As has been argued in previous articles of this series, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is supposed to serve as the “flagship” bilateral project under the Belt & Road Initiative (BRI). Both China and Pakistan have viewed and projected the corridor accordingly. As far as Pakistan is concerned, CPEC carries huge investment, infrastructural and fiscal incentives. For China, the corridor has more than economic value for the following reasons.
Though CPEC can serve as the harbinger of socioeconomic development to western China, i.e. Xinjiang that borders Pakistan, it can also act as a bridge for market expansion and connectivity not only within China, but also regionally. For example, the corridor can be connected with rail and road networks in South and Central Asia. Even Gwadar port can work with Chabahar in terms of complementarity. Put differently, the success of CPEC is crucial for the projection, negotiation, execution, and expansion of the BRI.
Nevertheless, if policy and executory ineffectiveness on the part of the Pakistani government magnifies and China’s obsession with governance and security related concerns persist, CPEC as a project may invite serious troubles ahead. If the challenges, as already discussed in the previous articles, remain unresolved in the short to long-run, the corridor will not only affect itself but also other BRI projects. In strategic terms, unfelt, unrealised and unresolved governance and security challenges of CPEC are likely to send unpleasant vibes to all regional and global stakeholders, of which some countries such as India are still sceptical of President Xi Jinping’s One Belt, One Road (OBOR) vision. Secondly, inconclusiveness of CPEC projects is very likely to discourage bilateral and multilateral economic cooperation in the South western and Central Asian region. Undoubtedly, such a policy direction carries the potential to affect the economic interests of both China and Pakistan negatively.
Out of the six proposed economic corridors under the BRI, it is CPEC that connects only two countries — China and Pakistan. All other proposed corridors involve more than two countries, and in certain cases, two continents
Moreover, out of the six proposed economic corridors under the BRI, it is CPEC that connects only two countries — China and Pakistan. All other proposed corridors involve more than two countries, and in certain cases, two continents. Theoretically, the proposition, construction and execution of an economic corridor is comparatively convenient between two than three or more states because in the latter’s case a whole range of additional variables such as political and economic systems, cultures and popular perceptions of the countries involved are to be taken into account at the political and policy level.
In addition, CPEC, as already posited, involves two time-tested friendly allies whose strategic partnership has obtained measured durability. Since the mid-1960s, China and Pakistan have collaborated at bilateral and multilateral fora. Moreover, the two states have already amicably settled their borders in the wake of the 1962 China-India war. In other words, Pakistan is China’s only neighbour with which the country shares no territorial disputes. The two countries’ leadership, historically, made conscious efforts to understand each other politically, culturally and strategically. Although the people-to-people contact remained low in the past, a favourable outlook regarding China is on the up in Pakistan owing to CPEC. Importantly, Pakistan has obtained full membership of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and this speaks volumes about the consolidation of China-Pakistan relations in a changing regional geopolitical environment.
Last but not the least, CPEC is thus ensconced in history, mutuality of strategic interaction, and cultural harmony. Despite the aforementioned factors, if this experiment under the BRI remains skewed, it is likely to carry a negative trickledown effect for other corridors under the One Belt One Road, for as already mentioned, all other corridors involve more than two countries with diverse culture, politics, religions, languages and economy. It is therefore possible, at the policy level, that certain countries, who share a bitter history with China, may refer to the failures of CPEC while discouraging the BRI discourse nationally and extra-regionally. Thus, it is pertinent for both China and Pakistan to approach CPEC with seriousness of purpose, mutually assured benefits and due diligence.
To be continued
The writer is Head, Department of Social Sciences, Iqra University, Islamabad. He is a DAAD, FDDI and Fulbright Fellow. He tweets @ejazbhatty
Published in Daily Times, July 1st 2018.