For Beijing, alliance with Pakistan is a geopolitical game-changer - a success of Chinese expansionism, and for Islamabad, it is a life-time opportunity and its last chance for economic modernisation.

CPEC was sold as the ultimate solution to Pakistan's economic troubles. But, it was China that has squeezed all the benefits.

Foreign direct investment in Pakistan has seen a 27 per cent decline in the first seven months of the current fiscal, owing mainly to the fall in investment from its close ally China, a media report said on Tuesday.

The Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Pakistan during the first seven years fell by 27 per cent compared to the same period last fiscal year, Dawn newspaper reported, quoting the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) as saying.

The SBP, the central bank, on Monday said that the FDI during July-January FY-21 was USD 1.145 billion against an inflow of USD 1.577bn in the same period last fiscal year.

The inflow during January was USD 192.7 million compared to USD 219 million in the same month of the previous fiscal year, registering a 12 per cent decline.

However, the seven-month decline was mainly due to a decline in net FDI from China and an increase in net outflow to Norway, the report said.

The country-wise details showed that net inflow of FDI from China was USD 402.8 million against USD 502.6 million in the same period of last fiscal year.

So far, the net FDI from China is the highest in the list of inflows from other countries.

The inflows from China were USD 707.2 million during the seven months but the outflow of USD 304.4 million in the same period reduced the net FDI to USD 402.8 million.

Others from where over USD 100 million net FDIs were received were the Netherlands and Hong Kong, as they invested USD 122 million and USD 105 million, respectively, during the first seven months of FY21.

The inflows of FDI from the UK (USD 83.8m), the US (USD 73.5m) and Malta (USD 60.6m) were also significant during the seven months.

However, a drastic change in the inflows from Norway affected the overall inflow of FDI this year.

The SBP data shows that during the seven months of the previous fiscal year, the inflow from Norway was USD 288.5 million, while in the seven months of the current financial year a net outflow of USD 25.8 million was noted instead of any inflow from the Scandinavian country.

The power sector attracted the highest investment of USD 475.8 m against USD 373 m in the same period of last financial year; an increase of 27.6 per cent.

(With inputs from agencies)

For Beijing, alliance with Pakistan is a geopolitical game-changer - a success of Chinese expansionism, and for Islamabad, it is a life-time opportunity and its last chance for economic modernisation.

For Beijing, alliance with Pakistan is a geopolitical game-changer - a success of Chinese expansionism, and for Islamabad, it is a life-time opportunity and its last chance for economic modernisation. CPEC was sold as the ultimate solution to Pakistan's economic troubles. But, it was China that has squeezed all the benefits. Foreign direct investment in Pakistan has seen a 27 per cent decline in the first seven months of the current fiscal, owing mainly to the fall in investment from its close ally China, a media report said on Tuesday. The Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) in Pakistan during the first seven years fell by 27 per cent compared to the same period last fiscal year, Dawn newspaper reported, quoting the State Bank of Pakistan (SBP) as saying. The SBP, the central bank, on Monday said that the FDI during July-January FY-21 was USD 1.145 billion against an inflow of USD 1.577bn in the same period last fiscal year. The inflow during January was USD 192.7 million compared to USD 219 million in the same month of the previous fiscal year, registering a 12 per cent decline. However, the seven-month decline was mainly due to a decline in net FDI from China and an increase in net outflow to Norway, the report said. The country-wise details showed that net inflow of FDI from China was USD 402.8 million against USD 502.6 million in the same period of last fiscal year. So far, the net FDI from China is the highest in the list of inflows from other countries. The inflows from China were USD 707.2 million during the seven months but the outflow of USD 304.4 million in the same period reduced the net FDI to USD 402.8 million. Others from where over USD 100 million net FDIs were received were the Netherlands and Hong Kong, as they invested USD 122 million and USD 105 million, respectively, during the first seven months of FY21. The inflows of FDI from the UK (USD 83.8m), the US (USD 73.5m) and Malta (USD 60.6m) were also significant during the seven months. However, a drastic change in the inflows from Norway affected the overall inflow of FDI this year. The SBP data shows that during the seven months of the previous fiscal year, the inflow from Norway was USD 288.5 million, while in the seven months of the current financial year a net outflow of USD 25.8 million was noted instead of any inflow from the Scandinavian country. The power sector attracted the highest investment of USD 475.8 m against USD 373 m in the same period of last financial year; an increase of 27.6 per cent. (With inputs from agencies)

FDI in Pakistan down by 27 per cent in the first seven months; investment from China dwindles: Report

For China, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a geopolitical game-changer - the biggest success of Chinese expansionism, and for Pakistan, it is a life-time opportunity and its last chance for economic modernisation.

For the last 18 months, the US$60 billion infrastructure project has been both a source of interest and concern even as there has been a global debate over its potential and problems.

China appears to be backing away from its initial financial promises to Pakistan under Beijing-financed CPEC, amid rising corruption and terrorist attacks on Chinese engineers.

According to Asia Times, Pakistan Army is set to take near-total control of the CPEC in a bid to reassure Beijing that their investments will be more secure amid terrorist attacks on Chinese engineers and others facilitating the infrastructure projects.

The new bill comes at a time when reports suggest that China is slowly retreating from its promises.

Overall lending by the state-backed China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China declined from a peak of USD 75 billion in 2016 to just $4 billion last year. Provisional 2020 figures show that amount shrunk to around $3 billion in 2020, according to data of Boston University researchers in the United States.

