PDA

View Full Version : Pakistan Asks China to Build Naval Base in Nation



xinhui
22 May 11,, 20:43
A few concepts need to spell out -- "build" vs operate vs ownership vs control vs lease as those are loaded words


Pakistan Asks China to Build Naval Base in Nation
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
Published: 22 May 2011 10:46
Pakistan Asks China to Build Naval Base in Nation - Defense News (http://www.defensenews.com/story.php?i=6585771&c=ASI&s=TOP)

ISLAMABAD - Pakistan wants China to build a naval base at a deep-sea port in southwestern Baluchistan province, its defense minister said May 22, while also inferring that Washington was a fair-weather friend.
Links


Ahmad Mukhtar, who accompanied Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani during a recent visit to China, said the request was made during the trip, when Pakistan thanked Beijing for constructing Gwader Port, on the Arabian Sea.
Related Topics

Americas
Asia & Pacific Rim
Naval Warfare

"However, we would be more grateful to the Chinese government if a naval base was being constructed at the site of Gwader for Pakistan," Mukhtar said in a statement.

The deep-sea port was around 75 percent financed by China, which Pakistan has been trying to draw in as a strategic partner, especially since the discovery and U.S. killing on May 2 of Osama bin Laden north of Islamabad.

The commando raid rattled U.S.-Pakistan relations, with American politicians angered at how the al-Qaida leader had managed to conceal that he was living barely two hours from the Pakistani capital.

Gilani and his Chinese counterpart Wen Jiabao have both made a point of lauding mutual ties, just as Pakistan finds itself under pressure about whether its security services knew where bin Laden was.

"China is an all-weather friend and the closest ally of Pakistan, and it could be judged from the fact that in whichever sectors Pakistan requested assistance during PM's recent visit to China, they immediately agreed with Pakistan," the defense minister's statement said.

India, however, has voiced "serious concern" about defense ties between China and Pakistan and said it would need to bolster its own military capabilities in response.

New Delhi's comments follow reports that China plans to accelerate supply of 50 new JF-17 Thunder multi-role combat jets to Pakistan.

Pakistan also last week opened a nuclear power plant in central Punjab province with Chinese help and said Beijing had been contracted to construct two more reactors.

xinhui
22 May 11,, 22:59
Ft's write up.


22 May 2011 6:00pm?

Islamabad splurges on defence hardware

By Farhan Bokhari and James Lamont in Islamabad

Pakistan's economy is close to its weakest in the country's 64-year history. Annual economic growth has slumped to little more than 2.4 per cent, the fiscal deficit is yawning and support from the International Monetary Fund is an essential crutch.

Regardless of the floundering economy, the shopping list of its powerful military grows and grows.

Although a long-time ally of the US, Pakistan increasingly views China as a supplier of choice.

Yusuf Raza Gilani, Pakistan's prime minister, returned at the weekend from a four-day visit to Beijing with the promise of 50 fighter jets, worth about $1bn, and undertakings to develop his country's navy.

These, above power plants, dams and nuclear assistance, were the trophies of a visit intended to reassure Islamabad of its chief regional ally in the wake of the humiliation of the US raid on Osama bin Laden – the darkest moment for Pakistan's army since the loss of East Pakistan in 1971.

China has over the past two years cemented a relationship with Pakistan's air force over the supply of JF-17 aircraft and the offer of J-10 stealth fighters.

Moreover, Abbas Raza, the Karachi-based head of Pakistan's navy, is determined to extend Pakistan's strategic partnership with Beijing from the skies to the Arabian Sea.

Pakistan's defence ministry officials are negotiating the purchase of six new submarines. Delivery is expected over a decade. If agreed, the supply of submarines, worth as much as $3bn, would be the largest defence purchase between the two neighbours.

Admiral Raza explains that Pakistan is opening "a doorway for our Chinese friends" to broaden their presence in the Indian Ocean.

The attraction for Beijing is proximity to energy resources in the Gulf.

Western diplomats in Islamabad say China is quietly consolidating its partnership with Pakistan, but on commercial terms rather than unconditional assistance. "In the past decade, the Chinese have shown a growing interest in the region. The Chinese have worked quietly with Pakistan to gradually build up their presence," says one western ambassador in Islamabad.

Some regard the Chinese engagement as a test-bed for Chinese military exports and not, as yet, a threat to neighbouring countries, such as India. They say China's support for Pakistan may delay what threatens to become an inner crumbling of the country's institutions and economy. They also expect China to project its navy into the Indian Ocean, regardless of Pakistan's allegiance.

China has financed the deep-sea port at Gwadar in western Pakistan, near Iran and close to the straits of Hormuz at the eastern end of the Gulf. It has also sold four naval frigates and accompanying helicopters to Pakistan for $750m.

Han Xiao Hu, the senior captain who led Chinese vessels in an exercise off Karachi this year, defends co-operation as wanting to "promote peace".

"The Chinese are new to this region and we welcome their presence," said one Pakistani official. "China's growing presence serves to reinforce China's capacity and interests well beyond its shores, and Pakistan, of course, is very keen to see the Chinese here."

For Pakistan, a country with parlous public finances already forced to hold back on a planned purchase of three German submarines, China offers a cheaper option and long-term credit.

"China has come a long way in acquisition and mastering of technology. Besides, in the current economic situation [of a global economic slowdown], quite a few western countries may well be willing to sell technology to the Chinese for money," says Syed Pervez Shahid, a retired lieutenant general and former senior Pakistani military commander.

Others are less certain that China's military support is guaranteed. Disquiet over the killing of the al-Qaeda leader has put the relationship between the US and Pakistan militaries under enormous pressure.

Military assistance – which funds arms purchases – is likely to come under scrutiny from the Obama administration and Congress. Likewise, swelling military orders at a time when the country is suffering crippling power shortages might provoke domestic questions about the army's reluctance to embrace the austerity forced upon most of the country's 180m people.

Additional reporting by Kathrin Hille in Beijing

Dreadnought
22 May 11,, 23:14
Something tells me that Pakistan in fearing a cease to US aid. Sounds good to me let the Chinese pour cash into that crooked ass country and listen to their bullshit.

notorious_eagle
23 May 11,, 00:12
I agree, the US should cut off all aid to Pakistan. I cant believe that Pakistan sold itself this cheap, for a meagre $1.5 billion aid commitment the US holds an iron grip on Pakistan's political system. Heck, only $300 million was actually disbursed out of the $1.5 billion commitment. But i have my doubt if the US will cut off the aid, its the only thing that enables them to keep this hold on Pakistan's leaders. I honestly dont know what our incompetent leaders are smoking, they need to wake up and smell the reality.

The Chinese are providing Pakistan with some serious military hardware and are pouring in billions in investments in our infrastructure. Looks all nice and dandy, but the Chinese never hand out this much cash without asking something in return. This is definitely a scary scenario.

Parihaka
23 May 11,, 00:16
This is definitely a scary scenario.

It is to a certain extent. Obviously the question is, what does China get from the deal....

Dreadnought
23 May 11,, 02:28
I agree, the US should cut off all aid to Pakistan. I cant believe that Pakistan sold itself this cheap, for a meagre $1.5 billion aid commitment the US holds an iron grip on Pakistan's political system. Heck, only $300 million was actually disbursed out of the $1.5 billion commitment. But i have my doubt if the US will cut off the aid, its the only thing that enables them to keep this hold on Pakistan's leaders. I honestly dont know what our incompetent leaders are smoking, they need to wake up and smell the reality.

The Chinese are providing Pakistan with some serious military hardware and are pouring in billions in investments in our infrastructure. Looks all nice and dandy, but the Chinese never hand out this much cash without asking something in return. This is definitely a scary scenario.

The hold that you mention. Would that happen to be on what groups operate,train and are funded? If that is included into your "hold" scenaro then you might want to look at it as a way military operations dont escalate. I mean do you really think the rest of world is not going to hold Pakistan responsible for what the country breeds?

The actions of the past few days should clearly tell you that they cannot even control the monsters they know full well exist under their cover.

xinhui
23 May 11,, 02:36
American gives aid, Chinese offers investment.

The Chinese is seeing the mighty energy dollars in Pakistan – it is home the world’s 5th largest coal reserve in addition to the south point of the CAS refinery hub. If pushed, China can offload its middle east oil import in Gwadar, rail it to Xinjiang and to be refined there.

One of the developing story that is often ignored by the “how many jets, how many missiles” types – China is goaling to be the regional player in refinery. Imagine Japan’s oil imports are refined by the PRC. Due to shortage of land, Japan’s largest refinery is the Negishi Yokahama Refinery which ranked 30th in term of size, way down in the list.
China, on the other hand, has been building refining capacity left and right.



Surge of Chinese Refining Capacity Investment in 2010 - GLG News (http://www.glgroup.com/News/Surge-of-Chinese-Refining-Capacity-Investment-in-2010-51728.html?cb=1)

3E China Refining Capacity Survey 2010-2011 has shown that primary refining capacity (distillation) in China is expected to increase by an impressive 11.7 percent for 2010, making a big surge of the national refining capacity expansion campaign launched since 2008. Adding more sour crude oil processing and secondary refining capacity has become a major focus of investment by major Chinese refiners.


China's refining capacity may rise 50%, Sinopec says (http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/bizchina/2010-05/25/content_9890521.htm)

PetroChina to Pay $2.2 Billion for Singapore Refining (Update1)

PetroChina to Pay $2.2 Billion for Singapore Refining (Update1) - Bloomberg (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=conewsstory&refer=conews&tkr=SPCJF:US&sid=a3ORjy3xK_I4)


Construction of China-Russia refinery to start in H2 - Xinhua | Reuters (http://uk.reuters.com/article/2011/05/22/china-russia-refinery-idUKL3E7GM03620110522)

May 22 (Reuters) - The construction of a $5 billion China-Russia crude oil refinery in the northern port city of Tianjin will begin in the second half of this year, paving the way for its operations by 2015, the official Xinhua news agency said on Sunday.

Dreadnought
23 May 11,, 02:37
Tell you whats going to be interesting is when Pakistan learns about how China feels about religion such as the Uighurs. Bet that will be one interesting conversation and then perhaps we will see.

You will have a persistant and well practiced religious country dealing with those that view religions as a threat to power. Interesting to see what they will choose to recognize and what they will not.

xinhui
23 May 11,, 02:39
China invests billions in Afghanistan's copper mine, Pakistani coal is less of a risk.


China invest in Thar Coal field
Email
Written by ePakistanNews on Jan-29-11 2:18am
From: epakistannews.com

China invest in Thar Coal field - Pakistan - Zimbio (http://www.zimbio.com/Pakistan/articles/SnWb-G9AMM5/China+invest+Thar+Coal+field)







http://economicpakistan.wordpress.com/2008/01/03/hydroelectric-power-development/

Pakistan has vast reserves of coal. But there is very little energy produced by burning coal. China has now agreed to invest about $600 million for setting up an integrated coal mining-***-power project in Sindh. The project will produce 180 million tons of coal per year, which is sufficient to fuel the proposed 405 MW power plant. Pakistan is currently world’s seventh largest coal-producing country, with coal reserves of more than 185 billion tons (second in the world after U.S.A.’s 247 billion tons). Almost all (99 percent) of Pakistan’s coal reserves are found in the province of Sindh. Pakistan’s largest coal field is Thar coal field which is spread over an area of 9100 square kilometers, and contains 175 billion tons of coal. So far this coal field has not been developed but efforts are underway.

