Introduction

Dams play a crucial role in the development of a country. They provide water for domestic, industrial,
and agricultural purposes. Unfortunately, Pakistan faces hindrances in the construction of water
reservoirs for diverse reasons. However, constructing new dams has become essential to fulfilling the
country’s energy demands and vital to ensuring enough water storage as Pakistan is an agricultural
state relying heavily on water. Historically, she has constructed only two major dams- Tarbela and
Mangla dam- which are now insufficient to meet the country’s energy needs. Currently, multiple
political, social, environmental, and economic hurdles have retarded the construction of water
reservoirs, like the Kalabagh Dam and Diamer Bhasha Dam. Consequently, the water crisis, energy
crisis, and poor economy have become the country’s fate. Nevertheless, pragmatic steps can fix the
issue, such as attaining political consensus, eliminating financial and technical constraints, addressing
social concerns, and communicating provincial issues. Therefore, a collective effort of the federal and
provincial administrations is required to solve this daunting matter as soon as possible. This question
comprehensively discusses the causes of delaying the construction of dams in Pakistan and some
suggestions to overcome the problem.

Causes of delaying in the Construction of Dams in Pakistan

Political Causes

The main political reasons for delaying the construction of dams in Pakistan are the trust deficit
among the provinces, the country’s multi-party system, and the government’s adoption of short-
sighted policies. Consequently, the provinces remain unable to build a consensus among themselves
to construct new dams. Thus, they have become the bone of contention in constructing the Kalabagh
dam. Furthermore, here each province is dominated by a specific political party. Most of the time, the
party having a majority in the federal government does not have its hold in all provinces. Hence, the
central and the provincial administration do not agree to make new water reservoirs. Apart from these
political reasons, the short-term planning of the governing body also impedes the dam construction on
time. In this state, the general elections are held after every five years. So, the incumbent governments
adopt a narrow perspective of development. It focuses on early harvest projects that could help it win
the next election. As a result, governments are reluctant to invest in long-term heavy investment
projects, like constructing major water reservoirs. Therefore, it causes delays in the construction of
dams in Pakistan.

Economic Causes

Besides political causes, economic causes, such as lack of financial resources, also hamper building
large reservoirs requiring billions of dollars in Pakistan. The huge import-export gap, circular debt,
low revenue collection, inflation, and lack of foreign direct investment have made Pakistan’s
economy poor. The pandemic- COVID-19, sadly, has further deteriorated the financial condition.
Hence, she lacks the finance to spend on developmental projects, making dam construction difficult.
Besides it, their construction also needs years to complete. In Pakistan, the budget and time for their
building are under-estimated. For instance, any project, which is judged to be completed in ten years,
takes much more time than that. With time, its budget also increases. Thus, their construction on time
becomes impossible. Also, international donors, like World Bank, feel reluctant to invest in projects
facing political and social conflicts. Previously, the country has constructed dams with international
funding. But, now, the dams under consideration in Pakistan, such as Kala-Bagh Dam and Diamer-
Bhasha Dam, are facing political or land disputes. Therefore, financial constraints have hampered the
formation of dams here.

Social and Environmental Causes

Apart from the cause mentioned above, the social and environmental cause has also been the main
culprit behind the construction of new dams that, as a result, leave negative ecological and social
impacts across the country. This concern has been raised by different quarters. The administration has
to displace the people of that area to any other place; the process faces people’s resistance. They try to
stop the building of dams through strikes. Moreover, the construction of reservoirs disturbs the plants
and animals’ natural habitat because the installation of enormous water storage needs to clear a large
area, like forests. Consequently, to some extent, dam construction contributes to global warming-
currently a burning issue. Furthermore, it also causes water salinity, making agriculture in nearby
areas impossible. Additionally, construction on a large scale can also trigger earthquakes. As a result,
the formation of dams faces delay. So, social and environmental issues are also delaying the
construction of dams in the country.

Way Forward

To solve the issue facing the country today, adopting certain measures is a must. First of all, building
trust among provinces is essential to constructing dams in the country. The Council of Common
Interest, which represents all provinces, should effectively play its role in eliminating the gap and trust
deficit among the federating units. The dominated political parties of the provinces should also adopt
a positive approach to the national interest. Secondly, a strong economy is crucial to generating
revenue for the building of water storage. Therefore, Pakistan should take pragmatic steps to make its
economy vibrant. The import-export gap should be decreased to increase the tax revenue collection.
Third, the successive governments should adopt far-sighted policies instead of early harvest
endeavours. The construction of new dams should be made a priority. For this purpose, the
government should also acquire political consensus. Lastly, Pakistan should also work on technical
grounds to address the time, budget, and land-related problems. In this way, the land of pure can
protect herself from delays in constructing reservoirs.

Critical analysis

Dams are crucial for the progress and stability of a country. Pakistan is an agricultural country relying
on water. Unfortunately, she has only two large water reservoirs- Mangla and Tarbela- constructed
decades ago. It is saddening to note that Tarbela has already lost its efficiency by up to 20%. As a
result, the country is also facing an acute water crisis. Unlike India’s 120 days, she has water reserves
of only thirty days. Therefore, she should build small and large dams to ensure enough water storage
for domestic, industrial, and agricultural use. It will also help her eliminate the energy crisis, which
can lead her toward prosperity.

Conclusion

Pakistan should learn from previous mistakes. Failure to construct new dams has made her a water-
stressed country. Similarly, the energy crisis has become her main concern too. Undoubtedly, various
economic, social, environmental, and political obstacles lie behind delaying the construction of dams.
However, solutions are always there if taken timely. Pakistan should develop a political consensus to
make water reservoirs on a priority basis. The government’s sincere efforts would help the country
achieve sustainable economic growth.

