Source: Capital News of Beijing Daily    Published: 2023-09-15

The United States is growing increasingly wary of the "Belt and Road Initiative." On September 9th, President Biden announced during the G20 Summit in New Delhi said that the U.S. had signed agreements with India, Middle Eastern countries, and the European Union to construct a railway network and maritime routes connecting relevant countries.

As noted by the National Public Radio, Biden sees this as a "region-changing investment," highlighting it as one of Biden's strategies to counter China's "Belt and Road Initiative."

Another approach involves financial system reform. As early as last month, the U.S. government hinted that Biden would push for global financial institution reform at the G20, using rhetoric about China "creating debt traps" to persuade developing countries to distance themselves from cooperation with China. The Associated Press even published an extensive article titled "China’s loans pushing world’s poorest countries to the brink of collapse," asserting that countries like Pakistan, Sri Lanka, and Kenya are "victims."

Has China truly ensnared countries like Pakistan in a "debt trap"? In recent years, certain Western countries have frequently attempted to sow discord between China and Pakistan, tarnishing the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor. How should we view these attempts to disrupt China-Pakistani relations? Is the China-Pakistan relationship able to withstand such tests?

In collaboration with RDCY, Capital News has launched the "Global Governance Forum" section. Shakeel Ahmad Ramay, chief executive officer of Asian Institute of Ecocivilization in Pakistan, shared his views with us on topics such as so-called debt trap, the impact of the Belt and Road Initiative, and China-Pakistan relations.

Belt and Road Initiative

Capital News：This year marks the 10th anniversary of the Belt and Road Initiative. And this year also marks the tenth anniversary of the initiation of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor(CPEC). CPEC is a pilot project under the Belt and Road initiative.What is your overall impression of the Belt and Road Initiative? What kind of benefits has Pakistan seen from the Belt and Road Initiative or CPEC? Can you give a few examples?

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay: It's essential to reflect on the circumstances at the outset of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to appreciate its impact truly. We need to examine the world's challenges and the various issues plaguing humanity at that time. By doing so, we can better understand what BRI has brought to the world and how it has benefited it.

First of all, if we consider the state of affairs back then, poverty rates were on the rise, and food insecurity was a significant concern. Over 800 million people were grappling with food insecurity, and billions lacked access to safe drinking water. When it comes to electricity and energy, billions of individuals did not have access to reliable and affordable power sources.

Additionally, if you look at the infrastructure, the infrastructure deficit was glaringly evident, with an estimated gap in infrastructure investment exceeding $5 trillion. The question that begged an answer was why this gap in investment persisted. People worldwide were yearning for someone to step forward and contribute to bridging this investment gap, bringing about positive change in the lives of those affected. This was seen as a critical step in alleviating poverty and addressing food insecurity promptly.

Moreover, we also need to understand the gradually enhanced engagement of China since 1978. must consider the context. First, China addressed its own issues through reforms and dedicated work, while gradually opening up to the world. During the period, China was exploring a way to construct socialism with Chinese characteristics. However, after 1992, it took on a more global perspective especially after the launch of Go Global Policy.

However, President Xi Jinping’s leadership made an ever more significant shift in China’s attitude towards global issues. He realized now we have to explore socialism with Chinese characteristics by integrating into a global issue and by pulling together and share our prosperity with other countries. Why? Because at that time, in 2012-13, China had become the world's second-largest economy and the world’s largest trading partner. China was holding a central position on the global stage. There was a realization that China couldn't progress without taking on global responsibilities and sharing its prosperity. China has to take care of the needs of mankind as a whole. Here comes an entirely new vision when the President Xi Jinping has put forward a ‘community with a shared future for mankind.'

Under this vision, China launched the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which has since changed China’s global layout significantly.

Reports from various institutions, including the World Bank in 2018-19, suggest that the BRI has positively impacted. The World Bank's assessment indicated that every country of the world, either participating or not, in the BRI could expect a positive change in their GDP.

