China has changed its stance from harsh to soft on changing the name of China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC) of that persuade India joining the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).
The ambassador of China indicated the same thing about changing the name of Economic Corridor. But, opposite to it, the embassy’s website later removed its references due to an adverse reaction to Islamabad, for which the name changed would mean that China is ready to calm down, even if symbolically, the concerns of India’s sovereigns which have been opposed to BRI. China sees the situation of CPEC as an economic project, in which there is no impact on the issue of sovereignty to deal with India and Pakistan bilaterally. In May and now, the ambassador of China has proposed a corridor between China and India through Kashmir or Sikkim route.
With the suggestions of some Chinese experts in India, China has not lost anything through this pretense diplomacy that a diplomatic way out of BRI deadlock will have to be changed in favor of possible India’s involvement in BRI in the future by changing the name of the CPEC.
A cosmetic change in the nomenclature, however, will not make any difference on the ground as any corridor between China and Pakistan may have to face some parts of Jammu and Kashmir that were illegally occupied by Pakistan.
To accept this, India has not only legal reasons, but there is also a strategic step to encompass India in one area, where China itself is involved in a regional dispute with us. China is deeply attracting Pakistan to its influence and not to continue using it as a weapon against India, but also to challenge America’s presence in the area of Asian land and the decline in power.
CPEC is like a geographical political center for China in Asia and it will not lose it at any cost. In this project, China can lose its $ 46 billion as it is investing in terrorism wracked, politically unstable country. Apart from this, both are intended on creating an unfavorable environment for themselves to maintain contradictory relations with their direct neighbors, it is for larger geopolitical reasons, not alone economic benefits.
Also, China’s pretension is that these corridors are politically neutral and it can conceive of any condition on India’s sovereignty through Kashmir without any corridor. A corridor through Jammu and Kashmir will be connected to the corridor through POK and China can easily take advantage of double benefits.
Through this move, China will strengthen its hold on Jammu and Kashmir on both sides. Even Mehbooba Mufti has endorsed linking India with BRI as a test of “traditional trade routes of Kashmir” through Kashmir.
Indeed, it is not intended only to link Kashmir to the new China-India corridor but also to connect Srinagar through Muzaffarabad to the CPEC. The name of CPEC can be changed as the pressure point on functional aspects, raising questions about the benefits of the project.
In the context of Russia-India-China dialogue at the Foreign Minister’s level in Delhi on December 11 and December 12, flights that hit the corridors should also be seen. Russia has supported BRI, but India has widened its opposition in collaboration with Japan and America to expose its dubious dimensions.