The belt-tightening is believed to be in line with Beijing's so-called "rethink strategy" for its US$1 trillion BRI, which is under broad fire for "structural weaknesses" including opacity, corruption, overlending to poor countries resulting in "debt traps" and adverse social and environmental impacts, the Boston University researchers said.

Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, whose government is criticised for being under military control, is also facing flak in his country for not prioritising and expediting big-ticket Chinese infrastructure investments, Asia Times reported.

In 2018, Imran Khan had put on hold several CPEC projects suspecting corruption by the previous government. However, two years later, several of his Cabinet members were named in big corruption scandals involving the country's power sector. About one-third of Pakistan's power companies are involved in Chinese projects under the CPEC.

The 278-page inquiry report, compiled by the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) and presented to Imran Khan in April, unearthed alleged irregularities worth over USD 1.8 billion in subsidies given to 16 independent power producers (IPPs) including those belonging to Imran Khan's advisors Razak Dawood and Nadeem Baber, Asia Times said.

The SCEP had also investigated the profits earned by the Chinese power companies. The report revealed that Huang Shandong Ruyi Pakistan Ltd (HSR) and Port Qasim Electric Power Co Ltd (PQEPCL) were together overpaid by 483.6 billion rupees (USD 3 billion).

Terrorists in Balochistan province, meanwhile, have intensified their attacks on CPEC projects and Chinese nationals working on them, raising the security costs and political risks of the projects. Islamabad's move to give the military more control over the scheme is a clear attempt to mollify China's rising security concerns.

(With inputs from agencies)

For China, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a geopolitical game-changer - the biggest success of Chinese expansionism, and for Pakistan, it is a life-time opportunity and its last chance for economic modernisation.

For China, China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a geopolitical game-changer - the biggest success of Chinese expansionism, and for Pakistan, it is a life-time opportunity and its last chance for economic modernisation. For the last 18 months, the US$60 billion infrastructure project has been both a source of interest and concern even as there has been a global debate over its potential and problems. China appears to be backing away from its initial financial promises to Pakistan under Beijing-financed CPEC, amid rising corruption and terrorist attacks on Chinese engineers. According to Asia Times, Pakistan Army is set to take near-total control of the CPEC in a bid to reassure Beijing that their investments will be more secure amid terrorist attacks on Chinese engineers and others facilitating the infrastructure projects. The new bill comes at a time when reports suggest that China is slowly retreating from its promises. Overall lending by the state-backed China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China declined from a peak of USD 75 billion in 2016 to just $4 billion last year. Provisional 2020 figures show that amount shrunk to around $3 billion in 2020, according to data of Boston University researchers in the United States. The belt-tightening is believed to be in line with Beijing's so-called "rethink strategy" for its US$1 trillion BRI, which is under broad fire for "structural weaknesses" including opacity, corruption, overlending to poor countries resulting in "debt traps" and adverse social and environmental impacts, the Boston University researchers said. Pakistan Prime Minister Imran Khan, whose government is criticised for being under military control, is also facing flak in his country for not prioritising and expediting big-ticket Chinese infrastructure investments, Asia Times reported. In 2018, Imran Khan had put on hold several CPEC projects suspecting corruption by the previous government. However, two years later, several of his Cabinet members were named in big corruption scandals involving the country's power sector. About one-third of Pakistan's power companies are involved in Chinese projects under the CPEC. The 278-page inquiry report, compiled by the Securities and Exchange Commission of Pakistan (SECP) and presented to Imran Khan in April, unearthed alleged irregularities worth over USD 1.8 billion in subsidies given to 16 independent power producers (IPPs) including those belonging to Imran Khan's advisors Razak Dawood and Nadeem Baber, Asia Times said. The SCEP had also investigated the profits earned by the Chinese power companies. The report revealed that Huang Shandong Ruyi Pakistan Ltd (HSR) and Port Qasim Electric Power Co Ltd (PQEPCL) were together overpaid by 483.6 billion rupees (USD 3 billion). Terrorists in Balochistan province, meanwhile, have intensified their attacks on CPEC projects and Chinese nationals working on them, raising the security costs and political risks of the projects. Islamabad's move to give the military more control over the scheme is a clear attempt to mollify China's rising security concerns. (With inputs from agencies)

China retreating from promises to Pakistan under economic corridor: Report

The Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) has ordered its personnel to uninstall 52 “dubious” Chinese apps from their mobile phones immediately amid tensions escalated due to the India-China violent face-off which led to the killing of 20 Indian Army soldiers.

Inspector General, STF, Amitabh Yash, in a circular issued here on Friday, directed the STF personnel to also ensure that these Chinese apps were uninstalled by their family members as well.&nbsp;

"All the personnel of the STF, Uttar Pradesh are directed to immediately remove the following android apps from their mobile phones as well as that of their family members," Inspector General (STF), Uttar Pradesh said.

These apps included TikTok, UC Browser, Hello, WeChat, Shareit among others.

There are five video sharing apps in this list and it is interesting that most of the Chinese smartphone companies offer some of these apps in their smartphones. These apps are – Tick Talk, Vigo Video, Bigo Live, Weibo, We Chat, Hello and Like. Apart from this, many e-commerce apps are also included. 
 