Trade, bolstered by improved infrastructure, has also contributed to these positive changes. Furthermore, trade improvements, coupled with favorable soft-side policies are poised to significantly facilitate global trade. It's projected that around 40 million people worldwide will be lifted out of extreme poverty thanks to the BRI, with the majority of them residing in developing and least-developed countries.

They also discussed the potential for infrastructure and other forms of connectivity improvement. I'm referring to reports from the World Bank, not government reports from China or any friendly countries like Pakistan. This is an assessment from an international institution, the World Bank, which highlights the positive contributions of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

In the year 2018-19, China had another realization that while pursuing the dream of development and collaboration in a global context, China must recognize the crucial importance of environmental protection and the urgent need of addressing climate change. China understood that achieving prosperity and sustainable peace and development required a commitment to environmental sustainability and addressing climate change. China is both willing and able to tackle such issues.

This led China to expand the content of BRI during the 2nd Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation. China established various mechanisms, including one of the largest forums for International Coalition for Green Development on the Belt and Road, whereby all the BRI countries are empowered to dedicated to pursue a greener way of development.

Subsequently, China set itself an example to other countries by beginning reducing investments in coal and fossil fuels, shifting towards clean and renewable energy sources such as wind, solar, and hydropower. China also invested in green industries with minimal emissions.

Looking back over the past decade of the Belt and Road Initiative, there have been numerous positive changes worth celebrating.

Capital News：Thank you very much for your recognition of the Belt and Road Initiative. Washington assert that China's development financing to Pakistan and other BRI recipients is a debt-trap.this What your opinion regarding to the perception of China coming in by predatory financing and weakening a host country and gaining political influence? Do you think BRI pushing Pakistan into a "debt trap"?

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay: From an economic perspective, it's crucial to assess which types of debt can potentially become traps. Specifically, we need to examine the nature of these loans. Not all loans are economically sustainable, and some can indeed lead to debt sustainability issues and potentially result in a debt trap.

However, if we look at the loans under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), they differ from non-productive loans that does not generate any income for these countries’ people. These loans are productive in nature, primarily directed towards essential sectors like energy. Energy is a fundamental requirement for industries and businesses, and investments in this area can create significant economic opportunities.

Furthermore, when we consider the industries that China is investing in under the BRI, they are typically in the production sector of these countries. Additionally, the infrastructure investments, such as road infrastructure, play a vital role in enhancing connectivity.

Because in the modern era, connectivity is a key indicator of a country's development status. Nations with better connectivity can attract investments and businesses, while those with weak connectivity, they cannot attract the investment towards their country. So these kinds of loans are productive that can facilitate these countries’ development. This is one thing.

For another thing, it's worth noting that most BRI programs are structured as investment programs. To illustrate, let's take the example of Pakistan, where initial negotiations between Pakistan and China amounted to $62 billion. However, only $5.7 billion of this was in the form of loans. That means the majority of the BRI funding in the country was allocated to investment projects, which are less likely to pose a risk of debt trap.

This question refers to a fundamental issue regarding debt traps. It's important to understand why certain debt is not likely to become a debt trap. In the case of Pakistan, out of the $62 billion, $5.7 billion was allocated to the energy sector. This investment was particularly significant because Pakistan was grappling with a worst type of energy crisis, incurring annual losses of four to five billion US dollars due to electricity load shedding.

The debt played a pivotal role in rebalancing the situation by providing a stable and available access to electricity for the industries, fostering positive changes in businesses and people's lives.

In essence, it was a productive investment whereby the country and its people can generates income in the growing industries boosted by these investment, and from an economic standpoint, productive debts typically do not lead to debt traps as long as the country can capitalize on the opportunities it offers to create more jobs and thus stimulate a healthy economic growth.

Looking at other examples around the world, particularly the Sri Lanka case that often comes up in Western media discussions as a so-called victim of China’s debt trap, but they don't tell us the data of how the debt the country is bearing is constituted.It's crucial to consider the data. A matter of fact that these Western media would not like to reveal is nearly 50% of Sri Lanka's debt comes from Western private financial institutions, which posed a real challenge for Sri Lanka.