In addition to the coal project, China has agreed to build several other power plants in Pakistan to help the South Asian nation deal with its worsening electricity crisis. When completed over the next several years, these plants, including Nandipur (425 MW, Thermal), Guddu(800 MW, Thermal) and Neelam-Jhelum(1000 MW, Hydro), Chashma (1200 MW, Nuclear) will add more than 3000 MW of power generating capacity for the energy-hungry country. Pakistan is currently facing a deficit of 4,000 to 5,000 megawatts, resulting in extensive load-shedding (rolling blackouts) of several hours a day.

China has already installed a 325-megawatt nuclear power plant (C1) at Chashma and is currently working on another (C2) of the same capacity that is expected to be online by 2010. The agreements for C3 and C4 have also been signed. The United States has objected to China supplying C3 and C4 on the grounds that any Pak-China nuclear cooperation would require consensus approval by the NSG, of which China is now a member, for any exception to the guidelines. The US is applying double standards since it supported and got approval for such an exception from NSG for its own nuclear deal with India.

xinhui
23 May 11,, 02:44
Tell you whats going to be interesting is when Pakistan learns about how China feels about religion such as the Uighurs. Bet that will be one interesting conversation and then perhaps we will see.

You will have a persistant and well practiced religious country dealing with those that view religions as a threat to power. Interesting to see what they will choose to recognize and what they will not.

Actually, Pakistan has been "helpful" in cracking down Uighurs operate there, much more helpful compare to cracking down "other groups"



East Turkestan: Pakistan Uyghurs in Hiding

http://www.unpo.org/article/10951

Two prominent members of the exiled Turkic-speaking Uyghur community in Pakistan , many of whom oppose Chinese rule in their homeland, are on the run from the authorities following police raids on their homes.


notorious_eagle,

There ya go, this is China is getting in return.

Dreadnought
23 May 11,, 02:50
Actually, Pakistan has been "helpful" in cracking down Uighurs operate there, much more helpful compare to cracking down "other groups".


Guess your right Xinhui you would know better then many. Thanks for making that point.

xinhui
23 May 11,, 02:55
notorious_eagle,

The way I look at it, if the Sino Pakistan relationship goes south, Pakistan still has infrastructure left -- the dam and power stations are still there. Giving aid to political parties, those billions will be gone before I finish typing up this WAB post.


I agree, the US should cut off all aid to Pakistan. I cant believe that Pakistan sold itself this cheap, for a meagre $1.5 billion aid commitment the US holds an iron grip on Pakistan's political system. Heck, only $300 million was actually disbursed out of the $1.5 billion commitment. But i have my doubt if the US will cut off the aid, its the only thing that enables them to keep this hold on Pakistan's leaders. I honestly dont know what our incompetent leaders are smoking, they need to wake up and smell the reality.

The Chinese are providing Pakistan with some serious military hardware and are pouring in billions in investments in our infrastructure. Looks all nice and dandy, but the Chinese never hand out this much cash without asking something in return. This is definitely a scary scenario.

notorious_eagle
23 May 11,, 14:22
xinhui

Sir i think you misunderstood my intentions, i am all for good relations between China and Pakistan. I have seen some of the infrastructure work the Chinese have done up in Azad Kashmir and Balochistan, its absolutely magnificent and simply top class. I was referring to the serious military hardware that China is providing Pakistan. Its public now as insiders have revealed online that besides the 50 JF17's, the Chinese are providing FC20's equipped with latest avionics, newer generation of Chinese subs and frigates. There is also other military hardware that China is providing Pakistan but thats under the radar and obviously i am not at the liberty to reveal that online. Although it would be interesting if China builds a naval base in Gwadar, the presence of Chinese assets would ensure that Indian Navy does not comes close because an attack on Chinese assets would be equivalent of a declaration of war against China.

Dreadnought
23 May 11,, 14:56
And Pakistan would be foolish to think that continued attacks on the Indians from terrorists on their soil wouldnt go unanswered. China or no China.

In other threads it is claimed that Pakistan does not need "aid" from anyone particularly the West but what about the East?

One would think this certainly falls under that category in the bottom line otherwise they wouldnt be asking for it and giving rights to a military installation in return.

What would happen if the groups that Pakistan shields were to attack a Chinese istallation? That is given the fact they have touted "Soverignty" over security. What are they going to do then?

Who to turn to then if China then insisted that Pakistan deal with these groups or no "aid"?

Ironic huh?;)

All pointing to one direction IMO.

xinhui
23 May 11,, 17:23
notorious_eagle


Believe me (and the Indian war planners know this too) China is not going to fight no war for no body.

Dreadnought
23 May 11,, 17:53
Although it would be interesting if China builds a naval base in Gwadar, the presence of Chinese assets would ensure that Indian Navy does not comes close because an attack on Chinese assets would be equivalent of a declaration of war against China.

This however does not cancel the fact that once India has her carriers ready (2012 for the first), a direct strike on a target of terrorist interest in reprisal for an attack on Indian soil could not happen pretty quickly and without warning.

A thought Pakistan should take pretty seriously when it considers dealing with these groups on her own soil and under their own knowing.

Sooner or later, the vise is going to close from all sides about dealing these groups Pakistan allows to exist and one can imagine that Pakistan is not going to be to happy.

notorious_eagle
23 May 11,, 22:27
And Pakistan would be foolish to think that continued attacks on the Indians from terrorists on their soil wouldnt go unanswered. China or no China.

They are more than welcome to do whatever they want, but don't think that any surgical strike(if it succeeds) will go unanswered from Pakistan's side.


This however does not cancel the fact that once India has her carriers ready (2012 for the first), a direct strike on a target of terrorist interest in reprisal for an attack on Indian soil could not happen pretty quickly and without warning.

What if before the Indian aircrafts strike, they are intercepted and shot down. It wont be easy crossing Pakistan's coast without being intercepted, if you take in account how Pakistan is beefing up its radar coverage and fighter aircrafts near its coast lines. But does this also give Pakistan the justification for targeting Indian consulates in Afghanistan whom are providing support to rebels in Balochistan.


A thought Pakistan should take pretty seriously when it considers dealing with these groups on her own soil and under their own knowing.

Pakistan is doing whatever is in her capacity to deal with these terrorist groups. If NATO with all her military and economic might cannot stop terrorists from launching attacks in Pakistan from Afghan soil, Pakistan with only a fraction of those resources dont stand a chance.


Sooner or later, the vise is going to close from all sides about dealing these groups Pakistan allows to exist and one can imagine that Pakistan is not going to be to happy.

No proof that Pakistan allows these groups to exist, mere speculation on your part.

notorious_eagle
23 May 11,, 22:37
notorious_eagle


Believe me (and the Indian war planners know this too) China is not going to fight no war for no body.

Your right, this explains why the Chinese are arming Pakistan to the teeth. During this trip of Gillani to China, the Pakistani delegation was surprised as the Chinese were offering Pakistan their latest weaponry, usually its the other way around.

Dreadnought
24 May 11,, 00:03
No proof that Pakistan allows these groups to exist, mere speculation on your part.

Hmm, lets see: HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA..sorry just had to get that out.

Point being if the US knows it (has proof of it ) and NATO definately knows it, how is it that Pakistan dont know it?

So, If I get what you are saying here that groups,(camps) that Pakistan has raided as far back as 2008 is not there without their knowledge of them being there and dont know there are such places?

How is it the one and only Mumbai suspect was found on your soil among several others of importance including OBL over so many years and you say this is speculation?

You say I mere speculate? I say there is no speculation and Leopards dont change their spots.

Pakistan Raids Terror Camps Believed Tied to Mumbai Attacks - US News and World Report (http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2008/12/08/pakistan-raids-terror-camps-believed-tied-to-mumbai-attacks)

Dreadnought
24 May 11,, 00:09
What if before the Indian aircrafts strike, they are intercepted and shot down. It wont be easy crossing Pakistan's coast without being intercepted, if you take in account how Pakistan is beefing up its radar coverage and fighter aircrafts near its coast lines. But does this also give Pakistan the justification for targeting Indian consulates in Afghanistan whom are providing support to rebels in Balochistan.

What if they arent, are you willing to risk that populations health and well being over people that kill people for a living day in, day out there in Pakistan? Especially with Nuke facilities etc, If so thats a pretty tall order to fill if you ask me. IMO, the government might find that an important point of interest, especially if they are trying to stay in power or ever going to find an equillibrium for the country. Ever.

As far as targeting Indian consulates, I guess not so long as you dont expect them not to target yours in return right?

Is there even a point to that statement about consulates?:confused:

Dreadnought
24 May 11,, 00:18
Pakistan is doing whatever is in her capacity to deal with these terrorist groups. If NATO with all her military and economic might cannot stop terrorists from launching attacks in Pakistan from Afghan soil, Pakistan with only a fraction of those resources dont stand a chance.

She needs to rid herself, her government and her military of simpithisers to terror. Until she does, shes peeing in the wind and others will more then likely do it for her if necessary even if by Drone strikes.

I dont see Pakistan doing even a fraction as much as NATO. All you have is a mountain region to deal with along with a few other places. Afghanistan and Iraq are countries not x amount of miles of mountains.

You act as though Pakistan is helpless in the Intel Community i think that can be shown to be not true. Especially intel about the camps on Pakistani soil as well as the madrasses that are known breeders of radicals. Claim stupid, but there are far too many facts from different media's reporters, interviews,pictures etc to know better.

Dreadnought
24 May 11,, 00:23
No proof that Pakistan allows these groups to exist, mere speculation on your part.


Just one of many I could show you from 2007. Its now 2011.:

CIA: Bin Laden in Pakistan Establishing New Camps - The Blotter (http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/02/cia_bin_laden_i.html)

Parihaka
24 May 11,, 01:31
Your right, this explains why the Chinese are arming Pakistan to the teeth. During this trip of Gillani to China, the Pakistani delegation was surprised as the Chinese were offering Pakistan their latest weaponry, usually its the other way around.

QUOTE=Officer Of Engineers: China will fight India to the last drop of Pakistani blood

zraver
24 May 11,, 01:52
No proof that Pakistan allows these groups to exist, mere speculation on your part.

Seriously getting tired of that worn out lie. The numer if infiltrators caught from Pakistan in kashmir, the number of senior taliban and AQ opertaive killed by drone strikes in Pakistan, The confessions of one of the Mumbai attackers, the amount of Pakistani supplied equipment recoveredl, the number of terror leaders caught in Pakistan.....

Pakistan's complicity in terrorism is undisputed by everyone outside Pakistan. The only real question is how high up the complicity goes. At this very moment there are Pakistanis protesting the US drone strikes that kill terrorists and complaining that the US killed OBL a master terrorist. So we know support for terrorists in many cases goes all the way to the lowest levels of society- but how high does it go?

Officer of Engineers
24 May 11,, 02:07
Your right, this explains why the Chinese are arming Pakistan to the teeth. During this trip of Gillani to China, the Pakistani delegation was surprised as the Chinese were offering Pakistan their latest weaponry, usually its the other way around.Pakistan offering weapons to China? Hehehehahahahahahaha.

xinhui
24 May 11,, 04:10
FT's OpEd and to some degree I share some of the sentiments.


