Standing as a reincarnation of the historical old silk
route, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is defined as a game
changer. China has pledged to invest $46 billion in a highway network from
Khunjrab to Gwadar, energy projects and the establishment of economic zones. The
stated policy of the Pakistan government is to spread the benefits of this
investment through the equitable distribution of resources and projects to all
provinces. Curiously, Gilgit-Baltistan (GB) is seldom mentioned in these
statements by government functionaries. CPEC projects were actually initiated
with the construction of the Gwadar Port by the Chinese and the upgradation of
the Karakorum Highway (KKH) entering Pakistan through GB.
It all began when KKH was built in the late ’60s and
’70s along the Gilgit and Indus rivers. Thousands of Chinese crossed into
Pakistan to build the road. It was a daunting task to take up this massive
project manually with very limited machinery. However, the Chinese and their
Pakistani counterparts blasted their way through sheer hard rock walls,
shifting gravel and mountains to carve a road, popularly known as the eighth
wonder of the world. It was indeed a feat of engineering and the courage of
thousands of men who lost their life while forging this road is commendable.
The local population was apprehensive of this massive
ingress and its impact on their daily lives. The government allayed their fears
by telling them that this road would open GB to the world, bring prosperity to
the area and new jobs for the youth. Highly patriotic, the people of GB
welcomed this development. It did open the area to the outside world and
created employment. But a price had to be paid in the shape of years of unrest
and bloodshed in the region due to sectarian strife introduced to the area as
outsiders brought in contested ideologies to bear on local political, religious
and social dynamics. Further, the huge trucks taking goods to and from China
spewed smoke and polluted the environment, and also brought in drugs and guns.
This area has a unique history as its people after a
valiant two-year struggle overcame the organised army of the Kashmir state,
liberating the area and acceding to Pakistan in the hope of becoming
Pakistanis. Tragically, the Pakistan government, instead of integrating these
patriots as citizens accepted their accession only for administrative control,
defining it as a disputed territory of Jammu & Kashmir. The purpose of this
was in anticipation of creating assured votes in the event of the promised
plebiscite materialising. The plebiscite never took place, and there is no
possibility it will, but this region was tagged to the Kashmir dispute and
administered through presidential decrees. Because GB does not have any
representation in parliament and is not part of Pakistan constitutionally, it
does not figure in state structures where decisions regarding the federating
units are taken. Resultantly, they have no say in CPEC projects. They are not
even represented in any consultative and planning committees of the projects.
CPEC projects according to the Planning Division are
designed for the economic development of each province. For GB, except for the
KKH upgradation that will result in scattered ribbon development of services
along the roadside, no CPEC projects have been included in the overall plan.
Surprisingly, no hydropower project has been identified for funding under CPEC.
The government of Pakistan is focused on coal and LNG projects located in the
plains of Punjab and Sindh. The Planning Division has oddly ignored the
potential of hydropower projects. Along the KKH, the potential of
run-of-the-river projects is phenomenal. At Bunji alone, a project of 7,400MW
of energy can be established with two additional projects of 2,000MW each
upstream from this location. These alone can meet much of Pakistan’s energy
requirements. Hydro energy is environment-friendly, low-cost and economically
viable; it can save billions of dollars in forex required for the import of
oil, LNG and coal. While the world is opting for clean energy, we are opting
for polluting power-generating projects.
Since GB has no say in CPEC projects, there is no one
to safeguard its people’s rights. The only way to give them a voice to ensure
protection of their claim for economic development through CPEC is to resolve
their constitutional status with representation in parliament and all
government structures. The government must recognise that there has been a
silent revolution in education in GB thanks to NGOs, and the literacy rate
amongst the youth is now almost 100pc. Thus, they may not accept the
oft-repeated promises of good times to come. They want to be part of decisions
that directly impact their future. Without resolution of the legal status of
GB, this is impossible.
This state of legal void will give rise to questions
about the entire arrangement of agreements for these projects. And when the
discrimination becomes apparent in project implementation, it is likely to give
rise to discontent that can degenerate into protests endangering the entire scheme.
The committee established under the chairmanship of the foreign affairs adviser
must take into account these factors, while considering the fundamental
constitutional issue.
To safeguard their official stance on Kashmir, the
Foreign Office should use its imagination as it is not a problem of the people
of GB who have opted for Pakistan unconditionally. Any halfway cosmetic
solution such as observer status in the National Assembly (as was granted in
the early 1980s) will be unacceptable. They must have the full rights and
privileges of a Pakistan citizen with representation in parliament. A
discontented population at the head of the economic corridor can derail the
entire project, which does not bode well for the people of GB and Pakistan, the
country that they love and died for in armed conflicts with its enemies.
AFZAL A. SHIGRI
The writer, a former IGP Sindh, belongs to
Gilgit-Baltistan.
Comments
Post a Comment