Pakistan Occupied
Kashmir, Here We Come!
The informal summit at
Mahabalipuram, Tamil Nadu, has some unremarkable, if solid, agenda items. But
these could have appeared in any bilateral state visit between the heads of
government of India and China. These concern trade, investment, technology, tariffs,
visas, broad-based terrorist threats and so forth.
Such matters can, and do,
also get taken up at other venues and summits that dot the annual calendar.
These, jointly and severally, afford handy delegation level talks on their
sidelines.
But an informal summit
like the one in Wuhan, China, and the one now, which allows several hours of
one-on-one informal meetings, can work on medium term strategic issues better
than most other formats.
The defensive positions
and formal reservations can be set aside as already read, as both leaders come
to them extremely well briefed.
The type of work they
individually and jointly do at such summits therefore, may not emerge into the official
lexicon on either side, let alone the public domain, for a considerable time
after.
Even if certain sensitive
things are agreed upon, the enabling actions that are put into motion, also
take time to fructify.
But, as a consequence, these
confidential tete a tetes as a diplomatic construct, can truly tackle
game-changer issues.
Which is possibly why
India and China have begun to hold them soon after the lengthy stand-off at
Doklam.
In a broader context, that
is no doubt impelling, China is under considerable financial pressure and
stress even as its economic growth has halved from peaks of a few years ago. This
is a widely held perception in strategic circles, though details of how tough
the situation is are hard to come by, given China’s opaque systems of
governance.
But, it is safe to assume
that China carries massive debt, most of the legacy amounts from its high
growth years being internal debt, as otherwise, if it were external, the world
would be privy to it. Suffice is to say, its foreign exchange dollar/euro
reserves, though it runs into trillions, is not even a fraction of what is the
position here.
There is also the massive
amounts owed to China by a host of impoverished or fairly poor nations that
have availed of China’s offer to build large infrastructure in their countries.
Yet other countries have sold China their land and mines. China’s ongoing
liabilities are considerable without commensurate revenues to balance it.
That China has obtained
masses of such infrastructure on long lease in these countries when they have
been unable to pay instalments against their debt, inclusive of tax holidays
and other favorable terms, does not, as yet, help its cash flow. Nor does it
make China popular in this day and age, because it smacks of colonial style imperialism.
Nevertheless, to get this
reality going into economic viability, China needs people to use, and pay for
the facilities they have created. But even a couple of years after Hambantota
and Gwadar are operational, next to nobody has come to call at these ports.
In the case of Gwadar, the
resentment against both the Pakistanis and Chinese felt by the Balochis makes
it a volatile prospect for trade that needs to pass from that port through and
from Pakistan.
In the case of Sri Lanka,
nobody else seems to want to use a Chinese port, when China has gone out of its
way, in the garb of helping, to menace most of the countries bordering the
South China Sea, and even further afield in the Asia-Pacific and Indian Ocean
region.
The China Pakistan
Economic Corridor (CPEC), that will absorb at least $ 60 billion of China’s
money, is also in financial trouble. Investment from China has slowed of late
as a consequence, and the costs of keeping what has been put on the ground
secure have risen exponentially. It is also extremely vulnerable to a conventional
war between India and Pakistan. This could well be provoked by cross-border
terrorist attacks and the belligerence against India of Pakistan’s armed forces
along the international border or line of control (LoC).
Pakistan, on its part, is
unhappy that the CPEC has not generated very many Pakistani jobs, or
contributed substantially to its economy while saddling it with massive debt. A
politically unstable Pakistan, run, de facto, by its all-powerful army, is near
bankrupt. It is totally dependent on loans from the multi-lateral lending
agencies, and China. Aid is also taken from whichever quarter it can secure it.
This makes the future prognosis even bleaker.
Besides, like the Palestinians
before them, fellow Islamic nations are reluctant to fund Pakistan. It is
widely seen as a basket case and bottomless pit, that carries the opprobrium of
being terrorist central too. America’s strategic dependence on Pakistan,
because of its long standing involvement in Afghanistan has diminished. And
this to the extent that the US is pulling out of the region irrespective of the
consequences.
The prospect of
piggybacking on an “Islamic nuclear capacity” is no longer as alluring as it
once was, given the fate that engulfed Col. Gaddafi of Libya, and the pressures
being exerted on would-be nuclear Iran.
And using seconded or
retired Pakistani troops, trainers and advisers, in Saudi Arabia and the UAE,
has not yielded very good results versus the Houthi rebels, or even for routine
security work internally.
As Pakistan’s sole benefactor
cum colonizer today, things are not going very well financially for China. It
is forced increasingly, to protect its sunk investment, to prop up the
Pakistani military with money, planes, guns, and tanks. This, at its own
expense, to all intents and purposes.
China’s tariff
negotiations with the US, its biggest export market still, are not going very
well either. President Trump is determined, like none other before him, to
wring unprecedented concessions out of the People’s Republic. This is altering
the status quo drastically. This more so because Chinese exports to a slowed US
economy, and a recessionary Europe have dwindled over the last several years.
There is little upside in prospect even in the medium term.
China’s production
costs have also risen substantially occasioning many foreign manufacturers to
emigrate to Vietnam, Bangladesh, and India. It is in urgent need of finding
other markets, and India, with its size and population, is a good prospect
despite a handsome trade surplus in China’s favour already.
India, on its part, has
steadfastly refused to join China’s belt and road initiative, unlike Nepal,
because the CPEC runs from Xinkiang via
PoK and Gilgit-Baltistan, which are both Indian territory that it intends to
reclaim. This, more so, after the abrogation of Articles 370 and 35A and the reorganization
of J&K into two union territories for now.
In is thought, in the
strategic thinking of the Government of India, that it is impossible to remove Pakistan’s Kashmir obsession till the rest of
the territory is reclaimed from Pakistani occupation as well.
India has vowed to do so
of late, at the opportune time. It has also made it clear to China that any
infrastructure it has built, or is in the process of building in PoK and
Gilgit-Baltistan, is without its expressed permission. This includes the road
and associated infrastructure, a dam in PoK and so forth. The native people of
the region are also unhappy with the Pakistani-Chinese occupation and want to
revert to India at the earliest.
The time is ripe therefore,
and perhaps the matter has been, or will be, discussed between Prime Minister
Narendra Modi and President XI Jinping at Mahabalipuram.
If China tacitly approves
of India reclaiming PoK/Gilgit-Baltistan and uses its good offices to hold
Pakistan to a token resistance; a case can be made for India joining the belt
and road initiative in return.
This will give new life
and strength to the whole enterprise, without compromising China’s abiding support to its
ally Pakistan, and the latter’s
legitimate territorial integrity.
That Baluchistan that
contains the port of Gwadar, will chafe at the bit and seek independence from
Pakistan, is a real, if separate, issue, and China will have to come to terms
with it later, perhaps in league with India.
However, subduing Pakistan’s
aggressive instincts, its calls for jihad, including its cross-border terrorism,
is as much in China’s best interest as India’s.
Trade cannot flow between Xinkiang and Gwadar,
and all points of the compass within India, and via Pakistan, if peace and
tranquility is not secured. China can make this happen, if it undertakes an
about turn from the long held policy of using Pakistan to bait India.
(1,418 words)
For: Sirfnews
October 12, 2019
Gautam Mukherjee
No comments:
Post a Comment