FT.com / Comment / Editorial - China struts larger on world stage (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/b96def94-856f-11e0-ae32-00144feabdc0.html#ixzz1NEfdM400)

China struts larger on world stage

Published: May 23 2011 20:08 | Last updated: May 23 2011 20:08

Hitherto, the default position for Asian nations has been to draw closer to China economically, but huddle under the US defence umbrella. Pakistan shows that China’s rise – as a military as well as an economic power – is making that calculation more complex. Within days of Pakistan’s humiliation over the killing of Osama bin Laden, Yusuf Raza Gilani, the prime minister, travelled to Beijing. He came back with a Chinese commitment to take over the operation of Gwadar port, close to the Iranian border. Islamabad has asked Beijing to upgrade the facility to a naval base. The message is clear. If Washington scales back its support for Pakistan, there is more than one game in town.

In one sense, this is a dangerous ploy. Islamabad is using anxiety about China to keep US military aid flowing. Washington does not generally react well to blackmail. Indeed, it should judge continuing support for the Pakistani military on its own merits, not by what China might do in its absence. New Delhi, too, is nervous about closeness between Pakistan and China. It regards Gwadar port as part of China’s so-called string of pearls, a chain of ports in Bangladesh, Burma, Sri Lanka and Pakistan that New Delhi thinks is designed to encircle India.


Yet it would be equally dangerous to overreact to Beijing’s tighter links with Islamabad. As China’s trade and investment ties with the outside world deepen, it will inevitably seek to protect its interests. Officially, China’s policy is non-interventionist. But that stance is being tested by its ever-closer integration in the global economy. Witness Libya, where Beijing was obliged to rescue more than 30,000 Chinese workers.

In some ways, China’s greater international involvement is to be welcomed. China, too, has an interest in stable and open trade. As such, it is playing a constructive role in anti-piracy operations. That is not to say that China’s rise is without danger. The world has a sorry record of accommodating rising powers. It is in China’s interests to be more transparent about its intentions, and to assure the international community – in deeds as well as words – that its rise is benign. By the same token, the world needs to draw China into dialogue and international commitments. Robert Zoellick, former US deputy secretary of state, articulated the idea of making China a “responsible stakeholder”. The term has a patronising ring. But it remains the best framework for dealing with the rising Chinese superpower.

siddharth
24 May 11,, 12:49
Why would China be so protective of a worthless, failed state like Pakistan? Chinese Prime Minister recently said, "an attack on Pakistan would be considered an attack on China" and ''China and Pakistan are brothers''. Every country just cares about it's own interests. China is using Pakistan to continue disturbing India and to get closer to the oil in the gulf.

siddharth
24 May 11,, 12:54
No proof that Pakistan allows these groups to exist, mere speculation on your part.
That's what every Pakistani will say, but the world knows the reality.

Vinod2070
24 May 11,, 13:05
Pakistan offering weapons to China? Hehehehahahahahahaha.

I am sure something was lost in translation there. Probably he meant that China normally doesn't share the latest tech with Pakistan but one that is a generation behind.

Or may be he meant the proliferation of Western tech. to China. ;)

Let's wait to hear from him.

xinhui
24 May 11,, 17:01
Why would China be so protective of a worthless, failed state like Pakistan?

easy there. I understand your sentiment, but easy with those type of statements. keep this up, you won't last long here.

Dreadnought
24 May 11,, 17:30
Why would China be so protective of a worthless, failed state like Pakistan? Chinese Prime Minister recently said, "an attack on Pakistan would be considered an attack on China" and ''China and Pakistan are brothers''. Every country just cares about it's own interests. China is using Pakistan to continue disturbing India and to get closer to the oil in the gulf.

A buffer state for China with India in between them and Pakistan. Maybe just one idea.
Could also be the possibility of economics and making cheap goods. Cheap goods/Cheap Labor.

NgatimotiNutter
24 May 11,, 18:07
A buffer state for China with India in between them and Pakistan. Maybe just one idea.
Could also be the possibility of economics and making cheap goods. Cheap goods/Cheap Labor.

Cheap goods from cheap Pakistani labour? Yes if makes perfect sense, why shouldn't China extend its influence? Its not going to be the home of cheap labour forever. A buffer state though? I doubt it, the Himilayers seems apat at that.

People ask the greatest threat of nuclear war in todays world, where we are talking about is where its at, that is the worrying part

Sumku
24 May 11,, 18:57
notorious_eagle,
There ya go, this is China is getting in return.

Is it just the thing that China seeks to get in return from Pakistan or is it also one of the many things that China seeks to get in return ?

Sumku
24 May 11,, 19:05
the presence of Chinese assets would ensure that Indian Navy does not comes close because an attack on Chinese assets would be equivalent of a declaration of war against China.

Probably you are mistaking India' self restraint with something else. A lot of Indian PM's have taken personal political risks to ensure that things dont escalate out of control but trust me this will not remain so for a very long time. Time right now is just not right enough for India to let things escalate but India is fast approaching a point of no return-both politically as well as economically. We are fast reaching a point where India will not only be forced to act but worse, wont feel the economic pain too much.

troung
25 May 11,, 01:32
China Refuses to Confirm Reports it Will Run Strategic Pakistani Port
China Refuses to Confirm Reports it Will Run Strategic Pakistani Port | News | English (http://www.voanews.com/english/news/China-Refuses-to-Confirm-Reports-it-Will-Run-Strategic-Pakistani-Port-122498969.html)
Stephanie Ho | Beijing May 24, 2011
Participants listen to speeches during the opening ceremony of newly built Gwadar port, about 700 kilometers (435 miles) west of Karachi, Pakistan (File Photo - March 20, 2007)
Photo: AP

Participants listen to speeches during the opening ceremony of newly built Gwadar port, about 700 kilometers (435 miles) west of Karachi, Pakistan (File Photo - March 20, 2007)

China says it has not heard of Pakistan’s request to operate a strategic port on Pakistan’s southwest coast and to help build a naval base there.

Pakistani Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar says China has agreed to take over operation of Gwadar, a strategic deep water port that China helped to build several years ago.

The Pakistan Defense Ministry also has said that Islamabad would be grateful if China also helped to build a naval base there. A Pakistani statement says the deal was reached last week when Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani was in China.

Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu Tuesday told reporters that China and Pakistan are engaged in extensive cooperation. But she said she has not heard of the specific Gwadar project.

Jiang Yu , Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman
VOA - D. Schearf
Jiang Yu , Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman

Jiang says the topic also was not raised during the Pakistani leader’s visit to China last week.

While China helped to fund and to build the commercial Gwadar port several years ago, it is now run by the Singapore Port Authority. The port is located at the northern end of the Arabian Sea, with key access to shipping lanes heading west to the Persian Gulf.

Despite China’s lack of official confirmation, Tim Huxley, a defense expert with the International Institute for Strategic Studies, says he has heard about the proposal.

“The initiative seems to have come from the Pakistani side, and I am sure there would be commercial benefits for China in doing this,” he said.

The Pakistani prime minister’s trip to China last week came as some U.S. lawmakers are calling for reducing billions of dollars in aid to Islamabad. While ties between Pakistan and the United States have long been tense, the killing of Osama bin Laden on Pakistani territory has worsened the relationship on both sides.

Huxley says he sees two reasons why China may want to consider helping with the Gwadar port.

“One is China’s assistance in developing a commercial port and secondly possibly China’s assistance to develop a Pakistani naval base, that might in the future, that Chinese vessels could visit that Pakistani naval base, which was been developed with Chinese assistance," he said. "I would not rule that out in the future.”

Huxley says China has been expanding its naval operations in the Indian Ocean mostly because it wants to secure its oil supplies from the Middle East. He said that as China’s economic power increases, its navy will increase as well to protect those interests, raising concerns among China’s neighbors.

==================

Wednesday, May 25, 2011 E-Mail this article to a friend Printer Friendly Version

http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=2011\05\25\story_25-5-2011_pg3_3

WASHINGTON DIARY: The self-centred beggar —Dr Manzur Ejaz

It is only in the Pakistani media that violation of sovereignty is the focus of discussion rather than Osama’s comfortable living arrangement near an elite military academy. The rest of the world is focusing on Osama rather than the legality of the American operation in Abbottabad

Probably it is a matter of taste that Prime Minister Yousaf Raza Gilani wanted to hear the same translated lecture from Chinese leaders that Senator John Kerry had given in Islamabad. Maybe it was easier in Beijing because Chinese lectures were (hopefully) directly translated into Urdu or Seraiki. President Asif Ali Zardari may have been given a similar dose in Moscow though the details of his achievements have yet to come out. Both had rushed to the Chinese and Russian capitals to prove their utility to the military brass after the embarrassing US operation in Abbottabad.

It is clear from the published reports that China has flatly told PM Gilani that it does not give budgetary support or cash transfers to countries. They promised some loans on favourable conditions, but this was then sent for approval to the Politburo of the Communist Party. This is an atypical Chinese diplomatic way of saying ‘no’ because such a loan could have been cleared quickly if need be. This simply shows that salvaging Pakistan’s economy is not a Chinese priority or that they take it as a waste of money.

The plan to rush to Beijing was as sane as not knowing that Osama bin Laden was living in Abbottabad near a military academy for the last five years. Probably, there is no method in Pakistan’s madness of decision-making processes. Idealising Pakistan’s strategic worth in global politics, Pakistan’s ruling elite is bereft of common sense. They thought once they announce to the Chinese and Russians that they are getting a legal divorce from the US, Beijing and Moscow would jump all around and shower Yuan and Roubles upon them. No one paused for a moment to think that both China and Russia, victims of jihadi terrorism, agree with the US on the point that terrorist networks must be rooted out of Pakistan. But we have become like street-beggars who develop a habit of asking every passerby for money.

Before PM Gilani had reached Beijing, a senior leader of the Chinese military had declared that his country will not confront the US over Pakistan. And why would China confront the US over Pakistan while its economic interests are heavily vested in the US? Moreover, has China ever confronted the US on any policy other than American policy regarding Taiwan? China has proved to be the wisest nation when it comes to its economic interests. They have economic interests in Pakistan as well but cannot lose the US market, which is their bread and butter. In addition, why would China confront the US for something which, ultimately, safeguards al Qaeda, the Taliban and other jihadi terrorist groups? It is only in the Pakistani media that violation of sovereignty is the focus of discussion rather than Osama’s comfortable living arrangement near an elite military academy. The rest of the world is focusing on Osama rather than the legality of the American operation in Abbottabad.

The Chinese know what the world is saying and are afraid to run into an embarrassing position if the US decides to bring its case against Pakistan harbouring terrorists to the UN. This is the reason that they told Mr Gilani:

One: Pakistan should normalise its relations with India, the US and the rest of the world. The Chinese were telling Pakistan that it is awfully lonely and cannot be supported just by Beijing if the rest of the world stands against it.

Two: the Chinese subtly chided Pakistan for not eliminating the madrassa networks that are producing terrorists. Privately, China has been asking Pakistan to take action against jihadi nurseries but this time they went public on this point.

