Pakistan's Blue Economy: Vast Offshore Resources in Exclusive Economic Zone

[Syed1.]

There is a "China town" in every major international city in North America or Europe.... IDK how people got the idea that Chinese settling in Pak means China ruling over Pakistan.


220million Pakistanis vs 500,000 Chinese


Pakistanis should not be scared of the Chinese, instead they should be scared of the jahil people that reside amongst them and contribute zilch towards the country.

 

[RiazHaq]

There is a "China town" in every major international city in North America or Europe.... IDK how people got the idea that Chinese settling in Pak means China ruling over Pakistan.


220million Pakistanis vs 500,000 Chinese


Pakistanis should not be scared of the Chinese, instead they should be scared of the jahil people that reside amongst them and contribute zilch towards the country.

Mid-1960s America saw a phenomenon called the "British Invasion". Anecdotal evidence suggests similar phenomenon, albeit on a smaller scale, is occurring in China with about 100,000 Pakistanis arriving there in recent years. While the growing presence of the Chinese in Pakistan gets a lot of press, there has been relatively little coverage of the movement of people in the other direction---from Pakistan to China. Jalil Shaikh, a Pakistani-American tech executive in Silicon Valley, has observed this phenomenon during his frequent visits to Jiangsu province in China. Jalil is often welcomed as "iron brother" by the people he meets during his stays in China.

https://www.riazhaq.com/2019/01/pakistani-mini-invasion-of-china.html

 

[khanmubashir]

We leased the port, not che city. Know before you post. It says the “expected” influx of that much Chinese for businesses by 2022. But now a days we see what 1000 chinese in gawadar ? So how are we going to have 500000 Chinsese in 4 years when we currently have only 1000+ ? That project is a fuckn Housing society designed to handle 500000 people including Chinese businessmen.

No major housit project can succeed without interest and participation from locals

 

[niaz]

Pakistan should increase the maritime sovereignty to 500 nautical miles deep Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ)

Honorable Khan Sahib

Regret to point out that no country can unilaterally extend its territorial waters or exclusive economic zone simply because other countries will not accept it.

Law applicable on high seas has evolved over the centuries and after many discussions among the sovereign nations. Unites Nation has done sterling working by bringing 150 nations together in 1982 and getting them to accept it.

“United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS)

This convention resolved many important issues related to rights over the oceans such as:

- Setting territorial sea boundaries 12 miles offshore

- Setting exclusive economic zones up to 200 miles offshore

- Setting rules for extending continental shelf rights up to 350 miles offshore

- Creating the International Seabed Authority

- Creating other conflict-resolution mechanisms (e.g., the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf)

In 2014 and the international Code for ships operating in the Polar waters (Polar Code) was also agreed.

According to this Convention over the territorial sea, foreign aircraft do not have automatic flyover rights, alien fishing or other resource extraction rights do not exist, and there is no right to conduct marine scientific research without the coastal State’s permission. Innocent passage for merchant ships is allowed.

“The concept of ‘innocent passage’ through the territorial sea is derived from Articles 18 and 19 of the 1982 Convention and it means the continuous and expeditious transit, through territorial waters or internal waters, en route to or from the high seas, in a manner which does not prejudice the peace, good order, and security of the coastal State”

“Passage is not innocent when a vessel makes use of the territorial sea of the Coastal States for the purpose of doing any act prejudicial to the security, to the public policy or to the fiscal interest of that State.”32 The coastal State has the right to prevent passage which is not innocent

Convention ( Article 55), “Gives coastal States the right to establish an exclusive economic zone which may extend upon to 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the territorial sea is measured (Article 57). The establishment of this zone gives the coastal State considerable sovereign rights with respect to the living and non-living resources, and “with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from water, currents, and winds”

http://www.un.org/depts/los/nippon/...llows_pages/fellows_papers/adi_0809_syria.pdf

 

[VCheng]

Mid-1960s America saw a phenomenon called the "British Invasion".

