The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor

Lessons learned from Santa and Banta Singh

When the British government asked for bids for the digging of a tunnel under the English Channel, quotations were in the millions of pounds. Singh Twins Construction, however, quoted only 10,000 pounds. ‘Considering the magnitude of the project,’ the construction chairman asked the lowest bidder, ‘how do you propose to complete the job for such a pittance?’

‘It’s simple,’ Santa Singh – the elder twin, and CEO – replied. ‘Banta here grabs a shovel and starts digging from France. I take another shovel and start digging from England. We dig until we meet, and you’ve got a tunnel.’

‘But what if you never meet?’

‘Why do you worry? You’ve got two tunnels then!’

Santa and Banta were not allowed to execute their innovative plan. However, despite denied an opportunity to revolutionise civil engineering, their legacy lives on.

For when it comes to infrastructure engineering, Nawaz and Shahbaz Sharif clearly are proponents of the Santa-Banta philosophy. In fact they are doing one better than the Singh brothers: they are giving us not one, not two, but three routes for the CPEC.

Unlike the Singh brothers, the Sharif brothers don’t need approval from anybody when it comes to deciding what is going to be built; and how; and why. Thankfully so, because as a nation at war, we just don’t have time for fancy stuff such as consensus building. Furthermore, the objections raised by critics of the project don’t hold much water either. In the following, we will consider some of these objections.

Some critics contend that for a road to be called an economic corridor, it requires a lot of infrastructure – security, communication, hotels, industrial areas, etc. They allege that the powers that be are interested in only the Motorway route; and the plans for the other two routes are an insincere attempt to placate the smaller provinces. That, even if the two routes are completed, they will be devoid of any infrastructure; rendering the Motorway route the only feasible option. They point out that the Punjab is already envied on the part of the smaller provinces, and the CPEC – even if three routes actually get built – is going to further exacerbate the situation. These critics fail to understand the strategic implications of the CPEC. Like most things in Pakistan, the CPEC (despite its name) is as much about security as it is about economy. These roads can be used for movement of troops and landing of aircraft in the event of a war. Since we are never sure which of our borders is more problematic at any given time, the more the routes, the merrier; also, the further apart they are, the better.

Some detractors of the project claim that the sudden shift of focus to the Motorway route smacks of self-interest on the part of the ruling elite, and reminds them of the manner in which the M2 was made to go out of the way – quite literally – to include Chakri. That is taking a very narrow view of the situation. From the point of view of the people of Chakri, the motorway passing through their city is a great boon. In the context of the CPEC, Punjab is to Pakistan what Chakri is to Punjab. The objectors don’t realise that economic prosperity in one region of a country rarely, if ever, fails to trigger prosperity in other regions. It’s time we rose above our parochial ways of thinking and started seeing the bigger picture.

A major objection on the CPEC is the lack of transparency. More specifically, the critics complain that nobody except the Sharif brothers knows the real plan. While this observation is factual, I don’t see any cause for concern. The apparent lack of transparency is in fact a tactical move. If no citizen – including high level government officials – knows the real plan; and if China doesn’t know the real plan (hence the need for the Chinese embassy to release a polite reminder to get on with things); what chance our enemies know about it? The Sharif brothers sure know how to keep the enemy in the dark.

An obvious advantage of having three routes is the flexibility they bring. Today’s enemies may very well be tomorrow’s friends. If pundits and senior analysts know what they are talking about, the unprecedented wealth generated by the CPEC may induce our neighbors to beg us for a piece of the pie. We can extend it to become ICPEC (pronounced I see pec) – standing for either the India-China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, or the Iran-China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, depending upon the geopolitical situation at the time.

In summary, there’s absolutely no justification for whining about the three route solution. People who are doing so are guilty of playing politics on a national security issue, and are therefore unpatriotic. The more patriotic sections of the society will undoubtedly cheer the construction of a fourth (and a fifth) route as well. Concepts like health of the federation are great ideas, but there’s a time for everything. We must remember that we are in a state of war. The smaller provinces must immediately stop playing politics on the issue. Do it for the country!