China and US Battle For Influence in Pakistan

[Riaz Haq]

Top US and Chinese diplomats have visited Pakistan to meet with the country's new prime minister Mr. Imran Khan within days of his assuming office. The US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo was the first to call on Prime Minister Imran Khan in Islamabad. Pompeo's visit was soon followed by a three-day visit by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi. What is at stake in the battle between China and the United States in Pakistan is the prize of global superpower status, according to the US-based Wall Street Journal.

There is a lot of speculation in the western media about the objectives of Pakistan policies being pursued by the two great powers and their impact on the US-China competition for world dominance. Such speculations have centered on the debt related to China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) and the US leverage in potential IMF bailout of Pakistan.

American business publication Wall Street Journal has produced a short video explaining how its staff sees what it describes as "US-China conflict brewing in Pakistan". What is at stake in the battle between China and the United States in Pakistan is the prize of global superpower status. Here are the key points it makes:

1. The US-China conflict brewing in Pakistan is about global dominance sought by the two great powers.

2. If China succeeds, it could become the new center of global trade. If the US wins, it could frustrate China's push to become a global power. The impact of it will be felt around the world for decades.

3. China has already surpassed the United States as the world's biggest exporter of goods and services.

4. The biggest project in China's Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) in which China is investing heavily and providing massive loans.

5. China could use the infrastructure built in Pakistan under CPEC to gain access to the Indian Ocean and supplant the United States in Pakistan.

6. CPEC-related spending is sinking Pakistan deeper in debt to China. It could force Pakistan to seek $8 billion to $12 billion bailout by IMF where US is the biggest shareholder with veto power.

7. US does not want the IMF bailout money to be used to repay Chinese debt. Not bailing out Pakistan is not an option because it could cost US an important ally in the region.

8. US could, however, use IMF bailout to limit what Pakistan can borrow from China. Such a condition will achieve the US objective of significantly slowing down CPEC and BRI.

9. Pakistan's dilemma is that it needs both the infrastructure improvements financed by China and the IMF bailout to ease pressure on its dwindling foreign exchange reserves.

10. Whoever wins in Pakistan will become the number one global superpower.

Can US "Spend Them (Chinese) Into Oblivion"?

Here's the Wall Street Journal video:

https://youtu.be/wvw-85CC1t4

Related Links:

Haq's Musings

South Asia Investor Review

Can Pakistan Avoid Recurring Balance of Payment Crisis?

Pakistan Economy Hobbled By Underinvestment

Pakistan's IT Exports Surging

Can Indian Economy Survive Without Western Capital Inflows?

Pakistan-China-Russia Vs India-Japan-US

Chinese Yuan to Replace US $ as Reserve Currency?

Remittances From Overseas Pakistanis

Can Imran Khan Lead Pakistan to the Next Level?

China to Expand Manufacturing in Special Economic Zones

[Riaz Haq]

The Asian Century

The key to deciphering Jaishanker’s strategic intent in his Thailand comments lay in his use of the term “Asian Century.” This echoed the words of former Chinese reformist leader Deng Xiaoping, who, in a meeting with former Indian Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi in 1988, declared that “in recent years people have been saying that the next century will be the century of Asia and the Pacific, as if that were sure to be the case. I disagree with this view.” Deng went on to explain that unless China and India focus their respective and collective energies on developing their economies, there could, in fact, be no “Asian Century.”

While Washington may not have heard the subtle implications of Jainshankar’s words, Beijing appears to have done so. Almost immediately after the text of the Indian minister’s comments was made public, the spokesperson for China’s foreign minister declared that both India and China “have the wisdom and capability to help each other succeed rather than undercutting each other.” The takeaway from this exchange is that while both China and India view their ongoing territorial disputes as problematic, they are able and willing to keep their eye on the bigger picture — the ascendancy of the so-called “Asian Century”.

The fact is that India and China have been working toward this goal for some time now. Both are critical participants in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, which envisions the growth and empowerment of a trans-Eurasian economic zone that can compete with the economies of the US and Europe on a global scale. Likewise, India and China are actively cooperating within the framework of the Brics economic forum, which is emerging as a direct competitor to the Western-dominated G7.

While it is possible for India to navigate a policy path balancing the US and China in the short term, eventually it will need to go all in on China if its aspirations for an “Asian Century” are ever to be met. This narrative is overlooked by those in the US pursuing zero-sum policies with India when it comes to China.