(With inputs from agencies)

The Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) has ordered its personnel to uninstall 52 “dubious” Chinese apps from their mobile phones immediately amid tensions escalated due to the India-China violent face-off which led to the killing of 20 Indian Army soldiers.

The Uttar Pradesh Special Task Force (STF) has ordered its personnel to uninstall 52 “dubious” Chinese apps from their mobile phones immediately amid tensions escalated due to the India-China violent face-off which led to the killing of 20 Indian Army soldiers. Inspector General, STF, Amitabh Yash, in a circular issued here on Friday, directed the STF personnel to also ensure that these Chinese apps were uninstalled by their family members as well. "All the personnel of the STF, Uttar Pradesh are directed to immediately remove the following android apps from their mobile phones as well as that of their family members," Inspector General (STF), Uttar Pradesh said. These apps included TikTok, UC Browser, Hello, WeChat, Shareit among others. There are five video sharing apps in this list and it is interesting that most of the Chinese smartphone companies offer some of these apps in their smartphones. These apps are – Tick Talk, Vigo Video, Bigo Live, Weibo, We Chat, Hello and Like. Apart from this, many e-commerce apps are also included. (With inputs from agencies)

Immediately remove 52 Chinese apps from your phone, orders Uttar Pradesh STF to employees

Exposing The Hypocrisy Of China & Pakistan On Human Rights.

Human Rights: China & Pakistan must look within!

It’s the same old story as China has once again showed its intent on which side of terror it stands. &nbsp;Once again, it has torpedoed the United Nations efforts to ban Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar. It has been proved beyond doubt that China can’t be a trusted ally in the global war against terrorism.&nbsp;

China’s action is in direct contrast to the position it has maintained publicly that it is opposed to any form of terrorism. The reason d'être behind China’s avid desire to protect Jaish chief is beyond explanation. Is it only to help its staunchest ally Pakistan or something else?

China has pumped in billions of dollars in Pakistan and continues to do so. Its biggest ever infrastructure development plan – China-Pakistan Economic Corridor – itself is worth close to 60 billion dollars. Moreover, over 30,000 Chinese people, including engineers and construction workers, are posted there. China apprehends that its projects could be in jeopardy if it signalled any change in its policy vis-à-vis Masood Azhar. In the past, several Chinese engineers involved in the project have been attacked and abducted, and later released by militants active in the restive Balochistan following intervention by Pakistan. That seems to be the prominent concern of China. In preventing the Pakistan-based terrorist from being declared as a global terrorist by the United Nations Security Council, China is, in fact, protecting its assets and interests, more than anything else.

China’s opposition to proscribing Azhar is baffling given that Jaish-e-Mohammed has already been blacklisted by the 15-nation Security Council of which China is one of the five permanent members. The Jaish was blacklisted by the UN Security Council in 2001, a year after its formation, following a deadly attack on Indian Parliament in December 2001, which had brought India and Pakistan on the verge of a fourth war. Strangely, China considers JeM an outlawed organisation, but not its leader? There seems to be a serious defect in the original charter of the United Nations which gave special powers to the P-5 countries. There is an urgent need for immediate rectification of this rule. Otherwise, any one permanent nation can keep on foiling adoption of any resolution. The best way is to introduce the rule of the majority within the five permanent members, otherwise, the international community would always be found wanting in arriving at any decision due to contradicting stand by one or other countries.

This is the fourth time that China has blocked a combined bid by the United States, France and the United Kingdom to declare Azhar a global terrorist by putting the proposal on a “technical hold” before eventually terminating it on the grounds that “there is no consensus” in the 1267 Committee of the UN Security Council. &nbsp;How can there be a consensus if one country (read China) continues with its unprincipled stand on Azhar? In 2017 also, it was the odd nation out in the 15-member Security Council when the P3 nations – the US, UK and France – sought to place Azhar on the 1267 sanctions list that would have entailed his travel ban and freezing of assets. While the proposal had the approval of all the other 14 members of the Security Council, it was China which censored it. Needless to say, China is misusing its veto power.

The dichotomy between China’s alleged commitment to fight terrorism and its action is quite evident as it is a signatory to the Xiamen Declaration signed in September 2017 at the 9th BRICS summit in the Chinese city of Xiamen. The Xiamen Declaration had called upon the international community to establish a "genuinely broad" international counter-terrorism coalition. Moreover, it was also a party to a decision of the five-member BRICS nations summit in Xiamen which had called for decisive action against militant groups based in Pakistan terming them as a security concern in the region. Some of the groups mentioned in the declaration included Taliban (Islamic State)..., Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. The last two groups have been involved in several deadly attacks against India, including the latest one in Pulwama in which at least 40 paramilitary soldiers were martyred in a suicide attack, and which was claimed by Jaish.

What is China’s compulsion in protecting Azhar, who is, no doubt, a prized asset for Pakistan? Well, if the United Nations declares Azhar a global terrorist, then Pakistan will be compelled to arrest him and seize his assets. &nbsp;And this is something the Imran Khan government can’t afford to do fearing violence by an army of militants prepared by Azhar. Besides, Azhar has deep influence in the rural pockets of the country through his seminaries. His popularity soared during the devastating earthquake in 2005 when his seminaries provided financial and medical assistance to the affected people while the government agencies were found lacking in evacuation and rehabilitation works. Secondly and most importantly, he enjoys the support of the Pakistani army. Does Imran Khan, who himself has been propped up by the army, have the guts to go after Azhar? Your guess is as good as mine.

