“一带一路”倡议越发令美国如鲠在喉。9月9日，美国总统拜登在印度新德里参加G20峰会时宣布，美国与印度、中东国家和欧盟签署协议，建设可以连接相关国家的铁路网络和海上航线。
拜登视之为“改变游戏规则的区域投资”，美国全国公共广播电视台（NPR）指出，这是拜登寻求对抗中国“一带一路”倡议的方法之一。
而“方法之二”就是金融体制改革。早在今年8月，美国政府就放风拜登将在G20峰会上推进全球金融机构改革，通过炒作中国“制造债务陷阱”以说服发展中国家抛弃与中国的合作。美联社还炮制了长文《中国贷款将世界最贫穷国家推向崩溃边缘》，宣称巴基斯坦、斯里兰卡、肯尼亚等国是“受害者”。
中国让巴基斯坦等国陷入“债务陷阱”了吗？某些西方国家近年来频频挑拨中国和巴基斯坦的关系，抹黑中巴经济走廊。如何看待这些挑拨中巴关系的行为？中巴关系经得起考验吗？
长安街知事联合中国人民大学重阳金融研究院推出“全球治理大家谈”栏目。亚洲生态文明研究与发展研究所首席执行官沙克尔·艾哈迈德·拉马伊（Shakeel Ahmad Ramay）就中巴关系及“一带一路”倡议的影响等与记者进行了分享。
中国从不强行给他国上“民主课”
知事：今年是“一带一路”倡议提出十周年，也是中巴经济走廊（CPEC）启动十周年。中巴经济走廊是“一带一路”倡议的重要先行先试项目，巴基斯坦在CPEC下取得了哪些发展成就？
沙克文·艾哈迈德·拉马伊：“一带一路”倡议的提出源自对当时全球情况的审慎反思，其影响也需在此背景下考察，才得以真切理解。
当年，全球贫困率居高不下，粮食安全是急需解决的重大问题，超过8亿人口没有足够的食物，数十亿人无法获得安全的饮用水。在能源和电力方面，同样有数十亿人口无法获得可靠且负担得起的电力。基础设施的匮乏也是一个显而易见的问题，基础设施投资缺口估计已超过5万亿美元，而且投资缺口一直存在。
全球各地的人们都期待着有人能站出来，为填补这一缺口做出贡献，为困难群体的生活带来积极的改变。这是迅速减缓贫困、解决粮食安全问题的关键一步。
我在深入研究中国国内发展后发现，中国在解决自身问题的同时，也在逐步向世界开放。中国意识到，中国特色社会主义的发展必须融入全球发展，和世界共享繁荣。在2012年至2013年期间，中国已是全球第二大经济体，成为包括美国在内的120多个国家和地区的最大贸易伙伴，在全球舞台上占据了中心位置。如果中国不承担国际责任，不分享繁荣成果，将无法取得进步。
在上述双重背景下，中国提出了“一带一路”倡议，也为这个世界带来了重大变化。
得益于基础设施的改善，贸易也为这些积极变化做出了重要贡献。地区贸易的增加，配合有利的政策环境，又显著推动了全球贸易。预计将有大约4000万人因此摆脱极端贫困，其中大部分位于发展中国家和最不发达国家。
这些报告还探讨了改善基础设施和其他形式的互联互通的潜力。需要指出的是，这些结论而非来自于中国或巴基斯坦等对华友好国家的政府报告，而是源自国际性机构世界银行的一份评估报告，着重突显了“一带一路”倡议的积极贡献。
在2018-2019年间，中国又有了一个新认识——在追求发展梦想和全球合作的同时，保护环境和应对气候变化同样至关重要。中国清楚地意识到，实现繁荣与可持续、和平与发展，需要对环境可持续性和应对气候变化做出承诺。
随之，中国建立了多种绿色发展机制，例如“一带一路”绿色发展国际联盟论坛。中国还开始减少对煤炭和化石燃料的投资，转向风能、太阳能和水电等清洁和可再生能源，并投资了低排放的绿色产业。回顾“一带一路”倡议十年历程，发生了许多值得庆祝的积极变化。