Three: the Chinese told Gilani that the situation in Afghanistan is improving and Pakistan should not do anything that can stall it.

The Chinese have told Pakistan that they are on the same page as the US as far as the issue of terrorism is concerned and Pakistan should lower its obsession with India. Furthermore, the Chinese have advised that the US is going to be the only source of funds needed for budgetary support for Pakistan. China can invest in infrastructure projects but no cash transfers. Recent assignment of hydro projects to Chinese companies show that China is using its leverage to get better deals from Pakistan than it could if international bids were invited.

Now it is clear Mr Gilani, Zardari, and other lovers of the military cannot deliver much beyond staging fake dramas of patriotism. The military and its backers, the PPP and the PML-Q in particular, can present themselves on TV channels as a big power that can shoot down drones and stop the US from Abbottabad-type future operations, but this is all empty rhetoric. They can neither stop drones nor Abbottabad-like operations. Boasting for the media is one thing and actual military capability is another matter, where the Pakistan Air Force is no match for the US. And, China is not coming to Pakistan’s rescue even after multiple Abbottabad-like operations.

The writer can be reached at manzurejaz@yahoo.com

notorious_eagle
25 May 11,, 02:15
Pakistan offering weapons to China? Hehehehahahahahahaha.

Apologies for the typo, i meant Pakistan asking for tech from China. In this case, the Chinese were eager to share their latest tech with Pakistan.


Probably he meant that China normally doesn't share the latest tech with Pakistan but one that is a generation behind.

Actually China always shares the latest technology with Pakistan. Some of Chinese tech in possession of Pakistan is better than the ones that is equipped with the Chinese Armed Forces.


Or may be he meant the proliferation of Western tech. to China. ;)

Pakistan has never proliferated any Western technology to China, its simply a fallacy that has been floated around. Sorta reminds me of the B.S propaganda that was floated in the media that Pakistan transferred an F16 to the Chinese. Although i will admit that this is true that Pakistani engineers have shared their expertise and experience of using/testing Western technology with the Chinese, a lot of input that went into the JF17 was from PAF's experience of operating the F16's.

Dreadnought
25 May 11,, 02:49
Actually China always shares the latest technology with Pakistan. Some of Chinese tech in possession of Pakistan is better than the ones that is equipped with the Chinese Armed Forces.

I would almost bet not. Nooooo country shares their top military tech with anybody, they are tempered below the host countries standard trust me, especially when almost "given" away. If not trust me then ask many of the aerospace people and others here on the WAB with far more knowledge about these sorts of transactions. You can pretty much bet on it.

What you percieve to be the latest tech (given to Pakistan by China) is already old by China's military standards make no mistake.

Think about it, China is a major modern player on the chess board as compared to Pakistan who is a money pit, Do you really think they will share their cash cows with you?

Now you know why the US wouldnt think of it either.;)

notorious_eagle
25 May 11,, 03:08
Actually China always shares the latest technology with Pakistan. Some of Chinese tech in possession of Pakistan is better than the ones that is equipped with the Chinese Armed Forces.

I would almost bet not. Nooooo country shares their top military tech with anybody, they are tempered below the host countries standard trust me, especially when almost "given" away. If not trust me then ask many of the aerospace people and others here on the WAB with far more knowledge about these sorts of transactions. You can pretty much bet on it.

What you percieve to be the latest tech (given to Pakistan by China) is already old by China's military standards make no mistake.

Think about it, China is a major modern player on the chess board as compared to Pakistan who is a money pit, Do you really think they will share their cash cows with you?

Now you know why the US wouldnt think of it either.;)

Okay, for starters i suggest you look up the type of F7's that China operates and the type of F7's that Pakistan operates. The F7's in possession of Pakistan are more advanced than the ones operated by Chinese, although they were manufactured by the Chinese.

Moving on to China not sharing their top military tech. The latest BVRAAM's that China has produced SD10B, they are going to be the standard BVRAAM equipping PAF's fleet of JF17 and FC20. China has offered the SD10A for export to other countries, but the latest SD10B is being only exported to Pakistan. The FC20(J10B) which is the latest block of the Chinese J10 is only going to be exported to Pakistan as the J10A was outright rejected by PAF. There are other numerous examples such as the C803, C602 Missiles and MBRLS A100 which is in possession of Pakistan. Thus, when it comes to Pakistan, the Chinese are always more than forthcoming in providing Pakistan with their latest tech :).

S2
25 May 11,, 03:31
"Pakistan is doing whatever is in her capacity to deal with these terrorist groups. If NATO with all her military and economic might cannot stop terrorists from launching attacks in Pakistan from Afghan soil, Pakistan with only a fraction of those resources dont stand a chance."

We do what we can with forces spread from Nimroz through Helmand and Kandahar up the eastern border to Kunar and Nuristan and then north to Mazur-I-Sharif. More to the point, we fight these men wherever they may be found, even Abbottabad when necessary.

OTOH, Pakistan is YOUR land unlike Afghanistan is for America. Were the afghan taliban leaders hiding on your lands for the last ten years actually Indians, every Pakistani would flood there screaming with pitchforks. There is no lack of ways and means where the ends are adequately rationalized.

Afterall, for what other purpose does your army serve but to eject the enemies of Pakistan while providing succor and safety to its citizens and foreign friends?

No, notorious_eagle, you dissemble and obfuscate your protection of these men like Haqqani and Omar. It is plainly understood.

Doktor
25 May 11,, 03:39
Don't know if this is the right thread but mods can edit/(re)move my message if they feel it is wrong.

With so much help pouring into Pakistan from China, and so many Chinese within their bases, it strikes me odd how nobody asks (publicly) if China knew where OBL was?

Dreadnought
25 May 11,, 03:58
Okay, for starters i suggest you look up the type of F7's that China operates and the type of F7's that Pakistan operates. The F7's in possession of Pakistan are more advanced than the ones operated by Chinese, although they were manufactured by the Chinese.

Moving on to China not sharing their top military tech. The latest BVRAAM's that China has produced SD10B, they are going to be the standard BVRAAM equipping PAF's fleet of JF17 and FC20. China has offered the SD10A for export to other countries, but the latest SD10B is being only exported to Pakistan. The FC20(J10B) which is the latest block of the Chinese J10 is only going to be exported to Pakistan as the J10A was outright rejected by PAF. There are other numerous examples such as the C803, C602 Missiles and MBRLS A100 which is in possession of Pakistan. Thus, when it comes to Pakistan, the Chinese are always more than forthcoming in providing Pakistan with their latest tech :).

Do you understand the difference between the "latest tech" and "export" no matter to whome its exported to? If you dont then look at the difference between PC3s for a start. You have the USN standard version (before retirement) and then you have the "export" version that was offered to not only Pakistan but India as well and thats only a recon plane.

You may get the very same ground vehicles but what about the fire control systems. The US version "export" of the Abrams is almost the same ground vehicle except for its propulsion (a given) and the FC sets (another given) and sights.

Even the PC3's were given Pakistani products instead of American products now you tell me which of the two versions is the real tech and what is steps below?

Look at the US warships that have been sold to the Pakistan Navy, do you really think they are as capable and the USN's version?

Officer of Engineers
25 May 11,, 03:58
Apologies for the typo, i meant Pakistan asking for tech from China. In this case, the Chinese were eager to share their latest tech with Pakistan. Son, no, the Chinese are NOT willing to share. A curiously examination of the technologies offered will tell you that ... but follow my lead ... and no, Son, you are no more privy to any more information than I am. Your relatives will NEVER offer you classified info but they may offer you sensitive but deductive open source info. In short, those of us who served can deduced a hell of a lot, including your Indian brethren.


Actually China always shares the latest technology with Pakistan. Some of Chinese tech in possession of Pakistan is better than the ones that is equipped with the Chinese Armed Forces.Only because they're newer than the ones already introduced into the PLA's procurement life cycle. But come mid-life upgrade, your Pakistani models would be behind ... until their mid life upgrade.


Pakistan has never proliferated any Western technology to China, its simply a fallacy that has been floated around. Sorta reminds me of the B.S propaganda that was floated in the media that Pakistan transferred an F16 to the Chinese.That is horse crap and a half. No, Pakistan NEVER allowed the Chinese to take apart a F-16 but yes, we've got reports that Pakistan allowed the Chinese to take every measurement they can from a Pakistani F-16. No, Pakistan did not allow China to take apart a F-16 but also, Pakistan allowed China to take a measuring tape to every inch of the F-16, including its engines.

The letter of the law with the US was never violated ... but the spirit? All I will state is that Pakistan never violated the letter of their agreement ... but that is extremely a far cry from claiming innocence of not allowing the Chinese to examine the F-16.


Although i will admit that this is true that Pakistani engineers have shared their expertise and experience of using/testing Western technology with the Chinese, a lot of input that went into the JF17 was from PAF's experience of operating the F16's.The CAF/PLAAF wants nothing to do with the FC-1/JF-17 and in fact effectively refused the 200 plane buy the CCP obligated them to. Pakistan's input was neither effective nor wanted.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 04:10
The CAF/PLAAF wants nothing to do with the FC-1/JF-17 and in fact effectively refused the 200 plane buy the CCP obligated them to. Pakistan's input was neither effective nor wanted.

I think the recent events has allowed PLAAF to capitalize on this golden opportunity to finally get rid of these planes. How else are the PLAAF gonna supply PAF with this 'emergency' order of 50 planes immediately? I bet the PLAAF's generals are laughing all the way to the banks at the expense of PAF.

Officer of Engineers
25 May 11,, 04:27
Well, yes and no. There will never be a JF-17/FC-1 regiment in the CAF/PLAAF and thus, the Chinese avoided the operational costs in that BUT the CCP has committed to a 200 plane buy and that money will come out of the CAF/PLAAF budget as a subsidized cost. In short, the CAF/PLAAF will never buy the 200 planes but will pay the difference to keep the costs artificially low for the Pakistanis.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 04:37
Well, yes and no. There will never be a JF-17/FC-1 regiment in the CAF/PLAAF and thus, the Chinese avoided the operational costs in that BUT the CCP has committed to a 200 plane buy and that money will come out of the CAF/PLAAF budget as a subsidized cost. In short, the CAF/PLAAF will never buy the 200 planes but will pay the difference to keep the costs artificially low for the Pakistanis.

What about the spares?

Officer of Engineers
25 May 11,, 04:41
Already built into that price. The CAF/PLAAF will pay the difference ... but way better than having inducting a plane they never wanted.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 05:18
How long will the spares last? If you are only gonna make 200 planes and PLAAF doesn't want any more of them, it means that the PLAAF would be pushing to produce 200 planes very fast and shut that factory down to save money and costs. When that happens, Pakistan is up the creek without a paddle and SOL because it means no more spares unless Pakistan buys that factory and shift that factory to Pakistan.

Officer of Engineers
25 May 11,, 05:29
The CAF/PLAAF does NOT want even one of those 200 planes. The Chinese will not be buying any of them and most certainly none of their spares. The Chinese will be paying the money flat out as a subsidy to the Pakistanis to reduce their per plane cost. The Pakistanis will get all the spares they've contracted for ... and not one part more. Most certainly, they will not be getting any of the Chinese spares ... because they will not be built.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 05:35
The CAF/PLAAF does NOT want even one of those 200 planes. The Chinese will not be buying any of them and most certainly none of their spares. The Chinese will be paying the money flat out as a subsidy to the Pakistanis to reduce their per plane cost. The Pakistanis will get all the spares they've contracted for ... and not one part more. Most certainly, they will not be getting any of the Chinese spares ... because they will not be built.