China, too, is aware of the predicament of its all-weather ally. &nbsp;Therefore, it has been repeatedly blocking any attempt to outlaw Azhar even at the expense of its own image. But while doing so, China risks global isolation.&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

It’s the same old story as China has once again showed its intent on which side of terror it stands. Once again, it has torpedoed the United Nations efforts to ban Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar.

It’s the same old story as China has once again showed its intent on which side of terror it stands. Once again, it has torpedoed the United Nations efforts to ban Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar. It has been proved beyond doubt that China can’t be a trusted ally in the global war against terrorism. China’s action is in direct contrast to the position it has maintained publicly that it is opposed to any form of terrorism. The reason d'être behind China’s avid desire to protect Jaish chief is beyond explanation. Is it only to help its staunchest ally Pakistan or something else? China has pumped in billions of dollars in Pakistan and continues to do so. Its biggest ever infrastructure development plan – China-Pakistan Economic Corridor – itself is worth close to 60 billion dollars. Moreover, over 30,000 Chinese people, including engineers and construction workers, are posted there. China apprehends that its projects could be in jeopardy if it signalled any change in its policy vis-à-vis Masood Azhar. In the past, several Chinese engineers involved in the project have been attacked and abducted, and later released by militants active in the restive Balochistan following intervention by Pakistan. That seems to be the prominent concern of China. In preventing the Pakistan-based terrorist from being declared as a global terrorist by the United Nations Security Council, China is, in fact, protecting its assets and interests, more than anything else. China’s opposition to proscribing Azhar is baffling given that Jaish-e-Mohammed has already been blacklisted by the 15-nation Security Council of which China is one of the five permanent members. The Jaish was blacklisted by the UN Security Council in 2001, a year after its formation, following a deadly attack on Indian Parliament in December 2001, which had brought India and Pakistan on the verge of a fourth war. Strangely, China considers JeM an outlawed organisation, but not its leader? There seems to be a serious defect in the original charter of the United Nations which gave special powers to the P-5 countries. There is an urgent need for immediate rectification of this rule. Otherwise, any one permanent nation can keep on foiling adoption of any resolution. The best way is to introduce the rule of the majority within the five permanent members, otherwise, the international community would always be found wanting in arriving at any decision due to contradicting stand by one or other countries. This is the fourth time that China has blocked a combined bid by the United States, France and the United Kingdom to declare Azhar a global terrorist by putting the proposal on a “technical hold” before eventually terminating it on the grounds that “there is no consensus” in the 1267 Committee of the UN Security Council. How can there be a consensus if one country (read China) continues with its unprincipled stand on Azhar? In 2017 also, it was the odd nation out in the 15-member Security Council when the P3 nations – the US, UK and France – sought to place Azhar on the 1267 sanctions list that would have entailed his travel ban and freezing of assets. While the proposal had the approval of all the other 14 members of the Security Council, it was China which censored it. Needless to say, China is misusing its veto power. The dichotomy between China’s alleged commitment to fight terrorism and its action is quite evident as it is a signatory to the Xiamen Declaration signed in September 2017 at the 9th BRICS summit in the Chinese city of Xiamen. The Xiamen Declaration had called upon the international community to establish a "genuinely broad" international counter-terrorism coalition. Moreover, it was also a party to a decision of the five-member BRICS nations summit in Xiamen which had called for decisive action against militant groups based in Pakistan terming them as a security concern in the region. Some of the groups mentioned in the declaration included Taliban (Islamic State)..., Al-Qaeda, Lashkar-e-Taiba and Jaish-e-Mohammad. The last two groups have been involved in several deadly attacks against India, including the latest one in Pulwama in which at least 40 paramilitary soldiers were martyred in a suicide attack, and which was claimed by Jaish. What is China’s compulsion in protecting Azhar, who is, no doubt, a prized asset for Pakistan? Well, if the United Nations declares Azhar a global terrorist, then Pakistan will be compelled to arrest him and seize his assets. And this is something the Imran Khan government can’t afford to do fearing violence by an army of militants prepared by Azhar. Besides, Azhar has deep influence in the rural pockets of the country through his seminaries. His popularity soared during the devastating earthquake in 2005 when his seminaries provided financial and medical assistance to the affected people while the government agencies were found lacking in evacuation and rehabilitation works. Secondly and most importantly, he enjoys the support of the Pakistani army. Does Imran Khan, who himself has been propped up by the army, have the guts to go after Azhar? Your guess is as good as mine. China, too, is aware of the predicament of its all-weather ally. Therefore, it has been repeatedly blocking any attempt to outlaw Azhar even at the expense of its own image. But while doing so, China risks global isolation. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

China blocking UN ban on Masood Azhar proves it can’t be a trusted ally in global war against terrorism

it's not a surprise for any strategist that China has blocked India's bid to get Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar designated as a global terrorist for the fourth time. China has repeated the old story of putting "technical hold" on the proposal asking for more time. The proposal to designate Azhar under the 1267 Al Qaida Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council was moved by France, UK and the US on February 27, days after the fidayeen attack of the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) which killed more than 40 CRPF soldiers in Pulwama.

How does it matter for India?&nbsp;

If the proposal was accepted, it would have amounted to the freezer of JeM assets, future funding and travel ban on Masood Azhar. Realistically, none of these measures would have affected the terror activities of JeM, which has earlier been declared as US-designated terror organisation. 
 