LOL!

This invasion referred to the wave of pop and rock and roll bands gaining popularity among US teens, that is all. The connection to the present topic is non-existent.

On topic, Pakistan's coast does have a lot of untapped economic potential indeed.

 

[GeraltofRivia]

So much discussion above is about the 500,000 Chinese invasion. Looking at it from business minded angle, if there are 500,000 Chinese eventually living in Gwadar, it mean the Gwadar project has achieved a grand success. To attract this number of Chinese to Gwadar, it should offer a great package of amble business/work opportunity, excellent infrastructure, enjoyable lifestyle that are competitive to major cities in China, which is pretty high standard and is improving quickly. A large portion of the migrants will likely be from high wealth high skill stratum, who will bring economical activities to local community. Also a sizable Chinese population in Gwadar will see as an endorsement to other East/SE Asian people, eg Korean, Japanese, Philippiness, Vietnamese. They will more likely to be attracted to Gwadar and feel comfortable in doing business in the area. Gwadar will become a attractive, modern, vibrant, international trade city.

Being optimistic as much as I am to the future of Gwadar and Pakistan, having 500,000 Chinese living in Gwadar seems to be a bit stretch to me. Except business and professional people, nowadays Chinese are growing inward looking for its elevated living standard and work opportunities. It even started to attract people from overseas Chinese population from what I can see in the last few years and trend can only grow stronger.

At the end of day, any Chinese or foreign nationals that like to reside in Pakistan are on Pakistani sovereign land and subject to Pakistani law and local custom. Everything is still under full control of Pakistani authorities.

Mid-1960s America saw a phenomenon called the "British Invasion". Anecdotal evidence suggests similar phenomenon, albeit on a smaller scale, is occurring in China with about 100,000 Pakistanis arriving there in recent years. While the growing presence of the Chinese in Pakistan gets a lot of press, there has been relatively little coverage of the movement of people in the other direction---from Pakistan to China. Jalil Shaikh, a Pakistani-American tech executive in Silicon Valley, has observed this phenomenon during his frequent visits to Jiangsu province in China. Jalil is often welcomed as "iron brother" by the people he meets during his stays in China.

https://www.riazhaq.com/2019/01/pakistani-mini-invasion-of-china.html

That’s very good point. I have seen greater number of vblog of Pakistani in China, which is very welcomed.

For Pakistan exports businesses achieving great success in the growing Chinese consumer market, it is essential to build good personal connection and presence locally. Doing business in China is as much a commercial engagement as a relationship one.

 

[khansaheeb]

Honorable Khan Sahib

Regret to point out that no country can unilaterally extend its territorial waters or exclusive economic zone simply because other countries will not accept it.

Law applicable on high seas has evolved over the centuries and after many discussions among the sovereign nations. Unites Nation has done sterling working by bringing 150 nations together in 1982 and getting them to accept it.

“United Nations Law of the Sea Convention (UNCLOS)

This convention resolved many important issues related to rights over the oceans such as:

- Setting territorial sea boundaries 12 miles offshore

- Setting exclusive economic zones up to 200 miles offshore

- Setting rules for extending continental shelf rights up to 350 miles offshore

- Creating the International Seabed Authority

- Creating other conflict-resolution mechanisms (e.g., the UN Commission on the Limits of the Continental Shelf)

In 2014 and the international Code for ships operating in the Polar waters (Polar Code) was also agreed.

According to this Convention over the territorial sea, foreign aircraft do not have automatic flyover rights, alien fishing or other resource extraction rights do not exist, and there is no right to conduct marine scientific research without the coastal State’s permission. Innocent passage for merchant ships is allowed.

