What's new

US Aims to Revive Projects in Central Asia, Asia-Pacific to Counter OBOR

Go feed your toiletless hungry people first.

I see you live in Canada, and from the quoted comment I assume you have developed the habit of living out on state welfare for breathing.

But India is not a welfare state, nor we have the luxury or intent to be one in near future. All we can do is give them jobs, and able them to make a 'respectable' living out of their own hard work. For that, we need to make products and have an economical operational trading route to our potential markets. So investing in Chabahar and similar connectivity projects with south east Asia will enable us to put our workforce to work.
 
.
I see you live in Canada, and from the quoted comment I assume you have developed the habit of living out on state welfare for breathing.

But India is not a welfare state, nor we have the luxury or intent to be one in near future. All we can do is give them jobs, and able them to make a 'respectable' living out of their own hard work. For that, we need to make products and have an economical operational trading route to our potential markets. So investing in Chabahar and similar connectivity projects with south east Asia will enable us to put our workforce to work.
I do not live on welfare.
Yes I live in Canada.

However I'm a Pakistani citizen.
 
.
Under the Radar: Are Sri Lanka’s ports the next Great Game for China, India and Japan?
lankaport-800x500_c.jpg

0 0 46 0
by Jeremy Luedi , April 17, 2017


Increased international interest in the Indian Ocean comes at a convenient time for Sri Lanka, as the country continues to recoup after the end of its decades-long civil war which ended in 2009. The island nation is being courted (and courting in turn) by various major powers, each seeking a stake in developing Sri Lanka’s strategic location midway between the Middle East and the Straits of Malacca. While opportunities present themselves, all this attention also comes with its own set of complications.

International actors, notably India and Japan have become increasingly concerned about the level of Chinese investment and influence in Sri Lanka. This has in turn set off a flurry of activity among all parties to secure Sri Lanka’s favours. On April 12th, Prime Ministers Abe and Wickremesinghe met to discuss furthering bilateral cooperation. This is PM Wickremesinghe’s second visit to Japan since coming to power in 2015, and his ninth overall. The meeting resulted in $410 million in Japanese loans for Sri Lankan infrastructure projects, as well as $9.2 million in grant aid for the development of the Trincomalee port.

Other recent developments include Japan’s decision to appoint a special representative to coordinate development in Sri Lanka, as well as a code sharing agreement between Sri Lankan Airlines and JAL which will help facilitate six new routes between Japan and South Asia, aiding trade and tourism ties between Colombo and Tokyo.

Japan looks to boost ties, counter China
Speaking during the meeting, PM Abe stated that “without a free and open Indian Ocean, there cannot be real prosperity in the region. This is why it is essential for Sri Lanka to achieve sustainable growth as a hub and develop ports that are open to everyone.” These comments came in the wake of Sri Lanka’s assurance of its commitment to free navigation and the authority of the United Nations Convention of the Sea (UNCLOS). These statements bolster Japan’s own focus on these issues, as well as mark out China, which has refused to abide by UNCLOS arbitration over the contested South China Sea.

This also ties into greater Japanese concerns about China’s increasing presence in the Indian Ocean, the main conduit for vital energy shipments from the Middle East to Japan. These fears had been heightened by the previous Sri Lankan administration’s close ties to China. In his latest visit, PM Wickremesinghe is pitching Sri Lanka as a trade and finance hub, halfway between Doha and Singapore. To this end, Wickremesinghe wants “Japan to use Sri Lanka as a hub for trade. We expect to deepen our existing FTA with India through the Economic and Technology Cooperation Agreement, expect to sign a FTA with Singapore and another with China. We also hope to talk to Japan, Indonesia and other ASEAN countries with regards to FTAs.”

Sri Lanka’s efforts to seal an FTA with China were on display a week prior to PM Wickremesinghe’s Japan visit, as China hastily sent high ranking officials to balance the Prime Minister’s visit to Tokyo. Chinese officials pledged to speed up negotiations on a bilateral FTA, as well as praised Sri Lanka as a key partner in China’s 21st Century Maritime Silk Road efforts. Due to the aforementioned plan, Sri Lanka is benefitting from increased Chinese attention, as well as from Abe’s ‘Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy’, and India’s ‘Look East’ policy.