知事：华盛顿方面声称，中国向巴基斯坦和其他“一带一路”合作伙伴提供的发展融资是一个债务陷阱。您如何看待美国诋毁中国通过“掠夺性融资进入并削弱东道国并获得政治影响力”？“一带一路”倡议使巴基斯坦陷入债务危机了吗？
沙克文·艾哈迈德·拉马伊：从经济角度来看，“一带一路”倡议下的贷款本质上是生产性投资，主要面向如能源等关键部门和道路等基础设施建设，在这些领域的投资可以创造巨大的经济机会。
中国通过中巴经济走廊向巴基斯坦投资了至少620亿美元，这是“一带一路”倡议的一部分。其中只有57亿美元是贷款形式，以投资的方式被用于巴基斯坦的能源部门，这对巴基斯坦来说是雪中送炭。
当巴基斯坦每年因电力而造成的损失高达40至50亿美元，巴政府致力于解决能源问题之时，来自中国的贷款成功地为工业提供了动力，也促进了巴企业和人民生活的改善，在经济平衡方面发挥了关键作用。
从本质上讲，生产性的债务通常不会导致债务陷阱，只要债务国能够利用这笔资金促进本国相关行业的发展。巴基斯坦的实际情况证明，“债务陷阱”叙事只是西方捏造的谎言，巴基斯坦的开伯尔-普赫图赫瓦省（KPK）、旁遮普省和其他地区都没有经历所谓的“债务陷阱”。
巴基斯坦瓜达尔港资料图。图源：视觉中国
另外，西方媒体经常讨论斯里兰卡和赞比亚的债务问题，却从不告诉国际社会具体的数据。
在斯里兰卡的债务构成中，来自西方私人金融机构的借款高达近50%，赞比亚的情况也差不多。相比之下，中国债务仅占斯里兰卡从亚洲开发银行获得债务总额的10%多一点，还提供比西方金融机构更优惠的贷款条件。
50%的债务都不是陷阱，区区10%的中国债务怎么就成了“陷阱”？这种指控在经济上站不住脚。就连约翰斯·霍普金斯大学等美国机构进行的研究调查，也没有发现中国制造“债务陷阱”的证据。面对海量的信息，区分哪些是美西方国家的宣传、哪些是事实，这一点很重要。
知事：您认为西方国家为什么要炒作“中国债务陷阱”理论?
沙克文·艾哈迈德·拉马伊：西方长期以来一直宣扬西式的民主自由和经济秩序理念，认为这是唯一可行的发展路径和国际治理的终极解决方案。可是西方的模式和经济体系经常受到军工复合体的影响，倾向于打着民主的旗号干涉他国事务，实际上与其所坚持的民主原则背道而驰。如果小国不听指挥，就有可能招来“颜色革命”。
然而，中国已用自身的发展成果向世界证明，不同的发展模式都可以茁壮成长。
在发展方式上，中国艰苦奋斗式的成长历程不同于西方历史上殖民掠夺式的资本积累，这对一直试图通过掌控全球局势来阻碍其他国家独立发展的西方来说，简直难以相信。
在发展理念上，中国从不强行给其他发展中国家上“民主课”，也不插手其内政。中国向世界提供了一个选择：让我们在不干涉彼此事务的前提下，共同致力于经济发展。
中国的发展方式、理念和成果，从各个方面挑战了先前占主导地位的西方叙事，西方对此产生了危机感和随之而来的猜忌。
知事：中巴经济走廊已走过第一阶段，主要解决了巴基斯坦关键基础设施和能源短缺问题。如今，已进入高质量发展的第二阶段，计划在多个领域开启新合作。您认为第二阶段的合作重点将是什么？
沙克文·艾哈迈德·拉马伊：第二阶段有几个关键的着力领域。在工业化领域，中巴双方已郑重承诺启动工业化进程，首要举措便是设立经济特区。在最初的阶段，亟需发展基础设施，包括能源和农村基础设施，现在它们已经基本建设完成。第二阶段旨在进一步提高和加强巴基斯坦的生产能力。两国正在共同努力，推动一些产业从中国转移至巴基斯坦，并鼓励增加对巴基斯坦的投资。
农业合作对巴基斯坦至关重要，因为当前巴基斯坦的经济体系以农业为基础。农业对巴基斯坦国内生产总值的直接贡献超过20%，其间接贡献也不可忽视。农业生产为巴基斯坦的出口产品提供了不可或缺的原材料，如棉花、皮革制品、大米、芒果等。