“The concept of ‘innocent passage’ through the territorial sea is derived from Articles 18 and 19 of the 1982 Convention and it means the continuous and expeditious transit, through territorial waters or internal waters, en route to or from the high seas, in a manner which does not prejudice the peace, good order, and security of the coastal State”

“Passage is not innocent when a vessel makes use of the territorial sea of the Coastal States for the purpose of doing any act prejudicial to the security, to the public policy or to the fiscal interest of that State.”32 The coastal State has the right to prevent passage which is not innocent

Convention ( Article 55), “Gives coastal States the right to establish an exclusive economic zone which may extend upon to 200 nautical miles from the baselines from which the territorial sea is measured (Article 57). The establishment of this zone gives the coastal State considerable sovereign rights with respect to the living and non-living resources, and “with regard to other activities for the economic exploitation and exploration of the zone, such as the production of energy from water, currents, and winds”

http://www.un.org/depts/los/nippon/...llows_pages/fellows_papers/adi_0809_syria.pdf

Well Iceland did:-

The International Court of Justice considered a dispute between Iceland and the United Kingdom regarding a proposed extension by Iceland of its fisheries jurisdiction. Iceland failed to appear or to plead its objection in this case. In 1948, Iceland’s Parliament passed a law directing the Ministry of Fisheries to issue regulations establishing explicitly bounded conservation zones for fishing. A 4-mile zone was subsequently drawn in 1952. In 1958 this zone was extended to 12 miles, establishing a new 12-mile fishery limit around Iceland which was reserved for Icelandic fisherman. The United Kingdom did not accept the validity of the new regulations, and its fisherman continued to fish inside the 12-mile limit. After the 1960 Second United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, England and Iceland began a series of negotiations to resolve their differences, and in 1961 reached a settlement in an Exchange of Notes agreeing to a 12-mile fishery zone around Iceland. In 1971, Iceland decided to extend its fisheries jurisdiction to a 50-mile zone, and maintained that the 1961 Exchange of Notes was no longer in effect. These actions form the core of this dispute. The Court held that the 1972 Icelandic Regulations constituted a unilateral extension of the exclusive fishing rights of Iceland to 50 nautical miles. Iceland could not unilaterally exclude the United Kingdom from areas between the fishery limits agreed to in the 1961 Exchange of Notes. The Court decided that Iceland and the United Kingdom had to undertake negotiations in good faith to find an equitable solution to their differences concerning their respective fishery rights. The parties were to consider that Iceland was entitled to a preferential share in the distribution of fishing resources due to the special dependence of its people upon coastal fisheries, as well as the principle that each state must pay due regard to the interests of the other in the conservation and equitable exploitation of these resources. The court noted two concepts that had been accepted as part of customary law: (1) the idea of a fishery zone in which each state may claim exclusive fishery jurisdiction independently of its territorial sea, and that a fishery zone up to a 12-mile limit from the baseline is generally accepted; and (2) the concept of preferential rights of fishing in adjacent waters in favour of the coastal state which has special dependence on its coastal fisheries.

https://www.ecolex.org/details/cour...iceland-5ae5ef80-fd49-4539-aebd-3fec992edd6d/

 

[niaz]

Well Iceland did:-

The International Court of Justice considered a dispute between Iceland and the United Kingdom regarding a proposed extension by Iceland of its fisheries jurisdiction. Iceland failed to appear or to plead its objection in this case. In 1948, Iceland’s Parliament passed a law directing the Ministry of Fisheries to issue regulations establishing explicitly bounded conservation zones for fishing. A 4-mile zone was subsequently drawn in 1952. In 1958 this zone was extended to 12 miles, establishing a new 12-mile fishery limit around Iceland which was reserved for Icelandic fisherman. The United Kingdom did not accept the validity of the new regulations, and its fisherman continued to fish inside the 12-mile limit. After the 1960 Second United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea, England and Iceland began a series of negotiations to resolve their differences, and in 1961 reached a settlement in an Exchange of Notes agreeing to a 12-mile fishery zone around Iceland. In 1971, Iceland decided to extend its fisheries jurisdiction to a 50-mile zone, and maintained that the 1961 Exchange of Notes was no longer in effect. These actions form the core of this dispute. The Court held that the 1972 Icelandic Regulations constituted a unilateral extension of the exclusive fishing rights of Iceland to 50 nautical miles. Iceland could not unilaterally exclude the United Kingdom from areas between the fishery limits agreed to in the 1961 Exchange of Notes. The Court decided that Iceland and the United Kingdom had to undertake negotiations in good faith to find an equitable solution to their differences concerning their respective fishery rights. The parties were to consider that Iceland was entitled to a preferential share in the distribution of fishing resources due to the special dependence of its people upon coastal fisheries, as well as the principle that each state must pay due regard to the interests of the other in the conservation and equitable exploitation of these resources. The court noted two concepts that had been accepted as part of customary law: (1) the idea of a fishery zone in which each state may claim exclusive fishery jurisdiction independently of its territorial sea, and that a fishery zone up to a 12-mile limit from the baseline is generally accepted; and (2) the concept of preferential rights of fishing in adjacent waters in favour of the coastal state which has special dependence on its coastal fisheries.