Given the destiny inherent in the collective embrace of an “Asian Century” by India and China, the US could well find itself on the outside looking in when it comes to those wielding influence in the Pacific going forward. One thing is for certain — the “American Pacific Century” which encompasses the period between the Spanish-American War and the post-Cold War era, where US military, political, and economic power reigned supreme, has run its course. Whether or not India and China will be able to supplant it with an “Asian Century” is yet to be seen. But one thing is for certain — the strategic intent is certainly there.

Scott Ritter is a former US Marine Corps intelligence officer whose service over a 20-plus-year career included tours of duty in the former Soviet Union implementing arms control agreements, serving on the staff of US Gen. Norman Schwarzkopf during the Gulf War and later as a chief weapons inspector with the UN in Iraq from 1991-98. The views expressed in this article are those of the author.

[Riaz Haq]

Was China a factor in US$450 million US-Pakistan F-16 deal, or is it all about airspace access?

by Tom Hussain

https://www.scmp.com/week-asia/politics/article/3193522/was-china-f...

A deal struck to maintain and upgrade Pakistan’s warplanes has prompted speculation the US military may have secured airspace access in return
Both sides share a common enemy in Afghanistan-based terror groups. But some analysts see China as part of the reason for the F-16 deal as well


For the first time since the United States cancelled military aid to Pakistan in 2018, Washington this month approved a US$450 million package to maintain and upgrade the South Asian nation’s fleet of F-16 fighter jets, hinting at a thaw in bilateral ties that had turned decidedly frosty of late.
The deal announced on September 9 followed a flurry of diplomatic activity, prompting speculation that in return for agreeing to keep Pakistan’s warplanes airborne for the next five years, the US military covertly secured access to the country’s airspace to carry out counterterrorism operations.
Though Islamabad has repeatedly denied any such conspiracy, the assassination in late July of al-Qaeda chief Ayman al-Zawahiri in Kabul is widely believed to have been carried out by a US drone that traversed Pakistani airspace en route to its target.

Was China a factor in US$450 million US-Pakistan F-16 deal, or is it all about airspace access?
A deal struck to maintain and upgrade Pakistan’s warplanes has prompted speculation the US military may have secured airspace access in return
Both sides share a common enemy in Afghanistan-based terror groups. But some analysts see China as part of the reason for the F-16 deal as well
Pakistan

[Riaz Haq]

Suhasini Haidar
@suhasinih
India, Pakistan both partners of U.S. with different points of emphasis: Biden administration
"We look to both as partners, because we do have in many cases shared values...shared interests." Said State dept spokesperson

https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/india-pakistan-both-par...

https://twitter.com/suhasinih/status/1574601690581389313?s=20&t...

-----------

India and Pakistan are both partners of the U.S. with different points of emphasis, the Biden administration said on September 26, a day after visiting External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar questioned the rationale behind the latest American F-16 security assistance to Islamabad.

Referring to the argument made by the U.S. that F-16 sustenance package is to fight terrorism, Mr. Jaishankar had said everybody knows where and against whom F-16 fighter jets are used. "You're not fooling anybody by saying these things," he said in response to a question during an interaction with Indian-Americans.

"We don't view our relationship with Pakistan, and on the other hand, we don't view our relationship with India as in relation to one another. These are both partners of ours with different points of emphasis in each," State Department Spokesperson Ned Price told reporters at his daily news conference.

"We look to both as partners, because we do have in many cases shared values. We do have in many cases shared interests. And the relationship we have with India stands on its own. The relationship we have with Pakistan stands on its own," he said.



Early this month, the Biden administration approved a $450 million F-16 fighter jet fleet sustainment programme to Pakistan, reversing the decision of the previous Trump administration to suspend military aid to Islamabad for providing safe havens for the Afghan Taliban and the Haqqani network.

"We also want to do everything we can to see to it that these neighbours have relations with one another that are as constructive as can be possible. So that's another point of emphasis," Mr. Price said in response to a question.

Responding to another question, Mr. Price said it is "not in Pakistan's interest to see instability and violence in Afghanistan".

"The support for the people of Afghanistan is something we discuss regularly with our Pakistani partners; our efforts to improve the lives and livelihoods and humanitarian conditions of the Afghan people, and to see to it that the Taliban live up to the commitments that they have made," he added.

Pakistan is implicated in many of these same commitments: the counterterrorism commitments, commitments to safe passage, commitments to the citizens of Afghanistan, Mr. Price said. "The unwillingness or the inability on the part of the Taliban to live up to these commitments would have significant implications for Pakistan as well".

