Css 2019

Log In

Q2: Examine China's Strategic Vision behind ‘The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI)’, also known as the One Belt One Road (OBOR).

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Understanding BRI: Structure and Geography
  3. Strategic Vision Behind BRI
    • Geopolitical Objectives
    • Economic Security and Trade Expansion
    • Maritime and Infrastructure Dominance
    • Energy Diversification and Supply Chain Security
  4. China’s Global Diplomacy through BRI
    • Influence in Asia, Africa, and Europe
    • Strategic Counter to U.S. and India
    • BRI and Multipolarity
  5. Impact on Pakistan and CPEC’s Strategic Role
  6. Theoretical Framework
    • Neomercantilism
    • Complex Interdependence
    • Realism and Power Transition Theory
  7. Challenges and Global Response
  8. Conclusion
  9. Visual Aid: BRI Corridors and Goals Summary Table
  1. Introduction

The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), also known as One Belt One Road (OBOR), is the flagship foreign policy and global economic strategy of the People’s Republic of China under President Xi Jinping. Launched in 2013, it aims to connect Asia with Africa and Europe via land and maritime networks to promote trade, investment, and development. However, beneath its economic surface lies a strategic vision shaped by China’s global ambitions, resource security needs, and desire to reshape the international order.

  1. Understanding BRI: Structure and Geography
  • The BRI consists of two main components:
    • Silk Road Economic Belt (land-based) connecting China to Central Asia, Europe, and the Middle East
    • 21st Century Maritime Silk Road connecting Chinese ports to Southeast Asia, Africa, and Europe
  • BRI includes over 150 countries and 30 international organizations as partners
  • More than $1 trillion committed in infrastructure projects across railways, roads, ports, pipelines, and fiber optics

“The BRI is not China’s solo, but a symphony played by all parties.” – President Xi Jinping

  1. Strategic Vision Behind BRI
  2. Geopolitical Objectives
  • Counter U.S. hegemony and reshape the global power structure
  • Revive China’s image as a global civilization hub and reclaim its historical Silk Road legacy
  • Develop an alternative to U.S.-led institutions like the IMF and World Bank through AIIB and BRI forums

“The BRI reflects China’s aim to export a Sino-centric world order.” – Robert Kaplan (Geopolitical Analyst)

  1. Economic Security and Trade Expansion
  • Secure new markets for China’s manufacturing overcapacity
  • Facilitate yuan internationalization and financial integration
  • Access global consumer bases without depending solely on Western trade routes
  1. Infrastructure and Maritime Dominance
  • Strategic control of chokepoints: Gwadar (Pakistan), Hambantota (Sri Lanka), Djibouti, Piraeus (Greece)
  • Build dual-use infrastructure (civilian and military potential) under soft-power guise
  • Develop an alternative to the Malacca Strait chokepoint, which remains vulnerable to U.S. Navy
  1. Energy Diversification and Supply Chain Security
  • China imports over 70% of its oil, most via the Strait of Hormuz and Malacca Strait
  • BRI routes (e.g., CPEC, China-Myanmar Pipeline) bypass these chokepoints
  • Secures Central Asian gas and minerals and promotes green energy corridors
  1. China’s Global Diplomacy through BRI
  2. Influence in Asia, Africa, and Europe
  • Africa: Infrastructure in Kenya (Mombasa–Nairobi railway), Ethiopia (Addis–Djibouti rail), Angola
  • Europe: BRI ports in Greece, Italy, Serbia allow Beijing to penetrate EU’s economic space
  • Asia: Deals with Cambodia, Myanmar, Iran, Pakistan boost strategic clout
  1. Strategic Counter to U.S. and India
  • BRI offers an alternative to U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy and Quad (Australia, India, Japan, U.S.)
  • Counters India’s sphere of influence via CPEC and Bangladesh-China-India-Myanmar Corridor (BCIM)

“BRI is China’s strategy to write the rules, build the infrastructure, and shape the global order.” – Graham Allison, Harvard

  1. Toward a Multipolar World Order
  • Supports the global south, reduces reliance on Western aid
  • Increases China’s voting power and leverage in UN, IMF, WTO, and climate negotiations
  • Creates dependency-based alliances through debt diplomacy
  1. Impact on Pakistan and CPEC’s Strategic Role
  • China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC): Flagship BRI project with $62 billion investment
  • Gwadar Port offers access to the Arabian Sea, bypassing the Malacca Strait
  • Projects include motorways, energy plants, fiber optics, SEZs, and railways
  • Strategic for both:
    • Pakistan gains infrastructure, energy, and employment
    • China gains sea access and regional leverage

“CPEC is not a bilateral project but a window of regional integration.” — PM Shehbaz Sharif (2022)

  1. Theoretical Framework
  2. Neomercantilism
  • BRI reflects China’s use of state power to dominate trade, secure resources, and control capital flows
  • Chinese SOEs lead BRI, backed by state policy banks
  1. Complex Interdependence
  • China creates economic interdependence with over 140 countries via BRI
  • Use of infrastructure, trade, and technology to build long-term political alignment
  1. Realism & Power Transition Theory
  • BRI is a strategic tool in China’s bid to replace the U.S. as the global leader
  • Balancing U.S. alliances through Eurasian connectivity

“This is not just economics; it’s strategic statecraft.” – Parag Khanna, Global Strategist

  1. Challenges and Global Response
  2. Debt Trap Diplomacy?
  • Sri Lanka leased Hambantota Port to China for 99 years (2017) after debt default
  • Pakistan faces debt-servicing challenges under CPEC
  1. Security Threats
  • BRI projects targeted by militants in Balochistan, Myanmar, and East Africa
  • Requires military protection, contradicting China’s non-interventionist narrative
  1. Western Pushback
  • EU’s Global Gateway, G7’s B3W (Build Back Better World) and India-Middle East-Europe Corridor (IMEC) launched to counter BRI
  • U.S. accuses BRI of being opaque, coercive, and neocolonial
  1. Sustainability and Environmental Concerns
  • Many BRI projects lack environmental impact assessments
  • Construction projects risk deforestation, displacement, and climate violations
  1. Conclusion

The BRI represents China’s grand strategy to shape a China-centric global order, balancing economic expansion, strategic ambition, and political influence. It has transformed China from a rule-taker to a rule-maker, offering the global south an alternative model to Western liberalism.

Yet, the initiative’s success depends on its ability to overcome security threats, economic volatility, and rising geo-economic competition.

For Pakistan, CPEC is a lifeline, but must be leveraged with institutional reform and regional stability to avoid overdependence.

As Xi Jinping puts it:

“The BRI is the road of peace, prosperity, openness, and innovation.”

  1. Visual Aid: Summary Table of China’s BRI Vision

Strategic Pillar

Goal

Instrument

Geopolitical

Counter U.S., shape multipolarity

Port access, soft power

Economic

New markets, overcapacity relief

Infrastructure, trade deals

Maritime Security

Avoid chokepoints

Gwadar, Djibouti, Piraeus

Energy

Diversify routes, supply security

CPEC, pipelines

Diplomacy

Influence in Global South

Loans, AIIB, forums

Q3. Give a critical appraisal of Pakistan’s Foreign Policy in perspective of Climate Change.

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Pakistan’s Climate Vulnerability: The Diplomatic Trigger
  3. Foreign Policy Response to Climate Change
    • Multilateral Climate Diplomacy (UNFCCC, COPs)
    • Bilateral Partnerships (China, EU, US)
    • Climate-Resilient Development Diplomacy
  4. Achievements of Climate-Centric Foreign Policy
  5. Challenges and Shortcomings
    • Institutional Fragmentation
    • Overdependence on Aid
    • Limited Climate-Trade Integration
  6. Theoretical Lens
    • Green Diplomacy
    • Complex Interdependence
    • Global Environmental Realism
  7. Conclusion
  8. Visual Aid: Summary Table of Pakistan’s Climate Diplomacy
  1. Introduction

Climate change has become a core pillar of Pakistan’s foreign policy, especially since the 2022 floods, which displaced over 33 million people and caused economic losses of $30 billion. This humanitarian disaster pushed Pakistan to globalize climate vulnerability as a foreign policy issue. While Pakistan has positioned itself as a moral leader in climate diplomacy, its foreign policy responses remain largely reactive, fragmented, and aid-driven rather than proactive and structural.

  1. Pakistan’s Climate Vulnerability: The Diplomatic Trigger
  • Ranked 8th most vulnerable country to climate change (Global Climate Risk Index, 2021)
  • Faces glacial melt, water scarcity, floods, heatwaves, and crop failures
  • Agriculture-dependent economy: 19% of GDP, 38% employment
  • Over 60% of Pakistan’s exports are climate-sensitive (textiles, rice, cotton)

“Pakistan has become ground zero for global warming.” – Sherry Rehman, former Minister for Climate Change

This vulnerability provides both leverage and legitimacy for Pakistan to push its climate agenda on international forums.

  1. Foreign Policy Response to Climate Change
  2. Multilateral Climate Diplomacy
  • Active participant in UNFCCC, COP summits, and G77+China
  • At COP27 (Egypt, 2022), Pakistan successfully led the push for a Loss and Damage Fund, with UN Secretary-General António Guterres calling the floods a “climate carnage”
  • Pakistan co-chaired UN Loss and Damage Transitional Committee (2023)
  • Member of Adaptation Fund Board and Green Climate Fund
  1. Bilateral Partnerships
  • China: Cooperation under CPEC Phase II for climate-resilient infrastructure and green energy transition (solar, hydel)
  • EU: Technical cooperation on climate-smart agriculture, disaster risk reduction, and GSP+ compliance
  • USA: Engaged via Global Methane Pledge and U.S.–Pakistan Climate and Environment Working Group (2023)
  1. Climate-Resilient Development Diplomacy
  • Resilient Recovery, Rehabilitation and Reconstruction Framework (4RF) presented in Geneva Conference (2023)
    • Pakistan raised $9 billion in pledges from World Bank, Islamic Development Bank, ADB, and other donors
  • Climate diplomacy now includes development banks, private investors, and UN agencies
  1. Achievements of Climate-Centric Foreign Policy
  • Global climate recognition post-2022 floods
  • Institutionalization of Loss and Damage fund at COP27, a major diplomatic victory
  • Increased financial flows from IFIs and donors for climate resilience
  • Enhanced Pakistan’s moral voice in Global South–North climate justice discourse

“This is not charity—it is climate justice.” – PM Shehbaz Sharif at COP27

  • Establishment of Pakistan Climate Change Authority under international guidance
  • Collaboration with China, Germany, and UK for renewable energy transition
  1. Challenges and Shortcomings
  2. Institutional Fragmentation
  • Climate diplomacy is not fully integrated into Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ strategic framework
  • Climate and development policies often function in silos
  • Limited inter-ministerial coordination: Climate, Commerce, Planning, Foreign Affairs
  1. Aid Dependency and Reactive Strategy
  • Climate foreign policy is often event-driven: floods, droughts, COP summits
  • Reliance on external financing without parallel domestic policy reforms
  • Weak follow-up on international commitments (e.g., forest preservation, emissions transparency)
  1. Limited Integration of Climate with Trade, Security, and Economy
  • GSP+ engagement with EU has not fully leveraged climate components
  • No major climate alignment with OIC or South Asian partners
  • Climate not embedded in economic diplomacy (MOUs with GCC, Central Asia, ASEAN)
  1. Lack of Climate Leadership and Expertise in Diplomacy
  • Few diplomats with climate specialization or technical background
  • Negotiating teams often underprepared at COPs or donor platforms
  • Minimal participation in climate knowledge production globally
  1. Theoretical Lens
  2. Green Diplomacy
  • Pakistan uses moral legitimacy, vulnerability narrative, and diplomatic advocacy to push for climate reparations
  • Champions Global South’s voice in environmental multilateralism
  1. Complex Interdependence
  • Pakistan’s climate survival is tied to transnational cooperation
  • Engages with a range of actors: UN, EU, China, IFIs, INGOs, diaspora networks
  1. Global Environmental Realism
  • Despite cooperative rhetoric, climate negotiations reflect power hierarchies
  • Developed countries offer loans, not reparations
  • China’s and U.S.’s strategic rivalry limits global coherence on climate justice

“We are living through an era of environmental realism masked as multilateralism.” – Dr. Adil Najam (Environmental Policy Expert)

  1. Conclusion

Pakistan has made important diplomatic strides in climate advocacy, especially post-2022 floods, securing a global platform and resources. Yet, its foreign policy remains overly reactive, aid-driven, and under-institutionalized. To become a leader in climate diplomacy, Pakistan must integrate climate goals into trade, foreign, and development policies, professionalize its diplomatic cadre, and develop climate-resilient infrastructure and governance at home.

The future of Pakistan’s climate diplomacy lies in moving from climate victimhood to climate leadership.

  1. Visual Aid: Summary Table – Pakistan’s Foreign Policy and Climate Engagements

Area

Action Taken

Challenges

UNFCCC/COPs

Led Loss & Damage push at COP27

Reactive participation, limited follow-up

Bilateral (China/EU/US)

CPEC green transition, tech support

Fragmented agreements

Donor Coordination

$9B raised in Geneva 2023

Aid dependence

Diplomatic Capacity

Created climate division in MOFA

Low expertise, no specialized diplomats

Trade/Development

GSP+ engagement, 4RF

Poor climate-trade linkage

Q4. What could be the reasons of emerging water conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan?

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Overview of Pakistan–Afghanistan Water Sharing
  3. Emerging Causes of Water Conflict
    • Lack of Bilateral Treaty
    • Afghan Dam Construction
    • Climate Change and Glacier Melt
    • Trust Deficit and Geopolitical Tensions
    • Domestic Pressures and Food Security
  4. Key Flashpoints and Projects
    • Kabul River Basin
    • Kamal Khan and Shahtoot Dams
    • Pakistan’s Downstream Concerns
  5. Strategic Implications of the Water Conflict
    • Bilateral Relations
    • CPEC and Regional Stability
    • Water-Linked Terrorism and Border Tensions
  6. Theoretical Framework
    • Hydrorealism
    • Resource Conflict Theory
    • Complex Interdependence
  7. Policy Options and Way Forward
  8. Conclusion
  9. Visual Aid: Summary Table of Drivers of Water Conflict
  1. Introduction

Water is emerging as a strategic flashpoint in Pakistan–Afghanistan relations. The absence of a water-sharing treaty, increasing dam construction by Afghanistan on shared rivers, and regional climate stressors have led to fears of a looming hydro-conflict. As both countries are agrarian and water-stressed, the Kabul River basin has become a critical theatre for diplomatic tension and national security.

  1. Overview of Pakistan–Afghanistan Water Sharing
  • Pakistan and Afghanistan share five major rivers: Kabul, Kurram, Gomal, Swat, and Punjkora
  • The most critical is the Kabul River, a tributary of the Indus River, supplying 25% of Peshawar Valley’s water
  • Despite this interdependence, there is no formal water treaty, unlike the Indus Waters Treaty (1960) with India

“The Kabul River is to Pakistan what the Euphrates is to Iraq.” – Dr. Hassan Abbas, Water Security Expert

  1. Emerging Causes of Water Conflict
  2. Lack of Bilateral Treaty or Legal Framework
  • No binding treaty defines water entitlements or usage rights
  • All negotiations (2003, 2006, 2010, 2013) have stalled due to political instability in Kabul
  • Absence of data-sharing, monitoring, or institutional cooperation exacerbates mistrust
  1. Dam Construction by Afghanistan
  • Afghanistan has initiated over 12 dam projects on the Kabul River Basin with foreign funding (India, Iran, USAID)
  • Most prominent are:
    • Shahtoot Dam (funded by India, 2021): Will reduce drinking water for Islamabad and Rawalpindi
    • Kamal Khan Dam: Controls Helmand River, threatens Pakistan’s Chagai and Sistan regions
  1. Climate Change and Glacier Melt
  • Both countries depend on Hindu Kush-Himalayan glacier-fed rivers
  • Rising temperatures causing:
    • Erratic monsoon
    • Glacial lake outburst floods (GLOFs)
    • Seasonal mismatch in water availability

“Climate change is acting as a threat multiplier in South Asia.” – UNEP (2022)

  1. Trust Deficit and Geopolitical Tensions
  • Afghanistan accuses Pakistan of interference and border violations, while Pakistan sees Kabul as harboring anti-Pakistan militants (TTP)
  • Water has become securitized, not treated as a resource but as a strategic tool
  1. Domestic Pressures and Food Security
  • Afghanistan wants hydroelectricity and irrigation autonomy
  • Over 70% of Afghan agriculture is rain-fed, prone to failure without dams
  • Pakistan’s agriculture belt in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and northern Punjab relies on uninterrupted river flow
  1. Key Flashpoints and Projects

Project

Country

River Basin

Implication

Kamal Khan Dam

Afghanistan

Helmand

Affects Pakistan–Iran shared waters

Shahtoot Dam

Afghanistan (funded by India)

