CPEC and American interests
Dr Shabir Choudhry London 14 May 2017
Americans
have this ability to smell danger to their national interests in advance; and
take appropriate measures to ensure that the danger is kept far away from their
borders. They also know how to protect their defence, strategic and economic
interests around the world. This is why some people claim, ‘America is a
neighbour of every country’.
Gulf
of Oman, the Arabian Sea and the Indian Ocean have great significance for
America. If they want to save their interests, and interests of the European
countries in this region, then they have to formulate appropriate strategies to
protect their rights. It is believed that the balance of power may change in
the region if all the CPEC related projects are completed, as there are hidden
strategic and military aspect to the CPEC.
Many
analysts believe that it is not a simply economic corridor, because the CPEC is
a ‘tool for geo – strategic control which will destabilise regional and
global security for decades’. Some Pakistani strategic experts who are
angry with the central government point out that if the CPEC is completed as
intended then it will have the ability to cause ‘havoc’; and to stop this,
international powers should support ‘oppressed peoples in Pakistan to face
the onslaught and fight back’.
Senator Mushahid Hasan Syed, who is a Member
Parliamentary Committee on the CPEC, and who is regarded as an expert in
international relations said, ‘China Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is
not only the part of OBOR but in fact, it is its pillar. “Pakistan is the only
country which is sharing the land and maritime route for the project. I believe
that China is becoming the centre of economy and in the 21st century's
balance of power – be it political, strategic or economy are also shifting from
West to East.” 1
Many
people say that this century will see a rise of Asia, and countries like China
and India will have indispensable role in this, provided they stay away from
military confrontation. Rise of China will undermine importance of some other
big players of international politics. Questions are being debated in many
circles:
·
If America, India,
UAE, Iran, Japan, Britain and other Western and Middle Eastern countries will
remain quiet and let China dictate international politics?
·
Will they allow
China to become a credible threat to their interests in Gulf of Oman, Arabian
Sea and in the Indian Ocean?
·
Or will they work
out strategies to contain the fast rising Chinese influence?
It must
be noted that there is a strong military aspect to the CPEC; and China will
have a credible military presence in Gwadar, especially Chinese naval ships and
submarines; and a joint naval task force. As the Gwadar port is very important
in China’s ‘String of Pearls’, it is because of this America view the CPEC and
Chinese control of Gwadar with suspicion.
America
would like Pakistan to achieve economic and political stability, which would
help Pakistan to combat extremism and terrorism. In this context, they would
not oppose the Chinese presence in Pakistan to support on commercial and
economic fronts. However, they would not like a strong Chinese military
presence in Gilgit Baltistan and in and around Gwadar Port.
Despite
some resentment and bitterness in certain sections, the US has been a very
important friend and ally of Pakistan, which has provided enormous military and
economic aid. Leaving aside what America gave to Pakistan prior to 2003,
however, since 2003, America has provided Pakistan:
·
$10.5 billion in economic
assistance,
·
$7.6 billion in
security-related aid,
·
and $13 billion in
counter-terrorism support,
·
even recently the U.S.
Senate passed $1.1 billion under the Security Enhancement Act on account of
mutual strategic partnership.
Instead
of building dams or power plants in Pakistan, America gave huge amounts in
cash; and allowed the Pakistanis to spend that money according to their
preferences and needs. Unlike America, China refrained from handing cash
amounts to Pakistani military and political leadership, may be because they
knew Pakistanis are good at pocketing big chunk of that.
Although
China and America are big trading partners, but Washington actively wants to
contain Chinese influence in South China Sea with help of allies like India,
Japan, Indonesia and Singapore. As far as America is concerned, Gwadar is the
most important in China’s ‘String of pearls’. This term symbolises the naval
bases that China dominates in that region.
Irrespective
of strategic and economic rivalry, China and America cannot afford a military
confrontation. They have very strong economic and commercial ties, and are
heavily dependent on each other as far as business is concerned. Pakistan will
have to learn how to protect and promote its national interests; and must
acquire diplomatic skills to deal with both major powers in such a way that
they don’t get annoyed.
To some
experts, it makes a perfect sense for America to encourage and support India to
give Pakistan the same bitter medicine they have been giving to India in
Kashmir and in other parts of India for many decades. In other words, encourage
rebellious elements in various parts of Pakistan, in Gilgit Baltistan and in
Pakistani occupied Jammu and Kashmir to take arms against Pakistan.
In this
regard, in September 2016, the US State Department Deputy Spokesperson Mark
Toner in a reply to a question if India and America were working together
against the CPEC, said:
“I would dismiss it
outright. We have a strong bilateral relationship with Pakistan, but one that
is premised on counter-terrorism cooperation and – as part of that
conversation, or that dialogue and that cooperation that we have on
counter-terrorism issues, we made it very clear that Pakistan can’t pick and
choose which terrorist groups it goes after and it has to go after those groups
that seek to do harm to its neighbours and may seek refuge on Pakistani soil.” 2
Just like America, India is also interested
in containing China; and unlike China, India has some border disputes with
China too. So, it is natural that there will be China – India rivalry and
competition in the region and beyond, especially when India is also trying to
cut out its international role. Despite good trading relations and apparently
friendly relations some people fear that there could be a military
confrontation between them.
I do not think China and India can afford a
military confrontation, as both countries have a big economic agenda, which is
essential for any international role. Both countries have matured leadership,
and they have sensibly avoided a military clash since the war of 1962; and have
agreed to resolve disputes by a process of dialogue.