The funding through the unauthorised route is business as usual by attaching some of its members with any nominated social welfare organisation.

In nutshell, India has to continue dealing with terror activities of JeM with or without the imposition of the UNSC ban. India has to show the resolve to deal with JeM itself, for which it has all the options, overt as well as covert, on the table. The UNSC ban on Azhar was thus a symbolic exercise which must continue with similar zeal to rebuild the diplomatic pressure after six months when it can be reconsidered because naming and shaming in UN platform has its own importance. &nbsp;

How is China affected?&nbsp;

Chinese considerations in blocking the ban are governed by its own perceived national interest. China has to protect its economic investment in CPEC including its safe future operation and safety of over 5000 workers from terrorist groups, which are controlled by the Pakistan army and ISI. China also wants to retain leverage in terms of Masood Azhar against India for opposing CPEC and BRI. There seems to be an understanding between China and Pakistan for not training ETIM terrorists causing trouble in Xinjiang province of China and a promise to look the other way when Chinese cause atrocities on Uighur Muslims. In any case, Pakistan’s relation with China is that of a client state being protected by the dragon. China was also not too happy with Indian resolve exhibited in air strikes in Balakot.

This decision of China is marred with some risks as well. China after this action remains isolated with Pakistan on the issue of terrorism and does not project itself as a world power in making by this petty politics. It has also pushed India few notches closer to the western world, risking a promising Indian market. 
 
Options for India &nbsp;&nbsp;

It seems evident that by blocking the bid to get Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Maulana Masood Azhar designated a global terrorist China has much more to lose than India. India has to continue with the policy of offensive defence with all options to get rid of the terrorists emanating from Pakistan soil and continue the proxy war in India. 
 
India needs to develop the capacity for the same; hence start with steps to enhance its ‘Comprehensive National Power’ (CNP) because strategic partnerships will have to be developed with like-minded nations.&nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.) 
&nbsp;

it's not a surprise for any strategist that China has blocked India's bid to get Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar designated as a global terrorist for the fourth time.

it's not a surprise for any strategist that China has blocked India's bid to get Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Masood Azhar designated as a global terrorist for the fourth time. China has repeated the old story of putting "technical hold" on the proposal asking for more time. The proposal to designate Azhar under the 1267 Al Qaida Sanctions Committee of the UN Security Council was moved by France, UK and the US on February 27, days after the fidayeen attack of the Jaish-e-Mohammed (JeM) which killed more than 40 CRPF soldiers in Pulwama. How does it matter for India? If the proposal was accepted, it would have amounted to the freezer of JeM assets, future funding and travel ban on Masood Azhar. Realistically, none of these measures would have affected the terror activities of JeM, which has earlier been declared as US-designated terror organisation. The funding through the unauthorised route is business as usual by attaching some of its members with any nominated social welfare organisation. In nutshell, India has to continue dealing with terror activities of JeM with or without the imposition of the UNSC ban. India has to show the resolve to deal with JeM itself, for which it has all the options, overt as well as covert, on the table. The UNSC ban on Azhar was thus a symbolic exercise which must continue with similar zeal to rebuild the diplomatic pressure after six months when it can be reconsidered because naming and shaming in UN platform has its own importance. How is China affected? Chinese considerations in blocking the ban are governed by its own perceived national interest. China has to protect its economic investment in CPEC including its safe future operation and safety of over 5000 workers from terrorist groups, which are controlled by the Pakistan army and ISI. China also wants to retain leverage in terms of Masood Azhar against India for opposing CPEC and BRI. There seems to be an understanding between China and Pakistan for not training ETIM terrorists causing trouble in Xinjiang province of China and a promise to look the other way when Chinese cause atrocities on Uighur Muslims. In any case, Pakistan’s relation with China is that of a client state being protected by the dragon. China was also not too happy with Indian resolve exhibited in air strikes in Balakot. This decision of China is marred with some risks as well. China after this action remains isolated with Pakistan on the issue of terrorism and does not project itself as a world power in making by this petty politics. It has also pushed India few notches closer to the western world, risking a promising Indian market. Options for India It seems evident that by blocking the bid to get Jaish-e-Mohammed chief Maulana Masood Azhar designated a global terrorist China has much more to lose than India. India has to continue with the policy of offensive defence with all options to get rid of the terrorists emanating from Pakistan soil and continue the proxy war in India. India needs to develop the capacity for the same; hence start with steps to enhance its ‘Comprehensive National Power’ (CNP) because strategic partnerships will have to be developed with like-minded nations. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

UN ban on Masood Azhar: Pakistan is drawing its strength from China

Last week, we saw Pakistan reaching out to every conceivable friend for bailout assistance. The government was also unable to control radical elements that overpowered its decisions and judiciary in Asia Bibi&nbsp;case.

Pakistan's foreign reserves have plunged 42 per cent since the start of the year and now stand at about $8 billion. As per the State Bank of Pakistan report, the total debt of Pakistan in 2018 stands at 78.4 per cent of its GDP.&nbsp;

What Imran Khan has got from Saudi Arabia is meagre $3 billion support for a year and a further loan worth up to $3 billion in deferred payments for oil imports. He must have gone to China mentally prepared to mortgage anything to get a similar bailout package. Meanwhile, China said more talks are needed to finalise economic aid to Pakistan.

