China says wants peace after newspaper warns on South China Sea clash

[Hellfire]

India has unique opportunity to act as a mediator and bridge between the US and China at the moment. Many bridges could be mended if there was a proper attempt at bringing the two main parties to the table.
The rest, as you also will agree, is just a propped up set of nations which are acting as vassals, even though that seems like a harsh view, it is a reality.
Through better relations with China, a more meaningful relationship can be built which can bring peace to all nations in the area. There could be a genuine attempt at peace between our nations later with China as a mediator which would not see India as an enemy. There is a natural alliance because three large nations, Russia, China and India could really reshape the way the geopolitical situation in the region and hopefully correct many wrongs in the region and bring the common man some semblance of peace.
India, if it wants to be a diplomatic Juggernaut, needs to move beyond simple calculated risks and foray into deeper waters and try and achieve what is difficult for other nations at the moment. I think India holds a lot of cards at the moment and their aligning themselves so easily for a few exemptions which frankly do not mean much is a folly in my eye. Good diplomacy will do what billions of dollars of military expenditure will not and maybe curb a new arms race that is going to eat all the nations in the region.
I would like your analysis on this line of thought, I may be wrong in my assumptions and would like your opinion sir.

All you have posted is the sensible approach and is what India is on. There is no posturing by India against China. It is merely on the lines of the UNCLOS, that India has based its approach.

If China is in violation of the same, then Indian stance is as per the convention and not because China is the belligerent. If you have studied Indian diplomatic and political approach at the international forums, India has always been party to all established UN conventions and works hard to posture itself as an abider of the rules and conventions. Over here too, India has upheld the UNCLOS and Indian Navy continues to traverse SCS inspite of PLAN's efforts to dissuade it from doing so as under UNCLOS it is authorised to do so and China is a signatory to the same. But this act of 'defiance' is not in conjunction to US. Also, Indian posturing is more in terms of favourable approach to US rather than pro-US. The latter would require India to abandon its positions on various contentious issues like Iran, Russia, Syria etc, something which India has not done. If one is to really get into the depth of easing of sanctions on Myanmar and Iran, you will find Indian diplomacy in the background at work.

However, we digress and the pertinent question at present is the effect of UNCLOS ruling on Chinese approach to the issue. I am sceptical that China will be keen to end up being a party that stands in violation of a convention that it is signatory to. However, the Chinese approach to the issue is also something that is antithetical to their present position on UNCLOS, so does China dump the convention now? If it does, what are the ramifications for China?

What majority of our friends from China are focussing on, and indeed others too, is a the military aspect, little realising that military aspects are far fetched. The price in terms of diplomatic currency and influence are far reaching and more immediate than a potential military conflict.

 

[grey boy 2]

On the contrary, If Pakistan did not have nukes and have behaved in the way we have the past 69 years we would have suffered the same fate as Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya.
The fact that we haven't despite the odds heavily stacked against Pakistan is a miracle in itself.




Wrong. Pakistan's gain=China's gain. Hence why China is investing in at least $46 billion in Pakistan and is set to invest in billions more in the coming years and decades. Win win for both Pakistan and China.

So true buddy, without nukes, the Indians would have eaten Pakistan alive long back

 

[greenwood]

See, if your aim is to bait, flame and troll, carry on. But I shall take leave of the nonsense then. However, your interest is to engage in a logical discussion, more than willing here. You have quoted me, I had chosen not to engage with you as your stats do indicate a person usually bereft of any logic and only interested in being a complete dunce.

I had pointed out a silly post by my own country member cautioning him that the topic has no role where India is involved and it shall lead to trolling - something which your posts so far have confirmed. That stupidity invites stupids to troll and derail a great topic for a thread.

However, you quoted my post to post another silly point. And have continued since as your post above. If you are too daft to even understand that I am not interested in a troll fest nor am sitting here to explain my post when you are not even a party to my post, then by all means carry on.

Your above rant is bereft of any logic or base for further discussion. So, please stop quoting me.