"So, for that reason, we do share a number of interests with Pakistan regarding its neighbour," Mr. Price said.



The United States, he noted, has been intently focused on the devastation that has resulted in the loss of life resulting from the torrential floods that have devastated large areas of Pakistan.

"We have provided tens of millions of dollars in relief for these floods. The Secretary today will have additional details on further US assistance for the Pakistani people, in light of this humanitarian emergency that Pakistanis are facing," he added.

[Riaz Haq]

Hassan Akbar
@hass_akbr
Shocking coming from a country that has been on the receiving end of US generosity what with the CAATSA waiver. Can’t believe India thinks it can dictate US foreign policy while selling Washington baloony about is own independence when it comes to Ukraine.

https://twitter.com/hass_akbr/status/1574369893797220353?s=20&t...


"You're Not Fooling Anybody...": S Jaishankar On US' F-16 Deal With Pak
"It's a relationship that has neither ended up serving Pakistan well nor serving the American interests," S Jaishankar said at an event in Washington


https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/youre-not-fooling-anybody...

[Riaz Haq]

With eye on Beijing, India and US make a show of unity amid fissures

On Monday, Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar had sharp words for US President Joe Biden’s approval earlier this month of a US$450 million package to maintain and upgrade the F-16 fighter jet fleet of Pakistan, India’s rival. The US argues that the F-16 fleet is important to counter terrorism.

https://www.scmp.com/news/china/diplomacy/article/3194048/eye-beiji...

A day after fissures reappeared in US-India ties, top diplomats from both countries struck a cordial tone on Tuesday in a show of unity with an eye on China – a common challenge and competitor in the Indo-Pacific.
On Monday, Indian External Affairs Minister Subrahmanyam Jaishankar had sharp words for US President Joe Biden’s approval earlier this month of a US$450 million package to maintain and upgrade the F-16 fighter jet fleet of Pakistan, India’s rival. The US argues that the F-16 fleet is important to counter terrorism.

India – a key partner in the US security strategy for the Indo-Pacific region to counter China’s growing muscle – opposed the move, contending that Pakistan harbours and exports terrorists. On Monday, Jaishankar said the US was “not fooling anyone” when it said the fighters would be used for counterterrorism “because we all know where they are deployed”.

Expressing a “keen interest to move forward on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework

Expressing a “keen interest to move forward on the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, a loose grouping of 13 countries from South and Southeast Asian countries led by the US to counter China’s dominance in international trade, Jaishankar said that “India and the US share a strong interest in encouraging more resilient and reliable supply chains”.
Discussing security issues, Jaishankar praised the US for adopting a more “international” approach and becoming “more open to engaging with countries like India” in initiatives such as the Quad Security Dialogue – a four-nation bloc including the US, India, Japan and Australia – that hope to counter China as its influence grows in the Indo-Pacific.
The Quad, he said, “has grown remarkably in the last two years”, adding that there was a “lot of promise in working with the US to shape the direction of the world”.

For his part, Blinken signalled support for “increasing the number of both permanent and non-permanent representatives of the United Nations Security Council, a long-standing goal of India”. China opposes India’s bid for a permanent seat on the Security Council; the two nations maintain strained ties over a decades-long border dispute in the Himalayas.

While Jaishankar avoided the topic of Pakistan, Blinken endured questions from the Indian press over the deal’s effectiveness in tackling terrorism. He said that it was the US’ “responsibility and obligation” to provide sustenance support, reasserting that Pakistan’s bolstered capability in counterterrorism benefited both India and the US.
Last week, China, one of the five permanent Security Council members, blocked a joint attempt by the US and India to sanction Sajjid Mir, a Pakistan-based commander of the Islamist militant group Lashkar-e-Taiba; India claims Mir played a role in the 26/11 Mumbai terror attacks in 2008 that killed more than 300 people.
Akriti Vasudeva of the Stimson Centre in Washington noted that with “the growing US-India strategic partnership, the two countries’ alignment on the Chinese threat and the need for a rules-based order, and their broad-based cooperation means that they have far greater convergences than divergences and will not let any misgivings derail or hamper their ties”.

[Riaz Haq]

By Nirupama Subramaian, Foreign Affairs and National Security Editor, Indian Express

“As Delhi demonstrates “strategic autonomy” to engage with every side — Quad one week, and Russia and China the next at the Shanghai Co-operation Organisation (SCO) in Samarkand — and work around Western sanctions to buy oil from Russia, and keep friends in all camps, it may have to come to terms that others in world play the same game.”

https://indianexpress.com/article/explained/us-pakistan-f-16-packag...