So essentially you are saying that PAF could be stuck with 200 planes that would not be flyable in 10 to 15 years? Oh that's rich. In one stroke, the Chinese have managed to halve PAF's fighting force in a decade. Ha ha ha ha.

Officer of Engineers
25 May 11,, 05:49
Well, not quite. The Chinese are now offering the J-10 and the Pakistanis will be buying ... mainly because they don't have a choice in the matter.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 05:53
Well, not quite. The Chinese are now offering the J-10 and the Pakistanis will be buying ... mainly because they don't have a choice in the matter.

But it will be at full cost with no subsidy, right? Then PAF cannot afford many of these J-10s. But one problem, what makes you think that Russia will permit the sales of the engines used for J-10s? Last I heard, the Chinese engine WS-10A is having problems and the PLAAF is not using them in their J-10s. I do not think that Russia will jeopardize the PAK-FA project they have going with India.

Officer of Engineers
25 May 11,, 05:59
But it will be at full cost with no subsidy, right? I really don't know. To this day, can you seriously tell me that a Chinese AK-47 costs less than a .3030? However, I do know the CCP will make it affordable for the Pakistanis.


Then PAF cannot afford many of these J-10s. But one problem, what makes you think that Russia will permit the sales of the engines used for J-10s? Last I heard, the Chinese engine WS-10A is having problems and the PLAAF is not using them in their J-10s. I do not think that Russia will jeopardize the PAK-FA project they have going with India.It does not mean the Chinese would not have solve their engine problems by then.

Vinod2070
25 May 11,, 05:59
Looks like a decent deal for both parties.

PAF gets something that it can afford, not necessarily what it would have liked. PLAAF gets to avoid what it never wanted.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 06:10
Looks like a decent deal for both parties.

PAF gets something that it can afford, not necessarily what it would have liked. PLAAF gets to avoid what it never wanted.

If you get around the spares issue, yes otherwise you are forced to cannibalize the least desirable planes in an effort to keep most of the planes flyable. The problem with that approach is that Chinese products are not that well known for their high durability and there's a diminishing return to the cannibalization approach

xinhui
25 May 11,, 06:56
But it will be at full cost with no subsidy, right? Then PAF cannot afford many of these J-10s. But one problem, what makes you think that Russia will permit the sales of the engines used for J-10s? Last I heard, the Chinese engine WS-10A is having problems and the PLAAF is not using them in their J-10s. I do not think that Russia will jeopardize the PAK-FA project they have going with India.

The JF-17s in PAF service are powered by the Russian RD-93 engine. It has become a non-issue.

xinhui
25 May 11,, 06:57
BM,

long team, low interest loan translates into Chinese as "we will forget it in a few years". it has happened a number of times in the past.

xinhui
25 May 11,, 06:59
If you get around the spares issue, yes otherwise you are forced to cannibalize the least desirable planes in an effort to keep most of the planes flyable. The problem with that approach is that Chinese products are not that well known for their high durability and there's a diminishing return to the cannibalization approach

PAK's A-5 (in service over 40 years) just entered its last overhaul cycle in Pakistan before retirement, thus far, none of the J-7s and A5s that has been in service for the last 30 years had been cannibalized. They manufacture parts at home and overhaul at home.

xinhui
25 May 11,, 07:02
Looks like a decent deal for both parties.

PAF gets something that it can afford, not necessarily what it would have liked. PLAAF gets to avoid what it never wanted.

again, you are looking at this from a military POV (there is nothing wrong with it) but for the Chinese, they have a border view, especially in their energy supply calculus .

xinhui
25 May 11,, 07:06
The CAF/PLAAF does NOT want even one of those 200 planes. The Chinese will not be buying any of them and most certainly none of their spares. The Chinese will be paying the money flat out as a subsidy to the Pakistanis to reduce their per plane cost. The Pakistanis will get all the spares they've contracted for ... and not one part more. Most certainly, they will not be getting any of the Chinese spares ... because they will not be built.

Yup, that is why the PAF is placing local manufacture at the Pakistan aeronautical complex at Kamera at such a high priority, they are screwed without local parts

Vinod2070
25 May 11,, 10:16
again, you are looking at this from a military POV (there is nothing wrong with it) but for the Chinese, they have a border view, especially in their energy supply calculus .

I understand it. Can't China get the Caspian energy bypassing Pakistan? May be much less of a headache.

For gulf energy and to bypass Malacca, I guess there is no other choice.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 14:28
The JF-17s in PAF service are powered by the Russian RD-93 engine. It has become a non-issue.

Under Russia protest. And there is a limited number of RD-93s that can be produced for these planes. But for J-10s? I don't think so. No way in hell is India gonna tolerate that.

Blademaster
25 May 11,, 14:30
PAK's A-5 (in service over 40 years) just entered its last overhaul cycle in Pakistan before retirement, thus far, none of the J-7s and A5s that has been in service for the last 30 years had been cannibalized. They manufacture parts at home and overhaul at home.

The A-5 and J-7s were no match against their contemporaries and I am not talking about the F-16s. That is one generation ahead of those planes.

xinhui
25 May 11,, 16:58
What I know:

The J-10 sales to PAF was first released in 2007 and confirmed by an article/interview with the Financial Times.

In 2009 it was confirmed that the PAF is interested in the B model, not A currently in service. The Russian, I think, would have enough time to fire a protest.



No surprise here.

Beijing could extend loans to purchasing countries and offer local assembly if there are sufficient orders, the source adds


DATE:30/09/09
SOURCE:Flight International
China's AVIC steps up sales push for FC-1, J-10 fighters
By Siva Govindasamy

China's AVIC steps up sales push for FC-1, J-10 fighters (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/09/30/332905/chinas-avic-steps-up-sales-push-for-fc-1-j-10-fighters.html)

China plans to market the Chengdu FC-1/JF-17 and J-10 fighters aggressively as part of its plan to become a major player in the global aerospace industry.

"While AVIC's main job is to manufacture aircraft, the company also fulfils a national agenda by producing military aircraft for China's political allies around the world," says a source close to Chengdu's state-owned parent company. "There are also countries that would like to buy a good fighter, but not at the cost of a Western fighter.

"While China's military aircraft have been exported for many years, this is the first time that there is a concerted effort to properly market them and establish a support network," the source adds.

In the past few months, senior company officials have been identifying the military products that will be given the most attention for the export market. In the fighter segment, the JF-17 and the J-10 are the two most important aircraft, says the source.

"Given that the JF-17 has been in service in China and Pakistan for a number of years and is a mature programme, it is being given first priority," the source adds.

Islamabad, which helped to develop the JF-17, has committed to buying 150 aircraft produced by the Pakistan Aeronautical Complex. This figure could rise to 300 aircraft to replace the country's air force fleets of Nanchang A-5s, Chengdu F-7s and Dassault Mirage III and Mirage Vs.

The JF-17 will be able to carry a variety of conventional and precision-guided bombs, and air-to-air and air-to-sea missiles from short- to beyond-visual-range. The type is already being marketed to countries in Africa, the Middle East, South America and South-East Asia.


"The J-10 is not ready for export yet, as AVIC is still finalising upgrades for the fighter," the source says. "But there has been interest from several countries."

AVIC is likely to begin exports of the new type - which entered Chinese air force service in early 2007 - after it has finished developing an upgraded J-10B version. Enhancements are to include a modified vertical stabiliser and ventral fins, redesigned engine inlet, a new radar and an infrared search and track sensor.
Pakistan is likely to be the first export customer, having begun negotiations to buy 36 aircraft several years ago. To be designated locally as FC-20s, deliveries are likely to begin from 2014-15.

Beijing could extend loans to purchasing countries and offer local assembly if there are sufficient orders, the source adds.

Double Edge
25 May 11,, 19:34
FT's OpEd and to some degree I share some of the sentiments.

...

Yet it would be equally dangerous to overreact to Beijing’s tighter links with Islamabad. As China’s trade and investment ties with the outside world deepen, it will inevitably seek to protect its interests. Officially, China’s policy is non-interventionist. But that stance is being tested by its ever-closer integration in the global economy. Witness Libya, where Beijing was obliged to rescue more than 30,000 Chinese workers..
How can China wanting to rescue her own ppl be considered interventionist ?

What was china's stance on Libya, abstain. So they've not changed yet.

notorious_eagle
25 May 11,, 22:44
"Pakistan is doing whatever is in her capacity to deal with these terrorist groups. If NATO with all her military and economic might cannot stop terrorists from launching attacks in Pakistan from Afghan soil, Pakistan with only a fraction of those resources dont stand a chance."

We do what we can with forces spread from Nimroz through Helmand and Kandahar up the eastern border to Kunar and Nuristan and then north to Mazur-I-Sharif. More to the point, we fight these men wherever they may be found, even Abbottabad when necessary.

OTOH, Pakistan is YOUR land unlike Afghanistan is for America. Were the afghan taliban leaders hiding on your lands for the last ten years actually Indians, every Pakistani would flood there screaming with pitchforks. There is no lack of ways and means where the ends are adequately rationalized.

Afterall, for what other purpose does your army serve but to eject the enemies of Pakistan while providing succor and safety to its citizens and foreign friends?

No, notorious_eagle, you dissemble and obfuscate your protection of these men like Haqqani and Omar. It is plainly understood.

Unfortunately Sir i agree with you, i retract my previous statement. Seeing as what has been happening in Pakistan for the past few days, its obvious that Pakistan's Military needs to come out all guns blazing. Launch an operation in NW and raids need to be conducted throughout the country and destroy these terrorist cells. This TTP problem has gone for way to long, i have no idea what the strategic planners are thinking at GHQ. I wholeheartedly supported the operations in SW and Swat, PA was dead effective and achieved its goals in record time. But after these operations, PA started taking things lightly and we can see the results of that. Dont get me wrong, i do and will always support Pakistan Army, but i am not the only supporter of Pakistan Army whose baffled by what is going through the heads of GHQ.

notorious_eagle
25 May 11,, 22:56
That is horse crap and a half. No, Pakistan NEVER allowed the Chinese to take apart a F-16 but yes, we've got reports that Pakistan allowed the Chinese to take every measurement they can from a Pakistani F-16. No, Pakistan did not allow China to take apart a F-16 but also, Pakistan allowed China to take a measuring tape to every inch of the F-16, including its engines.

The letter of the law with the US was never violated ... but the spirit? All I will state is that Pakistan never violated the letter of their agreement ... but that is extremely a far cry from claiming innocence of not allowing the Chinese to examine the F-16.

So Sir we agree on the fact that the letter of law was never violated. I remember reading that the Chief of Chinese Air Force was shown an F16 at Sargodha during 1989 i believe, and the American operators present at the base were watching the entire event like a hawk. Thats as far as i know the Chinese were allowed to get close to the F16.