Thanks



What is this thread about? South China Sea and maintenance of peace there in.

What laws are governing the dispute? UNCLOS.

What is the link about? The UNCLOS

Is China a signatory? Yes it is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea

Is China bound to follow the ruling? Yes as a signatory.

Will it? No idea.

Now are you able to get what the relation of the reference is? Or is it too much for you to correlate? Or you are simply being silly to derail the topic and are here to merely waste time and generally act a buffoon? You can let know so that I can ignore you too.




Yes my dear 'not the brightest student of history'. Please read about the Cholas .... and then just try and post sense and not merely your ignorance .... and stick to SCS

"
What is this thread about? South China Sea and maintenance of peace there in.
The report is a fabrication. The base of the thread is fake, you know.

What laws are governing the dispute? UNCLOS.
Not correct.

What is the link about? The UNCLOS
Yes

Is China a signatory? Yes it is.
Correct

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_parties_to_the_United_Nations_Convention_on_the_Law_of_the_Sea
Is China bound to follow the ruling? Yes as a signatory.
It is

Will it? No idea.
Certainly China refuse the arbitration based on UNCLOS ruling and terms.
"

Rather than wasting time on UNCLOS, we need to firstly talk about Philippines illegally occupying of Chinese territory in 1970's. In any international laws, it is still within statute of limitations. This is the background and origin of the territory disputes.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

So true buddy, without nukes, the Indians would have eaten Pakistan alive long back

If Pakistan didn't have nukes we would not be celebrating Eid today. Pakistanis would have suffered the same fate as the Red Indians and Australian Aborigines.

 

[Joe Shearer]

On the contrary, If Pakistan did not have nukes and have behaved in the way we have the past 69 years we would have suffered the same fate as Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and Libya.
The fact that we haven't despite the odds heavily stacked against Pakistan is a miracle in itself.

In Kerala, they have a saying about the ordinary, or common lizard on the walls of a house: it thinks while it is hanging from the roof that it is actually holding up the roof.

NOTHING would have happened to Pakistan without her nuclear arsenal. All that it did was to give her a superficial veneer of invulnerability, so that she could continue with the adventures that her immature leadership condemn her to.

Wrong. Pakistan's gain=China's gain. Hence why China is investing in at least $46 billion in Pakistan and is set to invest in billions more in the coming years and decades. Win win for both Pakistan and China.

Here I must refer you to the story of the monkey that hitched a ride across a river with a crocodile. In the middle of the river, the crocodile started to sink slowly, to the horror of the hitch-hiker. It was the hitch-hiker's liver that he was after, for the sake of treating his lady crocodile's indigestion. The monkey immediately agreed, and asked to be allowed to retrieve the liver; for safety's sake, it was kept on a tree on the banks of the river. Once ashore, of course, he climbed nimbly to the top of the tree, and swore to stay there.

I suggest that you wait till you get to mid-river.

That's your fault. In Islamic Moghol empire, the guys should have finished the Indians like the red Indians and Australian Aborigines. Muslims were too beneficent. Of course, nowaday it makes nonsense.

But not your fault. You have not failed to homogenise the population, whatever you conquered, whenever you conquered it. At least your brutality is consistent.

You should stop using big words with complex theoretical meanings. You could blow some head gaskets.

Point taken. Sorry.

 

[greenwood]

In Kerala, they have a saying about the ordinary, or common lizard on the walls of a house: it thinks while it is hanging from the roof that it is actually holding up the roof.

NOTHING would have happened to Pakistan without her nuclear arsenal. All that it did was to give her a superficial veneer of invulnerability, so that she could continue with the adventures that her immature leadership condemn her to.



Here I must refer you to the story of the monkey that hitched a ride across a river with a crocodile. In the middle of the river, the crocodile started to sink slowly, to the horror of the hitch-hiker. It was the hitch-hiker's liver that he was after, for the sake of treating his lady crocodile's indigestion. The monkey immediately agreed, and asked to be allowed to retrieve the liver; for safety's sake, it was kept on a tree on the banks of the river. Once ashore, of course, he climbed nimbly to the top of the tree, and swore to stay there.