Political culture.
Even after 74 years of existence, Pakistan’s political culture still reflects feudal, tribal and ultra-
conservative characteristics. Consequently, politics in Pakistan is the domain of family fiefdoms,
feudalism, business and clergy elites. A positive transformation of Pakistan’s political culture is an
uphill task and cannot take place unless there is a change in the mindset of those who wield political
power. The reason for the dearth of good governance, rule of law, the justice system and across-the-
board accountability is the lack of proper education, integrity, prudence and professionalism among
the lawmakers. It took the West several centuries to develop its political culture based on democracy,
political pluralism, integrity, accountability and professionalism. A society that lacks a proper work
ethic and cannot differentiate between right and wrong cannot have a viable political culture
Political culture can be defined as a set of beliefs, at-titudes, values and orientations towards political
objects in a given political system. These political objects, in turn, may be identified as political
parties, various types of élites (i.e. political, professional, religious, financial, military, bureaucratic),
autonomous groups, social classes, political institutions and so on. The inter-rela-tionship between
political culture and these political objects is of course quite complex. However, it will suf-fice, for
our present purposes, to suggest that political culture refers to shared experiences and values of a
community with specific relation to the political system.
Through historical experience these values, orientations and beliefs gain wider acceptance in the
community and, in turn, serve as a general frame of reference within which political sentiments and
activity are formulated, expressed, and translated into action. Indeed, political culture conveys a
strong sense of historical continuity, identifies regularity in patterns of political behaviour and style of
people. In the process, it also permits dissent, i.e. encourage differences in political values and
orientations without upsetting the general frame of reference.
Amongst some of the more eminent scholars Gabriel Almond has done much to formulate the concept
of political culture.! According to him, political culture can be comprehended by focusing on three
orientations. First, cognitive orientations, which deal with knowledge about political objects and
beliefs. Secondly, affective orientations, which deal with feelings, attachments, involvement or
rejection about political objects.
Thirdly, evaluative orientations, which deal with judgement and opinions about political objects.
Almond goes on to build on these orientations to suggest ideal types of "subjects", "parochial" and
"participant" political cultures.? Of course, these are ideal types and most political cultures do not fall
in one or the other category.
They may be a peculiar combination of some of these types. The important thing to bear in mind is
that when these orientations reinforce the political institutions of a society, there is a kind of
congruence between political culture and the body-politic.
Almond considers such a political culture as "allegiant. In explaining and analyzing the case of
Pakistan, this author finds the above mentioned orientations useful but ideal types of little relevance.
We would assert that Pakistan's political culture does not fit into any of these.
It stands out as a political culture characterized by disharmony between democratic ideals and the
autocratic reality on the ground. There is a general dearth of literature on the political culture of
Pakistan. One is hard put to identify any serious systematic study that examines the antecedents of
democratic ideals and autocratic reality in our political culture. This article is an attempt to address
this limitation by analyzing the dynamics of democratic ideals and autocratic reality. In our view the
democratic ideal implies consensus, interpersonal trust, tolerance (religious and academic), fraternity,
achievement orientation and faith in the principle of competitive politics and parliamentary
institutions.
Autocratic reality, on the other hand, connotes centralization, authoritarianism, unity through Islam,
suppression of dissent, personalization of power and assertion of the power of the military-
bureaucratic élites. In actual practice, however, Pakistan's political culture oscillates between these
democratic ideals and autocratic reality. In recent years, the gap between the two tendencies has
indeed widened. The democratic ideal has been one of the guiding principles of the Pakistan
Movement. It has persisted among various Pakistani élites, groups and social classes. Literary writers,
critics and poets like M. D. Taseer, Hasan Askari, Ahmad Nadeem Qasmi projected the.

THERE have been many political movements in Pakistan; some of them have also been between two
opposing ideologies, such as the Movement for the Restoration of Democracy and the Pakistan
National Alliance in the 1970s. All these movements have been about restoring Pakistan’s
Constitution and re-establishing parliamentary democracy. However, none of these movements sought
to change Pakistan’s political culture, and as such, left behind no legacy. Perhaps the only movement
that did this was the women’s movement and the establishment of the Women’s Action Forum in
1981. On the other hand, Zia’s Islamisation has left behind a powerful legacy, despite the fact that
there is a huge anti-Zia sentiment in the country.

It is interesting to see how Zia managed to create this legacy and how it has managed to survive after
his death. There are two aspects of this: one is the introduction of behavioural patterns in the day-to-
day life of the citizens of Pakistan, and the other has been the introduction of an education system that
has brought about fundamental changes in the behaviour of Pakistani society, especially among the
youth.

To begin with, he introduced the compulsory covering of the head for women TV anchors and the
only person who refused to follow this was Mehtab Rashdi. He also banned classical music and dance
and the presence and work of prominent poets and writers on television. Society as a whole accepted
this, with the result that Karachi’s famous dancing and music schools closed down. But Sheema
Kermani continued to dance fearlessly.

In addition, compulsory Zuhr prayers were introduced not only in all government institutions but also
in colleges and universities and the private sector followed this to seek support from the government.

What can society do to deal with Zia’s legacy?

Meanwhile, urinals were removed from all public and academic buildings because Muslims are not
supposed to urinate while standing. This created an acute shortage of toilets.

With the direct support of the government, the local mosque and the neighbouring madressah (if it
existed) came together to support the nizam-i-salat. An individual, who at Fajr, roamed the
neighbourhood asking the people to come to prayers, and those who did not were visited by the
mosque’s maulvis and asked if they had a quarrel with God. In their khutbas, the maulvis also
preached against the working and schooling of women and of their driving cars.

All this changed society, even the elite, who were not affected by the introduction of these
behavioural rules. They isolated themselves in their ghettoes, and they had very little to do with the
new divided society that emerged, especially in the urban areas.

