What's new

Li Keqiang hails Pakistan as China's 'iron brother'

Access to 250 JF-17 jets stationed in China, along with logistical and political support in case Pakistan go to war with China, regardless of context. And that is just documented, we do not know what else is agreed in the background. India are encircled.

Again very much speculative yet not unique at all. Pakistan itself received fighters/military resources from IRAN and many middle east countries, free Oil and many many other goodies way more than what China has ever given during war with India.

And there are no 250 JF-17 in China. If there are kindly share a source.
 
.
Access to 250 JF-17 jets stationed in China, along with logistical and political support in case Pakistan go to war with China, regardless of context. And that is just documented, we do not know what else is agreed in the background. India are encircled.

Did you guys get logistic and political(diplomatic support) from china in 65,71 or in kargil wars..?Drones continue to strike pakistan months after the kayanis warning to shoot next drone-If china intended,It could stop the drone strikes by diplomatic pressure alone...Yet..

And btw Chinese have not inducted a single FC-1,let alone station 250 battle ready..:partay:
 
.
Sir then how is this relationship any different from any other business dealing.

The Chinese government is in business to safeguard Chinese interests, not Pakistani. My point was that we can't blame them if Pakistan fails to uphold its end of the bargain. Even a sympathetically inclined friend can only give so much leeway.

I mean if this is the case then whats so special about it.

As I explained elsewhere, expansion of the Chinese sphere of influence into South Asia and beyond coincides with Pakistan's own national interests because it provides a counter to US and, especially, Indian influence. In short, there is a huge confluence of national interests.

Look at Russia e.g. They were ready to go to a Nuclear war with US for India (when the 7th fleet arrived in BOB in 71). Can you give an example where China has done something similar for Pakistan.

The USSR intervened because of their own agenda against the US. China's involvement into any Pakistani conflict would almost certainly drag the US/Russia into the game and, until recently, China was not in a position of strength to challenge any of them.
 
.
Did you guys get logistic and political(diplomatic support) from china in 65,71 or in kargil wars..?Drones continue to strike pakistan months after the kayanis warning to shoot next drone-If china intended,It could stop the drone strikes by diplomatic pressure alone...Yet..

And btw Chinese have not inducted a single FC-1,let alone station 250 battle ready..:partay:

A poster with beautiful avatar name "Human First" should lean about the topic first.

Right now your arguments are getting down to high school ground, fight.


peace
 
.
A poster with beautiful avatar name "Human First" should lean about the topic first.

Right now your arguments are getting down to high school ground, fight.


peace

This whole "iron brother" stuff is kinda high school level...:yay:..Dont you think so...?
 
.
i admire that your english is well,but i always read the post by a dictionary. i'm a student in university how can you use the english so well.:)
 
.
This whole "iron brother" stuff is kinda high school level...:yay:..Dont you think so...?


Check out my post on first page. I was the first one to pick on the "iron brother" thingy.

But this should be blamed on poor translation.

The same term can also be translated as mutual relation that is stronger "stronger than steel".

As I said, many of the Indian posters do not realize this forum is frequented by many "silent" Pakistanis. So you all need to make sure you present the best of the best of India can offer to Pakistan.

If we have good relations with China, Indian posters should be happy.

And in fact

I expect Indian posters to come here and wish that Pakistan and India relationship should be as friendly as well.

Not the other way around that Indian posters just wan to drag everything in this thread down to $hit.

I hope you understand.

I could tell that you are different from others when you picked up your avatar name. "Human first", wow. That's a sign of great intellect. Hope you use it reduce hatred.

thank you.
 
. .
As I said, many of the Indian posters do not realize this forum is frequented by many "silent" Pakistanis. So you all need to make sure you present the best of the best of India can offer to Pakistan.

If we have good relations with China, Indian posters should be happy.

And in fact

I expect Indian posters to come here and wish that Pakistan and India relationship should be as friendly as well.

Not the other way around that Indian posters just wan to drag everything in this thread down to $hit.

I hope you understand.

I respect and admire your attitude..I will surely try to contribute positively in this forum..
 
