Eastern CPEC route unfeasible: report

[mr42O]

ISLAMABAD:
By preferring a route that passes through Punjab and Sindh rather than Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan, the federal government is artificially inflating the cost of the China-Pakistan economic corridor, to the point where it may become economically unviable, claims a report studying the matter issued by the Balochistan government.

The report, titled “China Pakistan Economic Corridor: The Route Controversy”, addresses what Quetta feels is Islamabad’s lack of consistency on the matter, and its failure to take into account the needs and desires of all federating units of the country. The matter could get politically inconvenient for the federal government, since Balochistan Chief Minister Abdul Malik Baloch’s National Party is an ally of the ruling Pakistan Muslim League Nawaz.

However, Planning Minister Ahsan Iqbal claims that the report is one-sided and did not take into account the views of what he feels is the main stakeholder in CPEC: the federal government.

The report was prepared by the chief minister’s Policy Reform Unit, headed by economist Kaiser Bengali. It analyses the viability of the three CPEC routes based on three parameters: population density, total area under cultivation along the routes and total production of four major crops. These parameters become the base for determining the cost of land acquisition and displacement of population, the socio economic benefits and the environmental impact.

Read: Game changer: Army chief vows to turn economic corridor into reality

Pakistan has identified three routes for Chinese cargo: the eastern alignment (passing mainly through central Punjab and Sindh), the central route (passing partly through Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, and hitherto unconnected parts of Punjab and Sindh) and the western alignment (passing through the relatively underdeveloped areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan).

The provincial government claimed that “despite denials the route has been changed to pass through central Punjab”, Islamabad is primarily focusing on the eastern corridor.

The districts along the preferred eastern route are the most densely populated, having large swathes of land under cultivation and is the main source of production of four major crops, according to the report. All these factors will increase the construction cost. By comparison, the western route is thinly populated and the land is mainly barren.

The comparison between the three routes implies that the eastern route is economically unviable, claims the report.

By selecting the eastern route, the government is trading off today’s security risks with provincial discord and political instability in the future, the report stated.

However, Iqbal said that the central route was the shortest one. “The eastern alignment part of Peshawar-Karachi motorway serves the major markets, industrial areas and most populated centres of the country,” said Iqbal. He said the CPEC concept is not to create a “container-in, container-out” economy but rather help make the country a regional manufacturing hub.

Read: China-Pakistan Economic Corridor: Lines of development – not lines of divide

The report argues that the pre-existing sections are likely to save time and cost are not tenable, as most sections will have to be widened and re-laid to cater to the volume and load of the traffic.

CPEC trail

The report finds the traces of the CPEC in the mid-2000s when the Planning Commission made a presentation to the then-president Pervez Musharraf and prime minister Shaukat Aziz. It was then called the “Trade, Energy, Transport and Industrial Corridor”. The Musharraf Administration had identified the central route for creating surface transport connectivity between Gwadar and Kashgar in China.

The report also challenged the government’s claim that it will build all the three alignments. “The resources to build all three routes are not available and China would certainly not allocate resources to pander to political disagreements in Pakistan,” it added.

Published in The Express Tribune, July 26th, 2015.

Eastern CPEC route unfeasible: report - The Express Tribune

 

[RazorMC]

What do we expect from a rural, provincial political party like PML-N ?

 

[Fracker]

PS: report concentrate unfeasible approach due to political reason, Which can be easily overcome once it start operating. All Crying bitches can't do anything once it's up and running.

 

[Icarus]

Our people fail to understand that the CPEC is not a single road that will extend from point A to point B, it is a complex network of roads that must interconnect through out the country to improve access to production hubs and major domestic markets most of which lie in Punjab and Sindh.

 

[Dubious]

So it is

what Quetta feels is Islamabad’s lack of consistency on the matter, and its failure to take into account the needs and desires of all federating units of the country.

vs

did not take into account the views of what he feels is the main stakeholder in CPEC: the federal government.

Sometimes I wonder if some people and their mentality has passed the kingdom levels of ancient South Asia!

Shouldnt the views of everyone be taken into account federal is not a king and in a democratic gov EVERYONE is taken into account

It analyses the viability of the three CPEC routes based on three parameters: population density, total area under cultivation along the routes and total production of four major crops. These parameters become the base for determining the cost of land acquisition and displacement of population, the socio economic benefits and the environmental impact.

i think these are valid points and worth discussing!

Crops / fertile ground as well as displacement of population is indeed expensive and messy!

The districts along the preferred eastern route are the most densely populated, having large swathes of land under cultivation and is the main source of production of four major crops, according to the report. All these factors will increase the construction cost. By comparison, the western route is thinly populated and the land is mainly barren.

Apparently Pakistani population is not of interest to whomever is planning...Neither is cost...Some people prob think that money grows on trees

By selecting the eastern route, the government is trading off today’s security risks with provincial discord and political instability in the future, the report stated.

I guess planners are not visionary....Or they dont give a damn about Pakistan's future as long as their pockets are full now and they have something to show for to get next votes and nodding heads

However, Iqbal said that the central route was the shortest one. “The eastern alignment part of Peshawar-Karachi motorway serves the major markets, industrial areas and most populated centres of the country,” said Iqbal. He said the CPEC concept is not to create a “container-in, container-out” economy but rather help make the country a regional manufacturing hub.

