The far reaches of the Corridor

Gwadar is being constructed as a commercial port but in the future it could be developed it into a naval facility

Syed Mohammad Ali June 18, 2015
The writer is author of the book Development, Poverty and Power in Pakistan, available from Routledge

The plan to create the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a major development which has significance, not only for our own country and China, but has broader geostrategic ramifications as well. It is thus important to understand the multiple layers pertaining to the CPEC, including the broader geostrategic context in which this initiative has been conceived, as well as the power dynamics surrounding this ambitious project as they have begun to unfold within Pakistan. The $46 billion investment China intends to commit to Pakistan under the CPEC is impressive. The amount exceeds all foreign direct investment Pakistan has received in the past several years, and is considerably more than all the aid Pakistan has received from the US since 9/11.

The CPEC is a comprehensive infrastructure project, involving the construction of roads, railroads and power plants, over a 15-year period. The project is impelled by Beijing’s desire to expand its trade and transport footprint across Central and South Asia and obtain easier access to Middle Eastern and West African energy supplies via the Gwadar port. Access to the Gwadar port would also enable China to contend with growing US influence in the South China Sea, and bypass the potential threat of a maritime blockade.

Although Gwadar is being constructed as a commercial port at present, in the future it could be possible to develop it into a naval facility leading to maritime competition in the Indian Ocean, an issue that India is not oblivious to.

Moreover, the CPEC also has domestic implications for centre-province relations within Pakistan itself, which is also a matter of particular concern given the legacy of uneven development within the country. The project has begun to stir up controversy, and politicians including the ANP leadership in Khyber-Pakhtunkhw, as well as Baloch nationalists, allege that the project has been altered to benefit Punjab. The federal government is trying to stress that the CPEC aims to create a network of multiple routes and economic corridors which will serve all the four provinces equally.

Pre-existing infrastructure and varying levels of security do imply that progress on the different routes of the project will not be uniform. Our decision-makers thus face the difficult task of ensuring sufficient institutional coordination to meet the stipulated deadlines of the larger project, in addition to contending with political challenges and the prevailing lack of security which could threaten the success of the project. The provincial governments must also rise to the task and ensure they provide land for development projects, and provision of allied facilities, to meet the stipulated project deadlines. Ultimately, the CPEC initiative must ensure that all provincial capitals become major nodes for the economic corridor, or else the provincial tensions within the country will become further exacerbated.

Despite these challenges, the CPEC provides a unique opportunity for Pakistan to boost its strategic and economic position. It would thus be a shame if the CPEC were to become bogged down in political controversies like the Kalabagh Dam. If Pakistan remains unable to complete its part of the CPEC in a timely fashion, the Chinese will still have the option to focus their attentions on other routes, going through the Persian Gulf in Iran, or through Central Asia and Russia, but Pakistan will lose the golden opportunity of becoming a conduit for the growing Chinese influence over the coming decades.

Published in The Express Tribune, June 19th,  2015.

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


SKhan | 5 years ago | Reply I am agreed with the comment given by Sanjeev about the ambiguous agreement of Corridor by our country politician with China. In the first year we are going to pay 33.33 pc debts, in second we need to pay 13.33pc while in the 3rd and fourth year we will pay 20pc debt on the Chines investment of 46 billion. What type of goods we have to export to China? They are buying raw material from us on cheap price and will send us expensive furnished goods through CPEC. Our industries will be collapse soon and our labour force will lose their jobs. And you know there will be no labor/officer, engineer from Pakistan in the construction, development or any energy sector, but all will be from China. I think our sweet investor neighbor is the second form of East India Company. We need to review our decisions and agreement.
BlackHat | 6 years ago | Reply There are many who say that comments from Indians here betray some kind of jealousy and they wish the country ill. That may be true in some cases but not all. I, for one, fervently wish the people of Pakistan well and hope to see peace between the two peoples and economic wellbeing of the people of the subcontinent. I do make comments critical of certain policies pursued by the Pakistani establishment because they not only harm the people of Pakistan but also hold back the region. Historically one thing is certain. People of the subcontinent enjoyed highest standards of living when united under a powerful kingdom or empire. Other times they have suffered. Pakistan has tried getting into various alliances that have enhanced the wellbeing of its establishment at the cost of its people. China is its latest band wagon, forgetting China has its own national interest and that certainly is not primarily the welfare of the Pakistani people. Please think what being a puppet has got you. You are willing to tolerate atrocities perpetrated on your coreligionists but do not want accommodate those with whom you share your ancestry just because your forefathers chose a different religion!
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


Most Read