By Asia Maqsood 31/1/2018
India’s constant opposition towards CPEC would not be affecting this Project at all. Simultaneously, this project is not prohibiting India to be the part of CPEC being an inclusive project. This is purely a development project and has no excuse to restrain the development in the disputed areas as India is repeatedly casting its stance that CPEC passes through the disputed area and is a serious concern for India. It may intentionally do not want to raise the standards of living of the masses of those areas. CPEC is a flagship project of China’s One Belt One Road Initiative which includes more than 65 countries of the world and it is not like a Multilateral Export Control Regime “an international body that states use to organize their national export control systems”/regime like NSG in which a consensus of the member countries is needed for the new developments. For example, if one member country is not giving its consensus for any development, the whole development will be halted. Instead, CPEC project is an open and inclusive project and inviting other countries to invest for the mutual benefit and shared prosperities of the respective regions. Pakistan and China are working on the economic cooperative initiative are backed by the UN and several other countries of the world adding it is not directed against any third party. There is no universal justification of India’s claim over the disputed territories on the ground because there are such examples where the developmental work has been done such as last year Philippines released photographs of the construction of structures by Chinese vessels in disputed Scarborough Shoal in the South China Sea during ASEAN Summit in Vientiane. India beefed up its concerns against Chinese sponsored China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Will the disputes between or among countries obstruct the overall development of the region and the populace residing in those areas?
Recently on 27th January 2018 India’s Ambassador to China Mr. Gautam Bambawale’s statement “Beijing should pay serious attention to New Delhi’s concerns about the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and not ignore them. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor passes through Indian-claimed territory (POK) and hence violates our territorial integrity. This is a major problem for us” is the insufferable stance on CPEC. Since the introduction of this project, these kinds of statements have been up roaring on different international or national forums from India’s Side. Despite these stern statements, the project has been progressing very well. Moreover, the US has also shown its weight behind India by saying that it too believes the route of corridor passes through a disputed territory — a reference to Northern areas of Pakistan. The statement had come at a time when Foreign Minister Khawaja Asif was in Washington and held series of talks with the US officials to normalize the tense relations. This new stance has started another debate and is undoubtedly going to further damage the bilateral ties, as it is profusely obvious now that the US envisions a greater role for India in the region.
Apart from the vicious existence of terrorism in South Asia, the Kashmir dispute between Pakistan and India is also the biggest hindrance to any possibility of a large scale of investment coming into the region. India should be on the front line to negotiate with Pakistan to resolve this conflict as a solution to the concern on CPEC to promote prosperity and development in that area because the northern part of India bordering Pakistan and Indian Held Kashmir lacks the basic infrastructure.
India’s perceived sense of insecurity regarding this project is that through CPEC the sources and standards of livelihood of the people living in Pakistan’s side of Kashmir would be raised. This is serious anxiety in India as this hopeful situation presents a Pakistan’s GB stark contrast to the situation in Indian occupied Kashmir, where the occupation forces have unleashed a reign of terror against innocent Kashmiris for committing the ‘sin’ of demanding legitimate socio-political rights.
China would not give up CPEC just because of mere Indian protests. The Indian government will not cease its developmental activities in Arunachal Pradesh either. But is it not important to respect the voices of communities residing in disputed territories as a priority rather than following the institutional norms in developmental activities? From inter-governmental institutions like ADB/World Bank to each country sharing disputed territories like India or China or Pakistan, it is foremost important to stand up for rights to development of communities. Otherwise, Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) cannot be considered ‘universal.’ Indians are only good in massacring its minority races like Sikhs and Muslims.
In a nutshell, India’s regional aspirations to contain China’s growing regional influence and conveying such messages to China will not carry sufficient weight in the long run to cut China’s commitment towards CPEC. India has some faulted security relations with China even there is no CPEC. The only thing is that India being the major country of the region should play its influential part towards the development of the region making peace with the neighboring states.
Lastly, if India is striving hard by investing in Chabahar Port and other initiatives, such as its support to 116 influential projects in 31 provinces in Afghanistan, are aimed to undercut CPEC and increase India’s hold in Kabul then why it is protesting the developments in the disputed areas through which CPEC passes. These 116 India-sponsored projects will cover hydropower construction, farmland water conservation projects and renewable energy among others that will directly affect lives of the common people of Afghanistan. Likewise, through CPEC the regional development is possible if India looks at this project through the prism of the development.