However the planners think about their pockets oh wait they dont think at all since money grows on trees they have plenty to waste so Pakistan can sink in further debts and they can announce BUT WE MADE CPEC

“The resources to build all three routes are not available and China would certainly not allocate resources to pander to political disagreements in Pakistan,” it added.

But but...Money grows on trees no?

 

[xyxmt]

What do we expect from a rural, provincial political party like PML-N ?

Who says RAW's Disinformation doesnt work. Its so easy for RAW since everyone hates Punjab, just give them only 5 rupee for disinformation and bingo

 

[Dubious]

Our people fail to understand that the CPEC is not a single road that will extend from point A to point B, it is a complex network of roads that must interconnect through out the country to improve access to production hubs and major domestic markets most of which lie in Punjab and Sindh.

Yes but MAKING a network you require a few things and land is 1 of them...

To gain this set of land you need to move people (oh everyone can adjust leave your homes, land, crops, animals its all good and easy move to a less fertile area and try again), destroy crops (not that we have any food security issues I mean people are dying left and right so what as long as elite are well fed)....BEFORE making a HUGE move one has to take ALL THIS into consideration....and of course many more

I would however understand if the suggested part is say too hilly, that people cant construct but then again the promise was to build all 3 so that part isnt as hilly or difficult as claimed, eh?

 

[Icarus]

Yes but MAKING a network you require a few things and land is 1 of them...

To gain this set of land you need to move people (oh everyone can adjust leave your homes, land, crops, animals its all good and easy move to a less fertile area and try again), destroy crops (not that we have any food security I mean people are dying left and right so what as long as elite are well fed)....BEFORE making a HUGE move one has to take ALL THIS into consideration....and of course many more

I would however understand if the suggested part is say too hilly, that people cant construct but then again the promise was to build all 3 so that part isnt as hilly or difficult as claimed, eh?

Surely even if they decide to construct an 8 lane highway which requires 400 feet of land, and assuming that all of that land is arable, that still represents less than a speck of the arable land in Pakistan and is far from anything that could threaten food security as you claim. Your threat assessment is over inflated and does not take into account the fact that the construction of the road will bring much more benefits for the surrounding land holdings as in the case of motorways.

 

[Dubious]

Surely even if they decide to construct an 8 lane highway which requires 400 feet of land,

I think I read a report that it was a 2 lane highway Dont know shit seems to be flowing in media

and assuming that all of that land is arable, that still represents less than a speck of the arable land in Pakistan and is far from anything that could threaten food security as you claim.

The threat to food security was more on moving the population....You are counting 1 or the other...

If you move the population even if you desire 400 ft with the people moved it will effect more than 400 ft coz they arent going to go to the brink of the road to start their planting...Many crops dont even grow in disturbed areas...and 2ndly, do you think the type of construction that goes on in Pakistan it will be restricted and wont damage more land than necessary?

Just points to ponder....one can easily say ONLY 400 ft but rarely is the case....And I am talking about local farmers as well as commercial ones...Unki tou rozi hai crops....and if say they get moved to infertile land...knowing our politics, no one checkes the land before giving it to the displaced people

Your threat assessment is over inflated and does not take into account the fact that the construction of the road will bring much more benefits for the surrounding land holdings as in the case of motorways.

Question is does a farmer want people coming in and passing by his land? Does a sheep and cattle rancher want such a thing and what about those who transport things do they want to be bugged by such people claiming their land is being spoiled? Heck Kala bagh dam was threatening illogical people but it doesnt mean every's fear is illogical...

ESP if the OTHER route which is ALSO said to be built is more feasible and cheaper (less people to displace and less cultivation) then why not use it?

Also take this into account

By selecting the eastern route, the government is trading off today’s security risks with provincial discord and political instability in the future, the report stated.

Pakistan has identified three routes for Chinese cargo: the eastern alignment (passing mainly through central Punjab and Sindh), the central route (passing partly through Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, and hitherto unconnected parts of Punjab and Sindh) and the western alignment (passing through the relatively underdeveloped areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan).

For me all 3 are needed but the need of the hour is prob the underdeveloped areas and unconnected parts...WHY? COZ CPEC IS SUPPOSED to be for PAKISTANIs benefiting them AS WELL

and central and western routes are the ones which will connect the unconnected and that is a benefit than just making the already connected dense and crowd up.....

However the already connected prob have more industries so I understand they would want the route to pass through them...however that is not benefiting PAKISTANIS as a whole but as usual ONLY a certain creed!!

 

[Icarus]

I think I read a report that it was a 2 lane highway Dont know shit seems to be flowing in media

"Surely even if they decide"

I hope the meaning of these words is not lost on you. In case it is, let me make it very clear "It Was An Assumption For The Most Extreme Scenario In The Given Circumstances".

The threat to food security was more on moving the population....You are counting 1 or the other...