On the other hand veteran PAF pilots and engineers of the F16 were later transferred to the JF17 program. These are pilots and engineers whom had clocked thousands of hours on the F16, Shahid Latif whom was one of the pioneers of the F16 program for Pakistan became the head of the project. These veterans took their knowledge and experience of operating the F16 to China with them. I fail to understand how is that wrong?


The CAF/PLAAF wants nothing to do with the FC-1/JF-17 and in fact effectively refused the 200 plane buy the CCP obligated them to. Pakistan's input was neither effective nor wanted.

Well the PLAAF is testing it, there are reports that PLAAF will replace A5 with 150 FC-1 but will only use it as a ground attack aircraft and not multi role like PAF. If PLAAF wanted nothing to do with the aircraft, they still wouldn't be testing the aircraft, last year FC-1 equipped with WS-13 already made its maiden flight. But i understand if PLAAF does not inducts them, as their strategic requirements are far different than the ones of PAF. As far as Pakistan's contribution to the FC-1 program is concerned, compare what the aircraft was before PAF joined it and after. The Chinese welcomed PAF's participation in the project and the F16 was set as a benchmark for the project. PAF still has an entire contingent based in Chengdu, this should go to tell you the military to military cooperation between PLAAF and PAF.

Officer of Engineers
26 May 11,, 00:30
Well the PLAAF is testing it, there are reports that PLAAF will replace A5 with 150 FC-1 but will only use it as a ground attack aircraft and not multi role like PAF. If PLAAF wanted nothing to do with the aircraft, they still wouldn't be testing the aircraft, last year FC-1 equipped with WS-13 already made its maiden flight. But i understand if PLAAF does not inducts them, as their strategic requirements are far different than the ones of PAF. As far as Pakistan's contribution to the FC-1 program is concerned, compare what the aircraft was before PAF joined it and after. The Chinese welcomed PAF's participation in the project and the F16 was set as a benchmark for the project. PAF still has an entire contingent based in Chengdu, this should go to tell you the military to military cooperation between PLAAF and PAF.There is a difference between Chengdu and the CAF/PLAAF.

ArtyEngineer
26 May 11,, 03:01
These are pilots and engineers whom had clocked thousands of hours on the F16, Shahid Latif whom was one of the pioneers of the F16 program for Pakistan became the head of the project. These veterans took their knowledge and experience of operating the F16 to China with them. I fail to understand how is that wrong?


Its wrong because it is a total violation of the terms by which the US State Department authorised the export of the F16's to Pakistan in the first place. Thgis is all laid out in the state department ITAR's, however here is the most relevant statement and commentary:

Restrictions on Retransfer

ITAR also operates to prohibit the “Retransfer” (also called “Re-export”) of items on the USML by foreign persons unless the Retransfer is specifically authorized under the relevant export authorization.

The prohibition on Retransfer stems from the requirement for all export authorizations to include the statement that “[t]he technical data or defense service exported from the United States in furtherance of this agreement and any defense article which may be produced or manufactured from such technical data or defense service may not be transferred to a person in a third country or to a national of a third country except as specifically authorized in this agreement unless the prior written approval of the Department of State has been obtained."[31]


Hope this clarifies why taking knowledge gaind from the use of the F16 and giving it to China is WRONG.

Regards

Arty

xinhui
26 May 11,, 16:49
Two OpEds today from two leading news papers on this topic.

As a reminder, those are OpEds, folks in the place often confuse OpEds from News reports

FT.com / Comment / Op-Ed Columnists - China (http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cac10ffe-8701-11e0-92df-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1NTQLTbIv)

From FT:




http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/cac10ffe-8701-11e0-92df-00144feabdc0.html#axzz1NTQLTbIv
For all these reasons, argues James Brazier, Asia analyst at forecaster IHS Global Insight, China’s influence on Pakistan is bound to wax as that of America wanes. “In 10 years from now, China’s presence in Pakistan will be vastly greater than that of the US,” he predicts.

If Mr Brazier is right, Pakistan could become the first strategically pivotal country to move from the US to the Chinese camp. Oddly enough, that may not suit Beijing, which remains wary of getting sucked too deeply into world affairs. Pakistan could turn out to be a closer friend than China had bargained on.



From NYT:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/26/opinion/26iht-edlieven26.html

Up to now, China seems to have assumed that it could do separate deals with the Taliban and their allies to exclude Uighur militants, and that it may be able to do the same kind of deal to defend the Aynak mine. This is a mistake.


If China truly cares about Pakistan’s survival, it should be doing everything possible to get the Pakistanis to prevent international terrorism based on their soil.

Double Edge
26 May 11,, 18:06
Can't read that FT as i'm out of free articles !!

From xinhui's nytimes op-ed


Finally, China is building up energy routes from the Gulf via Pakistan to insure China against any future naval blockade by the United States or India.
If China gets blockaded then how much more harder would it be to blockade Pakistan as well ?

Only see the value of Pakistan as an alterative way to route oil to China during peace time.


Rather, if Washington swings round to the idea of negotiating a deal with the Taliban and using Pakistan as a mediator, China’s ability to influence Islamabad will be of great importance. For this to happen, however, Washington will have to persuade India to limit its own ambitions in Afghanistan; and China will also have to help bring Russia and Iran on board.
Am surprised to read that the Russians & Iranians need much convincing to act for China to be required to help bring them aboard.

Doesn't Washington have to be desperate to 'swing around to the idea of negotiating a deal with the Taliban'. You kicked them out of office, so how would negotiating with them now square with earlier actions. What message does it leave for the future. This ain't no Vietnam.


If China truly cares about Pakistan’s survival, it should be doing everything possible to get the Pakistanis to prevent international terrorism based on their soil.
..or content enough to keep them on life support in perpetuity. This will be a signficant test for this relationship. Let's say China cares enough.

The question then is why will China succeed where the US has failed.

The US already offered Pakistan aid & military assistance over the last ten years. Aren't these requiste incentives sufficient enough.
How does China react when Pakistan says 'they didn't know'.
Why will Pakistan be forced do to do more than follow the letter of any agreement.

xinhui
26 May 11,, 20:11
again, lets look at the facts (good folks at the US naval war college actual did the math).

China can address it's basic need (again, the word here is basic) to run its economy at the minimal with the two pipelines from CAR and one from fUSSR in the Russia Far East, in addition to local production and synthetic diesel fuel from coal ( at 7 to 9 USD a gallon)
it will be extremely painful. no one in China is going to like it.

Double Edge
26 May 11,, 20:38
Not sure i understood what you're trying to say here xinhui.

In peace time if you can get more routes its always better.

My point was i fail to see how routing oil through Pakistan will be safe in the event there was a lock at the malacca strait. It adds an extra element into the equation but its a smaller fish.

xinhui
26 May 11,, 23:19
My point -- in time of war when assuming a blockade of Malacca strait is in place (which is a huge assumption because of the middle-east owned tankers can not be boarded). According to the math done by the US naval college in an event of NO oil through the Malacca strait, the Chinese economy will suffer but it will not be stopped cold. Having extra supply from Pakistan would help so is converting Pakistani coal into synthetic diesel.

Tronic
27 May 11,, 01:23
My point -- in time of war when assuming a blockade of Malacca strait is in place (which is a huge assumption because of the middle-east owned tankers can not be boarded). According to the math done by the US naval college in an event of NO oil through the Malacca strait, the Chinese economy will suffer but it will not be stopped cold. Having extra supply from Pakistan would help so is converting Pakistani coal into synthetic diesel.

In the event of a war, Pakistan does not have the means to protect its own energy supplies, how will it protect Chinas'? The Karakoram corridor will not be difficult to disrupt.

xinhui
27 May 11,, 04:37
that is the point, one among many, the main source will be the two CAR and the one and will be two Russian pipelines. there are the main source. Pakistan and Burma while secondary still important to the calculus. The more the better.

Tronic
27 May 11,, 09:28
Ah, I get what you mean now. I concur. Painful scenario yet something is always better than nothing.

1980s
27 May 11,, 15:36
Reports emerged during Pakistan Prime Minister Yusuf Gilani's visit to China that Beijing would not only take over operations at Pakistan's Gwadar port in Balochistan province, it would also build a naval base there. The news set off alarm bells around the world, but China promptly issued a denial. Gwadar spells bad economics, premature geostrategic confrontation with the United States and the prospect of becoming the target of a burgeoning insurgency that might be receiving covert support from Washington and New Delhi. - Peter Lee (May 27, '11)

The occasion of Pakistan Prime Minister Yusuf Gilani's official visit to China was an opportunity for both parties to stake a claim to a post-United States future as the closest of allies, with a shared commitment to a stabilized Afghanistan and recovering Pakistan.

Chinese state media gave spectacular coverage to the visit as a sign of its geopolitical significance. The Chinese government contributed to the sense of occasion with the kind of gesture the Pakistani military - smarting from the humiliation of the killing of Osama bin Laden by American Special Forces inside Pakistan - appreciates the most: a promise to expedite delivery of 50 Chinese fighter jets.

Then Pakistan's Defense Minister Ahmed Mukhtar put his hoof in it:


"The Chinese government has acceded to Pakistan's request to take over operations at Gwadar port as soon as the terms of agreement with the Singapore Port Authority (SPA) expire," Associated Press of Pakistan (APP) quoted Defense Minister Chaudhry Ahmad Mukhtar as saying in a statement.

According to APP, Mukhtar said Pakistan appreciated that the Chinese government agrees to run the port, but would be more grateful "if a naval base is constructed at the site of Gwadar for Pakistan." [1]

His remarks set off alarm bells around the world, as pundits dusted off the "string of pearls" analogy describing China's alleged efforts to create a network of military-ready ports, and raised the specter of the Chinese dragon bathing his vermilion claws in the milk-warm waters of the Indian Ocean.

China promptly issued a denial - about building the naval base, at least - that made the whole episode look like another spasm of incompetence by President Asif Ali Zardari's administration. [2]

It also forced China's quasi-official nationalistic mouthpiece, Global Times - which had uncritically picked up on the Associated Press of Pakistan report - to do some backtracking, backfilling and blustering:


Beijing recently denied a rumor that the Pakistani government has invited it to build a naval base at the port of Gwadar. But this doesn't stop some of the Western countries and India, China's regional competitor, playing with the so-called China threat theory.

[I]f the world really wants China to take more responsibilities in Asia-Pacific region and around the world, it should allow China to participate in international military co-operations and understand the need of China to set up overseas military bases.
Peace is China's only military interest and the international community should keep this in mind. [3]

It looks like Mukhtar badly overreached in his attempt to convince the administration of US President Barack Obama of China's willingness to replace the US as Pakistan's official best friend forever.

It may simply be that he was just trying to be helpful, and get Pakistan out of an embarrassing jam on the operation of Gwadar.

There are three likely reasons and one unlikely reason why China has little interest in helping Pakistan play the Gwadar card, either as a commercial or military property.

The unlikely reason was floated by The Times of India. It linked the port project to the attack by militants on the Mehran naval base in Karachi this week, apparently in an attempt to publicize the fact that Chinese engineers are assisting the by now globally unpopular Pakistani military:


Apparently jolted by the Taliban attack on Pakistan's naval base, China on Tuesday indicated it would not invest funds on creating another naval base in that country. [4]

The linkage between the two events probably does not extend beyond the shared use of the three words "naval base" and "China".

