Public opinion on US interest in Pakistan's mineral wealth is predominantly skeptical and critical. Many express concerns about potential exploitation by global powers, drawing parallels to past experiences. There is significant distrust towards the Pakistani government's ability to manage resources to the country's benefit, with fears of corruption and mismanagement. Some see an opportunity for better geopolitical alliances, but overall pessimism prevails.

US Government

Pakistani Government

**Reminder:** Please be courteous to each other and report any violations of the subreddit rules.

 * Debate the point, not the person.
 * Be respectful and avoid personal attacks.
 * No hate speech.
 * Report rule-breaking content to the moderators.

 Please join our official Discord server: https://discord.gg/rFV6GTyPxm


*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/pakistan) if you have any questions or concerns.*

AutoModerator

The government will hand them over on a platter if the US asked.

googo1

mustafapakistan

So, if USA gets the contract, will the BLA target them also? Or are they only against Chinese exploitation of their resources?

ThisIsntMyAccount0

Misleading headlines, USA showed interest in Pakistans minerals just like China, UK, Saudia, Azerbaijaan and few others. It will be competitive process highest bidder will win the tender. However in my opinion Pakistan must give 50 share to USA and 50 to China, so that both block have incentive in peacefull Balochistan. If Pakistan played its card right it will be win-win situation for each party (Pak, USA, China).

kinkypk

Just another day of me cursing civilian rulers and politicians, clenching teeth about the total lack of R&amp;D, fuming over the industrialists over their unambitiousness, and lack of localisation. And our national hobby, corruption.

Loose_Ratio9565

Maybe now Pakistani elites will understand how economic colonialism works, hey they might even consider a protected economy like China and India. Nah too much to understand

GPSsignallost

Even if Pakistan earns trillions against these minerals, the lion's share of earnings will go to Lumber 1 and their families, which they will invest back in USA and Europe. So all in all, USA will be getting the minerals for peanuts in any way.

Fit-Calendar1725

This is exactly why the US is a terrible partner. Should have stuck with China.

HeWhoDidIt

If they want them then Pak should sell them for 50-60 billion minimum.
But our guys will sign any thing as long as they can pocket a few million dollars and maybe get a green card

[deleted]

![gif](giphy|ZFwUeNGrnwAl3KroMM|downsized)

Resident-Ant8281

As per research Ukraine currently holds around 12 trillion dollars worth of Raw earth minerals out of which at least 6 trillions dollar worth are in Russian occupied lands. While Pakistan has roughly speaking 50 trillion dollars worth of raw earth minerals. In my opinion the most important thing that our govt needs to do is get better at resource management. Tbf those minerals have been there forever and instead of leasing machinery ourselves we are leasing the mines to Chinese companies where we make pennies while they make billions. If we were to give lease the mines to US on condition where they would be extracted, made into final products in Pakistan and exported in US market as final form product. I think it’s a win win

DifferentTopic4446

Showbaaz khud agreement kr aya hai bhai terrorist soch rahay ab traning showbaaz se li jaye uss se bra daako bnaygay

Longjumping_Buyer396

What rare minerals? Pakistan has no significant natural resources, if we had it the local cia branch - aka Pak foj would have already sold it to usa

First_Cod5180

As with all things in this world it's complicated. 

One of the first reasons is water.
(http://www.dw.com/en/water-security-the-new-front-in-kashmir-struggle-between-india-pakistan/a-5935413) 

The glacial waters that flow through Kashmir provide water and electricity to a billion people in India. Pakistan also relies heavily on glacial waters flowing from the region to prop up its agricultural sector.

Three out of six rivers, which run through Pakistan, originates from Kashmir namely Rivers Indus, Jhelum and Chenab where as remaining three namely Rivers Ravi, Sutlej and Bias originate from India. Pakistan‟s agricultural life to a great extent depends on Kashmir. Economically, the waters of the Indus, Jhelum and Chenab, which originate through Kashmir, are vital to the agricultural life of Pakistan.
With the River Indus and its tributaries, as well as several other rivers, the PoK region has vast hydro resources, most of which lie untapped.