Chinese concerns over bailing out Pakistan&nbsp;

China knows that despite its help Pakistan will have to go to IMF for another bailout. &nbsp;China may not be comfortable with the kind of transparency being demanded by them including the details of debt to China. It may also not be keen to be pulled into the middle-east cauldron, the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran or Shia-Sunni divide.&nbsp;

China itself is struggling with the Trade War and poor returns on investment in BRI. Since the launch of the CPEC in 2015, power generation and infrastructure projects in Pakistan worth $28 billion have either been completed or proceeded to advanced stages of construction.&nbsp;

China will seek the assurance of Imran Khan about the smooth development of the project, because he has slashed $12 billion reducing CPEC to be worth $50 billion projects from planned $62 billion, and ordered an audit of the same.&nbsp;

Despite Imran’s anxiety and optics of wiping out corruption, Chinese will like to wait for any big ticket announcement till they are sure about the security of their project, 30,000 workers, security personals, and future of his association with Pakistani Army, ISI, and militant groups. &nbsp;

It can also be argued that to avoid IMF scrutiny China may be little more liberal with debt aid package to keep Pakistan afloat minus IMF loan, if possible. There can also be some quid pro quo in keeping the US out of this strategic space, some land grab (With earlier precedence of ceding Saksham Valley to China) or mortgaging some other sovereign rights. &nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp;

Internal chaos due to Islamic radicalisation&nbsp;

The way the Supreme Court decision to acquit Christian woman Asia Bibi in a blasphemy case triggered mass protests by radicalised elements. Militant groups like Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) and others including Hafiz Saeed outfits, outrightly challenging the government machinery, Supreme Court and Law and Order machinery, despite a warning personally by Imran Khan, indicates mass radicalisation.

Radical elements forced the government to an extent that it is likely to put her on Exit Control List (ECL). The militant groups like Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) and Falah-E Insaniat (FIF) have been taken off from the list of banned outfits.&nbsp;

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) that visited Pakistan last month, has also expressed dissatisfaction over any worthwhile control over terror funding. The support of Pakistan Army and ISI in developing terror support infrastructure to pursue a proxy war against India and Afghanistan is unlikely to be weakened due to their flawed narrative of ‘India Threat Theory’ to legitimize holding strings of power in their hand.

The fact that there has been an&nbsp;increase in defence expenditure and Pakistan aspires to be the fourth largest nuclear power in the world, clearly indicates that its military will not allow the government to muddle with its plans.

The Asia Bibi case gives an impression that Pakistan is in the dangerous path of Islamic radicalisation, which can lead itself into a semi-caliphate if radicalisation&nbsp;in Pakistani Army increases, but there is a catch.&nbsp;

An unstable Pakistan is not in global interest, nor in the interest of China as well as India, because it will take no time in getting converted into the largest jihadist caliphate.

It is the biggest harbour of terrorists in the world and does not seem to be inclined to any change in the status quo. It has been kept financially afloat in past by the United States, because of the reasons mentioned above and its strategic location, which was crucial to them at that point of time. Now for similar reasons and getting warm water access to its western region, China may have every reason to keep it financially afloat. &nbsp;

Pakistan’s other friends may also help directly or indirectly to pursue their own specific agendas. It may not be an exaggeration to say that it may lead Pakistan to be a future Chinese colony. For the time being China and other interested parties will not let Pakistan sink.&nbsp; 
 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Last week, we saw Pakistan reaching out to every conceivable friend for bailout assistance. The government was also unable to control radical elements that overpowered its decisions and judiciary in Asia Bibi case.