Furthermore, Western institutions tend to offer loans at higher interest rates and have stricter repayment terms. The indebted countries have to pay back at the time when required because these loans are not country-to-country, they are the company to the country. These loans are offered by some company, such as commercial banks, to these countries. So the countries that you cannot negotiate with them on equal footing.

In contrast, Chinese debt accounted for just over 10% of Sri Lanka's total debt from Asian Development Bank. Furthermore, Chinese terms were often more favorable than those of the Western institutions. So how only 10% of China's debt is a problem? That's all, all the things are very okay. I can't understand and I can't figure out any economic rationale how they can justify it as trap.In other words, such allegation of debt trap is groundless.

Let's take a closer look at the Zambia example. It wasn't a Chinese company that approached the Chinese government or any Chinese company influencing the Zambian government to sell its electricity supply company. Instead, it was the IMF advising the Zambian government on this matter.

If we examine examples from around the world, a growing trend of China’s investment in other countries emerges. When Chinese investments flow into Africa, they often contribute to enhanced productivity and collective development. Chinese companies frequently invest in capacity building for their employees and local communities, which is a vital aspect of their approach to cooperate with these countries.

In fact, similar observations can be made in various regions across the globe. Some American institutions conducted studies on China’s overseas investments, like Johns Hopkins University in the USA, which has examined Chinese investment projects in different parts of the world, including Africa, Latin America, and Asia. These studies found no instances of debt traps.

These American institutions couldn't identify any examples of such traps. They only pointed a finger toward the Sri Lanka case which I already described. It's essential to distinguish between propaganda and verifiable facts and data. You may hear a lot of claims on the propaganda side, but if you talk about facts and data, you will not find anything. So that is the whole story.

Capital News： From what I know, China isn't the biggest creditor to developing countries. Why do you think the Western countries are hyping up the "Chinese debt trap" theory?

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay:  China has opened up significantly in recent times. It's clear that they are not comfortable with any country reaching and exceeding an extreme level of control or being subjected to what they perceive as the dominance or even a form of economic servitude imposed by Western countries. So China has shaken and challenged this hegemony.

As China continues to grow, it aims to ensure that no country is subject to such levels of control. This stance signifies China's divergence from Western influence.

Moreover, Western countries have long propagated the idea of a liberal economic order, suggesting that this is the only viable recipe for the world. They've emphasized that liberal Western-style democracy is the ultimate solution for governance of country. Conversely, China has demonstrated to the world that different models can thrive and prosper. They argue that models of governance should be developed according to a nation's unique needs, culture, circumstances, and perspectives. In essence, China has championed its own ideology, diverging from the Western narrative that a liberal economic order and liberal democracy are the sole paths to success.

This ideological shift became more pronounced after the USSR's collapse, leading to discussions about the 'end of history' where only liberal economics and liberal democracy would reign supreme. China's alternative model has raised concerns in the West, as it challenges the previously dominant narrative. So that's why the western countries started to feel threatened by the alternative from the Chinese side.

Secondly, China has offered hope to developing countries by providing them with the opportunity to pursue their development projects without imposing terms and conditions. China does not preach lessons in democracy or lectures on the rule of law and other matters to these countries as these Westerners does. Instead, China presents an option to the world: let's work together on economic progress without meddling in each other's own affairs. China not only freed itself from Western hegemony but also assists other countries in breaking free from such hegemonic behaviors and attitudes.

China has emphasized this point of view on numerous occasions at international forums, advocating against bullying and dictating other countries' what to do and what not not to do. China firmly believes that every country has the right to make its own decisions. It tells other countries to be confident of the theory and institutions of their own by keeping their sovereignty and independence intact. And this aligns with the sense of confidence in Chinese socialism, as observed within China. So the west definitely don't like it, because they are easily extracting developing countries’ sources through the hegemonic world order.

Furthermore, China differs from the West in its approach to development. Western ways to development, historically, involved the exploitation of resources from developing countries through colonization and resource theft. In contrast, China has developed through hard work and does not engage in resource plunder. In fact, China helps other countries protect their resources. These fundamental differences upset the ‘apple cart’ of Western countries, as they have historically sought to control the world and hinder the independent development of other nations.