As we shall see, deadly peril is a fact of life for Chinese personnel at Gwadar already. China would be unlikely to reverse a major strategic decision because 11 Chinese helicopter technicians were in transitory peril more than 1,000 kilometers from Gwadar during an attack intended to embarrass the Pakistani military and destroy two US surveillance planes as retaliation for the raid that killed Bin Laden.

As for the likely reasons for Chinese wariness:

First and foremost, Gwadar is a failed commercial port - built with over US$200 million in unenthusiastic Chinese aid - in the middle of a wilderness that nobody visits. [5]

In the most recent court case that has bedeviled the port and its operator - Port of Singapore Authority or PSA - it was alleged that the only way to get business to Gwadar - for what purpose and to whose benefit it can only be imagined - was to divert cargo from Karachi:


Since PSA has failed to attract commercial vessels to Gwadar Port, it is reported and in common knowledge that the government at the expense of the public exchequer is subsidizing and artificially creating business for PSA by diverting different cargoes of urea and wheat (otherwise destined for the ports at Karachi) to Gwadar Port which reportedly resulted in a loss of at least Rs 2,500 [US$40] per ton in extra, unnecessary and unwarranted costs to the public exchequer. PSA has failed to make any investment in additional facilities at Gwadar Port contrary to the tall claims at the time of award of the CA to PSA, it added. [6]

The cash-strapped Pakistani government apparently reneged on a deal to develop a free-trade zone at the port, ditched plans to build transportation infrastructure connecting the port to the interior, and failed to follow through on a no-cost transfer of developable land at the port to the operators. The unhappy operators, PSA, have been subjected to accusations of non-performance it dismissed as unfounded, and harassing lawsuits inspired, it alleges, by interests from the competing port of Karachi.

Pakistan's Supreme Court has instructed the Gwadar Port Authority to cancel PSA's concession. If a new operator could be enticed into taking over the port, it is extremely unlikely that PSA would insist on serving out its contract until 2047.

Pakistan is understandably keen to find a new operator pronto for the troubled commercial port.

China has been floated as a potential replacement for PSA virtually since the inception of the contract, long before Mukhtar's statement; but China is unlikely to be enthusiastic about taking the port off PSA's hands except as an expensive favor to Pakistan.

It would not only take an immense expenditure - perhaps $2 billion - to link Gwadar to inland economic centers in Pakistan, western China and Central Asia; the effort would be largely zero-sum for Pakistan, taking business away from Karachi. The strategic justification for China - that Middle East crude could be landed at Gwadar, thereby avoiding the perils of the Straits of Malacca, and pumped or trained over the Himalayas at a capital cost of $30 million per kilometer in the more difficult stretches - seems more Pakistani wishful thinking than China's planning. [7]

Mukhtar might have been trying to sweeten the bitter commercial pill of taking over the commercial port by dangling the prospect of an advantageous cooperation between Islamabad and Beijing on a naval base.

He also may have been trying to placate the Pakistani navy at the same time by building a base for it at Gwadar, since the navy's reported unwillingness to surrender 582 acres (236 hectares) of prime land have been cited as a key obstacle to happy and harmonious development of the port. [8]

If so, Mukhtar's brainstorm, instead of pleasing everyone, will probably end up pleasing no one - especially the Chinese.

Which brings us to the second explanation for Beijing's lack of enthusiasm.

China is attempting to promote American military retreat from Afghanistan, and a reduced US security footprint in Central and South Asia. Showcasing Sino-Pakistani ties was supposed to serve as a declaration that the region's priorities were shifting from a massively destabilizing war effort led by the United States to an infrastructure and social development effort supported by China to the benefit of Pakistan as well as Afghanistan.

Raising the possibility that China was going to militarize Gwadar provided the US with an incentive to stick around and work out the kinks in its military relationship with Pakistan, instead of pulling up stakes.

The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs categorically knocked down the naval base story, as Dawn reported:


BEIJING: China said on Tuesday that it had not heard of Pakistan's proposal for China to help it build a naval port at the deep water port of Gwadar.

"Regarding that specific cooperative project, I have not heard of it," Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu told a regular news briefing in Beijing.

"It's my understanding that during the visit last week this issue was not touched upon," she said. [9]

Thirdly, Gwadar is in Balochistan ... and Balochistan is a loaded gun at the head of Pakistan and China that will go off if either country tries to make geostrategic hay with the port.

Pakistan's army seized Balochistan in 1948. Through five different bouts of hot insurgency and martial law, Pakistan asserted control over the region - and maintains control today - with its usual combination of brutality, incompetence and smug indifference, allegedly disappearing, torturing and murdering any Balochi leader of stature.

The entire province only has 6 million people - in a nation of 170 million - and their concerns and priorities are largely swept aside by the Pakistani government.

The Balochistan vibe is something along the lines of Afghanistan with an ocean view: mineral wealth, violence and resentment. Independence sentiment, or at least, independence rhetoric, is a staple of Balochi discourse.

In a similar but more subtle replay of the "you say Myanmar, I say Burma" clashing nomenclatures, "Balochistan" is the official name of the Pakistani province; "Baluchistan" is frequently the preferred spelling for independence advocates.

Supporting Balochistan independence is also something of a cottage industry among strategic thinkers in the United States.

Their motives are rather transparent - unless one believes that ardent support of Balochi independence can be reconciled with utter neglect of the aspirations of that other land of the dispossessed, the one that happens to be administered by India: Kashmir.

An independent Balochistan would be another case of substandard American nation-building, along the lines of Kosovo and Southern Sudan. But it would, like them, serve a negative purpose: weakening a disliked regime and denying a significant strategic asset to a competing power.

Independent Balochistan would achieve a trifecta of sorts. In addition to discommoding Pakistan and China, it would encourage agitation for independence across the Pakistani border among the Balochis of eastern Iran.

To support the independence of Balochistan - which would involve a radical dismemberment of Pakistan - a supporting narrative to merge the Baloch and anti-terror themes has been created to delegitimize the Pakistani state and challenge its right to territorial integrity. It goes like this:

The extermination of Islam-tinged terrorism is the world's existential errand in South and Central Asia.

Pakistan is infected with the radical Islamist virus.

By this framing, Pakistan is said to have two - and only two - alternatives.

One is to engage in a civil society revolution to root out extremists and the military-security complex that shelters them. This scenario is predicated upon rapprochement with a benevolent and generous India to knock the ideological, economic and national security props out from under Pakistani hardliners - and their Chinese enablers - and remake Pakistan as a vibrant, multi-ethnic democracy.

As Pakistani scholar Hami Yusuf articulated the position:


Policymakers have long acknowledged that the only way to ensure South Asian peace and prosperity is by normalizing relations between Pakistan and India. The chances for boosting trade, cooperating in Afghanistan, launching water- and energy-sharing projects, and eventually addressing disputed borders and transnational threats such as climate change are extremely low if Pakistan and India remain locked in an arms race spurred by Chinese contrivance. [10]

As the outpouring of official Pakistani satisfaction with Gilani's visit shows, the position described by Yusuf is not yet a "policymaker" consensus - unless vast swaths of the Pakistani and Indian military and security apparatus are excluded from the definition. For that matter, better to exclude the Pakistani people as well.

The most recent Pew poll of Pakistani attitudes - released in July 2010 - reported that India was regarded as the "greatest threat to Pakistan" by 53% of respondents. That's compared to 23% who named the Taliban. [11]

Pakistani civil society may be disgusted with its spooks and generals and their antics - like the accusation by ex-Inter-Services Intelligence chief and alleged de facto Taliban asset Hamid Gul that the United States carried out the Mehran raid - but consigning the country's future to the tender mercies of India - is still a hard sell.

That leaves the second alternative: Pakistan is relieved of its Islamist extremist problem by shedding its border regions - and its militants - through some internationally imposed disassociation, something that is, with a straight face, referred to as "peaceful Balkanization".

A notorious map published by Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Peters in the Armed Forces Journal in 2006 provided a picture of what a Balkanized Pakistan would look like.

Independent Balochistan would be a sizable rectangle composed of about 50% of current Pakistani territory - and a sizable chunk of Iran. For good measure, Peters envisioned Pakistan losing its Pashtun west to a muscled-up Afghanistan and dwindling to a narrow territory on either side of the Indus River. [12]

For the Obama administration, the attractions of presiding over the dismemberment of Pakistan have taken a back seat to obtaining the help of its security and military apparatus in finding a way out of the Afghan mess.

However, as the United States looks to wind down its involvement in Afghanistan and has less incentive to overlook Pakistan's inadequacies as an ally, the "let Pakistan go down the drain" faction may get a more favorable hearing.

The Balochistan independence movement is ready to assist.

The Baloch Conference of North America held a meeting in Washington at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace on April 30, 2011. It issued a declaration describing the horrors of the Pakistani occupation.

Going beyond the issue of Balochistan, the declaration characterized Pakistan as not being "a truthful and trusted ally in the war on terror" (making the prescient assertion, prior to the notorious raid to kill Bin Laden in Abbottabad, that "Bin laden, [his deputy] Aymen al-Zawahiri and [Taliban leader] Mullah Omar ... are still hiding in Pakistani sanctuaries provided to them by Pakistani military and its ISI").

In article 8, the declaration stops pussyfooting around to declare:


[I]This Conference considers Pakistan a terrorist state and asks the UN and the International Community to declare her as such.

Article 13 ties the various strands together and declares:


This Conference calls for a peaceful balkanization of Pakistan on ethnic and linguistic and cultural lines to eliminate and eradicate Islamic extremism and terrorism once and for all. This Conference rejects the artificially drawn British boundaries of the Durand line and Goldsmith line and demands the redrawing of the map of the region based on ethnic, linguistic and cultural lines. [13]

Linking Baloch independence to the war on Islamist extremists may appear to be an attractive, low-cost way to entice the United States into stirring the pot.

However, in practice "peaceful Balkanization" would probably look a lot more like a perpetuation of the miserable, expensive counter-insurgency the US has been conducting in Afghanistan and Pakistan for the past 10 years.

In February, before a Chinese-built naval base at Gwadar was even a glint in Ahmed Mukhtar's eye, Selig Harrison sounded the twin clarions of Balochi independence and the "war on terror" in an op-ed in the National Interest:


[T]he United States should do more to support anti-Islamist forces along the southern Arabian Sea coast. First, it should support anti-Islamist Sindhi leaders of the Sufi variant of Islam with their network of 124,000 shrines. Most important, it should aid the 6 million Baluch insurgents fighting for independence from Pakistan in the face of growing ISI repression. Pakistan has given China a base at Gwadar in the heart of Baluch territory. So an independent Balochistan would serve US strategic interests in addition to the immediate goal of countering Islamist forces. [14]

Great Game On!

On a demographic note, the entire Baloch population of Balochistan is only around 6 million. It is questionable that every one of them qualifies as an "insurgent" in open rebellion against the Pakistani state. Whether or not every man, woman and child in Balochistan is an insurgent, the sense of grievance against Islamabad is strong and genuine.

And, because they are seen as Islamabad's partners in penetrating and exploiting Balochistan, the Chinese are not popular there either.

The rhetoric of Balochi politics is dominated by resource nationalism of the sort that would receive short shrift from the United States and the international business community if it were invoked by the Democratic Republic of the Congo, and not voiced by a group much inclined to do the West a geostrategic favor in Pakistan.