第三个关键领域是融入第四次工业革命。未来几年，中巴双方都会高度重视科学技术发展。中国企业正在巴基斯坦开展许多业务，两国政府也在合作提升巴基斯坦机构的技术能力。中国还在推动两国的教育交流，鼓励巴基斯坦学生前往中国学习。
尽管两国在旅游、能源等其他领域也会有更高水平的合作，但我仍认为双方的重点仍会放在上述的核心领域。
不要掉入“反叙事”的陷阱
知事：在中国，我们称巴基斯坦为“巴铁”，您听说过吗？意思是中巴是“铁杆兄弟”。您如何看待当前的中巴关系，它在双边合作中扮演了怎样的角色？
沙克文·艾哈迈德·拉马伊：我们称之为巴中兄弟情谊，这份独特的友谊已经持续了一代人的时间，成为了两国友谊的一大特点。它超越了传统的国际政治互动，建立在相互尊重和真诚关怀的基础上。历史上，无论是中国还是巴基斯坦，都展现了在对方遇到困境时仗义援助的精神，我们是彼此关爱的兄弟，不是袖手旁观的外人，这种真诚的互助精神贯穿两国交往的始终，成就了这份特殊的友谊，也构筑了中巴关系坚定的基石。
正如中国国家主席习近平在2015年对巴基斯坦进行国事访问时所说：“这是我首次访问巴基斯坦，但我感觉就像到自己兄弟家中探访一样。”这番比喻意味深长，如果你对比中国与其他国家交往时所用的措辞，就会发现中国不会对任何其他国家使用“兄弟”这个词。也就是说，当中国使用“兄弟”这个词时，意味着中国真的视我们为“兄弟”。
中巴关系与西方国家对国际关系的看法有着根本的不同，因为在西方的国际关系理论和实践中，利益最重要，利益高于一切，国际关系中没有友谊的余地，任何国家只有有利可图，他们才会与之交往。而在中国的意识形态中，处理国际关系的本质特征是相互尊重，而不是利益第一。
早在20世纪80年代，一位中国官员就明言，中国人在巴基斯坦做生意，并非单纯以商业交易的眼光看待，而是以兄弟情谊相待。由此可见，中国人看重的绝不仅是利益，更是两国友谊的纽带。在历经风雨洗礼后，中巴两国关系在每一次危机面前都愈加坚韧。
可以毫不夸张地说，自建交以来，巴基斯坦和中国始终如兄弟一般同心协力。上世纪70年代，正是巴基斯坦成为了拉近中国与美国之间关系的纽带，促使中国走向国际舞台。而在上世纪60年代，巴基斯坦也积极支持中国加入联合国，为中国融入国际社会起到了重要的推动作用。
另一方面，中国在巴基斯坦持续投入了大量资金，在中巴经济走廊启动之前，中国企业就在巴基斯坦累计投资了100至150亿美元。随着中巴经济走廊的启动，两国关系得到了进一步深化。相互尊重一直是两国关系的核心要素，中巴都没有把对方当外人。在这种相互尊重和理解下，中巴友谊得以共同成长，历久弥坚。
知事：我们注意到，某些西方国家近年来频频挑拨中国和巴基斯坦的关系。比如，去年，巴基斯坦遭遇了前所未有的洪涝灾害，美国媒体就开始炒作所谓的“中国未全力帮助巴基斯坦抗洪”的说法。巴基斯坦发生袭击事件，一些心怀叵测的西方媒体借机抹黑巴基斯坦，抹黑中巴经济走廊。您如何看待这些挑拨中巴关系的行为？他们的目的是什么？中巴关系经得起考验吗？
沙克文·艾哈迈德·拉马伊：这不是一个新现象。
从新中国成立以来，巴基斯坦和中国的兄弟情谊始终如一。两国关系不仅坚定，而且还在不断加强。
然而，随着中巴经济走廊的扩大，我们目睹了渲染炒作和恶意诬蔑纷至沓来，试图阻碍中巴经济合作。
在离间中巴关系这一企图上，西方一开始是打算利用新疆问题，声称维吾尔族穆斯林受到虐待，并以此为幌子，暗示巴基斯坦应该与中国保持距离。
有一个荒谬的报道给我留下了深刻印象。接受采访的所谓“专家”拿出照片声称，在新疆被囚禁、戴上手铐、被限制在房间里不允许自由活动。
