Jacob Martin
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2015
- Messages
- 1,453
- Reaction score
- -8
- Country
- Location
This is just how the Chinese operate with their foreign investments, the contracts go to their state-owned companies and they bring in their own technicians to work on the projects.
In the case of CPEC there simply isnt Pakistani firms capable of constructing the higher efficient Chinese power plants, or the equipment to drill deep underground. They do assign their own technicians to oversee a team of Pakistani engineers, and one of the purposes of the Chinese techs is to train and assist the Pakistani engineers in the design and construction of these projects. Many of the projects also have the Chinese 'sub-contracting' to Pakistani firms anyway, the Chinese usually just maintain control on the engineering and design side of the projects.
Projects that can be independently handled by Pakistani companies such as the road projects and buildings are awarded to Pakistani firms.
Any other claims are just wild speculation because the simple fact is that a lot of information regarding CPEC is withheld by government officials, so its ridiculous to make these kind of articles in the absence of information.
Obviously there will be some sub-contracting to Pakistani firms but I cannot find such data anywhere. Why is it so important to keep it a secret?
As for your point about the way Chinese invest overseas, you have to remember that they are not very old at the game. And the problems faced by Chinese infrastructure problems from ASEAN to Africa to Sri Lanka are many. These projects have massive cost over-runs, zero local participation, often give negative risk-adjusted returns and in the absence of a master plan do not result in any flow of externalities.
http://thediplomat.com/2015/05/the-trouble-with-chinas-infrastructure-plans-in-asean/
https://www.google.co.in/amp/s/amp.ft.com/content/b1d9177c-7650-11e6-bf48-b372cdb1043a
The Chinese want security on their investments and this is just how they operate, CPEC is after all a series of loans and not charity. Besides that, it doesnt matter becasue the benefit gained from these projects is worth it:
The power grid is becoming balanced, railways are being revamped across the country, a major fibre optic project, Lahore Mass transit system, and of course the construction and revamping of many highways across the country.
Yes there may be a debt trap if the economy suddenly stagnates and doesn't grow, but as long as it does (and it will), then it will be enough to offset the debt.
I agree that the gains made in power supply, transportation and telecommunication are appreciable. It is no one's case that it is not so.
Having said that, you mentioned the main issue, which is whether or not the required externalities will be developed. Take the example of Sri Lanka.
In Sri Lanka, after the Hambantota port and adjoining infrastructure built by the Chinese hemorrhaged so much money that now they have had to lease it out to the Chinese itself as the government has literally defaulted on loan payments. The port was supposed to be a rival to Singapore, and yet could never take off. High debt servicing burden, lack of clear master plan, having no complementary development of the surrounding area, all these ensured that a port project on even an established trade route failed.
So while you are right in the sense that if the proper externalities accrue then the project will be a success, but the risk is enormous to say the least.
Development of the area surrounding Gwadar will be the key. A port, warehouses and and overland transportation network will not justify the cost of CPEC and the project would give negative risk-adjusted returns.
http://thediplomat.com/2016/11/china-and-sri-lanka-between-a-dream-and-a-nightmare/
It used to be good and you can see for yourself if you read articles from several years back, although they had criticism they were more balanced and usually proposed solutions or ideas at the end. Compare that with what they write now, and its clear that at some point they decided to completely switch their theme and writing style.
Another 'coincidence' is that those older articles were completely absent of Indians, and now almost every article on Dawn is flooded with them. They are clearly pandering to a certain type of audience, and they are a business after all.
I can understand your anguish at journalism that is not outcome-based and does not give fixes. I too was young not that long ago. But as you grow older, you will realize that theoretical frameworks are as vital as practical solutions. Western countries often get large projects right because they have already debated and discussed the theoretical framework to death.
But yes, it is very curious as to why so many Indians read it. It cannot be just for journalistic excellence, because Indians themselves are not the most discerning readers. So I agree it is a bit fishy.
Yes, and in the desperation for CPEC to fail, some facts are misrepresented and wild leaps in logic are made in the absence of important facts.
I hope you are not referring to me as I have only an academic interest in the subject. Economics is fascinating.