Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1234
Results 46 to 48 of 48

Thread: CPEC and Developments

  1. #46
    Turbanator Senior Contributor Double Edge's Avatar
    Join Date
    11 Sep 10
    Which is in line with what the VP at EXIM said in the reuters article posted earlier

    Relying on the assessments of the IMF, World Bank and the ADB, it notes that Pakistan’s economy cannot absorb FDI much above $2 billion per year without giving rise to stresses in its economy. “It is recommended that China’s maximum annual direct investment in Pakistan should be around US$1 billion.” Likewise, it concludes that Pakistan’s ceiling for preferential loans should be $1 billion, and for non preferential loans no more than $1.5 billion per year.

    Slow & steady

  2. #47
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Bangalore, India
    /\/\ 31 years..............even 5 years is too long a future. Anything can happen. And from the looks of Af-Pak scenario, the China+Pak combine has everything to lose, if India plays it's cards right.

    Btw, is that Samuel Jackson in disguise in your avatar?

  3. #48
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    12 Jul 13
    Bangalore, India
    Snakes in the backyard: China and Pakistan betray grand delusions
    Islamabad and Beijing think the infrastructure of terrorism can co-exist with economic infrastructure.

    The US State Department’s July 20 report on terrorism was stark in its assessment of Pakistan’s role in the fight against terrorism. Pakistan, the report said, provided “safe havens” for terrorist groups like the Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) and the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM).

    The annual US "Country Report on Terrorism 2016" articulates mounting US dissatisfaction with a one-time ally. Just five days before the report was released, the US House of Representatives tightened the screws on Pakistan. The legislation passed by the house makes it mandatory for the Pentagon to certify that Pakistan is not providing "military, financial, or logistical support" to individuals designated as terrorists operating in Pakistan or Afghanistan.

    The harshest indictment of Islamabad’s duplicity came from former secretary of state Hillary Clinton six years ago. "It's like that old story - you can't keep snakes in your backyard and expect them only to bite your neighbours," she told a press conference during an unannounced October 21, 2011 visit to Islamabad. “Eventually those snakes are going to turn on whoever has them in the backyard," Clinton added.

    Clinton’s rage was understandable. Her demarche came just five months after US special forces raided a compound in the garrison town of Abbotabad, Pakistan and killed 9/11 mastermind Osama bin Laden. There was mounting evidence that the Haqqani Network was being sheltered by Pakistan.

    Bin Laden was not the first terrorist to have been discovered in Pakistan. His lieutenant and 9/11 planner, Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, of Pakistani origin, was arrested from Rawalpindi in 2003. Taliban chief Mullah Mansour was killed by a CIA drone strike in May 2016, when he was driving through Pakistan.

    Pakistan’s deep state today shelters more terrorists than many European countries have Syrian refugees, a modern-day version of the ancient Taxila University which flourished there over 1,600 years ago with multi-hued global terrorists - Arabs, Chechens, Afghans, Kashmiris and Sikhs. All of them are "strategic weapons" that the Pakistani deep state can use against its neighbours. Heavy Industries Taxila is now Pakistan’s largest arms manufacturer. How’s that for irony?

    This terrorism university is what New Delhi describes as the "infrastructure of terrorism", an ecosystem which recruits, motivates, trains and finally infiltrates terrorists for deadly attacks into India and Afghanistan. Pakistan’s deep state neatly bifurcated their counter-terrorism drive after the 9/11 attacks and then US President George Bush’s “either you’re with us or against us” ultimatum.

    The deep state in Rawalpindi pretended to act against the Al-Qaeda and Taliban, occasionally serving up their leaders to claim cash bounties from the US. At the same time, it continued to push terrorists, its "strategic assets", against its neighbours.

    The US was aware of this, but perhaps turned a blind eye because the LeT and JeM were directed only in "Indian-administered Kashmir". Exactly how blurred these boundaries between good and bad terrorists are is revealed in a rigorously researched new book, The Exile. Investigative journalists Cathy Scott-Clark and Adrian Levy reveal how fleeing Al-Qaeda fighters were sheltered by the LeT and JeM.

    Osama bin Laden, in fact, received a respite when a JeM attack on India’s Parliament on December 13, 2001 triggered off a massive troop deployment along Pakistan’s western borders. This gave the Pakistan Army an excuse to pull out from the eastern borders where they had cornered Al-Qaeda fighters fleeing Afghanistan.

    The net result? The core of Al-Qaeda, including bin Laden and his deputy, Ayman al-Zawahiri, spilled over into Pakistan and escaped annihilation.

    But with decreased US flows, it has brought about a recent rethink within Rawalpindi. Pakistan Army's search for a new benefactor has ended up at the Karakoram Highway and in the wholehearted embrace of a questionable new project offered by China’s President Xi Jinping in 2013.

    The $62 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a supersized version of a project first offered by China to then Pakistan President Pervez Musharraf in 2003 proposes to build a network of power projects and industrial projects across the length of the country, providing it with an economic spine that will propel growth.

    Economic activity cannot go hand-in-hand with terrorism. But as the US State Department report shows, there has been no let up in Pakistan’s sponsorship of terror. Terrorist groups within Pakistan are something Beijing is entirely comfortable with, judging by its repeated blocking of Indian attempts in the United Nations to get the JeM’s Masood Azhar declared a global terrorist.

    Is Pakistan confident that the snakes it rears in its backyard will not turn on the CPEC? Is China confident that the corridor it is building through Pakistan will only be unidirectional? That is, the poisonous Islamist ideology being propagated by the deep state, the LeT and the JeM, will not flow into China’s restive Xinjiang province.

    These are the questions Beijing and Islamabad believe they have the answers for.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 4 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 4 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Syrian Civil War Developments
    By tankie in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 2476
    Last Post: 24 Jun 17,, 21:04
  2. Developments in Yemen
    By tantalus in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02 May 15,, 00:10
  3. Uzbekistan, and other developments in Central Asia
    By cyppok in forum Central and South Asia
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 01 Aug 13,, 12:31
  4. Top Ten Chinese Military Modernization Developments
    By oneman28 in forum East Asia and the Pacific
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 23 Jun 08,, 06:49
  5. Iran And Possible Developments
    By Gazi in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 26 Feb 06,, 16:02

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts