Posts tagged special zone

Government rebuffs China – Hindustan Times

By Martin Saxer | July 30, 2011

Two weeks ago we learned about plans by the Chinese foundation APECF to turn Lumbini, Buddha’s birthplace, into a “special development zone”. The USD 3 billion scheme, inspired by Mecca, seemed to have the backing of the UN Industrial and Development Organization as well as Nepal’s Maoist leader Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda,  who is allegedly a co-chairman of the Chinese foundation (previous entries here and here). However, the announcement turns out to be much more of a stunt than it originally seemed like.

Utpal Parashar (Hindustan Times) quotes Nepal’s culture secretary Mod Raj Dotel:

“Since the deal was struck between two organizations, which have no relation with Lumbini, keeping its actual stakeholder (Nepal) in dark, we have no obligation to recognize it.”

moreover, Parashar reports:

A meeting of foreign ministry officials on Wednesday to discuss the deal after reports about it started appearing in local media decided that Nepal government has nothing to do it.
The Unesco office in Nepal also denied any knowledge about the deal and is “unhappy” with it. The APECF website available only in Chinese doesn’t provide much detail about the project.
Another issue that has raised concerns in Nepal is the presence of Maoist chief Pushpa Kamal Dahal Prachanda as co-chairman of APECF and former crown prince Paras Shah as member.
Two weeks ago UN secretary general Ban Ki-moon sent an emissary to Nepal who urged Prime Minister Jhalanath Khanal to stop all developmental work at Lumbini for a year.

Now, lets see if either Pushpa Kamal Dahal or the Chinese government come forward with a statement.

Posted in Border Review | Also tagged , , | Leave a comment

Development plans for Xinjiang

By Martin Saxer | July 29, 2011

The Economist on development plans in Xinjiang:

In Kashgar they speak of the city’s “leapfrog development”. Their model is Shenzhen, the grandfather of Chinese boom towns, on the border with Hong Kong. Kashgar, they say, is to become a trading hub and manufacturing centre that will tap markets in South and Central Asia and even Europe with a web of new roads and railways. Its new “special economic zone” (a concept pioneered by Shenzhen) will produce everything from petrochemicals and cars to halal food, they say. “In the east is Shenzhen, in the west is Kashgar,” is the new official slogan. [...]

Xinjiang Economic Daily, closely controlled by the government, reports that Kashgar’s new zone could create as many as 600,000 jobs, a staggering figure given that only 460,000 people live in the city’s core urban area. The government speaks of training thousands of Uighur peasants to help them transfer to factory work.

However, there are those who doubt that Uyghur peasants will be good factory workers:

Tang Lijiu of Urumqi’s East-West Economic Research Institute says that creating the right kind of jobs for Uighurs is the key. “Because of their lifestyle, asking them to go into big industrial production, onto the production line: they’re probably not suited to that,” says Mr Tang, who is Han Chinese. Better, he suggests, to develop something like, well, basketball. That, Mr Tang says, might work in the same way that America’s National Basketball Association creates “more job opportunities for blacks”.

Posted in Border Review | Also tagged , | Leave a comment

Dixit on the Lumbini project

By Martin Saxer | July 28, 2011

In the second part of his piece Between sycophancy & adventurism for Republica, Dixit raises key qeustions about the Chinese Lumbini project that was announced ten days ago:

Why is the industrial development arm of the UN involved rather than UNESCO, the designated agency to oversee Lumbini as a World Heritage Site? Why are all the relevant ministries of the Government of Nepal as well as the Lumbini Development Trust (LDT) clueless about the memorandum? Is there a whiff of extra-territoriality when two alien entities sign a document in Beijing without official Nepali participation? All in all, why was the project so secretive, not consulting the key stakeholders in Kathmandu and Kapilvastu?

How deeply are the Chinese Government and the Communist Party of China involved with the APECEF proposal, or is this a renegade operation? The project document lists an entity of the Chinese Ministry of Commerce as the ‘government co-ordinating agency’. With Lumbini’s heritage sites less than 4 km from the Indian border at its closest, does the project hold out the danger of raising a reaction from India and triggering geopolitical competition that would harm Nepali interests? Is all the secretiveness precisely to take advantage of a transitional moment in Nepal when all political structures are in disarray, for the sake of a commercial killing and geopolitical encroachment?

None of these questions may be warranted, but for that the Nepali public needs clarifications from Chairman Dahal, the Chinese Government, the Government of Nepal and the LDT. The UNIDO Headquarters in Vienna and the UN Secretariat in New York may also educate us.

Lets see whether anybody is willing to come forward with an explanation. I am not sure how much substance there really is behind this plan.

Posted in Border Review | Also tagged , | Leave a comment

Joint eco-tourism zone at the Sino-Russian border?

By Martin Saxer | July 21, 2011

Yesterday, Heixiazi Island (or Bolshoy Ussuriysky Island, as it is known in Russia) officially opened for tourism. There was a ceremony, and a group of Chinese tourists visited the Island. China Daily (here and here), CRI English, CCTV and many others reported.

The island at the confluence of the Amur the Ussuri rivers was a bone of contention in the process of settling the border dispute between the Russian Federation and the PRC. In 2004, Russia agreed to relinquish control over roughly half of the 335 km² island to China. In 2008, the border demarcation was complete. During Wen Jiabao’s visit in Moscow in November 2010 a joint statement was issued that Heixiaxi/Bolshoy Ussuriyskyi island would be cooperatively developed into an eco-tourism zone.

Merely eight months later, the zone is up and running. Yet, it seems to be an exclusively Chinese affair, at least for the time being. Russian media have more or less ignored the event, or have briefly mentioned it in a different light. Komsomolskaya Pravda, for example, cites Xinhua on the matter and mentions that a Chinese travel agency has gained the exclusive right to organise tours.

Posted in Border Review | Also tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Buddha’s Birthplace as Special Zone: Chinese foundation plans $3 billion project Lumbini, Nepal

By Martin Saxer | July 17, 2011

Al Jazeera and The Hindu broke the story yesterday: A Chinese foundation by the name of Asia Pacific Exchange and Cooperation Foundation (APECF) with close ties to Beijing’s Party elite unveiled plans for a USD 3 billion “special development zone” in Lumbini (Nepal),  the place where Buddha Shakyamuni was born. Inspired by Mecca in Saudi Arabia, the idea is to develop Lumbini into a sprawling centre for tourism, pilgrimage, and commerce with new roads, power and water supplies. APECF’s chairman Xiao Wunan is said to be not only a Party member and a high ranking government official in China’s National Development and Reform Commission, but a Buddhist himself. He is confident to raise the money and says that support across the entire political spectrum in Nepal is already secured.

The Hindu’s Ananth Krishnan and Prashant Jha mention an interesting detail in this respect:

The APECF is known in Nepal for its association with the Unified Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist) chairman Pushpa Kamal Dahal ‘Prachanda.’ Last October, Mr. Prachanda attended a conference organised by the foundation in Kuala Lumpur. On his return, he told journalists in Kathmandu that the foundation appointed him as its ‘co-chairman.’

So there we go: a “special zone” to fuse religion and commerce, supported by the Chinese Communist Party and the leader of the Maoists in Nepal.

That pilgrimage centres and business ventures go well together is neither a Chinese nor a Nepali idea – just consider Lourdes or Rome. Also, that the Chinese Party State has a linking for Buddhism is well documented –  Shi Yongxin, abbot of the renown Shaolin monastery, said prominently at the 10th National People’s Congress in Beijing in 2007: Buddhism can contribute to building the Harmonious Society. And finally, that Chinese development would reach Nepal in the form of a “special zone” was only a question of time – Chinese managed “special zone” are prolific in the PRC’s neighbouring countries.

Thus, it makes absolute sense that Lumbini is the target (although I would never have guessed it). And still, the politics involved cannot be overlooked. This comes just a few days after Nepali police raided a Tibetan celebration of his His Holiness the Dalai Lama’s birthday as some sort of welcome gift to the new Chinese Ambassador to Nepal.

Posted in Border Review | Also tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Green and modern: plans for Ruili

By Martin Saxer | July 16, 2011

Ah Ngae Htwe for Eleven on the development plans for Ruili, the Sino-Burmese border town in Yunnan.

Under the project, Ruili County will be turned into a Sino-Myanmar Border Trade Center that will serve as the modern gateway of land route to south-western China and a model urban area complete with green and modern resorts.”

Scheduled for completion in 2016.

Posted in Border Review | Also tagged , , , , | Leave a comment