Most of what has been described above was done away with in the post-Zia period, but its influences
remain. One does not have to cover one’s head or avoid urinals and progressive writers and poets can
appear on TV. But among a very large number of people and institutions, there is an unease about this
and other elements introduced in the Zia period, which are considered questionable.

However, the real legacy of Zia is something that has lasted and has become unchangeable. These are
the blasphemy law and Hudood ordinances. The former can accuse anyone of blasphemy, leading to a
death sentence. The latter make it almost impossible to convict anyone of rape. These laws are
unchangeable and are protected informally by a link between the mosque and madressah, who have
the means to create violence and challenge the writ of the government. Since they are seen as the
product of religion, questioning them is next to impossible. So Pakistan remains divided between a
weak progressive left and liberal elements and the powerful though unrepresented right.

The other powerful legacy of Zia is the changes he brought about in the educational curricula of
schools and colleges. International geography and history were removed and Pakistan Studies and
Islamiat (both misrepresented) were considered sufficient to replace them. These changes are still
protected successfully by the politicians and academics produced by the Zia era.

So what can society do, both politically and culturally, to deal with the Zia legacy? Individuals have
proposed the coming together of ‘progressive’ NGOs to develop a common culture of women’s
emancipation, of dance, music and theatre, and of political education which, in the long run, bring
about changes in society. But can this function in a system where individuals are made to disappear
by the state, sometimes never to return? The media which has to be a major player in this process
cannot function independently and is always under surveillance and controlled by intelligence
agencies. Many who tried to fight for justice and truth have been gunned down.

Peace Agreements
Agreement Between the Government of India and the Government of the Islamic
Republic of
Pakistan on Bilateral Relations (Simla Agreement)
Simla, 2 July 1972

1. The Government of India and the Government of Pakistan are resolved that the two
countries put an end to the conflict and confrontation that have hitherto marred their
relations and work for the promotion of a friendly and harmonious relationship and
the establishment of durable peace in the sub-continent, so that both countries may
henceforth devote their resources and energies to the pressing task of advancing the
welfare of their peoples. In order to achieve this objective, the Government of India
and the Government of Pakistan
HAVE AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

I. That the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations shall govern the
relations between the two countries;
II. That the two countries are resolved to settle their differences by peaceful means
through bilateral negotiations or by any other peaceful means mutually agreed upon
between them. Pending the final settlement of any of the problems between the two
countries, neither side shall unilaterally alter the situation and both shall prevent the
organisation, assistance or encouragement of any acts detrimental to the maintenance
of peaceful and harmonious relations;
III. That the pre-requisites for reconciliation, good neighbourliness and durable peace
between them is a commitment by both the countries to peaceful co-existence,
respect for each other's territorial integrity and sovereignty and non-interference in
each other's internal affairs, on the basis of equality and mutual benefit;
IV. That the basic issues and causes of conflict which have bedeviled the relations between
the two countries for the last 25 years shall be resolved by peaceful means.
V. That they shall always respect each other's national unity, territorial integrity, political
independence and sovereign equality;
VI. That in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations they will refrain from the
threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of each
other.2. Both Governments will take all steps within their power to prevent hostile
propaganda directed against each other. Both countries will encourage the
dissemination of such information as would promote the development of friendly
relations between them.
2. In order progressively to restore and normalise relations between the two countries step
by step, it would agree that :
i. Steps shall be taken to resume communications, postal, telegraphic, sea, land including
border posts, and air link including overflights;
ii.Appropriate steps shall be taken to promote travel facilities for the nationals of theother
country;
 iii. Exchange in the fields of science and culture will be promoted. In this connection
delegation from the two countries will meet from time to time to work out the
necessary details.
3. In order to initiate the process of the establishment of durable peace, both the
Governments agree that :
i. Indian and Pakistani forces shall be withdrawn to their side of the international border;
ii.In Jammu and Kashmir, the line of control resulting from the cease-fire of December
17, 1971 shall be respected by both sides without prejudice to the recognised
position of either side. Neither side shall seek to alter it unilaterally, irrespective
of mutual differences and legal interpretations. Both sides further undertake to
refrain from the threat or the use of force in violation of this Line;
iii. The withdrawals shall commence upon entry into force of this Agreement and shall
be completed within a period of 30 days thereof.
4. This Agreement will be subject to ratification by both countries, in accordance with
their respective constitutional procedures, and will come into force with effect from
the date on which the Instruments of Ratification are exchanged.
5. Both Governments agree that the respective Heads will meet again at a mutually
convenient time in the future and that, in the meanwhile, the representatives of the
two sides will meet to discuss further the modalities and arrangements for the
establishment of durable peace and normalisation of relations, including the questions
of repatriation of prisoners of war and civilians internees, a final settlement of Jammu
and Kashmir and the resumption of diplomatic relations.

What is China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)?

Explaining China’s motives for the BRI, perception of the initiative internationally, and how the Belt
and Road may evolve in the future.

13 September 2021

The BRI is an ambitious plan to develop two new trade routes connecting China with the rest of the
world. But the initiative is about far more than infrastructure.

It is an effort to develop an expanded, interdependent market for China, grow China’s economic and
political power, and create the right conditions for China to build a high technology economy.

Why create the Belt and Road?

There are three main motivations for the BRI. The first, and most discussed internationally, is China’s
rivalry with the US. The vast majority of Chinese international trade passes by sea through the
Malacca strait off the coast of Singapore which is a major US ally. The initiative is integral to China’s
efforts to create its own more secure trade routes.

There is no doubt that China’s intention is also to make participating nations interdependent with the
Chinese economy, and thereby build economic and political influence for China.

