Easing of Pak-India trade tensions

Published: August 27, 2018
Email
The writer is a former caretaker finance minister and served as vice-president at the World Bank

The writer is a former caretaker finance minister and served as vice-president at the World Bank

The possible easing of tensions between Pakistan and India will have to occur in a difficult environment. To begin with are the changes Beijing is making in the way it handles its economy. It no longer has low-priced labour and for demographic reasons the Western markets to which most of its products went are not expanding as rapidly as they did in the past. It must look for other ways and one of them is to develop an industrial base that try and become the leader in the new industrial production system that is taking shape. This relies on linking production enterprises through supply chains that embrace the entire world, developed and emerging. But some of this is seen as a challenge by Washington under Trump.

It took a few months after Trump’s inaugural address to take on China. Initially he tried a charm offensive and invited “my friend” President Xi Jinping to visit him at Mar a Largo, the president’s Florida resort. His focus at that point was on North Korea. Trump had concluded that he needed China’s help to push back the North Koreans from their nuclear ambitions. He took the unusual step of holding a summit with the Korean leader in Singapore at which he believed he had secured President Kim’s agreement to denuclearise. Trump began to dream of the Nobel Peace Prize. But as most experts had predicted, moving North Korea from its nuclear ambitions would not be easy: the expected help from China did not materialise and Trump began to see China as a convenient political foil. He turned on China, initially using tariffs on trade as his weapon of choice. Since the spring of 2018, the United States and China have each put tariffs on $34 billion worth of goods, with $16 billion slated to take effect in late August. The trade war has sparked anxiety among some US industries, in particular among those in which China has become a major competitor. On August 23, China and the United States sat down again to resolve their differences. How would all this affect South Asia?

The consequences could be grave if the conflict between Washington and Beijing sharpens. One of the more serious ones would be to split the South Asian subcontinent down the middle. Already, China has a large presence in Pakistan. It is not only investing more than $60 billion in building the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, with between $8 and $10 billion coming in every year. Beijing is also aiding Pakistan in several different ways. It is providing emergency financial assistance to help Islamabad handle its fairly-severe balance-of-payments crisis.

But Pakistan is not the only South Asian country China hopes to have on its side. It is actively courting Bangladesh to join the BRI initiative. On the opposite side is the United States’ interest in India whose association is being sought by both Washington and Tokyo to partner them in what is called the Indo-Pacific alliance. If these competing interests materialise, South Asia could become the field where the new ‘great game’ between the two rival powers would be played. That is obviously not in the region’s larger interest.

South Asia remains the only world region that does not have a working arrangement among its nations. For decades South Asian countries have worked against one another rather than with one another. To put the blame for the discord on the lingering Kashmir problem is too easy an explanation. Overall suspicion has blocked the countries to take advantage of the obvious links between their economies to better the lives of their citizens. Pakistan, for instance, has a one-sided transit arrangement with Afghanistan which allows the latter to use its road infrastructure to export to India. But India cannot use the same facility for trading with Afghanistan. It is hard to understand the reason behind this discrimination.

India, by far the largest economy of the region, has to give more to its neighbours than it gets from them. This is the basic principle of exchange on which all successful regional trade agreements are based. If there is one large economy in the arrangement, it is the one that must bend more. Several years ago, I was engaged to do a study for the United States’ AID to determine why the South Asia Free Trade Area was not working. I visited most member countries before meeting Dr Manmohan Singh who was then India’s prime minister. He asked me how India’s neighbour felt about his country. “Not well,” I responded. “The only country that is not really unhappy with you is Pakistan and the reason for that is there is little bilateral trade.” India is not an easy country to trade with. He gave me the reason for that. Although international commerce is a central subject in the Indian Constitution, the states that neighbour the world outside can do a lot to hinder trade. Many do, by using what in trade parlance are called ‘non-trade barriers’ or NTBs. India is one of the world’s most aggressive users of this particular trade-retarding device. This is the main reason why Pakistan has not granted India the ‘most-favoured nation’ status.

Soon after being sworn in, Imran Khan and Shah Mahmoud Qureshi, as Pakistan’s prime minister and foreign minister respectively, have indicated their interest in improving relations with India. Both mentioned trade as an important area for discussions. Any bilateral understanding has to be undertaken in the context of world developments. Islamabad and New Delhi will have to be mindful that the impending China-US trade war will provide the context in which they deliberate.

 

Published in The Express Tribune, August 27th, 2018.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.

 

Facebook Conversations

Reader Comments (6)

  • Komal S
    Aug 27, 2018 - 10:15AM

    How much does Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal, Afghanistan or Maldives care about Kashmir? Now SAARC is a victim of a bilateral Kashmir issue. Hope Pakistanis realize that and let SAARC function.Recommend

  • Chacha Jee
    Aug 27, 2018 - 12:44PM

    Pakistan has zero goodwill credibility in India. May be in Muslim areas. But Muslim in India cozying up with Pakistan will seen with suspicion. Pakistani exports to India will improve only if general public or indian awam is not aware of it.Recommend

  • Malar
    Aug 27, 2018 - 6:02PM

    Neat articulation. Very impressive.Recommend

  • Kolsat
    Aug 28, 2018 - 4:50AM

    @Komal S: Totally agree with you. The author has sensibly argued for more trade among SAARC nations. Improved trade will raise standards and reduce animosity because our fate will be entertwined with each other. Hope politicians on all sides see the benefits and abolish NTBs.Recommend

  • Veer Singh
    Aug 28, 2018 - 10:14AM

    India is the top 5 trading partner of every country in the region including but not limited to Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Bhutan, Myanmar, Afghanistan & Iran. In a few years it will also become a top 5 trading partner of China. Pakistan is a top 5 trading partner of only Afghanistan and that’s only because of Afghanistan’s dependence on Pakistani ports. So the author should ask himself again as to which country of the region is a hinderance to regional trade.Recommend

  • SA
    Aug 29, 2018 - 1:57AM

    What is the purpose of this article? Much of it is on China -US and the last bit on South Asia. Makes no sense. Recommend

More in Opinion