Economic Geology of China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)
Written
By Aziz Alidad
Like other parts of High
Asia, the region of Gilgit-Baltisan has played a pivotal role as a crossroad
between Central and South Asia for centuries. Unlike common view of the region
being historically isolated because of geographical inaccessibility, modern
scholarship proves that the region remained a major conduit for movements
across the great massifs of the Himalaya, Hindukush, Karakorum and Pamir.
Indeed, it is not geography but political developments since nineteenth century
that turned different regions of High Asia into cul-de-sac. Hermann Kruzmann,
Chair of Human Geography and Director of the Centre for Development Studies
(ZELF) at Freie Universität Berlin, is of the view that for centuries these
mountains have generally been perceived as barriers to communication, however
they also facilitate communication, especially when they serve as crossroads.
Archaeological and historical evidences lend credence to the
thesis that the mountainous communities of High Asia were mobile and
communicated with neighbouring regions despite geographic obstacles. The region
spanning from Khunjerab Pass on China border to Indus Kohistan in Khyber
Pukhtunkhwa is full of epigraphs and petroglyphs that all almost 2000 years
old. The ancient petroglyphs records show people from different walks of life,
like religious pilgrims, soldiers, hunters, shamans and travellers, traversing
the treacherous terrain in the mountains. Since majority of these petroglyphs
depicts figures of pilgrims, Buddha, motifs and stupas, it can be deduced that
among other things, religion was one of the most wanted commodities on the old
Silk Road.
The historical interaction and exchange in High Asia continued
despite changes in routes of the Silk Road at the level of principalities
because of political events engulfing Central Asia. With the start of the Great
Game in the nineteenth century, the roof of world turned into a turf for
espionage and power game between the three empires – Russian, Chinese and
British. This has necessitated the then powers to map the passes and valleys to
carve out new passages and routes for their strategic goals.
What is mostly ignored in the research about colonial period is
how indigenous sports were employed by the British to achieve geo-strategic
objectives deep in the mountainous valleys and principalities in High Asia
against Russian and Chinese empires. Among different games, polo was the most
favourite one among colonial officers from military and administration. In the
colonial period, the indigenous polo of Gilgit-Baltistan got new boost through
sponsorship for the game in the shape of construction of new polo grounds in
villages of different valleys of the region, and induction of players in Gilgit
Scouts for the game only. In addition, new teams were formed and annual polo
matches were held that attracted local rulers and large number of people. This
tradition still continues in Gilgit-Baltistan as all military, paramilitary and
other governmental organisations have their own polo teams.
The covert purpose of establishing such an infrastructure and
organisation of polo in every part of Gilgit-Baltistan was to create a standby
force and system for logistics in place that could provide uninterrupted supply
to army in the inaccessible mountains of High Asia in case of military
conflict. Hence, we see expansion of new mule tracks and proliferation of polo
grounds in every nook and corner of Gilgit-Baltistan. It helped addition of new
arteries to the old Silk Road in the area.
The summer of 1931 was important because the region witnessed
first motorised vehicle arriving in Gilgit Agency from Kashmir by crossing
14,000 feet high Burzil Pass. It was a major breakthrough as it expanded the
infrastructure of movement from mule track to road. In the first half of the
twentieth century different regions of High Asia, including Gilgit-Baltistan,
experienced closing of all historical routes that connected mountainous
communities because of new demarcations in post Soviet and Chinese revolutions
period. With independence of India all old and new routes including
Gilgit-Kashmir road got disrupted. As a result, Gilgit-Baltistan literally
became isolated from all the neighbouring regions of central and South Asia.
Realising the gravity of situation, Pakistani government built Kaghan Route via
Babusar on urgent basis at the altitude of 13,691 feet. It was necessitated
more by the state’s attempt to merge peripheries in the centre than economic
reasons. But the construction of the Karakorum Highway (KKH) in 1964-1978 has
started a new era of expansion of horizons. Although, KKH was primarily build
for geo-strategic reasons, it has brought about major changes in society,
lifestyle, mind-set, economy and trade in the region. With the KKH, the
jeepable road has expanded into truckable highway.
Now after 35 years of KKH, Gilgit-Baltistan has re-emerged on
the radar screen of national, regional and international politics with China
Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). CPEC is a complex project. To understand its
complexity in a nuanced way it is indispensible to view CPEC by situating it
within the holistic framework of One Belt One Road (OBOR) initiative. OBOR
initiative is comprised of two components: “Silk Road Economic Belt” and “21st Century Maritime Silk Road”. It is
estimated that OBOR project will cost $6 trillion.
Unlike traffic Infrastructure in the past, OBOR will be gigantic
in its scale for it will cover more than 100 countries and transform them by
introducing mega infrastructures for trade and transport within short period.