.
Friends:

Below is a piece, that should be read in the light of the Editorial published in the Global Times (also posted above) - you will note the forum has anticipated this diplomatic juncture, I hope our readers will continue to be critical and not fearful to the point that they respond like Ostriches --- We have been consistent. even brutal in our effort to bring to the attention of our "sleeping: members, the importance of relations with China and that it must move from hyperbole to reality, and that this is primarily on the shoulders of Pakistan -- we have blown our relationship with the US, and though it was not entirely our fault, the net result is that our once strong ally is now the ally of our adversary and our relationship with the US will, at least not in the foreseeable future be anything other than one of greater frustration, fear and the ratcheting up hostile sentiment and action -- Will we make the same mistakes and allow our relationship with China to fail in the same way?? What must we do to avoid this possibility and secure our relationship from the machinations of those who not only mean us harm but are determined that Pakistan be further isolated and ultimately be broken in to smaller "independent" pieces :


Analysis: Beyond the Himalayan hyperbole
By Zarrar Khuhro
Published: May 24, 2013


KARACHI:

For all the sound, fury and Hollywood hype, the War on Terror was not a true strategic shift for the United States. I say ‘was’ because, for all real intents and purposes, the war is over for the United States.

Yes, the drones will continue to fly, terrorists will be monitored, the militarisation and intrusiveness of America’s domestic security services will increase and the odd lone wolf attack will be carried out. But on a strategic level, the US is now out of the fight. It’s another matter entirely that the length and breadth of the Muslim world will be faced with a metastasised al Qaeda and its allies for some time to come, but that’s not the topic of this piece. So long as the Middle-East remains balkanised and fragmented, a process aided by the Iraq invasion’s aftermath and now the Syrian civil war, the possibility of a regional hegemon arising remains a distant one. This coupled with a projected decrease in the US’ reliance on Mideast energy, means that this area will not be a prime strategic concern for the US in years to come. Al Qaeda essentially did not achieve its strategic goal of fomenting rebellion in the Muslim world, although one must admit that the war it inspired did succeed in delaying what is the true strategic realignment of the US: The Asian Pivot.

Starting from South Korea and Japan, and stretching all the way down to Vietnam, Myanmar and finally India, an attempt is being made to create a ‘shield’ of nations that can, if push comes to shove, contain China both diplomatically and physically. As a counter, China has its string of pearls, a series of ‘friendly’ naval bases – meant primarily for commercial purposes – that stretch around the Indian Ocean and culminate at Gwadar. The other importance of Gwadar to the Chinese is that it will be, ultimately, the jumping-off point for the economic corridor that Chinese PM Keqiang spoke of during his visit. This, along with Pakistan’s utility as a hedge against India and possibly the US, is the core of the strategic partnership. And make no mistake, it is a strategic partnership in the true sense of the term and is based on cold, hard geopolitics. To analyse it purely, or even primarily, through an economic lens is myopic and disregards the way the Chinese tend to do business. This is not a sugar-daddy in the mold of the US, which will keep the dollar spigot open. For Pakistan on the other hand, it is a relation of necessity. We have few friends in the region, and simply cannot afford to let the Chinese partnership sour, especially when we consider that the long-term strategic interests of Pakistan and the US are fundamentally divergent.

It is true, of course, that out of this necessity we have struck unequal bargains with the Chinese, but fairness is not a guiding principle in foreign affairs. For all the Himalayan hyperbole – which is meant largely for public consumption – It is not incumbent for the Chinese to look out for Pakistan’s best interests. That is, or should be, our job. But it is also another home truth that the junior partner usually ends up getting the short end of the stick, especially when that partner has nowhere else to go and is negotiating from a position of weakness, if not desperation. While the general public can view it as an ‘all-weather friendship’, one hopes that our strategic planners are looking at this relationship with their eyes wide open and with their rose-tinted glasses off.

A fundamental miscalculation made in the Pakistan-US relation was an assumption that Pakistan was permanently indispensible to the US. This was never the case, and at best our value to the US was situational and temporary. In the future, this value will degrade even further, making the China nexus even more important. Here, at least, geography itself dictates that Pakistan’s strategic importance will not fall below a certain minimum. Still, it is important to realise that Pakistan is only one aspect, and by no means the most important, of China’s game plan.