Lastly, Western models and economies are often influenced by the military-industrial complex, which tends to interfere in various countries under the guise of democracy or other agendas. This interference sometimes contradicts the principles of democracy upheld by Western countries themselves. In their interference to a specific country’s politics, sometimes there is for one candidate, other time this for other candidates. Western countries tend to support specific candidates on the pretext of democracy or other issues, pressuring them to heed their interests and provide them with advantages in the real-world.

Failure to comply to such interference may lead to concerns about  'color revolutions,' as we've witnessed in many countries where revolutions are driven by internal forces but can serve external agendas.

However, in the case of China, there is no such thing like that.The unity among China's leaders, fostered by the CPC, prevents external interference in Chinese affairs.

China's political system, characterized by the CPC's leadership, makes it difficult for the military-industrial complex or major industries to manipulate Chinese politics. Chinese leadership emphasizes that if other countries support China, they will receive support in return, but this support doesn't involve meddling in China's internal matters.

In China, there exists a unity among leaders, everybody has a good chance to come to the power. These aspects often contrast with the Western perspective and raise questions among Western observers.

Capital News: The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) has successfully completed its initial phase, primarily addressing Pakistan's critical infrastructure and energy shortages. Now, it has entered the second phase of high-quality development, aiming to initiate new collaborations in multiple areas. In your perspective, what do you believe will be the key focus of cooperation in this second phase?

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay:  In the second phase, which spans 2 to 3 years, with a primary focus on the initial 2 years, there are several key areas of focus. First and foremost is industrialization. In this phase, China and Pakistan have committed to kickstarting the industrialization process, beginning with the establishment of special economic zones. During the initial stage, there was a need to develop basic infrastructure, including energy and rural infrastructure, which has largely been completed.

The second phase aims to further boost and strengthen Pakistan's production capacity. Both countries are working together to facilitate the potential shift of some industries from China to Pakistan, as well as encourage increased investments in Pakistan.

Another critical area of cooperation is agriculture. Agriculture cooperation is very important for Pakistan, because right now Pakistan is an agriculture-based economy. Agriculture directly contributes over 20% to our national GDP and has a substantial indirect contribution. This sector is vital for Pakistan's main exports, such as textiles, cotton being a fundamental element in the textile industry, as well as other raw materials like leather products, rice, mangoes, and more.

The third focus area is the adoption of elements from the Fourth Industrial Revolution. China and Pakistan are placing a strong emphasis on science and technology in the coming years. Recent developments show Chinese companies operating in Pakistan, and both governments are collaborating to enhance the technological capacity of Pakistani institutions. China is also facilitating student exchanges, inviting Pakistani students to study in China as part of capacity-building efforts.

While there are other areas of cooperation, such as tourism and energy, the primary focus of China and Pakistan remains on these core sectors.

China-Pakistan relations

Capital News: In China, we refer to Pakistan as"Ba Tie," Have you come across this term before? It indicates the close bond between the two nations.

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay:  We say brotherhood.

Capital News: How do you view the current state of China-Pakistan relations, and what role do you believe it plays in bilateral cooperation between the two countries?

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay: First of all, we need to understand one very important fact that China-Pakistan relations cannot be examined, analyzed and understood in terms of traditional theories of international relations. Some of the unique relations that Pakistan has had for a generation, and I think that China-Pakistan relations are based on mutual respect and mutual concern.

If you review the history many times, you will find that when China came, Pakistan would help China, and sometimes China would help Pakistan in turn, but what is important during that period was that both countries were at the center of their respect. The two countries did not try to show condescending attitudes towards each other, and rather they fostered brotherly ties with each other and cared for each other. That constitutes a basic element of mutual respect, which is the stand of China-Pakistan relations because we feel for each other if one is confronted with some problems, the other will come forward as a helpful brother, not as a by-standing outsider.