***Strategic Location***

PoK is nestled between the Himalayas and the Karakoram Range, the Hindukush, and the Pamirs; it also shares borders with the Wakhan Corridor of Afghanistan, the rest of J&amp;K, China’s Xinjiang, Tajikistan, and Pakistan’s Khyber Pakhtunkhwa and Punjab. PoK is strategically unique and, until recently, considered largely inaccessible to outside world. Simultaneously, its geographical landlocked position makes it a gateway to important countries in the region. The connectivity quotient of PoK is slowly gaining prominence in regional strategic discourse. It is believed that some kind of a presence, economic or otherwise, in the region could be useful strategically.
Since Pakistan is central to China-led larger designs of promoting a regional connectivity network, Gilgit-Baltistan as the only land link between the two countries is of foremost significance.

***Economic Wealth***

As a region, PoK is largely pristine, and gifted with immense wealth of natural resources. The Indus and its tributaries which flow through the region render opportunities for large scale power generation projects and dams. In addition, Gilgit-Baltistan especially is blessed with large reserves of mineral deposits and Uranium reserves. This combination serves as a lucrative opening for countries like China. The Chinese have taken an active role in the mining sector of PoK possibly to fulfil their own domestic requirements.

Besides its strategic and political importance, Pakistan and India both claim Kashmir because of cultural and social reasons. Kashmir is a bone of confrontation between the two because for India it is the example of her secular identity, the only window open towards central Asia and has physical access with Afghanistan; Xinjiang (East Turkestan), hence is India’s Integral Part as per Instrument of Accession signed by Hari Singh of Jammu and Kashmir in Oct. 1947. From Pakistan perspective, According to Two Nation Theory of Mohammad Ali Jinnah, Kashmir should be a part of Pakistan due to its Muslim majority. Pakistan claims Kashmir as her lifeline; Jugular Vein.

***Military Significance***

One such area is the Siachen Glacier in the Karakoram Pass. It is the only barrier preventing Pakistani and Chinese forces from linking up in Kashmir. If Pakistan and China were allowed to link up their militaries at Siachen, India’s national security over the entire northern frontier would be greatly undermined. Such a link up would create a very powerful military force, consisting of India’s two biggest rivals who have fought with India. This force would be capable of joint and potentially decisive military action against India. That is why India spends huge funds to the forces deployed in Siachen since 1984. As for military importance is concerned, there are thirteen routes to Siachen Glacier for Pakistan, but there is only one route for India.
Strategically, Kashmir is located between three triangular nuclear weapons states of India, Pakistan and China. From Pakistan’s perspective, Kashmir is strategically located and can be used to cripple Pakistan economically and militarily.

There is also another extra reason. India has a hidden deep-seated fear of getting balkanised. (Major insurgencies in India have happened before, so there is some truth to it.) If something happens to Kashmir, the government fears of a chain reaction spreading throughout the country.

Blank_eye00

I won't speak for the other two. For China, if you look at the map of Aksai Chin/ China's claim, you would see that there is exactly one road (denoted with yellow line) that [connects Xinjiang and Tibet](https://www.google.com/maps/place/Aksai+Chin/@34.9326281,80.7855664,6z/data=!4m5!3m4!1s0x38ff9ce287122433:0xdfade1cd4541de6a!8m2!3d35.0313898!4d79.1321164). I believe China deemed the control of this passageway by a foreign power unacceptable.

[Other map for comparison](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/51/Kashmir_Region_November_2019.jpg)

BeybladeMoses

Encyclopedia Geopolitica has a good write up about the situation:

https://encyclopediageopolitica.com/2019/09/18/a-front-line-through-the-valley-a-primer-on-jammu-and-kashmir/

Also, i believe the headwaters of the Indus river begin in this region. Controlling the source of this river should have major geopolitical consequences. The Indus river flows from the mountains all the way through Pakistan and terminates at the port city of Karachi.

This river is a vital for: a source of drinking water, agriculture, commerce, hydroelectric power etc...

There are a litany of reasons why that region is important, and the Indus river is just one. 