India has lashed out at the US over its F-16 package to Pakistan
Why has the Biden Administration reversed Trump's freeze on military ties with Islamabad with a $450 million package for a lifetime upgrade of Pakistan's F-16 fleet? What is the deal, and why is Delhi unhappy?

Speaking at a meeting with the non-resident Indian community in Washington on Sunday, External Affairs Minister S Jaishankar lashed out at the US for its decision to provide Pakistan with a $450 million package for what the Pentagon has called the “F-16 case for sustainment and related equipment”. Jaishankar questioned the merits of the US-Pakistan partnership, saying it had “not served” either country. When asked about the US justification that the fighter planes were meant to assist Pakistan in its counter-terrorism efforts, Jaishankar retorted: “You’re not fooling anybody by saying these things”.

[Riaz Haq]

How China and Pakistan Forged Close Ties
Though ties between China and Pakistan began in the wake of the 1962 Sino-Indian clash, China did not embrace the relationship. By the mid-2000s, the shift in U.S.-India relations and China's own global ambitions made Pakistan a critical partner for China.

Article by Manjari Chatterjee Miller

https://www.cfr.org/article/how-china-and-pakistan-forged-close-ties

On a visit to China almost a decade ago, I had a conversation with a Beijing-based Chinese foreign policy analyst. The subject of China’s relationship with Pakistan came up and the analyst laughed ruefully. Although he acknowledged Pakistan saw the bilateral relationship as a valuable friendship, he implied that was not how China saw it. China was in some ways reluctant, I gathered, even to be seen as cultivating a friendship with Pakistan. At the time, the idea of taoguang yanghui (hide your strength and bide your time) still held sway in China, and the Chinese government was not only wary of being seen as an international spoiler state but also siding with one. China saw no need to trumpet the relationship, and Pakistan needed China more than the other way around.

---------


Pakistan is now an important partner for China. The relationship raises the specter that India may, in the future, face a two-front war, a scenario that would have been implausible a decade ago. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) and embassies in South Asia often tweet sympathetically about the relationship—including on topics such as Pakistan’s welcome of the Chinese-sponsored Global Security Initiative, China-Pakistan football matches, China’s flood aid, and pandemic cooperation. At an MFA press conference earlier this year, the spokesperson gushed that, “the bond of friendship and mutual assistance between the Chinese and Pakistani people is stronger than gold, and the two countries’ iron-clad friendship is deeply rooted in the people and boasts strong vitality.”

This is not to say the relationship is problem-free. China’s wariness about Islamist militants in Xinjiang and their links to Pakistani militants, its concern about Chinese citizens working in Pakistan who have been the targets of terror attacks, the sporadic opposition in Pakistan to CPEC projects, and China’s caution about weighing in on Kashmir (despite its recent condemnation of India’s abrogation of Article 370 and Wang Yi’s reference to the territory at the Organization of Islamic Cooperation meeting) all continue to be sticking points. Yet this is no longer just a relationship, but a genuine partnership. India should take note.

[Riaz Haq]

From Indian News Agency ANI:

America upgrades Pakistani F-16 fighter jets, experts weigh in | Latest News

https://youtu.be/QSgU_cYzR08

Sep 8, 2022 US has approved F-16 fleet sustainment programme to Pakistan. The deal is valued at up to $450 million. This program essentially means structural and software upgrades, leading to additional usable flight hours. Pakistan Government requested to include US Government for follow-on support of Pakistan’s F-16 fleet to include an F-16 Aircraft Structural Integrity Program. The country has also requested to consolidate and include logistics services for support of Engine Management Program and software support. This program essentially means structural and software upgrades. It will lead to additional usable flight hours on existing F-16 aircraft and better air-to-ground precision capability. Defence Expert PK Sehgal reacted to President Biden’s millions dollar deal by saying that the initiative has been taken by US in order to resist the global Chinese hegemony.

[Riaz Haq]

Gen Bajwa in DC, US envoy, German FM statements on Kashmir, show why Pakistan can’t be isolated.

By Shekhar Gupta

https://youtu.be/NuXd4d_clf4

The US ambassador visits Pakistan occupied Kashmir & refers to it as ‘Azad Jammu & Kashmir’, German foreign minister says UN could play a role in Kashmir & Pakistan’s Army Chief spends nearly a week in Washington. In episode 1093 of Cut The Clutter Shekhar Gupta explains why Pakistan cannot be isolated or ignored and where it stands right now.

