There is little denying that historians will remember CPEC as one of best things that ever happened to Pakistan, provided of course this country does not deliberately goof up. The question is, therefore, whether we are making a mess of it or not? This column contends that we havent messed things up as yet, but we are surely at the risk of it.

For instance, lets take the case of Gwadar, which is the raison dtre of CPEC. While the city has witnessed some physical development in the last few years, the CPEC-related activities by a host of non-port government actors are yet to take off on a war footing. Water, power, airport, and road infrastructure are still missing in action; institutions for developing soft skills of the local populace are also missing. There is a dire need, therefore, to bring all the relevant government bodies on one page.

Or take the whole issue of transparency. The government can claim to have been transparent as much as it wants, but the fact of the matter is that lack of transparency is the single biggest complaint about the CPEC. In political circles, lack of transparency has manifested itself by way of the interprovincial row over routes, and project allocation. In business circles, the most recent complaint came from the countrys biggest business representative body, the FPCCI, which said that lack of transparency is the most important issue with CPEC.

It is true that many business leaders too are yet to spell out exactly what they want in so far as the kind of information or engagement they want from the government in the context of CPEC. It is also true that complaining is a sort of a national pastime, and businesses and politicians are not exempt from that. Yet, it is also true that like justice, it is not enough that the government is transparent but it also has to be seen as transparent, which means that at the end of the day the onus of transparency lies on the government.

In view of these risks, therefore, the PML-N should first invite political parties for a Charter of CPEC along the likes of the Charter of Democracy. Or at the least include CPEC in the much-awaited Charter of Economy.

A Charter of CPEC would not only bring political parties on one page and reduce political bickering but it may also allay the concerns of the Chinese, who are not used to such noisy politics that gets in the way of development. CPEC is a long-term deal, and a Charter of CPEC therefore could go a long way in ensuring that political parties are on the same page for the decades to come.

Second, public-private dialogue in general, and in the case of CPEC in particular, need to be strengthened and institutionalised. This would help reduce the row over transparency, and also help tap the business acumen of local businesses whose input is critical for the success of CPEC; a success that does not come at the cost of local businesses and local labours.