As the President Xi Jinping stated during his visit to Pakistan in 2015, he said his first trip to Pakistan is like visiting the home of his “own brother.” This is a very significant statement, and if you look around the way China interact with other countries and the way China deals with international relations, China does not use such word for any other countries, and that is to say when China use the word, it really means a brotherhood. China-Pakistan relations is fundamentally different from what the Western countries sees on their international relations, because in the Western theory and practices of international relation, interests is the key element, which is before and above all, and there is no room for friendship, they goes somewhere only when they can gain interests.

In Chinese ideology, the essential feature of China’s interaction with other countries in terms of international relations is mutual respect rather than interests, though it is not to say that China don't seek interest.

I remember so one of the Chinese for I the finance minister he said in the 1980s, he said when we do business which are Pakistan, we don't do it at the business. We do is at the brotherhood and other way around. So we don't keep profit at the center of our business transactions. We keep something else that is our relationship if you look at all during the history. So this relationship gets stronger with each and every crisis if you look around.

There is another earlier case epitomizes Pakistan-China relations. I remember that it was in the 1980s China’s then finance minister saying that when China do business with Pakistan, they don't do it merely in the way of business but in the way of brotherhood, and they don't keep their relationship with Pakistan instead of profit at the center of their business transactions. Throughout the history, this relationship gets stronger with each and every crisis. It can be taken that Pakistan and China stood together in early 1970s, and back then it was Pakistan who broke the rift between China and USA, which led to China’s integration into the world system. It was Pakistan who gave China the important support for its seat in the UN in 1960s, which help China to connect with the world.

So if you look at China, you will see that China has been investing in Pakistan. Even before CPEC, Chinese companies had invested 10 to 15 billion dollars in Pakistan. After CPEC, the whole dynamics has been changed. As a result, both countries have made mutual respect a core element. And I find that each of the two countries is not like that outside. If that's the case, the relationship will grow together and will only get stronger at the best of times.

Capital News：These days, a lot of talk worldwide is pointing towards“Slowbalization”. It means trade openness slowed, and weakening political support for open trade amid rising geopolitical tensions. At the same time, there are more and more voices advocating for decoupling and cutting off industrial and supply chains.

what message do you think China and Pakistan will convey to the world? How can both China and Pakistan enhance cooperation and strengthen connectivity in this context?

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay: The anti-globalization campaign reveals a clear message: when Western countries find it challenging to dominate a field, they tend to oppose initiatives that promote globalization. Western nations have historically advocated for globalization, touting its benefits and emphasizing the advantages it brings to their companies, trade, and business partnerships. Why? Because they were feeling their companies will be winning, and believed they would be the primary beneficiaries, leading in trade and services, no country can compete them. So they say let's promote the competition, let's promote the globalization.

However, with the rise of China and other developing countries, the overall landscape has shifted. Western countries began to feel that they couldn't maintain their dominance in many fields. They encountered formidable competition from countries like China, which had surged ahead. China, in particular, has become the world's largest trade partner and a leader in various technologies, including quantum computing, artificial intelligence, 5G, 6G, and more.

For western countries, technology was the basis of their rule and they were holding the world through the monopoly of technology. But now China's influence extends to many technologies through major companies like Huawei, which plays a significant role in global technology. This shift in the global technological landscape stood a chance to overturn the West's previous dominance, and they began to resist globalization as a result. The roots of this resistance can be traced back to their apprehension about their losing of technological edge.

During a conference at the White House, former U.S. President Donald Trump made it clear that the United States could not tolerate any country surpassing it in modern technologies. This sentiment reflects their discomfort when other nations appear to be outpacing the U.S. in certain areas. In the past, Western countries championed globalization, emphasizing the benefits of new technologies for developing countries. However, as other countries, particularly China, began to excel in these technologies, the dynamics experienced an about-face shift. There have been concerted efforts to curb the growing influence of Chinese companies like Huawei, despite it has passed numerous security tests.

Western countries, particularly the United States, are reluctant to allow Huawei to compete with American and Western firms. This hesitancy arises from the belief that they cannot effectively compete with Huawei, without resort to measures like legal bans, criticism, and attempts to tarnish the company's reputation.