https://www.ecolex.org/details/cour...iceland-5ae5ef80-fd49-4539-aebd-3fec992edd6d/

Indeed Iceland did but it resulted in a long-running dispute as you have yourself mentioned and in what was known as 'Cod wars' where UK Navy vessels were deployed to protect UK vessels fishing in the self-declared exclusive zone which Iceland could not do a lot about. That was in back in 1971.

For the record, Iceland signed the UNCLOS in June 1985 and the same was ratified by the Iceland parliament in July 1994.

 

[Sugarcane]

So much discussion above is about the 500,000 Chinese invasion. Looking at it from business minded angle, if there are 500,000 Chinese eventually living in Gwadar, it mean the Gwadar project has achieved a grand success. To attract this number of Chinese to Gwadar, it should offer a great package of amble business/work opportunity, excellent infrastructure, enjoyable lifestyle that are competitive to major cities in China, which is pretty high standard and is improving quickly. A large portion of the migrants will likely be from high wealth high skill stratum, who will bring economical activities to local community. Also a sizable Chinese population in Gwadar will see as an endorsement to other East/SE Asian people, eg Korean, Japanese, Philippiness, Vietnamese. They will more likely to be attracted to Gwadar and feel comfortable in doing business in the area. Gwadar will become a attractive, modern, vibrant, international trade city.

Being optimistic as much as I am to the future of Gwadar and Pakistan, having 500,000 Chinese living in Gwadar seems to be a bit stretch to me. Except business and professional people, nowadays Chinese are growing inward looking for its elevated living standard and work opportunities. It even started to attract people from overseas Chinese population from what I can see in the last few years and trend can only grow stronger.

At the end of day, any Chinese or foreign nationals that like to reside in Pakistan are on Pakistani sovereign land and subject to Pakistani law and local custom. Everything is still under full control of Pakistani authorities.


That’s very good point. I have seen greater number of vblog of Pakistani in China, which is very welcomed.

For Pakistan exports businesses achieving great success in the growing Chinese consumer market, it is essential to build good personal connection and presence locally. Doing business in China is as much a commercial engagement as a relationship one.

Not all people have capability of looking at picture, these fears of Chinese will occupy Pakistan is instilled by Anti-CPEC brigade and we don't have shortage of emotional fools.

 

[Baby Leone]

lol sorry but we cant even make a good beach leave aside using the whole sea under us

 

[Chakar The Great]

What you mentioned was perfectly right but its not what constitution give permissions for just the mob kind of mentality ..... if you go to court complaining about the below mentioned points you may win the case but in 20-25 years , so people avoid doing it and find new place to live ....... you missed BPO professionals ....

But as Indian I can bet one thing we will never allow foreigners to settle in India in such a large numbers irrespective of their intentions ... the scars of imperialism are still green Britishers came in small numbers and sucked the blood for 200 years ... so straight forward no to foreigners

Wait what??? Who with sane mentality would like to settle in India???? Who are you kidding/???