Indian Defence Review

It is pertinent to note that both during the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak wars, the Chinese made only diplomatic noises in favour of Pakistan and nothing more.

In an interview on 29 July 2009, the Chinese ambassador to Pakistan, Lou Zhaouhi, talking about Pak-China relations stated that “. . . We are truly good neighbours, close friends, trusted partners and dear brothers. When China was in difficulty caused by the western blockades in the 1950s and 60s, it was Pakistan which opened an air corridor linking China with the outside world. In the 1970s it was Pakistan which served as a bridge for the normalization of China-US relations.”7 Alluding to the close ties between the two countries, recently Chinese president Hu Jintao expressed that relations between the nations were “higher than the mountains and deeper than the oceans.”8

Immediately after the 1962 Sino-Indian conflict, Pakistan and China had signed the Sino-Pakistan Frontier Agreement on 2 March 1963, wherein Pakistan illegally ceded 5,180 square kilometres in the Shaksgam-Muztagh Valley in POK to China. Since then, the Pak-China nexus has gone deeper, manifesting itself in diverse forms of cooperation especially in the military, missile and nuclear fields. Till 1965, being a member of the SEATO and the CENTO, Pakistan got much of its military hardware from the United States. However, the United States imposed an arms embargo owing to the Indo-Pak War in 1965, driving Pakistan into the Chinese arc of influence via its military hardware for Pakistan. During this period, Chinese military technologies were rather inferior to that of the West. But the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan in 1979 made Pakistan a much sought-after ally of the United States, and the U.S. military pipeline opened up once again, ostensibly to aid the mujahideen and Pak elements fighting the Soviets, though the aid and equipment were used by the Pakistanis to bolster their military machine against India—a pattern often repeated by Pakistan till date.

The mid-1980s saw the Chinese economy taking off, and Pakistan was generously rewarded by the Chinese for its efforts to help thaw U.S.-China relations, especially the visit of the then anti-India U.S. national security advisor Henry Kissinger, to China in 1970. Somewhere, Pakistanis take comfort in the adage “my enemy’s enemy is my friend.” However, it is pertinent to note that both during the 1965 and 1971 Indo-Pak wars, the Chinese made only diplomatic noises in favour of Pakistan and nothing more.

The Chinese are now endeavouring to extend the connectivity of this highway right up to Gwadar Port. The Chinese will subsequently be able to transport cargo and oil to and from the Pakistani ports”¦

In the last two decades, China and Pakistan have cooperated with each other in several joint-venture weaponry projects as also Pakistan has received equipment like the JF-17 Thunder fighter jets, K-8 Karakoram advance trainer aircraft, M-11 missiles, air defence radars, T-85 tanks, Al Khalid Main Battle Tanks, Babur cruise missiles, F-7 aircraft, F-22 frigates, and small arms and ammunition besides the Pakistan armed forces’ receiving on favourable terms and as outright aid several weapon systems for the three services. Pakistan’s entire missile weaponry is of Chinese and North Korean origin. In addition, China is the largest investor in the Gwadar Deep Sea Port, which is strategically located at the mouth of the Straits of Hormuz. “Why is China investing so much, even at the cost of earning global opprobrium as an irresponsible proliferator, and even at the risk of poisoning its relations with India . . . ?” To put it very simply, China and Pakistan have traditionally valued one another as a strategic hedge against India. “For China, Pakistan is a low-cost secondary deterrent to India and . . . for Pakistan, China is a high-value guarantor of security against India.”9

An ominous development that threatens to alter the existing security scenario in the subcontinent has been the expanding Chinese footprint in the Gilgit-Baltistan belt in POK. Noted South Asia observer Selig Harrison has stated that an estimated 7,000–11,000 soldiers of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) were deployed in this region masquerading as engineer personnel. Harrison has termed these developments as the unfolding of “a quiet geopolitical crisis” in the Himalayan borderlands of POK. Understandably, both China and Pakistan have denied these reports and Pakistan has stated that a “humanitarian team” was sent by the Chinese to Gilgit-Baltistan to assist in flood relief operations. In addition to Pakistan, POK holds immense strategic importance for China to establish its strategic footprint in this region, especially the 1,300-kilometre long Karakoram Highway, which connects POK Northern Areas with Kashgar in China’s Xinjiang province (home to the restive Uighur Muslims).

The Chinese are now endeavouring to extend the connectivity of this highway right up to Gwadar Port. The Chinese will subsequently be able to transport cargo and oil to and from the Pakistani ports of Gwadar, Pasni and Ormara in Baluchistan, thereby reducing its dependence on and the vulnerability of its oil supply to China from the Gulf via the congested Straits of Malacca. In addition to its improvement and widening, the Karakoram Highway has reportedly 22 tunnels that could be likely missile silos. Laying of rail lines along this highway is likely to commence soon. “Annual Report 2008–2009” of India’s Ministry of Defence has observed that “. . . Enhancing connectivity with Pakistan through the territory of J&K, illegally occupied by China and Pakistan, will have direct military implications for India.”10

From past and current trends in the Sino-Pak relationship, it can be surmised that China will continue to support Pakistan as an all-weather ally, especially against India and the United States. Nevertheless, China, with its growing global clout, will like to be seen as a responsible global player and thus will moderate Pakistan, to an extent, as its price for bailing Pakistan out economically and strategically.

To be continued…