Western nations are increasingly concerned about their waning competitiveness in economic matters. This concern is evident in recent initiatives, Pentagon makes moves to speed up tech transition to enhancing the technological capabilities of American companies. This unconventional approach involves a security agency working to boost the competitiveness of technology companies, even as they point fingers at China.

In this context, China is displaying remarkable patience and actively cultivating economic relationships. It is fostering an environment of openness. Meanwhile, China is spearheading the globalization process and advocating for multilateralism. China is going to be proactive and take the lead in global reforms, demonstrating an eagerness to drive multilateral efforts. This marks a departure from China's past approach.

As we discuss China's commitment to global reform, it's evident that China now stands as a champion at the heart of globalization. Similarly, Pakistan aspires to make significant contributions, particularly within the framework of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC). Pakistan can also play a role and Pakistan is ready to play the role. There is no second opinion. There is unanimous agreement that CPEC has greatly enhanced connectivity within Pakistan.

And in addition to that, the strategic location of Pakistan  is of paramount importance. We must recognize that we are situated at a pivotal juncture, acting as a vital node for connectivity across various regions.

Geographically, we have direct links with Central Asia to our north, South Asia to our south, and access to Gulf and Arab countries on one side, while also providing a gateway to North Africa on the other. This strategic positioning empowers us to serve as a central hub for global connectivity.

So, Pakistan is fully prepared to embrace this role. Both Pakistan and China extend invitations to other countries to participate in CPEC. This initiative holds the very potential to significantly augment trade connectivity and further advance the globalization process.

This isn't merely a theoretical assertion. A comprehensive study indicates that utilizing the CPEC route for trade with China presents tangible benefits. It streamlines the process, providing a direct and robust infrastructure link to China. This, in turn, yields substantial gains for countries involved. The study, which encompassed six countries including those in the Middle East and Europe, such as Saudi Arabia, Oman, Greece, the Netherlands, France, and Germany, clearly demonstrates the advantages of employing the CPEC route for trade with China.

Study highlighted that the travel time will be reduced by 20 days for Oman, 21 days for KSA, 24 days for Kuwait, 21 days for Netherlands, 21 days for Germany and 21 days for France by trading through the Gwadar.

It is substantial decrease which will be followed by reduction in cost of travel. The results of the study underlined that there would be saving of US$ 1857 for Oman, US$ 1457 for KSA, US$ 1457 for Kuwait, US$ 1357 for Holland, US$ 1357 for Germany and France on per container. China can accrue benefits of US$ 70 billion in saving on annual basis. It will also bring good revenue for Pakistan. It has been predicted that the benefits would be between US$ 7-8 Billion to US$ 10-12 billion on annual basis in form of services and fees. This enhanced connectivity will undoubtedly benefit these countries. It is precisely for this reason that Pakistan encourages others to consider joining CPEC, and China echoes this sentiment. The study also quantifies the potential savings. By utilizing CPEC for trade with these six countries up until 2016, it is estimated that a staggering 72 billion dollars could have been saved annually in transportation costs alone. This represents a significant financial gain, highlighting the substantial benefits of CPEC.

Both Pakistan and China are actively advocating for globalization and taking concrete steps to realize its potential. However, it's important to acknowledge that some may harbor reservations about the long-term implications of globalization. It's crucial to consider that one approach alone may not suffice to achieve the best possible outcome. This diversity of opinion is why there are opposing viewpoints.

Capital News: We’ve noticed that certain Western countries have been trying to sow discord between China and Pakistan in recent years. For instance, last year, during the unprecedented flooding in Pakistan, American media started spreading rumors about China not fully assisting Pakistan in flood relief. Whenever there’s a security incident in Pakistan, some malicious Western media outlets take the opportunity to criticize Pakistan and undermine the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor.What’s your take on these actions that are trying to stir up issues between China and Pakistan? What do you think their end goal is? Do you think China-Pakistan relationship can withstand these challenges?