In that respect it has similarities with the Marshall Plan that followed the Second World War – but
with the essential difference that China dispenses funding to other nations based purely on shared
economic interests.
The second key reason for the initiative is the legacy of the 2008 financial crisis. China’s government
responded to the emergency with a ¥4tn stimulus package, issuing contracts to build railways, bridges,
and airports, but saturated the Chinese market in the process. The Belt and Road framework provides
an alternative market for China’s vast state-owned companies beyond the borders of China.

Finally, the Belt and Road is seen as a crucial element in the Chinese government’s efforts to
stimulate economies of the country’s central provinces, which historically lag behind richer coastal
areas. The government uses the Belt and Road to encourage and support businesses in these central
regions, allocating budget generously, and encouraging businesses to compete for Belt and Road
contracts.

Why is it called the ‘Belt and Road’ initiative?

The Belt and Road Initiative is a relatively new name. Initially it was referred to as two separate
projects, then as the ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative, then finally as the Belt and Road Initiative.

The Belt

The Silk Road Economic ‘Belt’ element refers to plans for a revitalized series of ancient overland
trading routes connecting Europe and Asia to be built largely with Chinese expertise. The idea was
first proposed by Chinese president Xi Jinping during a visit to Kazakhstan in 2013, and central Asia
is seen as the most vital region for the ‘Belt’ element.

The Road

In 2014 Xi Jinping outlined plans to additionally establish new sea trade infrastructure along the old
Marco Polo route – a maritime silk road connecting China, Southeast Asia, Africa, and Europe. This
would be a longer route avoiding the Malacca Strait, incorporating fuelling stations, ports, bridges,
industry, and infrastructure through Southeast Asia and into the Indian Ocean. Pakistan is seen as
perhaps the most crucial partner country in this effort through the China Pakistan Economic Corridor
project.

The Belt and Road Initiative map

The Belt and Road Initiative in Asia

China views the BRI as vitally important in securing its borders on the Asian mainland. It has land
borders with 15 nations, including unstable states such as Afghanistan and nations seeking new
partnerships in opposition to the US, such as Russia. Belt and Road investments are viewed as a way
to facilitate China’s ‘periphery diplomacy’ – trade and infrastructure partnerships with the countries
along this enormous land border.

However, the idea of the Belt and Road forming a coherent China-led block in opposition to the US is
not necessarily accurate. Russia may not be a viable partner as it sees former Soviet Union states such
as Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, and Turkmenistan as belonging to its own sphere of
influence, and China’s proposed Belt challenges Russian power in the region.

Other serious opponents to the initiative in Asia include India as a key partnership in the Belt and
Road is between China and Pakistan, a nation China calls a ‘all-weather friend’. The China-Pakistan
Economic Corridor runs close to the disputed Kashmir region, creating an alliance of two nuclear
armed neighbours forging territorial links on India’s northern border.

The Belt and Road Initiative in Malaysia

Malaysian projects played a key role in feeding the narrative that the BRI is synonymous with
corruption. Former Malaysian prime minister Najib Razak signed the East Coast Rail Link (ECRL)
infrastructure deal with China, part of a broader Belt and Road vision of a united Southeast Asian
railway network.

The scheme became associated with a broader corruption scandal involving Razak and was cancelled.
However, Malaysia has not rejected the initiative or ruled out further involvement, and the ECRL
issues are largely perceived as merely local corruption.

The Belt and Road Initiative in Africa

China’s banks have funded numerous projects in Africa, including a major gas pipeline and railways
in Nigeria, plus projects in Uganda, Egypt, Ethiopia and many other countries.

The Belt and Road Initiative in Kenya

The centrepiece of the Kenyan government’s participation in the initiative is a high-speed railway
running between Mombasa and Nairobi, the first high-speed railway on the African continent.

Built by the Chinese, the project has provided jobs and training for a local workforce to operate the
railway – but also created serious questions about the country’s ability to service the Chinese loans
which paid for the railway and Kenya’s broader debt obligations to China.

The Belt and Road Initiative in Europe

One of the aspects of the Belt and Road Initiative that most alarmed western commentators is its
extension of Chinese influence into developed European nations such as Greece and Italy, a G7
nation.

The Belt and Road Initiative in Greece

Following the 2008 financial crisis, Greece suffered a prolonged period of economic instability and
worsening relations with the European Union. In 2016, China’s shipping firm, Cosco purchased a
majority stake in the Piraeus port, Europe’s seventh biggest harbour. Then in August 2018, Greece
announced it was formally joining the BRI.

The Belt and Road Initiative in Italy

In March 2019 a populist coalition government led by the Five Star Movement agreed to bring Italy
officially into the Belt and Road Initiative, signing a memorandum of understanding with Xi Jinping
in Rome. Italy and Greece’s participation in the Initiative alarmed the US.

However, the Italian collaboration remains thin on actual detail, with the memorandum of
understanding full of warm diplomatic language and acknowledgements of existing collaborations.
Further, Mario Draghi, prime minister of a new government in 2021, signalled Italy may withdraw
from the initiative.

The Strategic Importance of Pakistan: A Geostrategic Nexus

Pakistan’s strategic importance lies in its geographical position at the intersection of South Asia,
Central Asia, and the Middle East. It shares borders with critical nations, including Afghanistan,
China, India, and Iran, making it a pivotal player in regional stability, trade routes, and global power
dynamics, particularly in matters of security and energy interests.
Read this article to explore the multifaceted strategic significance of Pakistan and delve into its
geopolitical, economic, and security roles on the world stage.

Geopolitical Significance

Pakistan holds immense geopolitical significance due to its strategic location at the crossroads of
South Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East. Its proximity to Afghanistan, Iran, China, and India
makes it a major country in regional politics and current affairs.