I suggest that you wait till you get to mid-river.



But not your fault. You have not failed to homogenise the population, whatever you conquered, whenever you conquered it. At least your brutality is consistent.



Point taken. Sorry.

Neither your nor my fault, Muslims of Moghol empire made the fault. At least, now Indian take Taj as their own pride, but Taj was Muslims' great work.

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

In Kerala, they have a saying about the ordinary, or common lizard on the walls of a house: it thinks while it is hanging from the roof that it is actually holding up the roof.

NOTHING would have happened to Pakistan without her nuclear arsenal. All that it did was to give her a superficial veneer of invulnerability, so that she could continue with the adventures that her immature leadership condemn her to.



Here I must refer you to the story of the monkey that hitched a ride across a river with a crocodile. In the middle of the river, the crocodile started to sink slowly, to the horror of the hitch-hiker. It was the hitch-hiker's liver that he was after, for the sake of treating his lady crocodile's indigestion. The monkey immediately agreed, and asked to be allowed to retrieve the liver; for safety's sake, it was kept on a tree on the banks of the river. Once ashore, of course, he climbed nimbly to the top of the tree, and swore to stay there.

I suggest that you wait till you get to mid-river.



But not your fault. You have not failed to homogenise the population, whatever you conquered, whenever you conquered it. At least your brutality is consistent.



Point taken. Sorry.

Okay, have no idea how mentioning indian cities and fairy tales has anything to do with Pakistan. Think the Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans and Libyans can give a detailed analysis of the fate of poorly armed Muslim nations that don't have nuclear weapons. From a Pakistani POV, the only thing that matters is the survival of the unique Pakistani race, our unique culture and way of life. All other things come secondary or mean nothing to us.

 

[Joe Shearer]

The Philippine did break the law. The Philippine invaded into Chinese territory. UNCLOS has no rights of arbitrating of territory. Learn UNCLOS, it's more about EEZs delimitation, it's not universal on sea issues. Territory issues still abide by the force or negotiation, it's not late.

Sure. Have it your way. That is the trouble. You are your own judge, jury and executioner. It works during those periods of Chinese history while you are on the rise.

Neither your nor my fault, Muslims of Moghol empire made the fault. At least, now Indian take Taj as their own pride, but Taj was Muslims' great work.

Shows what you know, and what you don't. No single monument was exclusively Muslim; they used Hindu artisans, Hindu themes, Hindu contractors. Stick to the known.

Okay, have no idea how mentioning indian cities and fairy tales has anything to do with Pakistan. Think the Syrians, Iraqis, Afghans and Libyans can give a detailed analysis of the fate of poorly armed Muslim nations that don't have nuclear weapons. From a Pakistani POV, the only thing that matters is the survival of the unique Pakistani race, our unique culture and way of life. All other things come secondary or mean nothing to us.

Nothing wrong with that. Nobody will dispute that. It is the method. or methods that you used that I deplore.

 

[laphroaig]

Please don't worry. We are not selfish people. Your quota of complaining and envying will be kept in good preservation. You can start from the 12th of July, but please, please do not feel that you have to stop. We will support you in your grief and your humiliation.

It is a carefully-calibrated organ expressing the most extreme views that might be held by sections of Chinese official opinion. This allows them to tell the world what could be the worst case scenario, but without dragging in the official mouthpiece. It is as if India had an adjunct to Sushma Swaraj who behaved and talked like Arnab Goswami (appalling thought, but that is the closest I could get).

I must protest the unnecessary vilification of my brother from another mother.

 

[greenwood]

LOL.

Typical ignorance leading to arrogance. Your unilateral declaration of your national interest does not become law. It remains what it is, your own declaration of what you want to see.