Kabul River

Threatens Islamabad’s water supply

Gomal Zam Dam

Pakistan

Gomal River

May reduce Afghan downstream flow

  • India’s involvement in Afghan dam projects has added strategic depth, alarming Islamabad
  • Pakistan lacks counter-infrastructure, increasing vulnerability
  1. Strategic Implications of the Water Conflict
  2. Erosion of Bilateral Trust
  • Dam disputes may derail cooperation on border security, trade, and refugee management
  • Water could become a bargaining chip in broader bilateral negotiations
  1. Threat to Regional Connectivity and CPEC
  • CPEC’s western route through Balochistan and KP could suffer due to water scarcity and conflict-induced instability
  • Afghanistan’s exclusion from CPEC and BRI worsens regional fragmentation
  1. Rise in Border Conflicts and Radicalization
  • Khyber Pakhtunkhwa’s agriculture collapse can fuel youth militancy
  • Militants may exploit resource grievances
  • Pakistan’s border fencing and military posture could intensify

“Water wars in the 21st century won’t be hypothetical—they’ll be hyper-local and deeply regional.” – Brahma Chellaney, Geostrategist

  1. Theoretical Framework
  2. Hydrorealism
  • Water as a strategic asset, controlled and contested through infrastructure and geopolitics
  • Realist states act to maximize control over transboundary resources
  1. Resource Conflict Theory
  • Scarcity of essential resources (like water) in weak institutional environments leads to violence
  • Shared rivers without treaties are high-conflict zones
  1. Complex Interdependence
  • Despite tensions, both countries depend on mutual cooperation
  • Potential for co-management, water-for-energy deals, and joint climate resilience programs
  1. Policy Options and Way Forward
  2. Bilateral Water Treaty
  • Modeled on Indus Waters Treaty
  • Define usage quotas, dispute mechanisms, seasonal allocations
  1. Data Sharing and Monitoring
  • Establish joint hydrometric stations
  • Share satellite imagery and forecasts via UNDP or UNEP platforms
  1. Regional Mediation and Institutional Support
  • Use World Bank, SCO, or OIC for confidence-building
  • Integrate Afghanistan into regional hydrological networks
  1. Technical and Civil Society Engagement
  • Empower irrigation ministries, engineers, and civil society water panels
  • Encourage academic collaboration and trust-building
  1. Conclusion

The emerging water conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan is rooted in infrastructure asymmetry, absence of legal frameworks, and a lack of institutional trust. While strategic concerns remain high, the region cannot afford a hydropolitical escalation in the face of climate stress, food insecurity, and fragile peace.

Pakistan must pursue cooperative water diplomacy, push for a transboundary water treaty, and align its foreign policy with climate-resilient development, avoiding securitization of essential resources. Only then can the Kabul River become a source of cooperation, not conflict.

  1. Visual Aid: Summary Table – Drivers of Water Conflict

Driver

Pakistan’s Concern

Afghanistan’s Motivation

No Treaty

Unregulated flow

Retain sovereignty

Dams

Disruption of irrigation in KP

Hydropower and irrigation

Climate Change

Water variability, floods

Drought and crop loss

India’s Role

Strategic encirclement

Infrastructure investment

Trust Deficit

Militancy, border tension

Sovereignty, past grievances

Q.5. Discuss National Energy Policy of Pakistan in the Context of CPEC Signed in 2015. (20

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Pakistan’s Energy Crisis Before CPEC (Pre-2015)
  3. CPEC as an Energy-Driven Agreement
  4. Key Energy Projects under CPEC
  5. Strategic Shifts in National Energy Policy Post-CPEC
  6. Impacts on Energy Security, Foreign Relations & Industrial Policy
  7. Challenges and Criticisms
  8. Theoretical Framework
    • Neomercantilism
    • Energy Security Realism
    • Complex Interdependence
  9. Conclusion
  10. Visual Aid: CPEC Energy Projects Table + Pakistan’s Energy Mix (2023)
  1. Introduction

The China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), signed in April 2015, is a flagship project under China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). With an initial investment of $46 billion (later expanded to $62 billion), over 60% was allocated to energy projects, indicating CPEC’s critical role in reshaping Pakistan’s National Energy Policy. Designed to resolve Pakistan’s chronic energy shortfall, CPEC transformed how Pakistan approached energy mix, infrastructure, foreign financing, and regional integration.

  1. Pakistan’s Energy Crisis Before CPEC (Pre-2015)
  • Daily shortfall of 4,000–6,000 MW
  • Over 10 hours of load-shedding in urban centers; 18+ hours in rural areas
  • Poor transmission infrastructure; outdated grid system
  • Over-reliance on furnace oil and natural gas, with declining domestic reserves
  • Lack of foreign investment due to security risks and policy instability

“Pakistan’s energy insecurity was a national crisis with geopolitical ramifications.” – Dr. Moeed Yusuf (Strategic Analyst)

  1. CPEC as an Energy-Driven Agreement
  • Over $35 billion of the first-phase investment focused on coal, hydropower, solar, and wind projects
  • Intended to add over 17,000 MW of electricity
  • Goals aligned with Pakistan’s Vision 2025, which targeted:
    • Ending load-shedding by 2018
    • Diversifying energy mix
    • Regional energy trade (CAREC, CASA-1000)
  1. Key Energy Projects under CPEC

Project

Type

Capacity (MW)

Status

Sahiwal Power Plant

Coal (Imported)

1,320 MW

Completed (2017)

Port Qasim Power Plant

Coal

1,320 MW

Completed (2018)

HUBCO Thar Project

Thar Coal

660 MW

Completed

Karot Hydropower

Hydel

720 MW

Operational (2022)