1- Bridge between South Asia and Central Asia

Pakistan’s geographical location acts as a bridge connecting the South Asian subcontinent with
Central Asia. This geographic linkage plays an important role for trade, energy, and connectivity
routes. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is a prime example of this significance, as it
connects the Chinese city of Kashgar to Pakistan’s Gwadar Port, providing China access to the
Arabian Sea and, subsequently, the Indian Ocean.

2- Balancing Power Dynamics

Pakistan’s location serves as a balancing factor in the region’s power dynamics. It shares borders with
China, Afghanistan, India, and Iran. Its strategic importance is evident in the way major world
powers, such as the United States and Russia, have sought to engage with Pakistan to expand their
interests in South and Central Asia.

Economic Significance

Pakistan’s economic significance within the realm of geostrategy is substantial. Pakistan serves as a
vital transit route for trade and energy corridors. The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a
flagship project of the Belt and Road Initiative, boosts its geostrategic importance by enhancing
connectivity and economic integration with China.

Furthermore, Pakistan’s stability and prosperity are closely monitored globally due to its potential to
impact regional security. Economic development in Pakistan is seen as a means to promote stability,
counter-terrorism, and promote cooperation, making it a critical player in the geopolitical landscape.

1- Trade and Energy Corridor

CPEC, often referred to as the “Economic Game Changer,” is a monumental infrastructure project
that aims to connect Gwadar Port to China’s western region through a network of roads, railways, and
pipelines. This corridor is composed to enhance regional trade and facilitate energy transportation,
benefitting not only Pakistan but also its neighbours and global partners.

2- Agriculture and Resource Potential

Pakistan’s diverse landscape includes fertile plains, mountainous regions, and coastal areas. This
diversity allows for the cultivation of a wide range of crops and the extraction of valuable minerals.

Pakistan’s agriculture sector is a significant contributor to its economy, and its rich resource potential
makes it an attractive destination for foreign investment.

Security Significance
Pakistan holds significant security importance due to its strategic location at the confluence of South
Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East. Its border with Afghanistan has made it a central player in
the Afghan conflict, influencing regional stability.

Pakistan has historically been a key ally of western countries in counterterrorism efforts. Its military
capabilities, including a sizable army, air force, and navy, contribute to regional security dynamics.

1- Counterterrorism Efforts

Pakistan’s role in the global fight against terrorism cannot be undermined. As a frontline state in the
War on Terror, Pakistan has played a crucial role in combating extremist groups. Its tribal regions
along the Afghanistan border have been a focal point in efforts to stabilise the region.

2- Nuclear Arsenal

Pakistan is one of the world’s nuclear-armed states, and its nuclear weapons program adds a layer of
complexity to regional and global security dynamics. The country’s nuclear capabilities are not only a
deterrent but also a source of concern for its neighbours and the international community.

Also Read: Historical Perspective & Factors Behind UK Pound’s Strength

Regional Dynamics of Pakistan

Pakistan’s regional dynamics are of paramount geostrategic importance. Its relationships with
neighbouring countries like India and Afghanistan are marked by historical tensions, notably the
Kashmir conflict with India and its role in Afghan peace talks.

Pakistan’s proximity to China has deepened through projects like the China-Pakistan Economic
Corridor (CPEC), enhancing its significance in China’s Belt and Road Initiative and strengthening the
China-Pakistan partnership. Furthermore, its strategic location makes it a key player in regional
politics, influencing stability, security, and economic cooperation in a geopolitically volatile region.

1- Relationship with India

The relationship between Pakistan and India is one of the most significant regional dynamics. Their
long standing rivalry has been characterised by periodic conflict, most notably the Kashmir dispute.
The two nuclear-armed neighbours often draw international attention due to their geopolitical
tensions.

India and Pakistan have fought several wars since their partition in 1947. The First Kashmir War
(1947-48) was their initial conflict, centred on the disputed region of Jammu and Kashmir. The
Second Kashmir War (1965) followed, primarily over the same region, ending in a ceasefire
organised by the United States and Union of Soviet Socialists Republic.

The Third Indo-Pak War (1971) led to the creation of Bangladesh, with India supporting the
independence movement of Bangladesh. In 1999, the Kargil War erupted in the disputed Kargil
district of Kashmir.

2- Role in Afghanistan

Pakistan’s role in Afghanistan has been multifaceted and complex. It has faced allegations of
providing support to the Afghan Taliban, while also cooperating with the international community in
counterterrorism efforts. Pakistan’s use of proxy militant groups, like the Haqqani Network, has
strained its relationship with Western allies.

On the other hand, Pakistan has hosted millions of Afghan refugees, making significant humanitarian
efforts but also facing challenges in managing their presence. The country has struggled to control its
porous border with Afghanistan, which has facilitated the movement of militants.

Pakistan has been involved in peace efforts in Afghanistan, including its role in facilitating talks
between the United States and the Taliban. Its interests in Afghanistan include maintaining influence,
stability, and a peaceful neighbour. However, opinions on Pakistan’s actions in the region vary
widely, and the situation continues to evolve.

3- Relationship with Iran

Pakistan’s relationship with Iran holds significant strategic importance due to their shared border and
regional interests. Geopolitically, the border stretching over 900 kilometres connects South Asia to the
Middle East and Central Asia, making it a crucial region for trade routes and regional stability.

Energy cooperation, such as the Iran-Pakistan gas pipeline, has been explored, but progress has been
restricted by international sanctions on Iran. Both nations have also faced security challenges along
the border, including cross-border smuggling and insurgent activities in Balochistan.

Diplomatically, Pakistan has maintained relations with Iran but navigates a delicate balance in
regional matters like the Syrian civil war and the Saudi-Iran rivalry. Trade and economic ties are a
focus, especially with the development of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), which
enhances connectivity between Iran, Pakistan, and China.