Vying for military influence in Sri Lanka
This competition can be seen in Sri Lanka’s recent joint training mission with India, as well as an ongoing joint hydrographic survey to update maritime navigation charts of the increasingly busy nearby shipping lanes. Moreover, Sri Lanka’s effort to acquire 12 JF-17 fighter aircraft built in Pakistan in collaboration with China saw India quickly offer its new Tejas fighter, still in its trial period, as an alternative. China also provided Sri Lanka with a $11 million loan to buy an offshore patrol vessel in 2016, a purchase yet to be completed. In return, Japan has offered to provide two patrol vessels.

Efforts to vye for Sri Lankan military and geopolitical influence sees Japan, India and the US worried that China will use its foothold in the country to establish a military base, and /or use its majority owned port facilities for military purposes. These concerns have in turn led PM Wickremesinghe to state that “we want to ensure that we develop all our ports, and all these ports are used for commercial activity, transparent activity, and will not be available to anyone for any military activity.”

While this stance appears to be a victory for China hawks fearing Beijing’s growing reach, the reality is more complex. Firstly, if Sri Lanka actually implements such a policy it cannot make exceptions for the likes of the US without drawing the ire of other parties, notably China, especially given the economic clout which Beijing wields in the country. Consequently, even if no one can use Sri Lankan facilities, it means that China has still benefitted by preventing access for potential rivals. As the regional newcomer, China has less to lose from such an arrangement than existing Indian Ocean powers such as the US and India, and to a lesser extent Japan. This effectively makes Sri Lanka a demilitarized zone, in turn negating the regional superiority enjoyed by the US and India.

Mounting unrest over mega project terms
This competition has also led each of these countries to invest in various Sri Lankan port facilities, with China focusing on Hambantota, India and Japan on Trincomalee, and the US in Jaffna. Former president Mahinda Rajapaksa even went so far as to publically state that Sri Lanka plans to divvy up control of these ports accordingly. With economic growth the lowest in three years at 4.4% in 2016, Sri Lanka sorely needs foreign investment to boost its growth, yet this very scramble for Sri Lankan assets has created domestic problems of its own.

Sri Lankans have protested what they consider to be unfair concessions by their government to foreign partners, especially with regards to infrastructure projects. One of these flashpoints are plans for majority Indian control over a jointly operated oil storage facility in Trincomalee. Another sticking point are efforts to extend Colombo Port by eight to ten miles, making it the largest in the Indian Ocean, at the expense of surrounding land. The main focus of domestic anger however are Chinese plans for the extensive expansion of the Hambantota port and 15,000 acre Southern Industrial Zone special economic zone.

The $1.4 billion project is the single largest foreign direct investment in Sri Lanka, with an additional $13 billion expected from subsequent real estate development in the area. Part port, part new planned financial city, the project promises 83,000 jobs, yet has been delayed by violent protests and disagreements about share allocation. Specifically, the new development spares existing developed land and nature reserves, leaving only the surrounding villages and farms to bear the burden. This has incited the local population to action, who in turn are calling the endeavour a blatant land grab.

The planned Hambantota port city and prospective world financial hub

The project is also stoking unrest in the country as a whole, as the terms initially agreed to by the Sri Lankan government are widely seen as undermining national sovereignty. Specifically, the plan was to provide China with an 80% share in the industrial zone and port, as well as control of the project’s land for the next 99 years in exchange for $1.2 billion in debt relief. The fact that a Chinese-backed, Chinese built project is being given majority Chinese ownership and a 99 year lease in return for a reduction in Chinese debt shows how Beijing has cornered all aspects of this deal; its obvious lopsidedness in turn angering many Sri Lankans.