Quaid-e-Azam Solar Park

Solar

1,000 MW

Phase-1 completed

Jhimpir Wind Corridor

Wind

100+ MW

Multiple projects operational

Matiari–Lahore HVDC

Transmission

660kV

Completed (2021)

  1. Strategic Shifts in National Energy Policy Post-CPEC
  2. Infrastructure Development Focus
  • Heavy investment in generation and transmission, especially in coal and hydel
  • Establishment of Independent Power Producers (IPPs) through BOOT model
  • Inclusion of renewable energy in national planning
  1. Shift to Indigenous Resources
  • Thar coal became a strategic reserve, reducing dependence on imported fuel
  • Wind and solar gained traction in Sindh and South Punjab
  1. China as a Long-Term Energy Partner
  • Use of Chinese financing via China Development Bank, Exim Bank, ICBC
  • Preferential terms but tied to Chinese contractors and technology
  1. Impacts on Energy Security, Foreign Relations & Industrial Policy
  2. Energy Security Gains
  • Load-shedding reduced from 10–12 hours/day to under 2 hours by 2019 in urban centers
  • National grid expanded to accommodate new MWs
  • Lower production cost/unit (in some coal and hydel plants)
  1. Economic Revival
  • Industrial revival in textile, cement, construction due to power availability
  • SEZs envisioned under CPEC Phase II depend on stable power supply
  • GDP growth peaked at 5.8% in 2017–18, partially due to energy surplus
  1. Geo-economic Leverage
  • Pakistan gained strategic relevance in Belt and Road diplomacy
  • Energy corridors like Gwadar–Kashgar route created interdependence
  • Joint coordination through CPEC Authority enhanced diplomatic linkages

“CPEC is more than roads—it’s about Pakistan’s energy sovereignty.” – Ahsan Iqbal, former Planning Minister

  1. Challenges and Criticisms
  2. Circular Debt Crisis
  • Energy supply increased but financial reforms lagged
  • Circular debt crossed PKR 2.6 trillion (2023)
  • Delays in payments to Chinese IPPs created diplomatic tensions
  1. Environmental Concerns
  • Over-reliance on coal-fired plants raised pollution concerns
  • Solar and wind received less than 5% of total CPEC investment
  • Projects lacked Environmental Impact Assessments (EIA) transparency
  1. Debt Sustainability
  • 25–30% of energy loans to be repaid with sovereign guarantees
  • High capacity payments ($5 billion/year) due to take-or-pay clauses
  • IMF warned of unsustainable energy subsidies
  1. Underutilization and Planning Gaps
  • Some power plants operate below capacity due to grid limitations
  • SEZs delayed, reducing projected demand that justified power generation
  1. Theoretical Framework
  2. Neomercantilism
  • Energy policy focused on self-reliance, strategic resource security, and bilateral state-led financing
  • Chinese SOEs dominate the energy infrastructure in return for economic and diplomatic leverage
  1. Energy Security Realism
  • Energy viewed as a strategic instrument of sovereignty and national power
  • CPEC designed to reduce vulnerability to U.S.-India influence, particularly in the maritime domain (Strait of Hormuz, oil routes)
  1. Complex Interdependence
  • Pakistan’s energy future is increasingly interwoven with Chinese diplomacy
  • CPEC fosters economic dependence, but also opportunities for modernization
  1. Conclusion

Pakistan’s post-2015 National Energy Policy, shaped under the umbrella of CPEC, marked a paradigm shift from crisis management to strategic energy planning. The policy has yielded notable gains in generation, access, and reliability, while deepening ties with China.

However, it is challenged by debt burdens, circular debt, planning mismatches, and environmental risks. A truly sustainable policy will now require Phase II reforms: transition to clean energy, regional energy trade, and domestic financial restructuring.

Pakistan stands at a crossroads: it can either become an energy-secure economy or slip into energy-induced dependency.

  1. Visual Aid: Energy Projects & Mix (Post-CPEC)
  2. CPEC Energy Projects – Type-wise Distribution

Source

Projects

Total MW

% of CPEC Energy

Coal

6

7,000+

~67%

Hydel

3

2,000+

~19%

Solar/Wind

4+

1,000+

~9%

Transmission

1 HVDC line

–

–

  1. Pakistan’s Energy Mix (2023)
  • Thermal (Coal, Oil, Gas): 63%
  • Hydropower: 26%
  • Renewables (Solar/Wind): 6%
  • Nuclear: 5%

Q6: What is a pandemic? How can the pandemic management strategy be made part of the governance systems of Pakistan?

Word Count: ~1500
✅ Aligned with FPSC standards
✅ Includes real-world references: COVID-19, NDMA, NCOC, WHO, SDG-3
✅ Integrates IR & governance theories: Human Security, Resilience Governance, and Complex Interdependence
✅ Structured for handwritten presentation
✅ Visual Aid: Governance-Health Integration Framework table

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Definition of Pandemic
  3. Pandemic Governance in Global and Local Contexts
  4. Pakistan’s Experience with COVID-19
  5. Why Pandemic Strategy Must Be Integrated into Governance
  6. Key Components for Integration
  7. Theoretical Lens
  8. Challenges in Implementation
  9. Conclusion
  10. Visual Aid – Table: Integrating Pandemic Strategy into Governance
  1. Introduction

Pandemics are not just health crises; they are national security, economic, and governance crises. The COVID-19 pandemic highlighted the urgency for Pakistan to shift from ad hoc crisis response to a sustained pandemic governance framework. As global health becomes interlinked with political, technological, and economic systems, integrating pandemic management into Pakistan’s governance structure is essential to ensure national resilience.

  1. Definition of Pandemic

According to the World Health Organization (WHO):

“A pandemic is the worldwide spread of a new disease, typically caused by a virus or infectious agent that spreads easily between people.”

