Understanding the Chinese Mind
Being close friends of the Chinese, we also must learn from the Chinese negotiating style. When they talk, they talk with complete sincerity, making sure that they will not make any error. They want to be crystal clear on a specific point. Their opinion will not be vague. By asking questions, they are judging you that where do you stand and see if there is a possibility of coming closer for cooperation on any political point of view or on an economic project.
They are not fully commercial-oriented. They are partly commercial-oriented. They have a revolutionary Communist spirit that speaks of equality of all sorts of relations including economic projects than purely seeking commercial benefits. They only worry about the feasibility of these projects and once taken/discussed they will stand by them.
Foreign Minister and Prime Minister Zulfikar Ali Bhutto and Dr Henry Kissinger well read the Chinese social, political, strategic, and economic mindset than other leaders in the 1960s and 1970s and they built up basic relations with China.
Bhutto resolved the boundary issue with China in 1963 that paved the way for overall relations with China in the years to come as this solved the basic Chinese concern with Pakistan. Future relations could be based on this spirit. The whole Chinese political wisdom with Pakistan was based upon the Bandung spirit of equality, cooperation, mutual respect, non-interference, and peaceful co-existence.
Dr Kissinger’s art of negotiations with Premier Zhou Enlai opened up avenues for cooperation between the two countries in 1971. The way Dr Kissinger negotiated with Premier Zhou Enlai had broken the ice of tense relations of 21 years between the two great nations. Present Pakistani leaders should more learn from the Bhutto’s diplomacy with China and also from Dr Kissinger’s understanding of Chinese sensitivities.
Confusions after confusions over the CPEC could only disappoint our Chinese friends. Once they made decision they would firmly hold by it. They will make all efforts to make it a success. We as a nation must understand Chinese the way they came to help us during the 1965 war with India. They remained firm but we negotiated at Tashkent within three months. They readjusted their viewpoint with us.
We prefer changes in the middle of the way. The Chinese don’t. They are firm and far-sighted. Dr Henry Kissinger called them the “communist monks with revolutionary spirit”. They will go for commitment in a revolutionary zeal no matter what comes in their way.
They had already offered the package of US$ 46 billion and now they would no step back as this is not Chinese mind. It would be a shame for their culture and traditions. As far the US$ 46 billion package is concerned, they had decided long ago of President Xi Jinping’s visit to Pakistan in April last year. He only made a formal announcement at that occasion.
They thought well before committing to this offer. They knew all externalities and internalities. Pakistan system is contrasting to that. We first make offer and later rethink as to why made this decision. The Chinese would prefer to speak to a strong and sustainable leadership. They preferred a centralised authority to who they offer their rewards and that authority must give long-term commitments. Do we have that system.
The controversy over the route alignment typically represents Pakistani mind set. They defy after they made commitment to the project. In a democracy, these issues are settled in the parliament once, and then they do not come up over and again. There is a Parliamentary Committee on the CPEC, but the fights often comes from the fundamentally settled questions already agreed upon.
This is our mind set: decide first and later battle to change the decision. In this respect, Pakistan is neither a dictatorship nor a democracy. It is somewhere in between them. The result is that many projects are lying in the pipelines or gone to the graveyards. The country is “famous” for having graveyard of projects. Many donors were frustrated and got away of internal fight between the center and the provinces and inter-provinces cleavages.
Strangely, there were two “national censuses” on the CPEC. First one was done in May 2015 and the second one in January this year. In fact, for a sustaining democracy, only one national consensus was enough to make a decision. The Britain’s exit from the EU is the latest example. Once the referendum was made, decision was made for exit.
It is yet difficult to compare Pakistani and British democracies. We are still primary students of British democracy and it will take years to graduate from British democracy if the process of democracy continues instead of transit period dictated by either Sandhurst or Kakul-trained generals.
Like the British democracy, political process is on the track in China since 1949. Decisions are made within that system and not outside of that system. We need to learn from both British democracy and Chinese Communist revolution in order to democratise our decisions and to find out a revolutionary spirit for the early completion of such projects. Kalabagh Dam and CPEC are waiting for our national resolve to give answers to democracy and to revolutionary spirit.