Dear China: Help Us Fix Pakistan

Discussion in 'Pakistan' started by amoy, May 10, 2011.

  1. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,519
    Likes Received:
    1,544
    Dear China: Help Us Fix Pakistan - By Patrick C. Doherty | Foreign Policy

    The world's two superpowers must work together to fix the world's most broken country.
    BY PATRICK C. DOHERTY | MAY 9, 2011

    The war of words is officially on. The killing of Osama bin Laden has shone a harsh light on the fraught U.S.-Pakistan relationship.

    In Washington, lawmakers from both sides of the aisle are angrily questioning how it's possible that Pakistan didn't know about the whereabouts of Osama bin Laden as he hid for years under their noses in Abbottabad, a military garrison town. In Islamabad, Prime Minister Yousuf Gilani lashed out at the United States, calling it "disingenuous" to believe that Pakistan could have been "in cahoots" with al Qaeda. Whatever the case, the U.S. strategic calculus in South Asia is now in flux. What is Washington's best opportunity to use this watershed moment to restore stability to Pakistan? Partner with China.

    More... Unfortunately, the debate on Capitol Hill has quickly fallen into two polarized and short-sighted camps. In the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearings last week, both Democrats and Republicans used bin Laden's death to justify an accelerated withdrawal from Afghanistan. Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), the ranking member on the committee, argued, "It's exceedingly difficult to conclude that our vast expenditures in Afghanistan represent a rational [strategy]." Other lawmakers have called for renewed pressure on Islamabad to take direct action against anti-U.S. militant bases in Pakistan, such as the Quetta Shura and the Haqqani network.

    Neither path is likely to work. Abandoning Afghanistan for a third time since 1989 is not going to et us there -- indeed, each time the United States neglects the country, it gets worse. And strong-arm tactics won't work either: A gambit to withhold military or civilian assistance is also not going to force Islamabad to change its strategic calculus, which is rooted in decades of deep mistrust of the United States. Furthermore, because of continued U.S. dependence on Pakistani supply routes into Afghanistan and Pakistani intelligence services' ability to unleash terrorist devastation such as the 2008 Mumbai attacks, calling Pakistan's bluff could be disastrous.

    It's time to return to the fundamentals when it comes to U.S. interests in Pakistan. Ultimately, Washington desires a prosperous, sustainable, and secure South Asian region that does not remain a base for al Qaeda and its affiliates, or a likely flashpoint for a nuclear exchange.

    Understood this way, U.S. interests are broadly shared by China, Pakistan's primary ally and a major investor in the country's economic success. That's a point President Barack Obama should drive home to Chinese officials this week, as Washington hosts the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Indeed, the late Special Representative for Afghanistan and Pakistan Richard Holbrooke made a similar case to the Chinese in Beijing.

    To date, China's relationship with Pakistan -- with which it has shared military technology and invested in major infrastructure projects -- has only enabled that South Asian nation's unstable status quo. When it comes to military hardware, China has shared ballistic missiles such as the short-range DF-11, is jointly producing the JF-17 advanced fighter with Pakistan, and has provided its ally with anti-ship cruise missiles, among other weapons. China also built the massive multimodal port in the southern city of Gwadar, along with a highway and rail link connecting it to China. Indeed, the relationship is so strong that, at the request of Beijing, the Pakistani military stormed Islamabad's Red Mosque in 2007 to liberate 10 Chinese nationals, a move that crystallized the Pakistani Taliban as an anti-government movement.

    Nevertheless, there are two important points of convergence between Beijing's long-term interests and Washington's. First, China is concerned with preventing Islamist terrorism from disrupting its Central Asian energy routes and its restive western region, Xinjiang, which borders Pakistan. China is actively securing natural gas and oil reserves as far as Turkmenistan on the Caspian, rebuilding the old Soviet-era pipelines to feed its western frontier and crossing territory that hosts a majority Muslim population.

    Secondly, China has a stake in promoting sustainable, pan-Asian prosperity in the medium-to-long term to fuel its torrid economic growth. China -- and neighboring India -- are undertaking a monumental frenzy of urbanization. A study prepared by McKinsey estimates that approximately 375 million Chinese and 250 million Indians will move from villages to cities over the next 20 years. This growth will require a substantial productivity increase across all economic sectors -- but along the China-India periphery, the question of whether this massive urbanization will be sustainable hinges on higher levels of food production.

    This is where Chinese, U.S., and Pakistani interests powerfully intersect. China needs a marked increase in Pakistani agricultural productivity, while America needs Pakistan to build a prosperous economy and a moderate political order that sees its neighbors to the northwest and east as economic opportunities -- rather than threats. Land reform is key to creating a win-win situation for all three countries.

    Farm productivity in Pakistan is stuck between 17 and 50 percent of its potential, according to research from the Pakistan Institute of Development Economics. Improved agriculture requires better-educated farmers who own their own land and are incentivized to make use of sustainable methods that also boost their production. Even Cuba figured this one out.

    Political moderation requires the rise of a phenomenon that does not yet exist in Pakistan -- a competent and legitimate political party with a reform mandate. Pakistan's patronage pyramids -- run by powerful family dynasties -- are today inseparable from the civilian political parties they control. They are equally responsible for the status quo: economic failure and the government's sheltering of Islamist militant groups, despite billions of dollars in U.S. foreign assistance. At the root of that corruption is Pakistan's system of semi-feudal land ownership, which, ironically, the Chinese Communist Party is more than happy to prop up.