Cultural and religious affinities, including significant Shia Muslim populations, foster people-to-
people ties. However, Pakistan’s relationship with Iran is influenced by its ties with the United States
and Saudi Arabia, and striking the right balance amidst conflicting interests remains a challenge.
Thus, Pakistan’s strategic importance in the region is significantly influenced by its multifaceted
relationship with Iran.

Pakistan’s Global Partnerships

Pakistan has partnered with Western and Asian countries in regards to counterterrorism, peace talks
and economic development, which makes it a notable entity around the whole region.

United States-Pakistan Collaboration

The United States and Pakistan have shared a complex and evolving relationship. While they have
been strategic partners at times, they have also faced periods of distrust and disagreement. The U.S.
has relied on Pakistan for logistical support in its military operations in Afghanistan and considered it
a key ally in the fight against terrorism.

The collaboration between the United States and Pakistan in the War on Terror has been marked by a
complex and often uncertain relationship. After the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the U.S.
sought Pakistan’s support in its efforts to combat terrorism, particularly in neighbouring Afghanistan
where the Taliban regime sheltered Al-Qaeda (ISIS). Pakistan, led by General Pervez Musharraf at

the time, pledged support to the U.S. and allowed the use of its territory for logistical and intelligence
purposes.
This collaboration led to significant achievements, such as the capture of key Al-Qaeda operatives,
disruption of terror networks, and efforts to stabilise Afghanistan. However, the partnership also faced
challenges due to suspicions of Pakistan’s double-dealing, as some elements within its security
establishment maintained ties with militant groups.

Over the years, the relationship has fluctuated, with periods of increased cooperation followed by
tensions. Despite these challenges, the United States has continued to provide military and financial
aid to Pakistan. The collaboration remains vital for regional stability, counterterrorism efforts, and
achieving lasting peace in Afghanistan. Balancing shared interests while addressing mutual concerns
remains a critical aspect of this enduring partnership.

China-Pakistan Friendship

The China-Pakistan friendship, often described as “higher than the Himalayas, deeper than the
oceans,” is a foundation of Pakistan’s foreign policy. The solid strategic and economic partnership
between the two countries has strengthened over the years, with China investing significantly in
Pakistan’s infrastructure and development.

China and Pakistan share a deep and long-standing partnership that extends across economic and
military domains. This alliance, often referred to as the “China-Pakistan Economic Corridor” (CPEC),
is a flagship project of China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). It involves significant Chinese
investments in Pakistani infrastructure, including ports, roads, and energy projects, aiming to boost
trade connectivity and economic development.

Beyond economics, both countries have also collaborated closely on regional diplomacy. This
strategic partnership serves mutual interests, including countering regional challenges and enhancing
their geopolitical influence in South Asia and beyond.

Strategic Significance and Challenges for Pakistan

Pakistan’s strategic importance is an asset as well as a liability, facing complex challenges regarding
security concerns, terrorism, geopolitical rivalry and economic development, sometimes referred to as
a “crisis state”.

1- Security Concerns

Pakistan faces security challenges due to its proximity to conflict-ridden regions, such as Afghanistan
and the Middle East. Managing these threats is the foremost element in promoting peace.

2- Terrorism

Pakistan has fought with terrorism, causing internal instability and straining international relations.
Countering terrorism remains a top priority.

3- Geopolitical Rivalry

Being a pivot point in the rivalry between major powers like the United States, China, and India can
be risky, necessitating a delicate balancing act.

4- Economic Development

Despite its strategic location, Pakistan’s economic development lags due to issues like corruption,
miss-management and lack of infrastructure.
Opportunities and Benefits of Pakistan’s Strategic Importance

Along with the challenges, the geostrategic location of Pakistan has come up with numerous benefits
and opportunities.

1- China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC)

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor is a key factor of Pakistan’s strategic importance and
potential growth. Pakistan’s role in CPEC offers a meaningful economic boost, infrastructure
development, and connectivity with China and other countries.

2- Regional Connectivity

Pakistan can serve as an important transit route for trade and energy pipelines, enhancing its economic
prospects and creating thousands of jobs for its youth.

3- Counterterrorism Cooperation

Collaboration with the International community in combating terrorism can enhance security and
stability within Pakistan and the broader region.

4- Diplomacy and Reconciliation

Pakistan can play a vital role in mediating regional conflicts, like the Afghan peace process and
dialogue with India. Pakistan can boost peace and stability in the whole region through a diplomatic
approach.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Pakistan’s strategic importance is deeply rooted in its geographical location, economic
potential, and security dynamics. Its role as a bridge between South Asia and Central Asia, its
contribution to regional stability, and its partnerships with global powers like China and the United
States highlight its significance on the world stage.

While challenges persist, Pakistan’s strategic importance is unlikely to decline, and its ability to
navigate these challenges will continue to shape its role in the global arena. Understanding and
harnessing this strategic significance is essential for policymakers and analysts seeking to navigate the
complexities of Asian and global geopolitics.

FAQs

What is the Importance of Pakistan from a Geographical and Strategic Point of View?

Pakistan is strategically important due to its location at the centre of South Asia, Central Asia, and the
Middle East. It shares borders with key nations like India, China, Afghanistan, and Iran, making it a
vital player in regional geopolitics. Its closeness to the Arabian Sea also grants it access to important
sea trade routes. Additionally, Pakistan’s possession of nuclear weapons adds to its strategic
significance, influencing regional security dynamics.

Will there be another War between India and Pakistan?

India and Pakistan have a history of conflicts, wars, and tensions in the region persist, so the
possibility of future hostilities cannot be ruled out entirely. Efforts to maintain peace and resolve
disputes through diplomatic means are crucial in preventing such conflicts.

