ violations, instances of “forced disappearances”, land-grabbing, eviction of locals, and corruption, to recommend that Europeans should not invest in CPEC-related projects. The views expressed voiced concerns about the possibility of the Baloch and Gilgit-Baltistani people losing their identities through demographic changes brought about by “increasing military cantonments”. Here, let me clarify to my readers that I am undertaking an effort to defend CPEC because, in my view, it is the only project that offers the people of this benighted country the hope of a worthwhile economic future. CPEC is a product of the current kaleidoscopic geopolitical situation of the world, coupled with compulsions of geography, which have pushed Pakistan center-stage. No credit for its opportunities can be claimed by any political leadership, nor by the establishment; military or otherwise. The fact that the Chinese insisted on security guarantees from the GHQ, instead of our government, should be taken as a matter of national shame. Moreover, the project is far from perfect. I will stand alongside those who make sensible suggestions for its improvement, but, I will argue, as forcefully as I can, in defence of the project. It is undeniable that the citizens in all provinces, even in Punjab, have numerous legitimate complaints against current governance arrangement, as well as against the ‘establishment’, military and civil. These complaints deserve requisite attention. But, those who wish to express their displeasure by attempting to impede any hope of national progress in the country are not loyal to the state or to themselves. In fact, they may, albeit unwittingly, be acting in a manner as harmful to the nation as insurgents’ practices. In 2009, the army wanted an independent view of developments in Balochistan and what to do about it. For some reason, I was asked to undertake that project. It took me over two years to complete it. Though some of my observations may still be classified, let me share some Portions here. To begin with, most Baloch complaints were eminently reasonable, and “agencies” had a dismal record in Balochistan and there were, even then, despite official denial, instances of “disappearances” by government agencies. But, and this is important, after consistent effort of confidence-building I got members of the Baloch Student Union and military wings to admit that the bulk of the disappearances were actually executed by Baloch dissidents who copied the trademark style of agencies to lay the blame at their door. In many instances they dressed up in stolen or acquired uniforms. And, the bulk of the crimes and killings were attributed to agencies but carried out by rival gangs of thieves, thugs, extortionists, smugglers, land-grabbers, and rival sectarian gangs supported by the Saudis or Tehran. I was amazed to discover that, depending on how much of what was being smuggled, the gross revenue at stake between rival gangs was an estimated at a daily earning of $ 3-6 millions. Smuggled goods ranged from heavy weapons, small arms, and ammunition, to drugs, food items and fruit. To my surprise, the largest revenue source of smugglers was from fuel supply from Iran. Every single gang, whatever its nature, had political connections and patronage — at least three of whom still hold office. I will be grievously remiss if I fail to add that many had connections among those in uniform as well. I am aware that, at least, some of my recommendations were acted upon. Uniformed individuals were punished, sacked, or posted out and steps were taken to ensure their prompt accountability. The military’s desire to do this ‘on the quiet’ is one that I can understand but not sympathise with. When one is aware of having [earned] a tarnished reputation, it is not enough to try repairing it for the future. This is among those instances where ‘justice should also have been seen for it to be considered done’. But, and this too is important, every single Baloch I met, of whatever background, however reluctantly, ultimately acknowledged that every single development in every single corner of the province, was due to the military. Whether it was communication infrastructure, quality education in schools, colleges or universities, hospitals or health care, provision of water and other services, economic opportunities or swift relief during crises — all owed their thanks to the Army. I am in no position to assert that agencies are no longer involved in disappearances; I can merely hope they are not. But holding CPEC hostage to them, is indeed far-fetched. To be continued The writer is a retired soldier with pretensions of being able to think