    There is little time to waste: Commodity prices are nearing record highs, the fighting drags on in Afghanistan, and the people of Pakistan are hurting. In 2009, the year before the devastating monsoon floods that displaced some 20 million people, the United Nations judged that half of the Pakistani population was food insecure. Two-thirds of Pakistanis are living in rural areas and relying directly or indirectly on agriculture, with at least 24 percent of Pakistanis living on less than $2 a day.

    A green revolution in the Pakistani agricultural belt could forge an independent farming class in the countryside that could remake Pakistan both politically and economically. With a simultaneous effort to formalize property rights in urban areas, a moderate and stable middle-class would have the best chance to peacefully reassert the civilian government's full authority. In short, prosperity and self-reliance will lay the foundation for a government that is willing to embrace the Asian economic growth narrative and free itself of the need to bind the nation together using a narrative of perpetual external threats.

    But without deep reforms in Pakistan, China will not get what it needs out of its dysfunctional ally -- and neither Beijing nor Washington will be able to convince Islamabad to end its dangerous dalliance with South and Central Asian terrorist groups. Together, however, these two superpowers can succeed where, individually, each would fail.
    ==================================================================

    Edited: Removed comments.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: May 10, 2011
  2.  
  3. hit&run

    hit&run Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    May 29, 2009
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    4,667
    PM Gilani heads to China on four-day visit | Pakistan | DAWN.COM
    .
    .
    "I am his master's dog at kew. Pray tell me, sir, whose dog are you?" — Alexander Pope
    .
    .
    I wonder why China is so generous and why she wouldn't accost Gilani like USA did by asking him ''Whose dog are you''.
    .
    Anyhow,
    I have read some assertions of a keen China watcher at some another board that ISI and PA's real master is not USA but China. Since that day i have started giving a bit of thought to this equation. There is a profound history of cunning practises done by both China and Pakistan therefore one must not give benefit of doubt to both that they carry a normal state to state relationship. The timings, the rescues and the solaces China has provided to Pakistan is just very interesting.
     
  4. Yan Luo Wang

    Yan Luo Wang Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2010
    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    3
    No, China is NOT the "Master" of anyone.

    Even North Korea regularly goes against us, like when they developed nuclear weapons despite China repeatedly telling them not to, or when they snubbed us by refusing to attend the Six-party talks.

    China is not the "puppet master" in the shadows. We simply are not powerful enough to fulfil such a function. Not yet anyway.
     
  5. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    The best whores are those that willingly become whores without anyone forcing them to.

    North Korea is just a bitch to everyone, and is no one's whore. Put Pakistan is "deeper than mountains and higher than oceans" with China :)
     
  6. Yan Luo Wang

    Yan Luo Wang Regular Member

    Joined:
    Dec 22, 2010
    Messages:
    169
    Likes Received:
    3
    Why do you think it is fair to label an entire country as a "whore" repeatedly?
     
  7. SHASH2K2

    SHASH2K2 New Member

    Joined:
    May 10, 2010
    Messages:
    5,711
    Likes Received:
    723
    Location:
    Bihar, BanGalore , India
    people of country are represented by their selected governements . If a government behaves in a particular manner its quite obvious that people will also be labeled as same. after all its their government and they chose it .
     
  8. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Guys please mind your language, be civilized not a fanatic ;)


    This is a factually incorrect statement. Let me explain in simplest terms, suppose there are 10 candidate for a seat, and 1 candidate gets 20% vote, the other 9 get 10% each, then the one with only 20% of the vote wins. So how can you label a person who wins 20% as a true representative of the people ?
     
    SHASH2K2 and Oracle like this.
  9. civfanatic

    civfanatic Retired Moderator

    Joined:
    Sep 8, 2009
    Messages:
    4,562
    Likes Received:
    2,526
    Location:
    తెలంగాణ
    I am labeling the Pakistani state as a whore, because it has as much sovereignty over itself as a whore has over her body.
     
  10. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    @civfanatic I suggest you please don't insult whores.
     
  11. Singh

    Singh Phat Cat Administrator

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2009
    Messages:
    20,305
    Likes Received:
    8,270
    Location:
    011
    Manc pointed out if there are 10 candidates and 1 secures 20% and the other 9, 10% each then teh total comes out to 110%. Error is regretted. :rolleyes:
     
  12. amoy

    amoy Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jan 17, 2010
    Messages:
    5,519
    Likes Received:
    1,544
    Pupils gang up on their "enemies" at school. The same is true in the adults world. So there comes NATO, SCO alike. Every power usually has a clique around it. The US has many, such as Israel. Russia has a CIS. As a blessing China has NK and PK.

    NK is a bitch to US, SK and JP but does it bother IN? PK may be a nuisance to IN but for most others it's just fine except for that Taliban / Al Qaeda thing.
     
  13. Iamanidiot

    Iamanidiot Elite Member Elite Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2009
    Messages:
    5,326
    Likes Received:
    1,493
    Pakistan is on its way down and for one thing it can never play the role NK.
     
  14. BangersAndMash

    BangersAndMash Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 24, 2011
    Messages:
    748
    Likes Received:
    539
    Location:
    England
    Well China already gifted pakistan their most prized possession, the pride of their nation, which is the answer to all of pakistan's problems, got no food > BUILD MORE NUKES, got no electricity > BUILD MORE NUKES. What more does pakistan want from China?
     

Share This Page