What does Pakistan need to Improve?

Pakistan needs to improve its economic situation. Managing different challenges, good governance,
promotion of investment, agriculture and institution reforms, and human development will play a
crucial role in the success of Pakistan.

China’s Massive Belt and Road Initiative

China’s colossal infrastructure investments may usher in a new era of trade and growth for economies
in Asia and beyond. But skeptics worry that China is laying a debt trap for borrowing governments.

Introduction

China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), sometimes referred to as the New Silk Road, is one of the
most ambitious infrastructure projects ever conceived. Launched in 2013 by President Xi Jinping, the
vast collection of development and investment initiatives was originally devised to link East Asia and
Europe through physical infrastructure. In the decade since, the project has expanded to Africa,
Oceania, and Latin America, significantly broadening China’s economic and political influence.

Some analysts see the project as an unsettling extension of China’s rising power, and as the costs of
many of the projects have skyrocketed, opposition has grown in some countries. Meanwhile, the
United States shares the concern of some in Asia that the BRI could be a Trojan horse for China-led
regional development and military expansion. President Joe Biden has maintained his predecessors’
skeptical stance towards Beijing’s actions, but Washington has struggled to offer participating
governments a more appealing economic vision.

What was the original Silk Road?

The original Silk Road arose during the westward expansion of China’s Han Dynasty (206 BCE–220
CE), which forged trade networks throughout what are today the Central Asian countries of
Afghanistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan, and Uzbekistan, as well as modern-
day India and Pakistan to the south. Those routes extended more than four thousand miles to Europe.

Central Asia was thus the epicenter of one of the first waves of globalization, connecting eastern and
western markets, spurring immense wealth, and intermixing cultural and religious traditions. Valuable
Chinese silk, spices, jade, and other goods moved west while China received gold and other precious
metals, ivory, and glass products. Use of the route peaked during the first millennium, under the
leadership of first the Roman and then Byzantine Empires, and the Tang Dynasty (618–907 CE) in
China.

But the Crusades, as well as advances by the Mongols in Central Asia, dampened trade, and today
Central Asian countries are economically isolated from each other, with intra-regional trade making
up a small percentage of all cross-border commerce. They are also heavily dependent on Russia,
particularly for remittances, which made up nearly one-third of the gross domestic product (GDP) of
Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan before the Russian war in Ukraine scattered remittance-sending migrant
laborers.
What are China’s plans for its New Silk Road?

President Xi announced the initiative during official visits to Kazakhstan and Indonesia in 2013. The
plan was two-pronged: the overland Silk Road Economic Belt and the Maritime Silk Road. The two
were collectively referred to first as the One Belt, One Road initiative but eventually became the Belt
and Road Initiative.

Xi’s vision included creating a vast network of railways, energy pipelines, highways, and streamlined
border crossings, both westward—through the mountainous former Soviet republics—and southward,
to Pakistan, India, and the rest of Southeast Asia. Such a network would expand the international
use of Chinese currency, the renminbi, and “break the bottleneck in Asian connectivity,” according to
Xi. (In 2018, the Asian Development Bank estimated that the continent faces a yearly infrastructure
financing shortfall of over $900 billion.) In addition to physical infrastructure, China has funded
hundreds of special economic zones, or industrial areas designed to create jobs, and encouraged
countries to embrace its tech offerings, such as the 5G network powered by telecommunications giant
Huawei.

Xi subsequently announced plans for the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road at the 2013 summit of the
Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) in Indonesia. To accommodate expanding maritime
trade traffic, China would invest in port development along the Indian Ocean, from Southeast Asia all
the way to East Africa and parts of Europe.

China’s overall ambition for the BRI is staggering. To date, 147 countries—accounting for two-thirds
of the world’s population and 40 percent of global GDP—have signed on to projects or indicated an
interest in doing so.

Analysts estimate the largest so far to be the estimated $62 billion China-Pakistan Economic Corridor
(CPEC), a collection of projects connecting China to Pakistan’s Gwadar Port on the Arabian Sea. In
total, China has already spent an estimated $1 trillion on such efforts. Experts have predicted that
China’s expenses over the life of the BRI could reach as much as $8 trillion, though estimates vary.

What does China hope to achieve?

China has both geopolitical and economic motivations behind the initiative. Xi has promoted a vision
of a more assertive China, even as the country’s outstanding loans have grown to the equivalent
of over a quarter of its GDP.

Experts see the BRI as one of the main planks of a bolder Chinese statecraft under Xi, alongside
the Made in China 2025 economic development strategy. For Xi, the BRI serves as pushback against
the much-touted U.S. “pivot to Asia,” as well as a way for China to develop new trade linkages,
cultivate export markets, boost Chinese incomes, and export China’s excess productive capacity.
“China has had a fair amount of success in redrawing trade maps around the world, in ways that put
China at the center and not the U.S. or Europe,” says CFR’s David Sacks, an expert on U.S.-China
relations.

At the same time, China is motivated to boost global economic links to its western regions, which
historically have been neglected. Promoting economic development in the western province of
Xinjiang, where separatist violence has been on the upswing, is a major priority, as is securing long-
term energy supplies from Central Asia and the Middle East, especially via routes the U.S.

military cannot disrupt.

More broadly, Chinese leaders are determined to restructure the economy to avoid the so-called
middle-income trap. In this scenario, which has plagued close to 90 percent of middle-income
countries since 1960, wages go up and quality of life improves as low-skilled manufacturing rises, but
countries struggle to then shift to producing higher-value goods and services.