Last week, we saw Pakistan reaching out to every conceivable friend for bailout assistance. The government was also unable to control radical elements that overpowered its decisions and judiciary in Asia Bibi case. Pakistan's foreign reserves have plunged 42 per cent since the start of the year and now stand at about $8 billion. As per the State Bank of Pakistan report, the total debt of Pakistan in 2018 stands at 78.4 per cent of its GDP. What Imran Khan has got from Saudi Arabia is meagre $3 billion support for a year and a further loan worth up to $3 billion in deferred payments for oil imports. He must have gone to China mentally prepared to mortgage anything to get a similar bailout package. Meanwhile, China said more talks are needed to finalise economic aid to Pakistan. Chinese concerns over bailing out Pakistan China knows that despite its help Pakistan will have to go to IMF for another bailout. China may not be comfortable with the kind of transparency being demanded by them including the details of debt to China. It may also not be keen to be pulled into the middle-east cauldron, the rivalry between Saudi Arabia and Iran or Shia-Sunni divide. China itself is struggling with the Trade War and poor returns on investment in BRI. Since the launch of the CPEC in 2015, power generation and infrastructure projects in Pakistan worth $28 billion have either been completed or proceeded to advanced stages of construction. China will seek the assurance of Imran Khan about the smooth development of the project, because he has slashed $12 billion reducing CPEC to be worth $50 billion projects from planned $62 billion, and ordered an audit of the same. Despite Imran’s anxiety and optics of wiping out corruption, Chinese will like to wait for any big ticket announcement till they are sure about the security of their project, 30,000 workers, security personals, and future of his association with Pakistani Army, ISI, and militant groups. It can also be argued that to avoid IMF scrutiny China may be little more liberal with debt aid package to keep Pakistan afloat minus IMF loan, if possible. There can also be some quid pro quo in keeping the US out of this strategic space, some land grab (With earlier precedence of ceding Saksham Valley to China) or mortgaging some other sovereign rights. Internal chaos due to Islamic radicalisation The way the Supreme Court decision to acquit Christian woman Asia Bibi in a blasphemy case triggered mass protests by radicalised elements. Militant groups like Tehreek-i-Labbaik Pakistan (TLP) and others including Hafiz Saeed outfits, outrightly challenging the government machinery, Supreme Court and Law and Order machinery, despite a warning personally by Imran Khan, indicates mass radicalisation. Radical elements forced the government to an extent that it is likely to put her on Exit Control List (ECL). The militant groups like Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) and Falah-E Insaniat (FIF) have been taken off from the list of banned outfits. The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) that visited Pakistan last month, has also expressed dissatisfaction over any worthwhile control over terror funding. The support of Pakistan Army and ISI in developing terror support infrastructure to pursue a proxy war against India and Afghanistan is unlikely to be weakened due to their flawed narrative of ‘India Threat Theory’ to legitimize holding strings of power in their hand. The fact that there has been an increase in defence expenditure and Pakistan aspires to be the fourth largest nuclear power in the world, clearly indicates that its military will not allow the government to muddle with its plans. The Asia Bibi case gives an impression that Pakistan is in the dangerous path of Islamic radicalisation, which can lead itself into a semi-caliphate if radicalisation in Pakistani Army increases, but there is a catch. An unstable Pakistan is not in global interest, nor in the interest of China as well as India, because it will take no time in getting converted into the largest jihadist caliphate. It is the biggest harbour of terrorists in the world and does not seem to be inclined to any change in the status quo. It has been kept financially afloat in past by the United States, because of the reasons mentioned above and its strategic location, which was crucial to them at that point of time. Now for similar reasons and getting warm water access to its western region, China may have every reason to keep it financially afloat. Pakistan’s other friends may also help directly or indirectly to pursue their own specific agendas. It may not be an exaggeration to say that it may lead Pakistan to be a future Chinese colony. For the time being China and other interested parties will not let Pakistan sink. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Where is debt-ridden Pakistan heading?

The&nbsp;Doklam&nbsp;standoff has underscored that India still lives under the shadow of the 1962 war, says a former Indian army corps commander who served in Sikkim. &nbsp;In his view, the manner in which the incident ballooned&mdash;its non-stop media coverage&mdash;and the&nbsp;grand designs attributed to the&nbsp;mandarins in Beijing by experts of various persuasions&nbsp;suggests that suspicions about&nbsp;China&#39;s intentions run very deep.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

He believes a&nbsp;standoff in some godforsaken corner of their border&nbsp;is too small an issue to&nbsp;excite China&#39;s national leadership. &nbsp;If it is to teach India a lesson, there are other ways this can and has been done: some would say India&#39;s adverse trade balance with China, its inability to effectively counter China in the region, the stark disparities in development and income levels between the two countries has offered daily lessons for India.&nbsp;

But this very obvious economic and strategic asymmetry may be constant reminders in India of the&nbsp;military&nbsp;asymmetry that also&nbsp;prevails. While nobody can deny&nbsp;India&#39;s&nbsp;military has undergone&nbsp;major&nbsp;transformation since 1962, and infrastructure while still developing has improved, the Chinese not only present larger force&nbsp;levels, they can also move them faster and more efficiently given&nbsp;the phenomenal infrastructure they have invested in.&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>What form of retaliation? Some say it could be more transgressions along parts of the Line of Actual Control, pitching tents, refusing to move. We&#39;ve seen this before, small changes.&nbsp;</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=What form of retaliation? Some say it could be more transgressions along parts of the Line of Actual Control, pitching tents, refusing to move. We've seen this before, small changes.?" target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

It largely explains India&#39;s measured and limited response to Chinese fulminations, official and otherwise, as well as&nbsp;their intemperate name calling. &nbsp;Clearly, the&nbsp;national security bureaucracy saw no purpose in&nbsp;baiting the dragon, at least not now.&nbsp;

A&nbsp;former intelligence official says India will shake off this mindset&nbsp;the day we give China a&nbsp;bloody nose! He says India needs to defeat China militarily, 1962 must be avenged if India is to come out of this psychological straitjacket. &nbsp;&nbsp;

All that for later if at all. There&#39;s talk of China neither forgiving nor forgetting their loss of face in&nbsp;Doklam&nbsp;and&nbsp;retaliating maybe after the BRICS summit in Xiamen is over. &nbsp;What form of retaliation? Some say it could be more transgressions along parts of the Line of Actual Control, pitching tents, refusing to move. We&#39;ve seen this before, small changes.&nbsp;

What some find more worrying is the&nbsp;possibility of China doing a&nbsp;Doklam&nbsp;on India. There are at least two tri-junctions where India has territorial disagreements with&nbsp;the neighbours: One is in the&nbsp;Kalapani&nbsp;area which is&nbsp;the tri-junction of Nepal, India and China. Another is a sliver of territory disputed by Myanmar, and&nbsp;India with China forming the third angle of the tri-junction. In that sense, China&#39;s warnings to India in this regard need to be taken seriously.&nbsp;