If you move the population even if you desire 400 ft with the people moved it will effect more than 400 ft coz they arent going to go to the brink of the road to start their planting...Many crops dont even grow in disturbed areas...and 2ndly, do you think the type of construction that goes on in Pakistan it will be restricted and wont damage more land than necessary?

Just points to ponder....one can easily say ONLY 400 ft but rarely is the case....And I am talking about local farmers as well as commercial ones...Unki tou rozi hai crops....and if say they get moved to infertile land...knowing our politics, no one checkes the land before giving it to the displaced people

The people were duly compensated in all construction projects so far, I fail to see why it should be a problem this time and anyone who agrees to sell their lands do so through their own free accord, I am sure you must be aware of the Pindi-Lahore Motorway that had to miss Kalar Kahar City because the people there were not ready to sell their land.

Question is does a farmer want people coming in and passing by his land? Does a sheep and cattle rancher want such a thing and what about those who transport things do they want to be bugged by such people claiming their land is being spoiled? Heck Kala bagh dam was threatening illogical people but it doesnt mean every's fear is illogical...

ESP if the OTHER route which is ALSO said to be built is more feasible and cheaper (less people to displace and less cultivation) then why not use it?

Do you not understand that the whole argument here is that the question is not of 'Other routes' and feasible routes, its about obtaining as great connectivity as possible!

 

[Dubious]

Apart from worrying about the people I also backed the fact that we are not a rich country then why always go for the MOST expensive solution?

the federal government is artificially inflating the cost of the China-Pakistan economic corridor, to the point where it may become economically unviable

Now even if the highway will be close to the commercial places and would be too expensive to use then how is that beneficial?

And what about this?

Islamabad’s lack of consistency on the matter, and its failure to take into account the needs and desires of all federating units of the country.

I hope the meaning of these words is not lost on you. In case it is, let me make it very clear "It Was An Assumption For The Most Extreme Scenario In The Given Circumstances".

I hope that was the case ....Coz that report was presented based on the making of the roads by the army ....it was 2 lanes not 8

The people were duly compensated in all construction projects so far,

Paying money is not equal to fertile land....Paying money is also not the solution to uproot populations ESP if there is an alternative!

Fertile land and where crops are established ....should not be disturbed UNLESS you provide with an EQUALLY fertile land....How much research has been put on finding the fertility of land in Pakistan? and putting in more money to look do such research will only inflate the price of CPEC....Mind you money doesnt grow on trees and research documents and reports are not produced from thin air

Do you not understand that the whole argument here is that the question is not of 'Other routes' and feasible routes, its about obtaining as great connectivity as possible!

I think you read between the lines...Let me explain AGAIN:

the eastern alignment (passing mainly through central Punjab and Sindh),

These are far better connected than the other 2 options so if you are talking about AS GREAT CONNECTIVITY AS POSSIBLE it would mean to utilize the other 2 options:

the central route (passing partly through Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, and hitherto unconnected parts of Punjab and Sindh) and the western alignment (passing through the relatively underdeveloped areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan).

 

[Icarus]

I hope that was the case ....Coz that report was presented based on the making of the roads by the army ....it was 2 lanes not 8

Yes it is.

Paying money is not equal to fertile land....Paying money is also not the solution to uproot populations ESP if there is an alternative!

Fertile land and where crops are established ....should not be disturbed UNLESS you provide with an EQUALLY fertile land....How much research has been put on finding the fertility of land in Pakistan? and putting in more money to look do such research will only inflate the price of CPEC....Mind you money doesnt grow on trees and research documents and reports are not produced from thin air

Like I said, that is not for us to decide, if the people accept compensation and willingly forfeit their land to the government then it is hardly a matter of concern. Much more pressing land issues already exist such as turning Kala Shah Kaku into an education city using absolutely wonderful and productive land.

I think you read between the lines...Let me explain AGAIN:

Please take a moment to clearly explain your line of argument.

 

[Dubious]

Please take a moment to clearly explain your line of argument.

Sure

You said:

obtaining as great connectivity as possible!

So how is putting in more connections into a network that exists

the eastern alignment (passing mainly through central Punjab and Sindh)

and ignoring the underdeveloped and the areas with less connectivity

the central route (passing partly through Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa, and hitherto unconnected parts of Punjab and Sindh) and the western alignment (passing through the relatively underdeveloped areas of Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Balochistan).

= obtaining as great as connectivity as possible?

 

[Icarus]

Sure

You said:


So how is putting in more connections into a network that exists


and ignoring the underdeveloped and the areas with less connectivity


= obtaining as great as connectivity as possible?

Thank you, now here is what I am saying. I did not say that any route should be bypassed to begin with, in fact, I declined to acknowledge that such a thing as 'route' exists when there are no plans for one as such and the project centers around spreading a web of roads all over the country. So no, these areas will not be left out and neither will any other areas, hopefully.

 

[Dubious]

Thank you, now here is what I am saying. I did not say that any route should be bypassed to begin with, in fact, I declined to acknowledge that such a thing as 'route' exists when there are no plans for one as such and the project centers around spreading a web of roads all over the country. So no, these areas will not be left out and neither will any other areas, hopefully.

Ok ...Lets hope what you are saying is what is happening