The article i linked is really informative and goes way more into the historical (ie aftermath of the partition of the Indian sub continent) reasons why this region is significant, as well as the extremely diverse population that lives in and around that region

UncleSneakyFingers

For China its because it connects Xinjiang to Tibet

For India and Pakistan its because whoever controls it controls the fate of Pakistan. Its the source of the river that flows through the entirety of Pakistan. Its also remarkably close to the Pakistani capital. Imagine if your enemy controlled land just 20km from your capital, what would happen in a war.

ltzmy

If you want some of the information others have posted but in video form, Caspian Report has a good video on the Kashmir conflict:

https://youtu.be/S25ROi8GCfw

It doesn’t address China’s interests, but as others have said they have a transit route through their area that connects Xinjiang and Tibet.

SeasickSeal

I think because of prestige and the fact that it’s important to control the passage between the Chinese and Indian plains through the Hymalayas.

Lomellina

[Rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/wiki/subredditrules) / [Submission Statement Guide](https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/wiki/submissionstatement) / [Wiki Resources](https://www.reddit.com/r/geopolitics/wiki/index)

geopolitics_banbot

For India and Pakistan, it comes down to controlling a mountainous region that serves as the origin of rivers that basically define the Ganges plain and Pakistani nation.  The two countries hate each other for historical reasons (Muslims vs Hindus), and Jammu and Kashmir is the way that they can gain control over each toher.

China wants it so that it could dominate the Ganges Plain and Northern India.

Basically China wants to dominate Pakistan and India, Pakistan wants to secure itself and endanger India, and India wants to secure itself and endanger Pakistan.

The rivers that originate in Jammu and Kashmir flow all the way down to the Indian Ocean.

Sweet_Victory123

Hello, u/Additional-Library55!! Thank you for your submission to r/CriticalThinkingIndia. We appreciate your contribution to our community.

If your submission consists of Photo/Video, then, please provide the source of the same under this comment.

If your submission is a link to an external source, then, please provide a summary of the information provided in that link in the comments.

We hope that you will follow these rules and engage in meaningful discussions.

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/CriticalThinkingIndia) if you have any questions or concerns.*

Cute-Equipment-6557

Timely_Street_3075

We need more international reporters and narrative control 

We failed to counter pakistani claims so badly that now they are citing articles which they wrote themselves - as proof

CartographerOwn3656

Zebras_lie

Arth_kumar

redreddit83

About the online narrative, that's the biggest challenge. Pakistani claims aren't just agreed upon by them, but also by people across the world, and united by them being Muslim.

NotAnUncle

India Pakistan conflict will end up balkanising both. If Pakistan collapses it will not become a pluralistic democracy but a Taliban state and that's when India's real headache will start. So best to lay down these fantasies to rest and build peace not war. And if according to op India has such intentions of destabilizing Pakistan, that automatically justifies Pakistan's anti Indiia efforts. It's a spiral.

Full_Computer6941

What we should do now is bring the internal enemies to their knees deported or ....

Remarkable_Link8414

A7san 😂 pretty sure the movie is unwatchable

Angie961l

I'd be fine just banning any Gal Gadot movie for terrible acting 😂

Poisonous-Toad

Fluid_Motor3971

The movie is a disaster anyways ! I didn’t see it but that’s what the reviews say

Engineer2890

Dilligent-Dither

What’s wrong with this decision ? Why should we support Israelis actors ?

Cheesecake-Few

A Zionist as the witch and villain is pretty fitting though

mallydobb

They spared us from an absolute shitshow. The only reason she's still in movies is because she's from where she is. Any other actor would have been booted out of Jewllywood

HippityHoppotus

You guys are not missing anything anyway, the movie is shit

artzy_elle

https://preview.redd.it/1815ttkh4mxe1.jpeg?width=928&amp;format=pjpg&amp;auto=webp&amp;s=345f62af12c166f21ca56057d75af6d729bbb8d4

This is written on the Pakistani passport

RightPromise8850

That’s actually very good for all. It’s the worst movie ever made in the past god knows how many years. And not bad funny kind of deal, bad you’ll stroke out in the movies deal

Atyab-Kees-Kabis

they should ban it cause the movie itself sucks ass, wouldnt even bother pirating it.

AbedSalam1988

Wait a couple more mins someone will comment that she wouldn’t have joined the IDF if HA would just disarm 😂

NPC_777

Silver-Being2399

I wish as part of the reason Lebanon banned the movie, they said: cause she’s also a shit actor and we didn’t want to expose our people to bad content

Dependent-Internal37

Such a shame we’ll miss Gal’s amazing performance... then again, maybe she wasn’t acting at all.