Sri Lanka has a substantial foreign debt problem, of which some $8 billion is owed to China. It is interesting to note that these billions of dollars in debt accumulated under the previous Rajapaksa administration of 2005-2015, as China pumped mountains of money into a country shunned by Western investors due to the ongoing civil war and the government’s human rights record. Indeed, it is reported that Chinese support was critical in the government’s victory over the Tamil Tigers, with some $1 billion in arms flowing from Beijing to Colombo during the civil war.

The project was even an election issue in 2015, with Wickremesinghe’s campaign pledging to scrap the Chinese-funded project, only to approve in its first month in office. This flip flop and the terms of the deal have fuelled claims of neo-colonialism (the 99 year lease ironically harks back to the UK’s deal regarding Hong Kong’s New Territories that expired in 1997). Local politician DK Chanaka argues that “when you give away such a vast area of land you can’t stop the area becoming a Chinese colony.”

Public indignation has in turn forced yet another flip flop from the Sri Lankan government, with Colombo now seeking a 40% stake in the venture, a demand that has not met with Chinese approval, stalling the project, but otherwise not overly impacting Sri Lankan-Chinese relations. That said, the ongoing controversy surrounding the Hambantota project brings into question other mega projects and undermines business confidence, something that the government’s repeated U-turns on the issue have not helped. In any case Chinese interest in Sri Lanka remains strong, and if Colombo plays its hand well, it can benefit from playing off competing foreign powers to extract better terms for itself and its citizens going forward.

http://globalriskinsights.com/2017/04/radar-sri-lanka-next-great-game/
 
.
Japan pitches for Chabahar port
Suhasini Haidar
NEW DELHI, MAY 08, 2017 00:00 IST
UPDATED: MAY 08, 2017 04:37 IST

  • SHARE ARTICLE
  • PRINT
  • A A A
07-CITY-suhasinGJC1N44963jpgjpg

Kenji Hiramatsu

Indo-Japan civil nuclear cooperation agreement is still on track: Kenji Hiramatsu
Japan is keen on collaborating with India on projects in Asia and Africa as a counter to China’s Belt and Road initiative (B&RI), Tokyo’s Ambassador to New Delhi said here, indicating Japan’s nod for Australia’s bid to join a quadrilateral for military exercises with India and the U.S..

In an exclusive interview to The Hindu , Ambassador Kenji Hiramatsu revealed that the Japanese government was in talks with Tehran and New Delhi for a role in the Chabahar port project along with India.

“We are interested in connectivity projects and to make sure that this region is free and open and an important port like Chabahar is good for regional connectivity ... I can’t tell when it will materialise, but we have expressed our interest,” Mr. Hiramatsu said. India, Iran and Afghanistan signed a trilateral agreement in May 2016 to build trade and transit routes from the strategically located Iranian port into Afghanistan and Central Asia, a $20-billion investment for India, and will be seen as a rival to the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor’s Gwadar port.

Aked if Japan’s plans for connectivity in the region were being challenged by China’s 60-nation BRI, the Ambassador contended that Japan and India could offer similar projects to countries here, based on their common “principles.”

Prosperity, stability


“We are also providing rather generous financing to these countries as well, to enhance prosperity and stability. We hope many of these countries will also choose our projects, some of which we can do in collaboration with India,” he said, adding that Japan shared values of “democracy, freedom of navigation” with India.

The Ambassador’s statement points to the growing discussions on strategic convergence between India and other “Indo-Pacific” powers for whom China’s recent economic moves like the BRI as well as an aggressive maritime stance in the South China Sea have been a matter of concern.

Backing Australia’s request to join the trilateral “Malabar” naval exercises between India, Japan and Australia, Ambassador Hiramatsu said,

“We cherish the cooperation with Australia, and we have just had a Japan-Australia-India strategic dialogue and a political dialogue between these three countries, and we will have to see how it develops.”