Also,&nbsp;Arunachal Pradesh. Forget the seven main valleys which India closely monitors. There are scores of&nbsp;other&nbsp;smaller valleys and passes through which China can infiltrate. If the aim is to retaliate, create trouble, China has a range of options open.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="row">
<div class="article-blockquote">
<div class="col-sm-10 col-sm-offset-1 blockquote-content quoteshare">
<blockquote>
<h5>China cannot ignore the Indian market, nor can it afford to not engage with India as it pushes ties with Japan and the US.</h5>
</blockquote>
</div>

<div class="col-sm-1 blockquote-content">
<div class="share-blockquote"><a class="twitter popup" href="http://twitter.com/intent/tweet?text=China cannot ignore the Indian market, nor can it afford to not engage with India as it pushes ties with Japan and the US." target="_blank">&nbsp;</a></div>
</div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqquoteclosemark">&times;</a></div>
</div>
</div>

China is already probing India&#39;s soft underbelly, promising to&nbsp;invest 50 billion dollars or more in Pakistan; other reports said China had offered tiny Bhutan 10 billion dollars to back them on&nbsp;Doklam; China has&nbsp;overtaken India as the largest aid giver to&nbsp;Nepal; it&#39;s giving Bangladesh two submarines!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

There is a view that China is actively discouraging investment by Chinese companies in India. The argument is, why help build the&nbsp;Indian&nbsp;economy? &nbsp;Current levels of Chinese FDI are quite low, less than five billion dollars. The future doesn&#39;t look good amid reports of India levying tariffs on Chinese&nbsp;imports,&nbsp;and falling sales of Chinese mobile phones.&nbsp;

But there&#39;s always a silver lining. China cannot ignore the Indian market, nor can it afford to not engage with India as it pushes ties with Japan and the US.&nbsp;Doklam&nbsp;could also be the trigger for&nbsp;South-east Asian states to stop bowing to the dragon and build alliances that can help strengthen their own security and independence. &nbsp;Watch this space for more on the post-Doklam scenario.

Post-Doklam, South-east Asian states can stop bowing to China and build alliances that can help strengthen their own security and independence.

The Doklam standoff has underscored that India still lives under the shadow of the 1962 war, says a former Indian army corps commander who served in Sikkim. In his view, the manner in which the incident ballooned—its non-stop media coverage—and the grand designs attributed to the mandarins in Beijing by experts of various persuasions suggests that suspicions about China's intentions run very deep. He believes a standoff in some godforsaken corner of their border is too small an issue to excite China's national leadership. If it is to teach India a lesson, there are other ways this can and has been done: some would say India's adverse trade balance with China, its inability to effectively counter China in the region, the stark disparities in development and income levels between the two countries has offered daily lessons for India. But this very obvious economic and strategic asymmetry may be constant reminders in India of the military asymmetry that also prevails. While nobody can deny India's military has undergone major transformation since 1962, and infrastructure while still developing has improved, the Chinese not only present larger force levels, they can also move them faster and more efficiently given the phenomenal infrastructure they have invested in. What form of retaliation? Some say it could be more transgressions along parts of the Line of Actual Control, pitching tents, refusing to move. We've seen this before, small changes. × It largely explains India's measured and limited response to Chinese fulminations, official and otherwise, as well as their intemperate name calling. Clearly, the national security bureaucracy saw no purpose in baiting the dragon, at least not now. A former intelligence official says India will shake off this mindset the day we give China a bloody nose! He says India needs to defeat China militarily, 1962 must be avenged if India is to come out of this psychological straitjacket. All that for later if at all. There's talk of China neither forgiving nor forgetting their loss of face in Doklam and retaliating maybe after the BRICS summit in Xiamen is over. What form of retaliation? Some say it could be more transgressions along parts of the Line of Actual Control, pitching tents, refusing to move. We've seen this before, small changes. What some find more worrying is the possibility of China doing a Doklam on India. There are at least two tri-junctions where India has territorial disagreements with the neighbours: One is in the Kalapani area which is the tri-junction of Nepal, India and China. Another is a sliver of territory disputed by Myanmar, and India with China forming the third angle of the tri-junction. In that sense, China's warnings to India in this regard need to be taken seriously. Also, Arunachal Pradesh. Forget the seven main valleys which India closely monitors. There are scores of other smaller valleys and passes through which China can infiltrate. If the aim is to retaliate, create trouble, China has a range of options open. China cannot ignore the Indian market, nor can it afford to not engage with India as it pushes ties with Japan and the US. × China is already probing India's soft underbelly, promising to invest 50 billion dollars or more in Pakistan; other reports said China had offered tiny Bhutan 10 billion dollars to back them on Doklam; China has overtaken India as the largest aid giver to Nepal; it's giving Bangladesh two submarines! There is a view that China is actively discouraging investment by Chinese companies in India. The argument is, why help build the Indian economy? Current levels of Chinese FDI are quite low, less than five billion dollars. The future doesn't look good amid reports of India levying tariffs on Chinese imports, and falling sales of Chinese mobile phones. But there's always a silver lining. China cannot ignore the Indian market, nor can it afford to not engage with India as it pushes ties with Japan and the US. Doklam could also be the trigger for South-east Asian states to stop bowing to the dragon and build alliances that can help strengthen their own security and independence. Watch this space for more on the post-Doklam scenario.

China wants to isolate India but can't afford to ignore Indian market

china-pakistan-1

China & Pakistan, News on China & Pakistan, stories on China & Pakistan, articles on China & Pakistan, China & Pakistan stories at Wion, China & Pakistan news, China & Pakistan latest news

china pakistan-1