ParticularAd7127

I didn’t even know she was Israeli. I just hated the movie from instinct

OntheAbyss_

They are looking for ways to copy our stupidity

_reddit_account

OP. Nb3st? See everyone mbdo this shitty movie

RepairDue9286

they always attack khaleeji states calling them names saying they're not true leaders of Muslim world . they compete with khaleeji arabs sometimes I think they believe that they are part of the Middle East which is geographically not true not western asia MENA .  forgetting their roots south east Asia

EreshkigalKish2

In this movie, Gal Gadot plays the Evil Queen, who seizes Snow White's kingdom and attempts to have her killed.
So, I guess she's not really acting after all 😂😂

BrokeBoredInBeirut

Why is no one speaking about the video of Lebanese Christian’s celebrating the bombing of dahye? Lebanese Christian’s say they care for this country yet when in control they would give their land in a heartbeat

ServiceUnfair9410

Graaaaaaape!! 

PS: Pakistanis do love Lebanon and Lebanese people. 

I have a few pakistani friends, and believe it or not we have a LOT in common!

GolfIllustrious2168

That's not the real reason. But thanks anyway.

NeoBlayz

The movie is awful anyway who's gonna pay to watch that

sultanoftrabzonirl

Bad movie, but the government shouldn’t censor us. 

This is dumb.

Nintendo64Goldeneye

She was never a good actress to begin with. So overhyped. Good it’s banned wasn’t gonna watch it anyway

ShawarmaShenanigans

Good, Israeli settlers should go back to Europe and leave Palestine alone if they wanted us to accept them.

BabylonianWeeb

She's just eye candy but terrible acting. Boycotting a movie makes us more of a laughing stock tbh. Plus everybody just streams shit these days.

Decaf-Please

Okay, they keep banning movies in lebanese theaters , because an israeli person is acting of worked on the movie or because their are LGBTQ symbols etc…

You can watch it a week later on streaming sites, lebanon is a tiny market that has no impact on a movies sales.

You only end up hurting the movie theaters themselves, which anyways barely has any customers to begin with.

In the end it’s lebanese business’s and people that pay the price.

Bilbo_swagggins

Appropriate_Mind_213

i mean that was apparently a shitty movie, but regardless i don't get why a whole movie would be banned because one of the actors is israeli? seems petty to me

elliek17

Absolutely ABSURD and INSANE. Banning a movie because an actor is Israeli? How dumb can this get.

Adept_Librarian9136

You’re a bunch of snow flakes. You are not a big wealthy country.  No one cares if you “resist” by boycotting. Censorship hurts your country. Boycotting a dumb Disney movie is theatrics.  The only market that matters today for movies is China. 

I still find it hilarious how the middle east thinks wealth and power are unrelated to democratic values. Central planning and censorship have been shown to fail again and again.

sparklingwaterll

Interesting write up, just something minor that stuck out to me:

&gt; Belarus recently entered the Russia-US dispute. With a largely state-owned economy that never underwent neoliberal shock therapies (despite the lack of retirement among other capitalist aspects) 

I’m not sure where you’re getting that Belarus doesn’t have retirement.

It’s 65 for men and 60 for women, all retired persons receive a state pension.

You can read an English language description of their social safety nets [here](https://www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/progdesc/ssptw/2018-2019/europe/belarus.html), the USA’s Social Security Administration maintains some reviews of social safety nets in a selection of foreign countries.

Gauss-Legendre

This is a great write up. I would only comment on this part:

&gt;Saudi Arabia had become too big, too ambitious to be controlled by the United States. It financed Islamist terrorism and Wahhabi institutions around the world in a rejection of Westernist principles. 

&gt;The importance of Saudi Arabia for the free movement of oil, as well as its collaboration on many issues of international politics and the purchase of American weapons, prevented any possibility of extensive publication of these findings, even when the financing of Al Qaeda by the Al-Saud and assistance with its state intelligence culminated in 9/11. 

&gt;However, the ignorance of the American public could be exploited from the trauma of Al-Qaeda to "" fight terrorism and the nations that shelter it "" in a relatively disconnected way with 9/11.