Speaking about other areas of bilateral strategic cooperation, the Japanese Ambassador said the Indo-Japan civil nuclear cooperation agreement is still on track, and has been presented for ratification in the Japanese Parliament .

http://www.thehindu.com/todays-paper/tp-national/japan-pitches-for-chabahar-port/article18405900.ece

So why would Japans ambassador then express interest in CPEC? if they were really interested in "countering China" then they would want nothing to do with the OBOR initiative. More likely that Japan just represents multiple interests, notice how the ambassador when asked if its to counter China, never specifically says so.

India and Japan launch Asian and Africa growth corridor plan

AAG.jpg

The Asian Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC) vision. ANDUALEM SISAY | NATION MEDIA GROUP
ANDUALEM SISAY in Ahmedabad, India Thursday, May 25 2017 at 13:37 comment

India and Japan on Wednesday launched the Asian Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC), a vision document, which aims to link the two continents through multiple sectors.

“The idea is that India and Japan, with other willing partners, would explore joint initiatives in skills, health infrastructure, manufacturing and connectivity,” Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, said at the 52nd African Development Bank (AfDB) meeting his country is hosting.

The document, produced jointly by Indian and Japan’s research institutions, is a result of the discussions between Mr Modi and his Japanese counterpart Shinzō Abe.

Mr Modi visited Tokyo last year, during which the two leaders stressed the need for a partnership for sustainable and innovative development for Asia and Africa.

“In our joint declaration, we mentioned an Asia Africa Growth Corridor and proposed further conversations with our brothers and sisters from Africa,” said Mr Modi.

Development roadmap

The AAGC document is produced by the Research and Information System for Developing Countries (RIS) of India, the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) and the Eastern Asia (ERIA) of Indonesia and the Institute of Developing Economies Japan External Trade organisation (IDE-JETRO).

“AAGC is growth and development roadmap for Africa with back and forth linkages with Asia,” said, Ms Anita Prakash, the Director General of the Policy Development at ERIA, during the launch of the 30-page document.

“It is more than economic connectivity; it is about social connectivity having people at the centre,” she said, indicating that the full study, with projects and impacts on people at local level, may be ready by late 2018.

Commenting on the difference of the envisioned connectivity between Africa and Asia with China’s Belt Road initiative, Prof Sachin Chaturvedi, the Director General of RIS, said AAGC was more of all-inclusive, beyond infrastructure and recalled his prime minister’s objections to the China plan.

Core concerns

China hosted the Belt and Road Forum in mid-May, bringing together the leaders from around 35 countries.

“No country can accept a project that ignores its core concerns on sovereignty and territorial integrity,” the India Foreign ministry said on May 13 on why Delhi refused to be part of China’s plan.

It is not yet clear if AAGC was a response to China’s One Belt one Road plan and which offer Africa would take.

http://www.africareview.com/busines...rridor-plan/979184-3941554-15dklve/index.html

JETRO to push Japan-India business collaboration in Africa
BY ATUL RANJAN
NNA / KYODO


ARTICLE HISTORY


NEW DELHI – The Japan External Trade Organization plans to promote partnerships between Japanese and Indian companies looking to expand their presence in Africa by leveraging their mutual expertise, JETRO officials said.

The move is aimed at reducing market risks by combining the experience and knowledge of Indian firms in the African market with the technical and funding capabilities of Japanese companies to tap growth opportunities on the continent, the officials said.

Reiko Furuya, director of JETRO’s New Delhi office, said it is organizing a conference in March to discuss collaboration in Africa, among other topics.

Kenji Hiramatsu, Japan’s ambassador to India, said at the Vibrant Gujarat Global Summit held recently that both countries are looking to jointly explore opportunities in Africa.

“Indians have been doing business in Africa for a long time and have the knowledge and experience of operating in the market. We would like to combine this knowledge with the Japanese technologies and financing capabilities . . . this will be a win-win scenario,” the envoy said.

According to experts, the move is in line with a joint statement issued by Japan and India in November last year that “underscored the importance of India-Japan dialogue to promote cooperation and collaboration in Africa, with the objective to synergize their efforts and explore specific joint projects.”

Izuru Kobayashi, chief operating officer of the Economic Research Institute for ASEAN and East Asia based in Jakarta, said the Japanese and Indian governments are planning to start consulting on selecting specific projects in Africa as per the November statement.