The Philippines did not break the law, they occupied territory claimed by another state. This situation was subsequently covered by the UNCLOS, but at the time, it was an occupation by force with no legal foundation. Subsequently, it is subject to UNCLOS, but that also within the dimensions of the reality prevailing. UNCLOS cannot be used to overturn a long-standing and unique position, as China will have argued in its own favour. But UNCLOS can be used to clarify a situation where there are several claimants and none of them has pre-empted a legal clarification and made things out their own way.

This is what China has done; transcribing from the above,

• claimed territory
• made no attempt to make the claim tangible, except sending out fishing expeditions with fishermen committed to doing
• allowed the Philippines to make a rival claim
• disputed this (through the ROC) after the claim was made
• failed to resolve this through UNCLOS
• put on a brave face when the Filipinos went to arbitration/court but still not raised it with UNCLOS

That is for the PRC to take up, with the Government of India. It chose not to do so; it chose force, so now an appeal to law is a bit late.



Incidentally, China was not a party to the demarcation of the borders. China was suzerain power, not sovereign power. And the sovereign power agreed, while the Chinese delegate disagreed. In effect, China inherited the position accepted by the sovereign power, after conquering the sovereign power by force; there was nothing left to be done, and the reference to the Chinese delegate's disagreement is irrelevant.

"Incidentally, China was not a party to the demarcation of the borders. China was suzerain power, not sovereign power. And the sovereign power agreed, while the Chinese delegate disagreed. In effect, China inherited the position accepted by the sovereign power, after conquering the sovereign power by force; there was nothing left to be done, and the reference to the Chinese delegate's disagreement is irrelevant".


That's relationship of central government and local government. Both central and local government disagreed the Mcmahone line. The major political term you write wrong, the rest contents are all bullshit.

 

[Joe Shearer]

India has unique opportunity to act as a mediator and bridge between the US and China at the moment. Many bridges could be mended if there was a proper attempt at bringing the two main parties to the table.

In principle, you are outlining a very sensible way forward. I believe that in reality, however, it will break down on two counts:

1. China is herself going through a phase of acute insecurity, which has led to a lot of bluff and bluster. Unfortunately, in these situations of mutual aggressive posturing, all it takes is one idiot (one more idiot, considering that some bozo in Taiwan shot off a missile in the general direction of China sometime during the last 48 hours) to start a fire.
2. I am not sure about the maturity and depth of the present Indian leadership. Two years later, if they survive, they might serve. At the moment, their antics make me nervous. They are better at foreign relations than at internal relations, it is true, but not by much.

The rest, as you also will agree, is just a propped up set of nations which are acting as vassals, even though that seems like a harsh view, it is a reality.

I think that each nation should be allowed its independent existence and dignified self-preservation. No comment on your formula.

Through better relations with China, a more meaningful relationship can be built which can bring peace to all nations in the area. There could be a genuine attempt at peace between our nations later with China as a mediator which would not see India as an enemy. There is a natural alliance because three large nations, Russia, China and India could really reshape the way the geopolitical situation in the region and hopefully correct many wrongs in the region and bring the common man some semblance of peace.

India, if it wants to be a diplomatic Juggernaut, needs to move beyond simple calculated risks and foray into deeper waters and try and achieve what is difficult for other nations at the moment. I think India holds a lot of cards at the moment and their aligning themselves so easily for a few exemptions which frankly do not mean much is a folly in my eye. Good diplomacy will do what billions of dollars of military expenditure will not and maybe curb a new arms race that is going to eat all the nations in the region.
I would like your analysis on this line of thought, I may be wrong in my assumptions and would like your opinion sir.

I was writing little fractional notes but realised that was unfair and half-baked.

It seems appropriate to mull over your provocative and insightful post. Please bear with me.

I must protest the unnecessary vilification of my brother from another mother.

I apologise, kowtow and withdraw my grossly mistaken assertions.