Examples include:

  • Spanish Flu (1918–20): 50 million deaths globally
  • HIV/AIDS (1980s–present)
  • H1N1 (2009)
  • COVID-19 (2019–2023)

Pandemics differ from epidemics due to their global scale and impact on multiple governance sectors: health, economy, education, transport, and diplomacy.

  1. Pandemic Governance in Global and Local Contexts
  2. Global Level
  • Pandemic management is governed through International Health Regulations (IHR, 2005)
  • Agencies like WHO, GAVI, CEPI, and World Bank Pandemic Bonds play a role
  • Rise of health diplomacy and biosecurity cooperation
  1. Pakistan’s Governance Landscape
  • Traditional governance is siloed and reactive, not integrated for health emergencies
  • Weak coordination between federal, provincial, and district governments
  • Limited public health infrastructure, particularly in rural areas
  • Fragmented responsibilities among Ministry of Health, NDMA, and provincial health departments
  1. Pakistan’s Experience with COVID-19
  • Established National Command and Operation Centre (NCOC): a civil-military hybrid model
  • Utilized track-and-trace systems, lockdowns, and smart quarantines
  • Vaccination drive: Over 130 million people vaccinated
  • Launched Ehsaas Program for economic relief to 15 million+ households

“NCOC emerged as a model of crisis coordination, but not a permanent solution.” – Dr. Sania Nishtar

  1. Why Pandemic Strategy Must Be Part of Governance
  2. Health as National Security
  • Pandemics disrupt trade, tourism, schools, elections, and military logistics
  • Without preparedness, economic losses can reach 10% of GDP, as during COVID-19
  1. Global Interconnectedness
  • With increasing cross-border movement, Pakistan is vulnerable to zoonotic outbreaks
  • Climate change is increasing the spread of vector-borne diseases
  1. Pakistan’s Structural Vulnerabilities
  • Low health spending: ~1.2% of GDP
  • High urban slum density, poor waste management, weak digital governance
  1. Key Components to Integrate Pandemic Management into Governance

Pillar

Proposed Integration Strategy

Legislation

Enact a Pandemic Preparedness and Response Act

Institutions

Convert NCOC into National Public Health Emergency Coordination Centre (NPHECC)

Health System Strengthening

Universal Health Coverage (UHC), digital health records

Federal-Provincial Synergy

Unified SOPs under 18th Amendment compliance

Education Sector

Digital curriculum, e-learning resilience, mental health support

Finance and Budgeting

Pandemic Contingency Fund via Public Sector Development Program (PSDP)

Local Government

Empower union councils and Basic Health Units (BHUs) in rural zones

Research and Surveillance

Build virology labs, partner with NIH and universities

Public Communication

Counter disinformation via NADRA-linked SMS systems

  1. Theoretical Lens
  2. Human Security Approach
  • Shifts focus from military threats to health, economic, and environmental well-being
  1. Resilience Governance
  • Prioritizes anticipation, adaptation, and transformation in face of crises
  1. Complex Interdependence Theory
  • Shows how health, economy, and governance are deeply interconnected
  • Encourages cooperation with UN, WHO, China, GAVI, USAID
  1. Challenges in Implementation
  • Political volatility disrupts continuity in policies
  • Weak data infrastructure and digital systems
  • Public mistrust in state health initiatives (e.g., polio campaigns)
  • Limited fiscal space: Pakistan spends <1.5% GDP on healthcare vs. WHO-recommended 5%
  • Fragmented donor coordination and lack of domestic innovation
  1. Conclusion

Pandemic management can no longer be left to ad hoc emergency setups in Pakistan. It must be institutionalized within the national governance framework. By strengthening legal, institutional, digital, and fiscal architecture, Pakistan can prepare for the next pandemic with resilience, not panic.

This transformation requires not only public health reforms, but also a rethinking of governance philosophy — one that places human security at the core of national security.

“Pandemics are no longer once-in-a-century events. The next one could be worse. We must be ready.” – Dr. Tedros Adhanom (WHO DG)

  1. Visual Aid – Table: Governance Integration for Pandemic Preparedness

Governance Domain

Pandemic-Ready Reform

Legislation

Pandemic Preparedness & Response Act

Institutions

NCOC into NPHECC (Permanent)

Health Sector

Universal Health Access + Resilience

Digital Infrastructure

National pandemic surveillance system

Fiscal Management

Pandemic Contingency Fund

Local Governance

BHU empowerment and SOP training

Education

Hybrid learning models

Diplomacy

Biosecurity & vaccine diplomacy

Q7: Why and When Was BRICS Established? Which Countries Are Part of BRICS?

✅ Word Count: ~1400
✅ FPSC exam style with headings, real-world data, current expansion updates
✅ Covers BRICS origin, objectives, timeline, and member nations
✅ Includes theoretical lens (Neo-Marxism, South-South Cooperation, Multipolarity)
✅ Visual Aid: Timeline + Table of Members and Economic Stats

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. When and Why Was BRICS Established?
  3. Evolution: From BRIC to BRICS and Beyond
  4. Core Objectives of BRICS
  5. BRICS Member Countries and Their Profiles
  6. Expansion in 2023–24: The “BRICS+” Format
  7. Strategic Significance of BRICS in Global Politics
  8. Theoretical Lens
  9. Conclusion
  10. Visual Aids
  • Timeline of BRICS Evolution
  • Table of BRICS Members and Key Indicators
  1. Introduction

The BRICS grouping—consisting of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa—has emerged as a symbol of multipolarity and an alternative to Western-dominated global governance. Born out of economic ambition and strategic frustration with the West’s control over institutions like the IMF and World Bank, BRICS reflects the rise of the Global South in the international order.

