There’s no doubt that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is the largest single development plan in Pakistan’s history. Originally valued at $46 billion, the plan is now estimated to be worth $62 billion. The projects included in it are diverse but they’re mainly concerned with power generation; special economic zones; and development of infrastructure like a sea port, roads, and railways. Once completed by 2030, the CPEC projects are slated to have a game-changer effect on Pakistan’s economy. The government as well as state institutions in Pakistan see the CPEC with such a mix of excitement and reverence that even slight disagreement over some of its details is taken as blasphemy. No doubt the CPEC project is worth undertaking as it has the potential to add stimulus to our hardly growing economy. However, the euphoria surrounding the project and the view that it is the elixir to all our economic woes is problematic. That is because it raises unrealistic expectation among masses of an imminent prosperity, which most likely isn’t the case. At its best, the project can be a catalyst to put our economy on the right path for growth and development — that is if it’s complemented with other policy measures. Unfortunately, not only those other policy measures are missing but also transactions and individual projects initiated within the CPEC lack transparency and inclusiveness. This has led many experts to fear for the possibly devastating impact of risks in store for Pakistan. While the CPEC corridors and the Gwadar Port will have a more lasting impact on the economy, any good derived from projects such as those in the power sector will be of an ephemeral nature in view of Pakistan’s fastest population growth rate in South Asia. We will need to constantly keep investing in such sectors. Industrial zones to be established under the CPEC are yet to unfold and we would do well to remain alert about their impact, keeping in view other countries’ experience with Chinese investment. A case in point is the Hambantota experience of Sri Lanka. The potential of the road and port to be built under the CPEC is yet to be tapped and we must know that not all of Chinese trade with countries west of Pakistan is going to be conducted through these facilities. The road and port will serve as no more than just a shorter trade link to China’s western Xinjiang province. Besides, the port serves an extraordinary geopolitical objective for China. Nations can’t borrow development through one-off projects; they have to earn it following due toil. But then Pakistan is a conservative society steeped in socio-cultural dogma, which makes it so eager to sight even the non-existent chances of a miraculous power and prosperity from anything novel and glittering. Glimpses of this may be seen in our erstwhile excitement with becoming a nuclear power in 1999, and, more recently, in instances like claims made a charlatan that he has invented technology that enables cars to run on water as fuel. The CPEC may turn sour too. Anyway, if some in the government have any doubt as to why CPEC isn’t a panacea for our ailing economy and poor human development, they may refer to the case of Suez Canal in Egypt to see how far that project single-handedly failed to transform that country into a rising economy, let alone a developed country. No doubt the CPEC is worth undertaking. However, the euphoria surrounding the project and the view that it is the elixir to all our economic woes is problematic On the other hand, it’s so telling that every other day government and military leadership are seen assuring Pakistanis, Chinese and the world in general that ‘foolproof’ security has been ensured for CPEC. In fact, such claims only highlight our most important problem; until we rid ourselves of this overt obsession with security, we can’t guarantee a diversified portfolio of foreign direct investment from rest of the world sans China. This will require us to address the issue of sectarian radicalisation and terrorism. For this, military operations are fine but clarifying the state narrative is more important. Yet, a coherent narrative is starkly missing and whatever efforts are underway in that regard are only adding to the confusion, let alone countering the extremist ideology of private Jihad. Our foreign policy and national security interests need to be redefined in favour of not just coexistence, pluralism, and peace, but also to easeout over 38 percent of our population from poverty. There won’t be any let up in our economic woes until we define our national security and foreign policy objectives in the narrative of trade, development, economy and poverty alleviation. The sooner we learn that we can’t do business, trade and pursue development by having a state that continues to see things exclusively from the lens of military security, the better. Projects like CPEC are certainly needed, yet they can’t singlehandedly turnaround our fate. Any state continuing as a security state with low investments and consequently abysmal indicators in human development can’t simply thrive. Thus, we will need an unrelenting commitment to shun the narrative of a security state, reform our economy, diversify FDI, increase tax-to-GDP ratio and continue spending in human development areas like education, technical vocations, public health, and poverty alleviation in the next two decades. Only this will provide a sustainable foundation for any sustainable economic prosperity. The writer is a sociologist with interest in politics and history. He’s accessible on Twitter @ZulfiRao1