For all the skeptics and those possessed by cynicism, CPEC is a reality and has ceased to be a dream. Personally, this scribe however remains apprehensive about CPEC being a "game changer". The doubt is not for reasons of its possibility to be so; but because of our collective inability to foresee and negotiate with partners on equal footing of strength, resolve & vision.
Firstly, what do we mean by CPEC being a game changer? And secondly, for whom is it a game changer? Or who would benefit from the game changer?
Let me begin, with an interrogative thought, whose vision is CPEC? Pakistan's or China's? Without doubt and most certainly it is China's vision. The Chinese, pragmatic and possessed with amazing foresight as a nation, have been for a very long time planning to have access to the warm waters of the Persian Gulf. The motive is both, politics and economics; albeit more economics than political. Chinese desire to have access to the African Continent and particularly to the growing economies of Sub Saharan Africa, the Horn of Africa countries and West Africa has been on their radar, since the late eighties. I recall vividly, that in 1993, the Chinese foreign affairs ministry, assembled all their Ambassadors posted in Africa to Beijing and held a meeting under the banner of "China Africa Summit"- they were tasked to develop a business vision for China's entry into the African continent. They did. And CPEC, was one cornerstone of that vision.
China since the decade of eighties has been involved actively with the African Continent. They have been involved through joint ventures in building dams, roads, electrification project etc including large sports stadiums. The stadiums have been built mostly on gratis basis.
China while becoming the 'factory of the world' had very strategically selected 13 coastal cities on the eastern side of China for economic reform and development. Like South Korea, the Chinese had then begun to appreciate the concept of seeing exports as an engine of economic growth. They succeeded. In less than three decades, the cities of Qingdao, Dalian, Shanghai, Guangzhou and others had acquired the status of major exporting cities. Most of Chinese goods found their way to world markets through these 13 coastal cities and four special economic zones (SEZs), located in the South East of China.
In reaching out to the African Markets, the Chinese have had to use the maritime route across the Strait of Malacca and then climbing either to the Horn of Africa countries or around the Cape of Good Hope for the countries of West Africa; and to the North and South Atlantic Ocean for Europe, Northern Americas and Latin America, respectively. This entails heavy cost and longer duration for the movement of goods.
CPEC was the first brick laid in the later developed economic vision of 'one belt, one road'. Today China is evolving its economic strategy in three directions; CPEC taking them to Gulf and Africa, coupled with reduced transportation cost for goods meant for Europe and the America's; secondly on the road taking them deep into the golden triangle of Cambodia, Vietnam and Laos, and in its wake covering Burma, Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia; and thirdly in the western corridor that will make them land straight into the heartland of Europe, through Russia.
Against this backdrop, I return to my original thought of whose vision? And 'game changer' for whom? The obvious answer is; it is China. Now again arising from their visionary pragmatism, the Chinese are offering opportunities to those countries that lie in their path towards economic dominance.
It is now up to our economic managers of how much they would like to exploit the potential CPEC currently offers. Speed is of essence. There are already many European Companies bidding for the sub-contracts arising out of CPEC. An Italian company recently won the contract for baggage handling facilities, inclusive of its automation, for the new Gwadar Airport. Pakistan has to be fast and creative.
As a nation, on the negotiating table, we must present a resolute thought to the Chinese that all sub-contracts involving men, material and intellectual property (Programming and Computerisation) must be reserved for Pakistani Companies; or at least the right of first refusal must rest with Pakistan.
Along the route there would be a desperate need to have warehousing facilities, inclusive of cold storage facilities, coupled with facilities for housing, medical and health care, and most likely educational institutes too. So, why shouldn't Pakistan be given these right solely? We must learn to negotiate from a position of strength. Friendship with China, which hitherto has been only in the form of political support, today represents a great and new opportunity to be translated into a formidable and enduring economic partnership. A cursory look at mere numbers of trade between China and other neighbouring countries vis-à-vis Pakistan is a sad tale. China has a trade surplus of over USD 52 billion against India during the fiscal year 2015-2016. India, an enemy country to Beijing, gets to have over USD 70 billion trade! This truly tells us how wrongly we have pursued friendship with China.
With much fan-fare, the first consignment of Chinese goods, was loaded onto vessels at the Gawadar sea port. On this very first transaction, it would be best to know what amount of "revenue" we made-the tariff to the loading charges- what money did we as a nation make? Or was this done out of "friendship" - God forbid, if it is a "yeah", then Pakistan should dump the "game changer" idea into the dustbin of the many lost opportunities.
Borrowing would not make a country rich, just as it doesn't make any individual person wealthy; it is sheer effort and receiving adequate revenue (price) for that effort, which ensures a country's economic well-being.
(The writer is a freelance contributor)
Comments
Comments are closed.