  1. When and Why Was BRICS Established?

✅ When:

  • Coined by Jim O’Neill, an economist at Goldman Sachs, in 2001 as “BRIC” (Brazil, Russia, India, China)
  • First formal diplomatic meeting: 2006 (UNGA sidelines)
  • Official BRIC summits began in 2009 (Yekaterinburg, Russia)
  • South Africa joined in 2010, forming BRICS

✅ Why:

  1. Challenge Western Financial Domination
    • Bretton Woods institutions marginalize developing nations
    • No real voice for emerging economies in G7, IMF, WB
  2. South-South Economic Cooperation
    • Promote trade, investment, and technological transfer among the Global South
  3. Reform Global Governance
    • Push for UN Security Council reform
    • Demand greater influence in WTO, IMF, and World Bank
  4. Balance U.S. Unilateralism
    • Iraq War (2003), Global Financial Crisis (2008), and Western sanctions on Russia & others prompted realignment

“BRICS represents a desire for a new world order—not necessarily anti-West, but post-West.” – Parag Khanna

  1. Evolution: From BRIC to BRICS and Beyond

Year

Event

2001

BRIC term coined by Jim O’Neill

2006

First informal BRIC meeting (UNGA)

2009

First BRIC summit (Russia)

2010

South Africa joins – BRICS is born

2015

Launch of New Development Bank (NDB)

2023

Expansion to 6 more countries (BRICS+)

  1. Core Objectives of BRICS
  • Promote economic multipolarity
  • Establish independent financial institutions like:
    • New Development Bank (NDB)
    • Contingent Reserve Arrangement (CRA)
  • Enhance technological cooperation
  • Create a shared political voice on global issues
  • Encourage de-dollarization in trade
  1. BRICS Member Countries and Their Profiles

Country

Joined

Strength

Brazil

2009

Agricultural power, Amazon basin, South American anchor

Russia

2009

Nuclear power, energy exporter, anti-Western alignment

India

2009

Fast-growing economy, IT hub, democratic ballast

China

2009

World’s 2nd largest economy, BRI leader

South Africa

2010

Gateway to Africa, resource-rich, G20 member

Together, they represent:

  • ~40% of global population
  • ~25% of global GDP
  • Over 30% of global industrial output

“BRICS nations are the engines of growth for a future world economy.” – Narendra Modi, Indian PM

  1. Expansion in 2023–24: The Rise of BRICS+

At the 15th BRICS Summit in Johannesburg (August 2023), six new countries were invited to join:

New Members

Region

Argentina (withdrawn later)

Latin America

Egypt

Africa

Ethiopia

Africa

Iran

Middle East

Saudi Arabia

Middle East

UAE

Gulf States

Key Highlights:

  • Inclusion of energy giants (Iran, KSA, UAE) signals shift to petro-diplomacy
  • Iran’s inclusion challenges Western-led sanctions regimes
  • With Egypt and Ethiopia, BRICS penetrates African political core
  1. Strategic Significance of BRICS in Global Politics
  2. De-Dollarization
  • Proposal to trade in local currencies
  • China and Russia advocating BRICS common currency
  1. Alternative Global Institutions
  • NDB has $32.8 billion in approved projects (as of 2023)
  • BRICS Credit Rating Agency proposal underway
  1. Soft Power and Tech Cooperation
  • Joint space initiatives, cybersecurity dialogues, vaccine diplomacy (e.g., Sputnik-V)
  1. UN Reform Advocacy
  • Calls for permanent UNSC membership for India, Brazil, South Africa
  1. Theoretical Lens
  2. Neo-Marxism / World Systems Theory
  • BRICS as semi-peripheral alliance challenging core (West) domination
  • Rebalancing the exploitative capitalist structure
  1. Multipolarity
  • End of unipolar U.S. hegemony, rise of regional blocs (BRICS, SCO, ASEAN)
  1. South-South Cooperation
  • Based on mutual respect, non-interference, and economic solidarity
  • Contrast to IMF-style conditionality
  1. Conclusion

BRICS is more than an acronym—it is an ideological and strategic response to the Western-led order. Established in the wake of financial and geopolitical discontent, it now offers an alternative vision of global development, finance, and diplomacy.

As BRICS expands, its effectiveness will depend on internal coherence, overcoming contradictions (e.g., India-China rivalry), and actualizing its declarations into concrete reforms. Still, its presence as a powerful Global South bloc cannot be ignored in shaping the future of international relations.

“BRICS today reflects a new geometry of power—neither East nor West, but Global South-led.” – Dr. Kishore Mahbubani

  1. Visual Aids
  2. Timeline: BRICS Evolution

yaml

CopyEdit

2001 → Term coined (BRIC)

2006 → First meeting (UNGA)

2009 → 1st Summit in Russia

2010 → South Africa joins

2015 → NDB launched

2023 → BRICS+ expansion

  1. Table: BRICS Members and GDP Share

Country

GDP (Nominal, USD Trillion)

Population (Billion)

China

17.7

1.41

India

3.7

1.42

Russia

1.8

0.14

Brazil

2.1

0.22

S. Africa

0.4

0.06

BRICS Total

~25 Trillion

~3.25 Billion

Q8. How can Pakistan develop credible capabilities to deter ‘Hybrid’ warfare? (20 Marks)

✅ Word Count: ~1500
✅ FPSC-style formal tone
✅ Structured for handwritten booklet format
✅ Includes real-world references (Kulbhushan case, Indian disinfo campaigns, 5th Gen Warfare)
✅ Covers military, diplomatic, technological, legal, and civil components of deterrence
✅ IR Theories: Realism, Comprehensive Security, Constructivism
✅ Includes a table: Hybrid Threats vs. Countermeasures

Outline

  1. Introduction
  2. Understanding Hybrid Warfare
  3. Why Pakistan Is Vulnerable
  4. Existing Hybrid Threats to Pakistan
  5. Strategic Framework for Deterring Hybrid Warfare
  6. Components of Pakistan’s Deterrent Capability
  7. Theoretical Framework
  8. Challenges to Implementation
  9. Conclusion
  10. Visual Aid: Table – Hybrid Threats & Pakistan’s Counter Capabilities
  1. Introduction

The nature of warfare has evolved beyond traditional battlefields. The rise of Hybrid Warfare—a mix of conventional, irregular, cyber, and informational tactics—demands states to build multidimensional deterrence strategies. For Pakistan, sandwiched between conventional tensions with India, internal instability, and digital disinformation campaigns, building credible capabilities to deter hybrid threats is a matter of national survival and sovereignty.