Along with economy, it could change the very geology of the earth. The Great
Wall was mega structure of old inward looking China to protect itself from
invaders, but OBOR is mega infrastructure of outward looking confident China of
modern times. According to Professor Tang Mengsheng, Director Centre for
Pakistan Studies at Peking University, China, OBOR and its component CPEC is
necessitated by the increasing tensions of security in Northeast and Chinese
mistrust of South Asian countries due to territorial disputes. “Facing such
situation”, he writes “China has started to explore the possibility and
feasibility of “Western Development Strategy”, namely strengthening the
political and economic relations with South Asian, Middle East and African
countries in the West of China…”
Within overall Western Development Strategy of China, OBOR will
enact a crucial role. China considers Pakistan as an important bridge in the
realization of this strategy through CPEC. It is because of the central
importance of CPEC in OBOR initiative Mr. Wang Yi, China’s Foreign
Minister, explained the importance of CPEC in these melodic metaphors:
“If ‘ One Belt, One Road’ is like a symphony involving and
benefiting every country, then construction of the China
Pakistan Economic Corridor is the sweet melody
of the symphony’s first movement”. The central position of CPEC
in OBOR is evident from the fact that Gwadar city is the point where the
economic Belt and Road meet. Therefore, CPEC ought to be viewed within the
bigger whole of OBOR. Unfortunately, the maritime road is missing in Pakistani
policy and decision makers’ planning.
The project of CPEC does not appear in historical vacuum, rather
it has emerged from the womb of historical continuum. Building upon the
historical connections of China with the Pakistani part of High Asia, China in
collaboration with Pakistan built the Karakorum Highway (KKH), which in its
turn paved the way for CPEC. Despite historical continuity, CPEC is different
in terms of magnitude, coverage and purpose. KKH was primarily driven by
geo-strategic and political agenda, whereas CPEC project is a manifestation of
shift in Chinese policy from geo-economic and economic geology.
One Belt One Road signifies increased connectivity, investment
opportunities, collaboration of industries in finance, agriculture, tourism,
educational sector, human resource, health care, cultural exchange thus
spurring economic growth in the associated countries. Given the diversity of
political systems, interests, geographies and economic models in the countries
coming under the ambit of OBOR, existence of a holistic and coherent policy is
need of the time. Formulating policy is essentially a political issue. It will
be Herculean task to bring diverse states on single page, but it can become
reality because the main factor that propels OBOR is economic not ideological.
Through OBOR and CPEC, China wants to increase its connectivity to
international markets and energy sources. Now the major thrust of China is to
export its goods and manpower not to export communist ideology. A common
economic policy for whole OBOR or even certain geographical parts will prepare
ground for economic unification of OBOR region. Common economic interest can
gel disparate entities in one unified whole. The second element of OBOR is
currency. It may be possible to introduce regional currency like EURO in OBOR
region.
Given the intricate nature of OBOR, the planning and thinking
about CPEC needs to be geared towards harmonising discordant parts within a
holistic framework that will take into consideration contextual realities in
Pakistan. To remove bottlenecks and obstacles in smooth implementation of CPEC
in Pakistan, the government of Pakistan ought to introduce major structural
changes in political, economical and administrative domains. It will help
Pakistan to remove contradictions in the current structure of governance, which
is incongruous with the requirements of CPEC.
The existing political setup and administrative processes in
Pakistan are not conducive to CPEC. That is why China and Pakistan are
still working out ways to counter CPEC bottlenecks even after its
announcement in 2013. To chalk out implementation and financing mechanism and
processes, Pakistan needs to view CPEC at local, national, regional and
continental level. Since CPEC is the flagship project of OBOR, it is,
therefore, necessary to understand the fact that unlike KKH that connected two
states, OBOR is about continental integration. There is a likelihood of CPEC
may expand beyond China and Pakistan. There is a news item appeared in The News
(April 9, 2018) that states, “CPEC is being extended to Afghanistan”. This
shows flexibility to CPEC to accommodate emerging needs.
At national level the major issues and irritants for
implementation of CPEC stem from inequality in power sharing among the
federating units of Pakistan. For example, Balochistan being the largest
province in terms of area, but smallest in population has always remained at
the receiving end. Similarly, Gilgit-Baltistan is not a constitutional part of
Pakistan. Its ambiguous status and flawed policies of Pakistan provide accuse
for non-CPEC actors to meddle in the country’s affairs by making CPEC
controversial. India has repeatedly been making claims over the territory of
Gilgit-Baltistan because it is disputed territory, and thereby dubbing CPEC
initiative as illegal. Instead of removing ambiguity about the region, the
rulers of Pakistan keep Gilgit-Baltistan in constitutional limbo. The status
quo of the region may pose new challenges for Pakistan in future on the
diplomatic front.
The tried and tested formula of Pakistani rulers to tackle the
internal dissensions about CPEC is to ignore the peripheral voices first, and
giving concessions when it faces vehement opposition latter. But this kind of
quick fixes cannot address the issues and challenges related to CPEC that
demand meticulous planning, nuanced understanding and empathetic handling of
local issues. Only by taking into consideration social and political dimensions
from every angle, the plan of CPEC can become comprehensive and representative
of local aspirations for prosperity.