Shakeel Ahmad Ramay: This is not a new phenomenon. Right from the outset, it's clear that while others might not have maintained steadfast friendships with China, Pakistan and China have stood as unwavering brothers. Their bond is not only strong but continues to grow even stronger. However, with the expansion of CPEC, we've witnessed a surge in propaganda, malicious campaigns, and attempts to hinder our activities. Even now, Western countries, including India, openly oppose CPEC and have declared their intent to sabotage it.

They're employing various strategies. Unlike in the past, we're now in a different era—an era of connectivity and digitalization. They're utilizing new tools that might be more challenging to counter, such as Twitter, Facebook, and the like. However, fundamentally, they lack the data to substantiate their claims.

For example, in Pakistan, they initially raised concerns about Xinjiang, alleging mistreatment of Uighur Muslims. They insisted that China was engaged in egregious practices, even going as far as claiming that China was killing them, running concentration camps, and suppressing Islamic teachings. They used this as a pretext to suggest that Pakistan should distance itself from China. This was pure propaganda. One particularly interesting story involved a certain philosopher who not only endorsed this narrative but painted a picture of individuals being confined, handcuffed, and restricted from free movement within a room.

But one question, they are not allowed to do anything, but how they can get a mobile phone to take a picture and then they have the satellite internet connection to share the pictures with the world. I don't see if somebody is so mistreated. They are not allowed to do anything how the photographer can have a mobile, and also has this satellite mobile connection. It doesn't add up. These are the baseless claims propagated for their own agenda. The same goes for the narrative surrounding CPEC being a debt trap. The reality on the ground doesn't align with the narrative being spun. KPK, Punjab, and other regions are not experiencing the supposed negative impacts that are being asserted.

It's crucial to bear in mind that we're living in a vastly different world from the past. We must take a proactive stance rather than merely reacting to these propagandist narratives. Instead of outright dismissing them, let's ask for concrete data and evidence. Let's engage in a constructive debate based on facts and figures.

Furthermore, we should also be proactive in presenting our own narrative. For instance, why are you asking me about the debt trap? Because when you are asking this debt trap question, that means the other propaganda is getting strong and getting more visibility. They will say everybody is talking about the debt trap, so there is really some problems.

It's crucial for us to recognize the narratives being propagated without being fully informed. We must take charge of our own messaging rather than getting caught in a cycle of counter-narratives. In this endeavor, let's refrain from using terms like 'debt trap' when discussing. Instead, let's highlight China's efforts in debt relief and capacity-building within countries. China's assistance enables nations to take advantage of their own resources to generate income, aiding in their ability to repay loans from institutions like the World Bank and IMF. So China is providing them debt relief.

In the face of today's barrages of information, even though the bond between Pakistan and China is robust, confusion can still arise among the general populace. Not everyone has access to comprehensive knowledge, which can lead to uncertainty about what is accurate and what is not. This is precisely why we need to establish our own narratives. Otherwise, they will start to believe that maybe something is going wrong. There are some adults in the social media find that we have to come up with our own narratives now.It's time to proactively present our perspective.

Don't engage in a counter-narrative attempt, as doing so would inadvertently reinforce their narrative. They purposely steer conversations towards these topics, and they want you to discuss this as much as you can, hoping to exploit them for propaganda purposes, as is evident in the case of China and Pakistan.

We must avoid falling into the trap of reactive responses. When they assert 'debt trap,' we should emphasize 'debt relief.' When they raise concerns about human rights, we should indeed acknowledge the importance of such issues while also considering their actions in other regions. Are they sincere to Muslim? Never.Their sincerity in championing the cause of Muslims is questionable, given their track record in various countries.

They have killed, murdered thousands and thousands of Muslim across the world in Iraq and Afghanistan, in Libya, in Syria, here we can list names of many other countries that suffered from their outrageous atrocities. So they're using these selectively presented example to sow discord between our countries, We must wrest control of the narrative and be proactive, not reactive. China is now taking the lead, demonstrating a proactive approach to the issue of narrative-building.

If we don't address these issues head-on, they may not just remain benign discussions. They have the potential to sow confusion in the minds of the public. If someone sees a picture of China without context, they might form misguided conclusions. It's imperative that we deploy various tools to shape a narrative that accurately reflects the reality.