  1. Understanding Hybrid Warfare

Hybrid Warfare combines:

  • Kinetic operations (e.g., cross-border shelling, proxy attacks)
  • Cyberattacks and digital disruption
  • Psychological operations (PsyOps)
  • Propaganda and fake news
  • Economic coercion
  • Diplomatic isolation campaigns

“Hybrid war is war in the shadows. You may not even know you’re under attack.” – Gen. Valery Gerasimov (Russia)

  1. Why Pakistan Is Vulnerable
  • Prolonged border tension with India
  • Ethno-sectarian fault lines easily exploitable (e.g., Balochistan, Karachi, GB)
  • Cyber infrastructure is underdeveloped
  • High internet penetration but low media literacy
  • Weak narrative management internationally (esp. in Kashmir case)
  1. Existing Hybrid Threats to Pakistan
  2. Disinformation Campaigns
  • EU DisinfoLab (2020): exposed 750+ fake Indian media outlets targeting Pakistan
  1. Cyber Espionage
  • Attacks on NADRA, PTA, and financial institutions
  • Indian group “APT-C-36” linked to spyware targeting Pakistani officials (source: Group-IB, 2023)
  1. Proxy Insurgency
  • Kulbhushan Jadhav’s arrest exposed India’s covert ops in Balochistan
  1. Economic Hybrid Tactics
  • FATF grey-listing used to apply economic pressure
  • Indian lobbying at IMF and World Bank forums
  1. Diplomatic Warfare
  • Blockage of Pakistan’s narratives in global forums
  • Campaigns branding Pakistan as a “terror sponsor”
  1. Strategic Framework for Deterring Hybrid Warfare

Pakistan must develop integrated deterrence by building:

  • Resilient institutions
  • National narrative clarity
  • Tech and cyber capabilities
  • Civil-military synchronization
  • Proactive diplomacy
  1. Components of Pakistan’s Deterrent Capability
  2. Cyber Security & Digital Infrastructure
  • Launch Pakistan Cyber Security Authority (PCSA) (proposed under 2023 bill)
  • Invest in offensive and defensive cyber capabilities
  • Public-private cyber task force involving NADRA, PTA, NTC
  1. Strategic Communication & Narrative Warfare
  • Institutionalize narrative diplomacy via Ministry of Information & MoFA
  • Build global alliances to counter disinformation (e.g., align with Turkey, Malaysia)
  • Deploy AI-based bot-detection and sentiment analysis tools

“We must win the war of perception as much as the war of reality.” – DG ISPR (2022)

  1. Intelligence Reforms
  • Strengthen inter-agency coordination (ISI, IB, MI, FIA Cyber Cell)
  • Establish Hybrid Threats Fusion Centre (HTFC) akin to NATO’s model
  1. Civil Resilience & Public Awareness
  • Embed media literacy in schools and madrassas
  • Community-based reporting systems for misinformation
  • Train journalists and civil society in info-war ethics
  1. Legal and Policy Framework
  • Enact robust Anti-Hybrid Threats Act modeled on Estonia/Israel
  • Judicial empowerment to prosecute cyber-terrorism and economic sabotage
  1. Diplomatic Counter-Coercion
  • Build South-South alliances to oppose Indian lobbying at global forums
  • Promote lawfare through ICJ, UNHRC on disinformation and hybrid manipulation
  • Highlight EU DisinfoLab findings in diplomatic discourse
  1. Theoretical Framework
  2. Realism
  • Security as a zero-sum game; Pakistan must pursue power enhancement
  • Deterrence is achieved through capability buildup and cost-imposition strategy
  1. Comprehensive Security
  • Goes beyond military to include cyber, economic, and psychological defense
  1. Constructivism
  • National image and identity construction are vital in deterring external narrative control
  1. Challenges to Implementation
  • Political instability disrupts long-term hybrid defense planning
  • Civil-military distrust undermines institutional cohesion
  • Limited cyber education and R&D ecosystem
  • Legal grey zones around privacy vs. surveillance
  • Underfunded strategic communication units
  1. Conclusion

Pakistan cannot afford to fight 21st-century wars with 20th-century tools. To deter hybrid warfare, it must transition from reactive posture to preemptive, proactive, and permanent institutional frameworks. Deterrence in hybrid contexts is not about total dominance, but about making aggression unrewarding, risky, and globally exposed.

“Hybrid warfare has no frontlines. Deterrence must, therefore, have no weak links.” – Lt. Gen. (r) Khalid Kidwai

  1. Visual Aid: Hybrid Threats vs. Countermeasures

Hybrid Threat

Pakistan’s Counter Capability

Disinformation campaigns

Narrative diplomacy, AI-based monitoring, journalist training

Cyber-attacks

PCSA, offensive-defensive tools, public-private cyber cells

Proxy insurgency

Intelligence fusion, border fencing, regional partnerships

Economic coercion

Diversified trade blocs (Belt & Road, SCO, OIC), legal recourse

Diplomatic narrative war

Multilateral diplomacy, lawfare, UN engagement

. . IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 IR II-2021 

You cannot copy content of this pages.