-----------------

Pakistan is our most important neighbor

We must focus on Pakistan

We can not ignore Pakistan in India because the world can not ignore Pakistan

The Western world has an intrinsic relationship with Pakistan which doesn't go away

The West does not see Pakistan as so useful to them today and yet Pakistan can not be isolated

You can see all the indications that Pakistan is not isolated

A lot of (Indian) TV channels say Pakistan is isolated but the evidence doesn;t support it

Pakistan FM has visited Washington and met his counterpart Tony Blinken

Pakistan Army Chief has received a warm welcome at the US Defense Dept and met US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. Bajwa matters more than the Pakistan Defense Minister. Nobody knows his name.

US Ambassador to Pakistan Donald Blome, a career diplomat has visited Pakistan Occupied Kashmir and called it Azad Kashmir...Azad means free. 

When the chips are down in the region Pakistan is the ally Americans reach out to

The US does not want Pakistan to drift to China

German foreign minister Annalena Baerbock has spoken about Kashmir...the K word. She has asked for the UN to help solve the Kashmir issue. 

Bajwa is not a warmonger. He wants to normalize ties with India. He wants to trade with India. He doesn't want Faiz Hameed to succeed him. He used to be the ISI chief and took credit for the Taliban victory in Afghanistan. Do the Americans have leverage here? 

Where does Pakistan's unique power come from? Why can't Pakistan be ignored? Why can't Pakistan be isolated?

The Indian public needs to understand it.

Pakistan is too big in terms of population, too powerful militarily, too Muslim, too nuclear and too well located to be isolated. 

Pakistan has the 5th largest population and its population is growing fast.  It could soon exceed Indonesia to become the largest Muslim nation in the world. 

Pakistan has the 5th strongest military in the world.

In terms of nuclear weapons, Pakistan has the 4th largest nuclear arsenal in the world. 

Pakistan is too well located to be isolated. It has geo-strategic location. Pakistan is the western gateway to China. Pakistan opened China's ties with US. And then helped the US defeat the Soviet Union. 

The factors that made Pakistan such a strong ally to US still exist. Don't blame the Pakistanis for it. 

India is not willing to be commit to an alliance with the US. 

Imran Khan tried to change Pakistan's foreign policy to be more like India's but he failed. 

[Riaz Haq]

Biden is ignoring Pakistan. Here’s why that’s a mistake
BY HUSAIN HAQQANI,


https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3685418-biden-is-igno...

American officials are beginning to realize that ignoring or trying to isolate Pakistan is not a smart policy option. The U.S. maintains relations with a host of countries with which it disagrees. Why should Pakistan be different?

After a hiatus of a few years, Pakistan and the United States have started to re-engage, though Pakistan no longer features critically in U.S. global plans, as the Biden administration’s national security strategy makes clear. Over the past few weeks, Pakistani Foreign Minister Bilawal Bhutto Zardari met with U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Chief of Army Staff General Qamar Javed Bajwa met with Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin.

These meetings reflect recognition that Pakistan, with all its complexities, cannot be wished away. It is the world’s fifth most populous country and is the only majority Muslim nation armed with nuclear weapons.

Moreover, the U.S. has walked away from Pakistan before, in the 1990s over Pakistan’s nuclear program. That did not work out well for American interests as it only strengthened the most radical elements in Pakistani society.

But it is equally true that the Cold War-era considerations that brought Pakistan and the U.S. together are no longer applicable. The two countries have very different views on India (which Pakistanis see as an enemy and Americans view as an essential partner), China (which is considered an “iron brother” by Pakistan but deemed a threat by the U.S.) and Afghanistan (where Pakistan has consistently favored fundamentalist groups such as the Taliban against secularists preferred by Americans).

As the Pakistan Study Group report points out, the U.S. and Pakistan have parallel narratives of their shared experience. They were preoccupied with confronting different enemies and pinning different expectations on their partnership. Instead of behaving like a quarrelsome married couple, it is time for the two countries to try to be friends who work together where they can and disagree honestly where they cannot.

The close China-Pakistan relationship at a time of deepening U.S.-China rivalry should be a reason for greater, not less, American attention to Pakistan. In fact, even India, which wants Pakistan to stop supporting Muslim militants in the disputed Jammu and Kashmir region, should join the U.S to ensure Pakistan maintains a degree of sovereign autonomy over its actions and does not become a Chinese proxy.