试问，既然不允许做任何事情，那他是如何拿到手机拍照，还通过卫星互联网与世界分享照片？这说不通，这些都是西方为自己的特定议程而宣传的毫无根据的谎言。
2020年10月，中企承建的巴基斯坦拉合尔轨道交通橙线项目开通运营，标志着巴基斯坦步入“地铁时代”。图源：视觉中国
围绕中巴经济走廊的“债务陷阱”的叙事也是如此。实际情况与所他们所捏造的故事根本不相符。巴基斯坦的开伯尔-普赫图赫瓦省（KPK）、旁遮普省和其他地区都没有经历所谓的“债务陷阱”。
与以往不同，我们如今处在一个互联互通和数字化的新时代，信息传播的速度和广度前所未有。在面对那些宣传叙事时，我们不能仅仅作出反应，而应主动采取行动，与其单纯否定，不如要求对方提供具体的数据和证据。
同时，我们也应该积极地提出我们自己的叙事，避免陷入“反叙事”的循环中。
当他们说“债务陷阱”时，我们应该强调“债务减免”，要告诉世界中国在债务减免方面所做的努力。中国的债务减免为第三世界国家提供了额外的资源，帮助了它们偿还世界银行和国际货币基金组织等西方金融机构的贷款，这正是中国施以的援手。
你为什么会问我关于债务陷阱的问题？当你问这个问题时，意味着西方叙事的宣传效果正在变得越来越强烈和明显。他们会说，你看，所有人都在谈论“债务陷阱”，这说明它是一个真实存在的问题。
在这个过程中，我们必须非常谨慎地辨别那些在信息不足情况下传播的叙事。我们必须要自己所传播的信息负责，避免陷入“反叙事”的循环中。因此，在讨论时，我们可以避免使用“债务陷阱”这样的宣传术语，而是强调中国在债务减免方面所做的努力。
让我们开始积极主动地表达我们的观点吧，不要陷入到“反叙事”的逻辑陷阱里，这样做会无意中强化西方的叙事，他们就是故意引导人们谈论这些话题来达到宣传目的，这在中巴关系的例子中很明显。
当他们对中国的人权问题指指点点时，我们应该直指他们在人权问题上劣迹斑斑的事实。比如，他们是诚心诚意地关注穆斯林的福祉吗？从来没有。他们的犯罪前科历历在目，在伊拉克、阿富汗、利比亚、叙利亚等地，他们杀害了成千上万的穆斯林，他们只是试图利用穆斯林的名义在我们两国之间播下分歧的种子。我们必须掌握叙事的控制权，积极主动，而不是被动反应。
如果我们不正面解决这些问题，它们就会在公众的心中播下混乱的种子。尽管巴中友谊很稳固，但在“信息爆炸”的时代，并非每个人都能获得全面的信息，这可能导致人们受到西方宣传攻势的影响，对于何为真实、何为虚假感到困惑，这也正是我们需要建立自己叙事的原因。我们必须使用好各种工具来准确反映现实。
“输不起”就耍赖
知事：当前，全球很多讨论都指向全球化将退潮，“脱钩断链”的声音不断。在这种情况下，中巴将要向世界传递怎样的声音？两国要如何加强合作，加强互联互通？
沙克文·艾哈迈德·拉马伊：这轮反全球化浪潮揭示了一个明确的信息：当西方国家发现自己在原本占优势的领域地位不保时，他们往往会反对促进全球化的举措。
此前，西方国家宣扬全球化的好处，是因为他们觉得自己的企业能在贸易和服务领域稳赚不赔、永保领先。但现在情况发生了变化。
中国已经在量子计算、人工智能、5G、6G等技术方面处于领先地位。对于西方国家来说，技术就是立身之本，现在突然发现自己无法维持主导地位和技术优势了，他们就开始抵制全球化。
对于西方国家来说，技术就是它们的立身之本，它们通过技术控制世界。但现在，中国的影响力已经通过华为这样的大公司日益扩大，华为在全球科技领域发挥着重要作用。全球技术格局的这种转变挑战了西方之前的主导地位，因此他们开始抵制全球化。这种抵制的根源可以追溯到他们对失去技术优势的担忧。