"Incidentally, China was not a party to the demarcation of the borders. China was suzerain power, not sovereign power. And the sovereign power agreed, while the Chinese delegate disagreed. In effect, China inherited the position accepted by the sovereign power, after conquering the sovereign power by force; there was nothing left to be done, and the reference to the Chinese delegate's disagreement is irrelevant".


That's relationship of central government and local government. Both central and local government disagreed the Mcmahone line. The major political term you write wrong, the rest contents are all bullshit.

That is not at all the relationship of a central government and a local government. That is the ignorance of a hedge scholar. The sovereign government of Tibet (look up sovereign) agreed readily.

Since you don't even understand the terms concerned, your evaluation is a little flawed. And you are not the best judge of the rest of my contents. As someone else unconnected wrote, I should not use difficult terms in a discussion with ignorant people. He is right, and I am wrong.

 

[greenwood]

In principle, you are outlining a very sensible way forward. I believe that in reality, however, it will break down on two counts:

1. China is herself going through a phase of acute insecurity, which has led to a lot of bluff and bluster. Unfortunately, in these situations of mutual aggressive posturing, all it takes is one idiot (one more idiot, considering that some bozo in Taiwan shot off a missile in the general direction of China sometime during the last 48 hours) to start a fire.
2. I am not sure about the maturity and depth of the present Indian leadership. Two years later, if they survive, they might serve. At the moment, their antics make me nervous. They are better at foreign relations than at internal relations, it is true, but not by much.

I think that each nation should be allowed its independent existence and dignified self-preservation. No comment on your formula.



I was writing little fractional notes but realised that was unfair and half-baked.

It seems appropriate to mull over your provocative and insightful post. Please bear with me.



I apologise, kowtow and withdraw my grossly mistaken assertions.



That is not at all the relationship of a central government and a local government. That is the ignorance of a hedge scholar. The sovereign government of Tibet (look up sovereign) agreed readily.

Since you don't even understand the terms concerned, your evaluation is a little flawed. And you are not the best judge of the rest of my contents. As someone else unconnected wrote, I should not use difficult terms in a discussion with ignorant people. He is right, and I am wrong.

Who the hell give you the confidence and power to define the relationship? Korea, Annam, Myanmar, Ryukyu were suitable to the relationship of soverign government, they all had their own king or emperor and accpeted as vassal kingdom to China.

You really heritate everything from the British. They knew nothing, like to blabla, the famous story, ( red ) Indian live in America.

 

[footmarks]

Brother, NO country on earth can do ANYTHING to our brother THE GREAT CHINA. If anyone is insane enough to attempt any misadventure in the South China sea then you our brother will ALWAYS have Gwadar.

Oh dear, you read like a cupid struck teenage lover.

The fallout of which would have potentially massive benefits for Pakistan in that if China becomes very reliant on Gwadar, then China will HAVE TO ensure that Pakistan becomes an economically and militarily very powerful nation no matter the cost. Even if it means in-cooperating the Pakistani economy to the Chinese one. This would in an instance propel Pakistan into becoming a virtually developed nation like Turkey. Many interesting times ahead if you are a Pakistani.

It works the other way. If a country is heavily reliant on other "less developed" country, it will make sure that the other country remain impoverished and weak, and hence over-reliant on it.

 

[WAJsal]

@Joe Shearer ,@hellfire , GB as a region has always had pleasant relations with China or the present day China especially people close to the GB border. China has never laid claim on GB, or even the Tibetian angle applied in this case makes no sense to me. People of GB, or especially Hunza have been trading with Chinese from a long time ago. Give me some time to dig something up and maybe i can post it later here. People to people contact is quite impressive. Actually take a lot of pride in what we have done for displaced Uighur folks in GB and now they are permanently settled in GB and are happy with their lives while they can go back.
Secondly, it is beyond delusional to think that CPEC will not benefit Pakistan or it's just a Chinese project aimed to help the Chinese. It will be more beneficial to us compared to the Chinese but the Chinese are getting a fair deal out of their investment, all in all it's a good investment.