I think this is a mistaken way at looking at the Saudi-US relationship. Like with so-called "Israel", the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia isn't a genuine ally of the United States, that is, it doesn't forge friendly relations with the US on its own terms, like how Hez'bollah and other Shi'ite militia/political organizations have maintained friendly relations with Iran. (Nasrallah has even said that Iran "doesn't tell us what to do, we have to act for ourselves".) Saudi Arabia is a vassal state or proxy of Washington's undeclared empire. Washington more or less tells them what to do. If you think about this, it has interesting implications for the 9/11 attacks, doesn't it? 

Washington mostly has vassal states, proxies, and military protectorates. You could say Washington is 'allied' with London or Paris, as these are both imperialist countries that have a fragile truce with US imperialism when the world rate of profit is high e.g. in the form of NATO. 

So, Saudi Arabia along with other Gulf monarchies, aren't "too ambitious" for Washington, in funding and arming sectarian terror groups which are used to fight secular and progressive governments in the Middle East like secular Syria under Bashar al-Assad (an Alawite in a pluralistic but Sunni majority country), or Gadaffi's Islamic socialist Libya, which was progressive. Actually, Saudi Arabia performs a useful service to Washington by laundering the process through its own network of terror ratlines. This is how the intelligence side of things likes to operate. It legitimizes the United States and paints it like an outside actor when it's very much an inside actor. 

What "Westernist principles"? The "principles" of militarism, global plunder and genocide? Saudi Arabia fits well with Westernist principles. The imperialist Western countries, but especially a slave-holding settler colony like the US was founded as, don't have real principles worth looking up to, ones that actually advance human welfare anyhow. 

Now, al-Qaeda, ISIL and other sectarian Islamist groups do hold anti-Western, anti-US views, to be sure. But that's not necessarily a problem for the Western capitalist class. That's because, these anti-Western forces:

1. refuse to participate in the international system, or systems of development, and can only govern by force, not by show of leadership or any popular participation.

2. their *sectarian* and fanatically regressive character means that they're prone to splintering, and kept perpetually weak. Sectarian Islamism is deeply centered on excommunication of others from its religion. Minor disagreements result in splintering, which keeps them perpetually weak, like with Trotskyism. 

3. can be cynically used to undermine unfriendly governments, like Syria and Saddam's Iraq. Factoring in the two points above, this ensures that the country whose government is overthrown by these Islamist forces will never rise to any prominence or power again.

[In effect, these anti-Western views can't translate to anything that actually challenges US hegemonic power in the region,](https://twitter.com/IbnAlRafidayn/status/1210534409599934466) like: 

* Iran, which is an Islamic theocracy, but not sectarian, 

* Qadaffi's "Islamic socialist" Libya which was judged by US intelligence to be sufficiently anti-Soviet, but still had a socialist-like political economy;

* Syria, which is a secular State, but anti-Zionist (like Iran) and also pan-Arabist. Pretty inclusive.

It's also worth stating that Washington doesn't necessarily want Syria (for example) to be ran by Islamic extremists. The sectarian, anti-democratic character of these groups is useful for Washington, as explained above, and aligns with its own anti-democratic class interests (creating a safe investment environment for corporate America). 

Washington wants Syria to be run by Western businessmen and economists, preferably American ones, of Washington's own choosing. ISIL and other paramilitary proxy forces were meant to be defeated by US combat forces at a designated point in time. They don't pose a real problem to the US in any case (I mean, "Islamist terrorism" is down to like #7 in the State Department's latest "national security threats" list).

11-22-1963

Access our wiki [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/InformedTankie/wiki/index).

New comrades, ask for your user flair [here](https://www.reddit.com/r/InformedTankie/comments/h0z44q/request_user_flairs_you_would_like_to_see_by_your/?utm_medium=android_app&amp;utm_source=share)

*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/InformedTankie) if you have any questions or concerns.*

The United States is showing renewed interest in Pakistan, particularly in its mineral wealth, as part of a broader strategy to secure critical resources and counter China's dominance.

US Strategic Interests in Pakistan's Mineral Wealth

Why This Matters

Public Sentiment Summary

Highlighted Comments

Parties Involved

What the people want