So how do we increase our strategic value to China, keeping in view that while China may be the cornerstone of our grand strategy, we are a sideshow in theirs? The first answer is also the most obvious: by putting our house in order. All the talk of an economic corridor will remain just that unless we are able to secure the route that corridor must take; a route that currently stretches across terrain plagued by insurgency and chaos. Achieving this will not only allow Gwadar to reach its potential but also create the kind of credible state that can, finally, negotiate from a position of relative strength.
 
.
So India get $100 billion dollars trade we get the title of iron brothers:yay:
 
.
So how do we increase our strategic value to China, keeping in view that while China may be the cornerstone of our grand strategy, we are a sideshow in theirs?

There is nothing that Pakistan can do to change this reality. It is just a fact of life.

What it can only try and do is reduce it's dependence on this relationship to an extent where the national survival depends on it.

It never had to be this way and it can possibly still change.

The first answer is also the most obvious: by putting our house in order. All the talk of an economic corridor will remain just that unless we are able to secure the route that corridor must take; a route that currently stretches across terrain plagued by insurgency and chaos. Achieving this will not only allow Gwadar to reach its potential but also create the kind of credible state that can, finally, negotiate from a position of relative strength.

Again the relative strength can only come when all eggs are not in one basket.

And that means a fundamental change in the foreign policy (and the domestic policy that has been subservient to it) and all that it entails.

The Chinese government is in business to safeguard Chinese interests, not Pakistani. My point was that we can't blame them if Pakistan fails to uphold its end of the bargain. Even a sympathetically inclined friend can only give so much leeway.

Good that you realize this.

Only you could have realized it a bit earlier in the EU textile case.
 
.
So India get $100 billion dollars trade we get the title of iron brothers:yay:


This is not the fault of China, it is the fault of Pakistani politicians, more than any other, it's the politicians that are to blame for this - Just look at the history of this topic on this forum, you will see that we have saying that Pakistani officials are not serious about the relationship with China because they simply refuse to focus on the economic relationship, refuse to trade

@Develepereo has said that it intellectual dishonesty to say that the US$ 70 billion in trade between India and China is something we should emulate or seek to compete with -- what he and others, fail to understand is that what that volume of trade buys the Indian and the Chinese is a stake in each other - whereas what the Pakistani politicians and bureaucrats want is hand outs which they can route to their friends and families.

Instead of competing with the Indians to trade in as many goods and products that are exported to China, Pakistanis are being told that wringing of hands is as much as they can expect - it's shameless/

The Chinese Premier has articulated that the Pakistan China relationship "still" has potential - if the importance of this word is not taken seriously, Pakistan will end up further isolated - the resolve, the commitment to be a good friend is reflected in the use of the word "still", as is the sense that time is running out.
 
.
I notice you didn't -- or couldn't -- defend the intellectually dishonest claims in the propaganda piece itself.

It's easy to cut and paste. If you believe the claims, then defend them and refute our response.

Why should we blame the Chinese when it's the Pakistani government which has failed to provide security to investors?

Why should we not look at the causes -- and sponsors -- of instability in Baluchistan which is the primary reason for declining Chinese investments in Pakistan?

Why is it that a 70-30 trade imbalance in Pak-China trade and a "colonial" trade basket is bad for Pakistan, but a similar scenario is good for India?

It is not.

We are quite concerned about the trade imbalance. And yes, it is as tough selling manufactured goods or electronics to China as coal to Newcastle.

We are trying to open their IT services and pharma markets where we have some advantage.
 
.
So it's a three way tango between India, Pakistan and China and it surely seems China's playing us both India and Pakistan for suckers and balancing and counter balancing both of us. Just like what the US did...hope one day we wake up to reality and stop becoming pawns on someone else's chessboard for a few tidbits.
 
.

Pakistan Defence Latest Posts

Pakistan Affairs Latest Posts

Back
Top Bottom