I believe it will be more beneficial to Balochistan and GB more than any region. GB will see a new era of human development that it has never seen before. Imagine travelling to Kashghar from Islamabad in a friggin bullet train. Better infrastructure will boost the tourism industry to a new level, the numbers are only getting better.
PS: it used to take us 5-6 hours to get to Gilgit from Chilas and now it takes us a smooth drive of 3-4 hours. Life is only getting better.
Please read this piece, would recommend it.
http://www.dawn.com/news/1236159/ch...idor-a-boon-for-the-economy-a-bane-for-locals
Read this quote:

Hopes and doubts
With the CPEC passing through Gilgit-Baltistan, Salman hopes the route will open business opportunities for the region's traders.

Diverting fruit to China will be more profitable, for one, will be more profitable. “We can double our sales and profits if we can sell to China where cherries are very popular," he said.

Cherries grown in Hunza are popular exports to China. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool


Currently, he ships his produce to Dubai through air-cargo. "It would be faster and cheaper if we could send it by road to China via Xinjiang as we can get a one-year border pass to travel within that border," Salman explained.

According to the Asian Development Bank (ADB), Gilgit-Baltistan produces over 100,000 metric tonnes of fresh apricots annually. While there are no official surveys, Zulfiqar Momin, who heads Farm House Pvt Ltd., which exports fresh and dried fruits to the Middle East, estimates that Gilgit-Baltistan produces up to 4,000 tonnes of cherries and up to 20,000 tonnes of apples.

“All fruits grown in Gilgit-Baltistan are organic with no pesticides used,” Momin said.

An apple in Hunza, grown organically. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool


The CPEC, some believe, will also boost tourism in the 73,000 square km region. The region is considered to be a mountaineer’s paradise, since it is home to five of the ‘eight-thousanders’ (peaks above 8,000 metres), as well as more than 50 mountains over 7,000 metres. It is also home to the world’s second highest peak K2 and the Nanga Parbat.

The mighty Nanga Parbat soars high in the first light of the sun. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool


But development consultant Izhar Hunzai, who also belongs to the area, has no such expectations. The CPEC, he feels, is nothing more than a “black hole” as far as the people of the region are concerned.

“The government has not engaged with us; we do not know exactly how much or what Gilgit-Baltistan’s role will be in CPEC or how we will benefit from it,” he said.

While both Pakistan and China will benefit through this region, he feels his people will be left “selling eggs”.

“I fear when the region opens up, it will give short shrift to the locals," he added.

Also read: China’s new silk road: What’s in it for Pakistan?

Land of opportunities
But it does not necessarily have to be this way. According to Hunzai, the region has infinite water resources to tap.

“By building hydro power projects, Pakistan can sell clean energy to China and even use it for itself, the development consultant said. "If Bhutan can sell to India, why can’t we sell to China?” Hunzai poted out that the Chinese already taking the country’s national grid to its border province.

It made little sense to him that the Pakistan government wanted to buy 1,000MW of hydropower from Tajikistan under the Central Asia South Asia (CASA-1000) project and construct an expensive 750km transmission line when the resource was right there in the country’s own backyard.

Attabad Lake in Gojal in Upper Hunza. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool


However, the government is almost ready to revive the Diamer-Bhasha dam, a gravity dam on the Indus river in Gilgit-Baltistan, in the second phase of CPEC. Once completed, it is estimated to generate 4,500MW of electricity, besides serving as a huge water reservoir for the country.

Hunzai also lamented the government’s decision of buying discarded coal powered plants from China and using imported coal to run it. Doing some quick calculations on the back-of-the-envelope, he asked, “Why produce 22 cents per unit electricity from imported fuel and sell it to the people at a subsidised rate of 15 cents? Why not make electricity from hydropower which would cost just 0.02 cents?”

According to the ADB, Gilgit-Baltistan has the potential to produce nearly 50,000MW of energy. Just Bunji Dam, a run-of-the-river project that the ADB has invested in, has the capacity to generate up to 7,100MW electricity when completed.