Since CPEC is about geo-economic and economic geology, there is
need to view economic opportunities from geographic point of view. To envisage
CPEC as a new paradigm of economy, the policy and decision makers of Pakistan
have to take an imaginative leap. That would be possible if they extricate their
thinking from the confines of provincial and administrative boundaries, and
economic paradigm of pre-globalisation period. CPEC is to be viewed as a
phenomenon that will blur different administrative boundaries according to its
needs and requirements, and thus give birth to common economic interests with
new social configurations. Hence, economic zones have to be established not on
the basis of provinces but on geography.
For example, social and economical dynamics of the coastal belt
in Pakistan are different from the hinterland. To make CPEC more feasible, the
coastal areas of Balochistan and Sindh can make one economic zone. The point
where northern tip of Sindh, North-eastern Balochistan and Southern Punjab
converge can make an economic ring by forming central economic zone in
Pakistan.
Similarly, the mountainous
regions of Gilgit-Baltistan, and Chitral, Kohistan and mountainous areas of
Swat in Khyber Pukhtunkhwa can be clubbed together under one economic zone.
Such arrangement will enable the government to address issues pertaining to
culture, identity, economy and environment because the classification would be
based on geographical anthropology not political/nationalist ideology. In the
long run, the commonality of economic interest will give birth to new
solidarities and associations, and help reducing politicisation of economic
issues on narrow ethnic basis.
In order to address local grievances, all the provinces, Azad
Jammu and Kashmir and Gilgit-Baltistan should be made part of the CPEC planning
at the centre, but its implementation can be devolved at local level. For the
geographically based Special Economic Zone, a different mechanism of governance
and institutional structure may be devised so that it can cater to the needs of
zones efficiently and timely. The speed and efficiency cannot be achieved with
existing bureaucratic structure marred by red-tapism.
Among different regions of Pakistan, only Gilgit-Baltistan
borders with China, and it has long historical and cultural connections. Before
coming under the suzerainty of the British, the principality of Hunza had
tributary relations with China. The region can benefit from rich historical and
cultural relationship with China by forging new synergies and taking
initiatives on cultural and economic fronts. China has turned the Kashgar into
modern metropolis within two decades. Gilgit-Baltistan can gain from the
experience of development in Xinjiang–Uighur
Autonomous Region of China. Gilgit-Baltistan is faced with
challenges emerging from its burgeoning towns and cities. Chinese expertise in
urban planning in Xinjiang can be helpful to resolve urban issues. Because of
potential for mutual learning and joint initiatives under the umbrella of CPEC,
it can be envisaged that Gilgit-Baltistan will become hybrid case of
development by combining Chinese and Pakistani parts of CPEC in its plan. If
such a possibility emerges, then the government of Gilgit-Baltistan needs to
chalk out a plan that would address issues pertaining to cross border mode of
CPEC.
So far economic dimension has dominated discussion regarding
CPEC at the expense of its knowledge dimension. The proposed corridor will not
solely be economic, but it will also serves as knowledge corridor. Until
recently, no research and knowledge about CPEC was available. Due to lack of
any academic sources on CPEC, the knowledge vacuum is filled by conspiracy
theories. To stop this trend from further escalating into anti-CPEC narrative,
measures have to be taken to fill the information, knowledge and coordination
gap among multiple stakeholders of CPEC.
Currently, China is attracting thousands of students for different courses and
higher studies by providing scholarship in Chinese educational institutions. It
will help China to create a cadre of professionals who will have better
understanding of Chinese mind, processes and knowledge. This is highly laudable
initiative. Nonetheless, there is another important aspect of Chinese success
model in generating skilled and expert human resource. That is Chinese school
system. The success of Chinese universities cannot be attributed to higher
education alone. Behind this success, it is Chinese school system that feed
students with quality qualification to Chinese universities. In Pakistan we
have multiple schooling system, which has increased class divide within
society. Due to this students with quality education enjoy good economy status
and power, whereas students of poor background remain trapped in social and
economic poverty. Being an egalitarian education system, Chinese schooling
model can provide Pakistan with a viable model of education that will help in
bridging the yawning gap between education for haves and haves-not.
During last three years
some universities and think tanks in Pakistan have established centres and
special wings to study CPEC. However, the available studies need to expand the
horizon of framework of research to encompass human and social dimensions.
Purely quantitative and economical approach provides skewed view of intricate interface
between simple social set ups with complex systems. The in-depth studies into
psychological, cultural, gender, cognitive and social dimensions of CPEC will
provide us insights of dialectics of progress in the age of gigantic
infrastructure. Now the situation is that there is more talk related to CPEC
than understanding. At the moment the physical pace of CPEC is taking giant
leaps with no trail of knowledge behind. If the knowledge vacuum is left open
than it can become good abode for demons within to foster.
 Written By Aziz Alidad){kind=link}