Centre, provinces begin to see eye to eye on CPEC

All stakeholders show willingness to contribute


Sardar Sikander January 30, 2017
All stakeholders show willingness to contribute. PHOTO: AFP

ISLAMABAD: The ruling Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz and mainstream opposition parties may be at daggers drawn on the political front but the centre and provinces appear to be acting in unison as far as the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is concerned.

Serious differences over the multibillion dollar initiative between the federal, Khyber-Pakhtunkhwa and Sindh governments appear to be moving towards resolution and stakeholders have shown willingness to contribute their share in materialising the project, informed circles told The Express Tribune.

Provinces dilly-dallying over deployment of CPEC force

Not long ago, K-P and Sindh were accusing the centre of ignoring the Western Route of the CPEC, but following last month’s Joint Cooperation Committee (JCC) meeting in Beijing – which was attended by all four chief ministers – the provinces’ concerns were redressed by federal and Chinese authorities. Top K-P and Sindh government officials are now holding regular meetings with federal authorities to review progress on the CPEC and execute related projects as per their timelines, the official sources said.



Last week, K-P Chief Minister Pervaiz Khattak set up a steering committee to oversee progress on different CPEC projects. The committee comprises seven working groups that would monitor CPEC implementation and send progress updates to the chief minister, who would then share them with the prime minister, sources said.

To accommodate the demands of K-P and Sindh, the JCC approved in principle the inclusion of Karachi Circular Railways, Keti Bandar, special economic zones in Sindh and K-P, a 1,700MW hydel plant and circular railway track between Peshawar-Charsadda-Nowshera-Mardan and Swabi under the CPEC.

Speaking to The Express Tribune, Sindh Chief Minister’s Adviser Senator Saeed Ghani termed the inclusion of Sindh’s three projects a good development. “This is appreciable. But the CPEC’s reservations are not a Sindh-specific phenomenon. The reservations of other provinces including K-P and Balochistan also need to be redressed.”

CPEC route: PM asks federal officials to assuage provinces’ concerns

Official sources claim the last JCC meeting has brought provinces and centre closer. The federal government faces no CPEC-related problems in Punjab and Balochistan as the PML-N holds government there.

K-P still has some issues regarding the Western Route which prompted the K-P Assembly speaker to move the Peshawar High Court.

Federal officials, however, argue that K-P authorities have realised that taking to court an issue as sensitive as the CPEC may not serve Pakistan’s interest. “You just can’t drag the issues of national importance in the courts. You always have the room to deliberate and dialogue to sort out crucial issues,” a PM House official commented.

K-P Chief Minister’s Political Coordinator Zar Gul Khan confirmed the setting up of a steering committee to oversee the CPEC implementation. “It’s beyond any doubt that the CPEC is Pakistan’s lifeline and we are fully aware of the importance of this project that is no doubt a game-changer for the region. It’s the federal government whose policies gave rise to misunderstandings and uncertainty.”

Published in The Express Tribune, January 30th, 2017.

 

COMMENTS (1)

Munawer Aijaz | 7 years ago | Reply Highly appreciated to initiated such mega projects in Pakistan which any how not acceptable by Super Power and India which started conspiracy against project by using there agents in Pakistan by heavy funding ispecially by neighbor country India.Project should change who synario as some power blocks Afghanistan routes.By adding via chania route to Central Asian market benefit whole reagin.All the Pakistani prey for success of CEPC,and dream changing in reality.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