在白宫举行的一次会议上，美国前总统特朗普明确表示，美国不能容忍任何国家在现代技术上超过美国。这种情绪反映出，当其他国家似乎在某些领域要超过美国时，他们就感到焦躁不安。过去，西方国家支持全球化，强调新技术的好处。然而，随着其他国家，尤其是中国，开始在这些技术上表现出色，形势就完全变了。
华为的遭遇就是典例。尽管华为等中国公司通过了众多安全性测试，但西方各国一直在齐心协力遏制它们的影响力。
尤其是美国，不愿让华为与西方的公司竞争。这种不愿源于心虚，他们认为自己恐怕赢得与华为的竞争，从而做出了施加禁令、指责和试图玷污华为声誉等下策。
近期，美国五角大楼采取多项行动加快技术升级，以提高美国公司的技术实力。他们还推出了一些非常规举措，其中包括成立专门致力于这一目标的安全机构，这些举措的矛头多指向中国。
7月31日，巴基斯坦总理夏巴兹·谢里夫在中巴经济走廊启动十周年庆祝活动上发表讲话。图源：视觉中国
在这种背景下，中国表现出了非凡的耐心，积极发展经济关系，营造开放的环境。同时，中国在全球化进程中扮演着领跑者的角色，是多边主义的倡导者。巴基斯坦也希望在中巴经济走廊框架内作出重要贡献。巴基斯坦有能力，也愿意发挥积极作用。
中巴两国都热烈欢迎其他国家参与中巴经济走廊建设。研究表明，中巴经济走廊贸易简化了贸易流程，减少了运输成本。互联互通的强化无疑将使参与的国家受益匪浅。正是出于这个原因，巴基斯坦鼓励其他国家加入中巴经济走廊，中方对此表示赞赏。
中方多次强调，中国将在全球事务中持续发挥引领作用并展现出推动多边合作的强烈愿望。这与过去大不相同，很明显，中国现在站在全球化的中心。
此外，巴基斯坦的战略位置至关重要，位于各地区互联互通的关键节点上——北面毗邻中亚，南面与南亚相连，一侧通往海湾和阿拉伯国家。这一地缘战略定位使巴基斯坦能够成为全球互联互通的中心枢纽，巴基斯坦已做好充分准备扮演这一角色。
“一带一路”倡议具有显著增强贸易互联互通、进一步推进全球化进程的势能。这不仅仅是一个理论论断。一项综合研究表明，利用中巴经济走廊与中国进行贸易可以带来实实在在的好处。它简化了贸易流程，为通往中国的贸易提供了直接而强大的基础设施，由此产生的效应也为相关国家带来了可观的收益。这项研究横跨中东和欧洲的六个国家，包括沙特阿拉伯、阿曼、希腊、荷兰、法国和德国，清楚地展示了利用中巴经济走廊与中国进行贸易的优势。
通过中巴经济走廊进行贸易将减少运输成本、压缩运输时间。以前，一个集装箱的综合运输费用高达1000美元。随着中巴经济走廊的落地，这一成本预计将下降至每个集装箱600到700美元。同样，过去需要20天的运输时间，现在只需10天，节省了大量的时间成本。
该研究还对潜在的成本节约进行了量化。据估计，截至2016年，通过中巴经济走廊与这六个国家进行贸易，每年仅在运输成本方面就可以节省高达720亿美元。这代表着巨大的经济利益，凸显了中巴经济走廊的重大效益。中国和巴基斯坦都是全球化的积极倡导者，都在以实际行动挖掘和释放全球化势能。
以下为采访英文全文：
The Shakeel Ahmad Ramay Interview: Pakistan Rejects Provocation
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.
来源：长安街知事 记者：刘晓琰
流程编辑：u060
版权说明：任何媒体、网站或个人未经书面授权许可不得转载、摘编或利用其它方式使用本网站上的文字、图片、图表、漫画、视频等内容。
未经许可即使用，或以此盈利的，均系侵害本网站著作权及相关权益的行为，本网站将追究法律责任。
如遇作品内容、版权等问题，请在相关文章刊发之日起30日内与本网联系。
联系方式：
[email protected]