Finally, Beijing could seek geopolitical leverage over BRI countries. A 2021 study[PDF] analyzed
over one hundred debt financing contracts China signed with foreign governments and found that the
contracts often contain clauses that restrict restructuring with the group of twenty-two major creditor
nations known as the “Paris Club.” China also frequently retains the right to demand repayment at any
time, giving Beijing the ability to use funding as a tool to enforce Chinese hot button issues such as
Taiwan or the treatment of Uyghurs. In January 2022, Nicaragua officially joined BRI, one month
after severing diplomatic ties with Taiwan.

What are the potential roadblocks?

The Belt and Road Initiative has also stoked opposition. For some countries that take on large
amounts of debt to fund infrastructure upgrades, BRI money is seen as a potential poisoned chalice.
China views BRI projects as a commercial endeavor [PDF], with loans close to a market interest rate
that it expects to be fully repaid. Some BRI investments have involved opaque bidding processes and
required the use of Chinese firms. As a result, contractors have inflated costs, leading to canceled
projects and political backlash.

China Rarely Cancels Debt

Renegotiated debt by outcome, January 2001 to November 2020

Deferral or rescheduling
Modification to loan terms or other outcome Debt cancellation (write-off)

Examples of such criticisms abound. In Malaysia, former prime minister Mahathir bin Mohamad
campaigned against overpriced BRI initiatives and canceled $22 billion worth of BRI projects,
although he later announced his “full support” for the initiative. CFR’s Belt and Road Tracker shows
overall debt to China has soared since 2013, surpassing 20 percent of GDP in some countries.

Since the COVID-19 pandemic and the Russian invasion of Ukraine roiled global markets, a climbing
number of low-income BRI countries have struggled to repay loans associated with the initiative,
spurring a wave of debt crises and new criticism for BRI. In Pakistan, for example, imports required
to build CPEC infrastructure contributed to a widening budget deficit, ultimately resulting in a bailout
from the International Monetary Fund (IMF). And in Ghana and Zambia, high debt loads that partly
consisted of BRI loans led to sovereign default. However, many countries that sign on to BRI have
few alternatives, Sacks says.

“If loans that you know are charging an exorbitant interest rate are the only way [to get infrastructure
financing], you still have to weigh that trade off and probably proceed with that,” he says.

Other skeptics connect the BRI with climate change. Though China committed to stop building coal-
fired power plants abroad in 2021, nonrenewable energy investment has made up nearly half of all
BRI spending; ambiguity remains about whether the commitment applies to projects already in
progress or only to new projects, and if it restricts coal-fired power plant financing in addition to
construction.

How has the United States responded to China-led regional integration? The United States has
shared other countries' concerns about China’s intentions. Since the Obama administration’s Pivot to
Asia, the United States has spent billions of dollars and flexed diplomatic muscle to build
infrastructure and foster cooperation between low-income countries. President Donald Trump passed
the BUILD act, which consolidated Overseas Private Investment Corporation (OPIC), a U.S.
government agency for development finance, with components of the U.S. Agency for International
Development (USAID) into a separate agency (the Development Finance Corporation) with a $60
billion investment portfolio.

In 2021, President Joe Biden, in collaboration with the Group of Seven (G7), launched the Build Back
Better World Initiative (“B3W”) an infrastructure investment program conceived to compete with
BRI. Though some supporters say B3W acts as a complement to BRI, many acknowledge that its lack
of financing prevents it from acting as a serious challenger to China’s initiative. One year after B3W
was announced, commitments under the initiative totaled only $6 million, and it had been renamed the
Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment. Rather than investing in infrastructure, where
China holds an economic advantage (China won more than eight times as many World Bank-funded
infrastructure contracts as the United States in 2020), critics say Washington should boost its aid-
based lending through existing multilateral institutions, such as the World Bank and IMF.

Others have argued that the United States might find a silver lining in the BRI. Jonathan E. Hillman,
of the Center for Strategic and International Studies, says the United States could use BRI projects as
a way to have China pay for infrastructure initiatives in Central Asia that are also in the U.S. interest.

What is the role for third countries?

Some countries have sought to balance their concerns about China’s ambitions against the BRI’s
potential benefits.

India. India has tried to convince countries that the BRI is a plan to dominate Asia, warning of what
some analysts have called a “String of Pearls” geoeconomic strategy whereby China creates
unsustainable debt burdens for its Indian Ocean neighbors in order to seize control of regional choke
points. In particular, New Delhi has long been unsettled by China’s decades-long embrace of its
traditional rival, Pakistan. Meanwhile, India has provided its own development assistance to
neighbors, most notably Afghanistan, where it has spent $3 billion on infrastructure projects.

Although India was a founding member of China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB),
Indian and Chinese officials have since diverged on trade policy. Accordingly, the United States
views India as a counterweight to a China-dominated Asia and has sought to knit together its strategic
relationships in the region, most recently via the 2022 Indo-Pacific Economic Framework.

Japan. Tokyo has a similar strategy to New Delhi’s, balancing its interest in regional infrastructure
development with long-standing suspicions about China’s intentions. Japan has committed over $300
billion in public and private financing to infrastructure projects throughout Asia. Together with India,
Japan has also agreed to cultivate the Asia-Africa Growth Corridor (AAGC), a plan to develop and
connect ports from Myanmar to East Africa, though little progress has been made on the initiative
since it was announced in 2017.

Europe. Over two-thirds of European Union (EU) member countries have formally signed on to BRI
with large Chinese infrastructure investment responsible for projects such as the renovated port of
Piraeus in Greece and the Budapest-Belgrade railway in Hungary. Beijing has also funded a number
of projects on the continent in non-EU countries. These investments have “made it harder for the EU
to craft a united approach to China,” and Greece and Hungary have obstructed bloc-wide efforts to
criticize China, CFR’s Jennifer Hillman and Alex Tippett write.