Notwithstanding the trade and friendly
relations, India is anxious about the CPEC, as New Delhi perceives it as an
encirclement of India. Also, India believes, Gilgit Baltistan is an Indian
territory and the CPEC will go through that; and presence of the Chinese army
will endanger Indian national security, and strengthen Pakistani occupation of
that region. Indian security experts feel that
Pakistan and China have joined hands to endanger the Indian national interests.
They jointly present a serious threat, and their aim is to encircle and contain
India.
Furthermore, lease of Gwadar to China and a credible Chinese military presence in that region will change balance of power in that region; and present a serious threat to Indian national interests, including trade and maritime transport. So, it is India’s legitimate right to keep an eye on developments taking place in the neighbourhood; and especially watch issues and projects related the CPEC.
This is where, some experts say, India and
America have a common agenda. Whether one like it or not, India is the third
major player in this Geo-strategic region; and
it rightly perceives this mega economic venture and a large scale naval
mobilization a serious threat to its security, and puts global sea lanes at
risk.
Some commentators believe India is strongly against the CPEC and rising Chinese and Pakistani influence in the region; and is actively working to sabotage the CPEC projects by promoting insurgency in Balochistan. In this regard, New Delhi has developed closer military and economic ties with America. That practically meant good bye to the old policy of non - alignment. Realising India’s shift, Russia also openly came out to consolidate relations with Pakistan; and expressed its interest in the CPEC. Russia even sent its elite forces to do military exercises in Gilgit Baltistan and FATA to combat terrorism.
Different countries are
jockeying for positions and are making serious endeavours to make new deals and
alliances. How this complicated situation will unfold in future it is difficult
to predict. However, I feel the CPEC, despite its economic potential, can
destabilise Pakistan and Gilgit Baltistan, as it can magnetise a major
confrontation in the region because of the competing interests of various
countries.
Some experts believe India
and America, if they want to contain China and protect their interests in Gulf
of Oman, Arabian Sea, and in the Indian Ocean, then they have no option but to
take some pre-emptive actions against the CPEC and projects related to that.
One view is not to do anything tangible at this stage, and let the enemy spend
its huge resources on the infrastructure. Once the project is near completion;
then they can encourage the rebels or even send their own commandos to sabotage
it.
The
CPEC, after leaving the Chinese territory, is vulnerable all the way to the Gwadar
port. Those who want to sabotage the CPEC transport and trade can target it in
Gilgit Baltistan, in KPK and in Balochistan. It is very long route with full of
potential hazard points from where it is not too difficult to hit the targets.
Daniel Coats, Director of National
Intelligence, told lawmakers during a Congressional hearing that the ‘CPEC
will offer militants additional targets’. Longer the route, more vulnerable
it becomes. Daniel Coats further says: “Islamabad’s failure to curb support
to anti-India militants and New Delhi’s growing intolerance of this policy,
coupled with a perceived lack of progress in Pakistan’s investigations into the
January 2016 Pathankot cross-border attack, set the stage for a deterioration
of bilateral relations in 2016.” 3
The
National Intelligence Director further said, that ‘Pakistan-based
terrorist groups “will present a sustained threat to US interests in the
region and continue to plan and conduct attacks in India and Afghanistan.”
They may not have big success against high value targets, but they can easily
hit soft targets and inflict fear and chaos. In his view, “The greatest threat to Pakistan’s
internal security include Tehreek-e Taliban Pakistan, Jamaat-ul-Ahrar, al Qaeda
in the Indian Subcontinent, ISIS-K, Laskhar-e-Jhangvi, and Lashkar-e
Jhangvi al-Alami”. 4
As
pointed out at the beginning of the article that Americans know how to protect their
defence, strategic and economic interests around the world. If they genuinely
believe that sabotage of the CPEC related projects is in interest of America,
then they will find ways to do that. In order to simply of the task, they have
the ability to create a conducive environment in which other countries may feel
obliged to join to accomplish this task.
In
some cases, they don’t need to wave an American flag to do what they think is
necessary to protect and advance the American interests. In that case, they can
also use proxies. In prevailing situation countries are reluctant to use their
own troops for certain tasks, they hire services of non-state actors or proxies
to accomplish the tasks. Who knows better than the Americans how to create proxies
and use them against their enemies.
If China
can hire Blackwater terrorist private army to protect the CPEC route inside
China, is it not possible that another country can hire the Blackwater to
sabotage the CPEC in Gilgit Baltistan and in Pakistan? After all, it is
business as far as Blackwater or Academy (new name of the organistaion) is
concerned. They will probably take on any contract that will generate money for
the shareholders of the company.
In
South Asia, there are groups like TTP, IS, Taliban, Alqaaida, Blackwater, some
Balochi groups and some religious groups who will do anything for money. Any
country can hire their services, and if the price is attractive then these
groups can virtually do anything, even attack a Masjid; kill a religious
scholar or a medical specialist who saves lives of others.
It
means we have interesting and very challenging time ahead of us; and let us see
how the leaders of this region face these challenges and protect life, liberty
and dignity of fellow human beings.
References:
2.
Is America
against the CPEC? Sabena Siddiqi - November 15, 2016
https://defence.pk/pdf/threads/is-america-against-the-cpec.461157/
4. Ibid