Balochi politicians are agitating against Chinese investment in a copper and gold mine at Sendak as an Islamabad-coordinated raid on the region's riches.

On the issue of Gwadar, the provincial government has made the rather dubious claim that the key to success of the white elephant port is not massive investment to link it to Central Asian markets, but the exercise of professional Balochi management.

Asserting that former president Pervez Musharraf had slow-walked construction of Gwadar not because it was an immensely expensive boondoggle in the desert but because he wanted to delay Balochi enjoyment of this mercantile gold mine, the provincial government called for cancelation of the 40-year contract by PSA, and takeover of the contract by local interests.

When the first report of the alleged Chinese takeover of Gwadar hit the Pakistani papers, the provincial chief minister, Nawab Muhammad Aslam Raisani, who is also chairman of the board of directors of Gwadar Port, rushed to Islamabad to object to getting blindsided on the announcement and press the case for local, instead of Chinese, management. [15]

Under the rubric of forestalling "Panjabi-Han" infiltration, warnings - or unsubtle threats - to the Chinese to steer clear of the region are familiar themes in Balochi politics.

As an editorial, "Balochistan for Sale", in an online Balochi journal put it:


It is extremely disturbing the way Islamabad unilaterally decides the fate of certain mega projects and lands inside Balochistan without even the consent of the local stakeholders. Foreign investment is one thing but deciding the future a controversial project is another thing.

Such secret deals will only antagonize the local people of the conflict-driven province. In the past, Baloch armed groups had attacked and killed Chinese engineers because of the same reason. If Islamabad does not consult the Baloch and proceed with these high level deals, it is going to irresponsibly compromise the safety of the Chinese. The security of foreign nationals would further be jeopardized if Islamabad annoys the government of Balochistan too. [16]

The idea that China would find itself exposed to the same kind of savage insurgency that bedevils the United States in Iraq and Afghanistan is not, I suspect, unwelcome to American pundits.

Robert Kaplan, the Atlantic security columnist, has adopted Gwadar-as-linchpin framing and frequently returns to the theme of Baloch insurgents turning the province into a sea of sandy fire for unwelcome outsiders. He interviewed a Baluch nationalist, who told him:


"No matter how hard they try to turn Gwadar into Dubai , it won't work. There will be resistance. The pipelines going to China will not be safe. They will have to cross through Baluch territory, and if our rights are violated, nothing will be secure." In 2004, in fact, a car bomb killed three Chinese engineers on their way to Gwadar. Other nationalists have said that Baluch insurgents would eventually kill more Chinese workers, bringing further uncertainty to Gwadar. [17]

Several Chinese engineers have died in attacks around Gwadar and security was cited as one of several reasons why the Chinese pulled the plug on plans for a 200,000 barrel/day refinery at Gwadar.

There are nagging rumors that the Balochi separatists are receiving assistance from the US Central Intelligence Agency, India's Research and Intelligence Wing, and even Russian intelligence as part of their ongoing support for the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance in Afghanistan, and to punish Pakistan for its pro-Taliban Afghan policy.

Asia Times Online's Pepe Escobar has made the case for Gwadar as the key objective in the battle of Pipelineistan - US efforts to block the Iran-Pakistan (and maybe India) natural gas pipeline - in favor of the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India (TAPI) pipeline bringing in the stuff Pakistan so desperately needs through Afghanistan from Central Asia. [18]

On her blog, Dr Stuart Bramhall retailed some of the accusations of foreign involvement in training Balochi insurgents - which are indignantly denounced by Baloch advocates - while echoing the pipeline them.


[The United States, India and Russia] support Balochistan independence, owing to the province's strategic importance as an energy transit route. Not only is it a conduit for the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India oil pipeline (which is mostly non-functional because the Taliban keep blowing up the Afghanistan section) and the planned Iran-Pakistan-India natural gas pipeline, but more importantly it adjoins the Arabian Sea and the Straits of Hormuz, which annually transship 30% of the world's oil resources pass every year. [19]

In any case, to the Chinese, Gwadar spells bad economics, premature geostrategic confrontation with the United States and the prospect of becoming the target of a burgeoning local insurgency that just might be receiving covert support from Washington and New Delhi.

However, if China decides to play the long game on Gwadar, and shoulder the burden and risks of operating the commercial port, a port call by Chinese naval vessels - and, later on, the oft-rumored naval base - may indeed be in the cards.

[I]Notes
1. China agrees to run Pakistan port: report, Global Times (http://world.globaltimes.cn/asia-pacific/2011-05/657888.html), May 23, 2011.
2. China says unaware of Gwadar port proposal (http://www.paktribune.com/news/index.shtml?239675), PakTribune, May 25, 2011.
3. China needs overseas bases for global role (http://opinion.globaltimes.cn/chinese-press/2011-05/658995.html), Global Times, May 25, 2011.
4. China rejects Pakistan's naval base request, Times of India (http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2011-05-24/china/29577192_1_naval-base-ahmad-mukhtar-gwadar-port), May 24, 2011.
5. Thread: Gwadar may lose business to Iranian port of Chabahar (http://defenceforumindia.com/military'strategy/315-gwadar-may-lose-business-iranian-port-chabahar.html), Defence Forum of India, Feb 26, 2009.
6. Gwadar Port Authority: PSA barred from transferring any property (http://www.forexpk.com/highlights/todays-pick/gwadar-port-authority-psa-barred-from-transferring-any-property.html), Forex PK, Dec 9, 2010.
7. A Tale of Two Ports - Gawadar and Chabahar (http://gilgitbaltistanbulletin.wordpress.com/2011/01/12/gilgit-baltistan-a-tale-of-two-ports-gawadar-and-chabahar/), Gilgit Baltistan Bulletin, Jan 12, 2011.
8. China calls halt to Gwadar refinery, Asia Times Online (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KH14Df02.html), Aug 14, 2009.
9. China says it is unaware of Gwadar port proposal (http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/24/china'says-it-is-unaware-of-gwadar-port-proposal.html), Reuters, May 24, 2011.
10. Higher than the Himalayas? (http://www.dawn.com/2011/05/23/higher-than-the-himalayas.html) Dawn, May 23, 2011.
11. Concern About Extremist Threat Slips in Pakistan (http://pewglobal.org/2010/07/29/concern-about-extremist-threat'slips-in-pakistan/), Pew Research Center, Jul 29, 2010.
12. If Pakistan is an Ally, Why Are We Trying to Break Up Their Country? (http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2011/03/09/redrawing-the-map-the-balkanization-of-pakistan/), Stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com, March 9, 2011.
13. Click here (http://www.crisisbalochistan.com/secondary_menu/news/2011-balochistan-international-conference-washington-dc-usa.html) for text.
14. Free Balochistan (http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/free-Balochistan-4799), National Interest, Feb 1, 2011.
15. Raisani dashes to Islamabad to meet (http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=6187&Cat=13&dt=5/23/2011), The News, May 23, 2011.
16. Balochistan for Sale (http://www.thebalochhal.com/2011/05/editorial-balochistan-for'sale/), The Baloch Hal, May 22, 2011.
17. Pakistan's Fatal Shore (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/05/pakistan-8217's-fatal'shore/7385/), The Atlantic, May 2009.
18. China calls halt to Gwadar refinery (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/South_Asia/KH14Df02.html), Asia Times Online, Aug 14, 2009.
19. The CIA's Strange Bedfellows in Pakistan (http://stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com/2011/03/11/the-cias'strange-bedfellows-in-balochistan/), Stuartbramhall.aegauthorblogs.com, Mar 11, 2011.

Peter Lee writes on East and South Asian affairs and their intersection with US foreign policy.

Asia Times Online :: China News, China Business News, Taiwan and Hong Kong News and Business. (http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/ME28Ad01.html)

xinhui
28 May 11,, 20:42
w.t.f to the Atime article, lets see how it develops.... too soon to draw anything at this point.

China has an interest in develop the port into something, that is no question about it. the question is what that something is..............


Jim Holmes, professor of strategy at the U.S. Naval War college, weights in on the PLAN and Gwadar debate on NPR's PRI

Pakistan Okays China Naval Base | PRI's The World (http://www.theworld.org/2011/05/pakistab-oks-china-naval-base/)


Admiral Willard, the commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, notes that the base infrastructure or I should say, the commercial port infrastructure that China has funded in the Indian Ocean is clearly adequate for military use as far as the channel being deep enough, having big enough piers and whatnot, but at the same time in order to forward deploy a fleet for a long period of time you need, you’re gonna need major repair facilities, much like you would see with the U.S. 7th Fleet in places like Sasebo and Yokosuka.

Blademaster
28 May 11,, 20:50
Andy pls check your PM.

xinhui
30 May 11,, 19:54
Coal is the new gold, been saying (and made some money in the process via ETF) that for a while now.


China coal imports to double in 2015, India close behind
China coal imports to double in 2015, India close behind | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/30/us-coal-asia-idUSTRE74T2Q220110530)
By Rebekah Kebede and Michael Taylor

NUSA DUA, Indonesia | Mon May 30, 2011 11:21am EDT

(Reuters) - Top coal consumer China should see import demand more than double in the next four years and India will be close behind as both hoover up supplies on international markets to feed rapidly growing power industries, industry executives said on Monday.

China's thermal coal imports could rise to 200 million tonnes in 2015 from around 90 million tonnes in 2011, Neil Dhar, executive vice president of trading house Noble Group, told the Coaltrans Asia conference.

At 90 million tonnes, China's 2011 imports would be steady from 2010, he said. That would indicate shipments would rise for the rest of the year, as China's imports in the first four months of 2011 were down a quarter on 2010.

The flow into China, which emerged as the world's second-largest coal importer after Japan last year, fluctuates according to domestic coal prices and whether or not those are high enough to encourage more electricity output from coal-fired power producers.

China boosted power prices on Monday in an attempt to ease its worst power shortages since 2004. That may encourage more coal imports to boost power supply.

India's thermal imports could rise to more than 100 million tonnes by 2015, from around 67 million tonnes in 2011, Dhar said. Imports would jump by almost 10 million tonnes this year, he added.

Dreadnought
01 Jun 11,, 01:38
Why would the US need anything covert. It has plenty of "eyes" up there in space and other forms to keep up on recent events. The idea of the US having anything terrorist to do with China or Pakistans facilities or other is nonsense and half baked at best. An idiot can see that.:rolleyes:

Sounds more to me like Pakistan getting China to fund her needs by fueling it with fears of attacks. Play one off the other.

The US already has bases in the region and China holds more in US debt then anyone.

Here's a question for the good author.......

Why would the US fund anyone even covertly to attack her major debt holder namely China?

Its pretty plain to see whats at stake there although the author apparently dont.

Just wait until China fully understands what it takes to "shoulder the burden" with Pakistan. If they need an explanation they should just ask the US. It wont cost them a dime, but I bet it will indeed save them alot of money.:biggrin:;)

commander
03 Jun 11,, 14:30
I personally don't think China will be an all weather friend of Pakistan. They just don't want US to become stronger in the Asia-Pacific region. So China might be showing the candy to Pakistan now but later on definitely it will abandon Pakistan.