“Japanese firms are good at production and quality management while Indian firms have strong local presence and connections, which are complementary,” he said.

“Japan has been increasing official development assistance loans under the Quality Infrastructure Initiative, and India also extends a substantial amount of lines of credit to African countries,” he said.

“The partnership may create opportunities for both Indian and Japanese firms to develop bankable projects in Africa.”

According to the Federation of Indian Chambers of Commerce and Industry, collective gross domestic product in the African continent is expected to reach $3.6 trillion by 2020, up from $2.1 trillion in 2011.

Published reports show that Indian foreign direct investment in Africa stood at almost $12.5 billion in 2014 alone, while Japan’s cumulative FDI in the continent was $10.5 billion as of that year.

http://www.japantimes.co.jp/news/20...a-business-collaboration-africa/#.WSotRWjyuUk

So now you are combining AAGC and IPEC?

US urges Sri Lanka to join Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor (IPEC)
Mar 01, 2016 10:15 AM GMT+0530 | 0 Comment(s)

ECONOMYNEXT - The United States has urged Sri Lanka to get on boards its Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor initiative which aims to weave together an economic block weaving together South Asia, East Asia and Australia with the US.

"The United States encouraged Sri Lankan participation in its Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor initiative to increase economic connectivity among South Asian countries and with Southeast Asia…"

"As fellow democracies, our governments agree that we have a shared interest in working together to foster greater stability, security, prosperity, and a rules-based order for the Indo-Pacific region and around the world,"

Unlike the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) which recognized the value of free trade early and is becoming increasingly prosperous with high levels of economic freedoms available to citizens, South Asians citizens are poor with shackled trade freedoms.

The US is already linking ASEAN nations with the Americas through the Trans Pacific Partnership.

Sri Lanka has expressed interest in joining the TPP. The TPP is virtually a done deal and Sri Lanka will only have to worry about giving more economic freedoms to its own citizens.

An Indo-Pacific Partnership could ideally create a trading block covering the ASEAN and South Asian Association of Regional Co-operation (SAARC).

But the SAARC itself is decades behind ASEAN, and is still mired in regional politics and old-style economic nationalism which is entrenched in the region, with policy ideology generally favouring vested business interests rather than ordinary people and the poor.

Only Sri Lanka has given visa free access to India and Maldives to encourage people to people contact.

There is no active forum to take forward talks between South and South East Asia.

But the joint statement suggested that IPEC was in line with existing efforts to create regional linkages with Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC) involving Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand, Bhutan and Nepal.

President Barrack Obama during a visit to India in 2015, also pushed the IPEC initiative, which is initially not aiming at reducing duties but is more about creating physical linkages that paves the way for more trade and regional economic links.

"Complementing India’s Enhanced Look East Policy, the United States envisions an Indo-Pacific Economic Corridor that can help bridge South and Southeast Asia – where the Indian and Pacific Oceans converge and where trade has thrived for centuries," the US Commerce Department said last September.

"Fostering these types of connections – physical infrastructure, regulatory trade architecture, and human and digital connectivity – will create linkages all the way from Central Asia to Southeast Asia, via South Asia.

"A more integrated South Asia where markets, economies, and people connect is more likely to thrive and prosper.
"The United States is firmly committed to the security and prosperity of the Asian continent, and better connectivity, energy security, and stronger trade and investment links can help realize that objective. "

http://www.economynext.com/US_urges...Pacific_Economic_Corridor_(IPEC)-3-4381-.html

First of all, that was a different administration to the current one and therefore the US now has different strategies and goals in mind. Secondly, Obama states that Sri Lanka should join the project to join trade from Southeast Asia, not to abandon Chinas port, and certainly not pressuring private enterprises to avoid it.

Seeing as how Trump is quite chummy with Xi Jinping, and how the US and US companies has officially endorsed OBOR, I doubt they will now start to push against the project in favour of another one thats not built and which the US is also not a member to.
 
.
Back
Top Bottom