Naltar lake, 40 kms from Gilgit. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool


The government is not wilfully neglecting the region, countered long-time hydropower advocate Tahir Dhindsa of the Islamabad-based Sustainable Development Policy Institute. Instead, he feels the problem is more about the profits that middlemen make. It is all about the “kickbacks and commissions” that one can earn quickly from “cheap and carbon-spewing coal power plants”, compared to almost none from hydropower projects that can take up to 10 years or more.

Explore: Paris climate summit: An opportunity missed for Pakistan

“The future is renewables as has been reiterated in Paris at the COP21 and Pakistan should seriously be thinking about its future course of action,” he said.

Demographic shift
There is also the fear that the CPEC may lead to widespread displacement of the locals. “Of the 73,000 square kilometres, cultivable land is just 1pc," Hunzai explained. "If that is also swallowed by rich investors from outside, we will become a minority and economically subservient once there will be no farmland or orchards left to earn our livelihood from."

A local shepherd tending to his sheep near Khaplu. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool


He is not the only one. Given the secrecy and confusion surrounding the project, its design and its budgetary allocation, three of Pakistan’s four provinces recently held a well attended All Parties Conference (APC) and vented their anger at the central government for its opaqueness regarding the share of investments for each of the provinces.

“CPEC is not the problem. It has just highlighted the imbalance in provinces with the largest one, Punjab, being seen as favoured specially as far as investments on road infrastructure are concerned and fuelling bitterness among the rest of the three provinces,” rued Vaqar Zakaria, an energy expert heading Hagler Bailley.

Trying to address the concerns of the provinces soon after the APC, federal minister for planning, Ahsan Iqbal, who heads the Planning Commission of Pakistan, said in a television interview that this was not a time for scoring political points by making the project controversial. CPEC, he said, was not a project to benefit a party or a government as was being portrayed by politicians and the media but to the entire country.

A panoramic view of Hunza valley. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool


Of the US $46bn, between $35bn to $38bn were earmarked for the energy sector– of this, $11.6bnwill be invested in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa, $11.5bn in Sindh, $7.1bn in Balochistan and $6.9bn in Punjab.

Beijing has urged Islamabad to resolve the internal differences on the CPEC to create favourable working conditions for the project to roll out smoothly.

The hanging bridge of Hussaini. —Photo by Ghulam Rasool

I think it is beyond delusional to this that CPEC will not benefit Pakistan. I have only touches the social sector of things and how it will transform lives of the locals, think about the economic aspect of things...
https://defence.pk/threads/collection-at-gwadar-exceeds-customs-duty-target.437897/

And how it has transformed our lives as locals...Actually we are still in hardware mode, lots to be done yet. Please read between the lines.

@shimshali , other than better transportation and all...i'll tell you what else it has done for the locals, my father has been able to open an office in Gilgit, Gwadar and Kashghar, and guess how he was able to attract investors? yes CPEC did that. Now the biggest office is in Gilgit, it is not fully functional. Once we get into full-swing we will do a lot just for the city and the locals. This is only one example i am quoting, GB will soon become a hot-spot....We need to develop basic human needs first.

@Gufi ,@That Guy ,@HRK ,@Blue Marlin ,@Nilgiri ,@PARIKRAMA , anyone who would be interested.

PS: our aim should be to follow this model and this example:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...islamists-poverty-pollution-and-10411618.html

 

[PAKISTANFOREVER]

Oh dear, you read like a cupid struck teenage lover.



It works the other way. If a country is heavily reliant on other "less developed" country, it will make sure that the other country remain impoverished and weak, and hence over-reliant on it.

If there was any truth in what you say then China would not have helped Pakistan become a nuclear weapons state with the capability to indigenously produce H-bombs and thermonuclear weaons:

http://isis-online.org/isis-reports...g-nuclear-weapons-time-for-pakistan-to-rever/

Nor would China have invested in at least $46 billion in Pakistan with billions more set to be invested in the coming years/decades.