SIGN UP - IT'S FREE!
SEARCH FSM
| National Debt Clock |
A million seconds pass in 12 days.
A billion seconds pass in 31 years.
A trillion seconds pass in 31,688 years!
February 16, 2010
Exclusive: Iran and China – Is the Engagement Over?
Diplomatic relations between the United States and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) have become tense in recent months. At the December Copenhagen climate conference, China’s insistence than only the U.S. and “rich” countries had to curtail their economic growth collapsed the meeting. At the UN in early January, Beijing blocked new sanctions on Iran as the Tehran regime continued its nuclear enrichment program. Also in January, China continued to reject demands that it end its currency manipulation which is plundering global trade during the World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
The Obama Administration on January 29th confirmed the sale of helicopters, air defense missiles and other military items to Taiwan originally approved by the Bush administration. Beijing bitterly protested the sale as it has continued to deploy offensive units opposite the island democracy it considers a renegade province. As Reuters reported,
“Senior Chinese military officers have proposed that their country boost defense spending, adjust PLA deployments, and possibly sell some U.S. bonds to punish Washington for its latest round of arms sales to Taiwan.”
On February 8th, Dongfan Chung, a Chinese-born engineer who had worked for U.S. aerospace firms, was sentenced to 15 years for spying. A Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman claimed the charge of “so-called ‘espionage activities’ of China in the US is groundless and out of ulterior motives.” Yet, the 2009 annual report to Congress of the bi-partisan U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission found,
As a means of enhancing its military modernization and economic development, China has been heavily involved in conducting human and cyber espionage against the United States. U.S. counterintelligence officials have concluded that Chinese intelligence collection efforts are growing in scale, intensity, and sophistication.
At the same Beijing press conference it was claimed “the situation of the Korean Peninsula has eased recently” as top Chinese and North Korean officials met. Yet, intelligence sources believe North Korea will conduct another nuclear test this year. Chinese diplomacy has sought to calm the waters after each Pyongyang provocation.
Beijing’s support for both North Korea and Iran is at the heart of the Great Power confrontation. On February 11th, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad proclaimed his country a “nuclear state” with the ability to produce weapons-grade enriched uranium. On the same day, Global Times, the international affairs organ of Beijing’s official People's Daily (the newspaper of the ruling Communist Party) ran an editorial predicting,
“A showdown is nearing over the Iran nuclear standoff, as the US continues building pressure within the UN Security Council to pass a resolution approving tougher sanctions on Iran. China still holds that diplomacy should be used to solve the issue.” The editorial stated the government’s underlying principle for opposing the U.S. action, “Like many other developing countries, China has been the victim of sanctions by the world powers. Even today, China still faces Western embargos. Chinese have a natural resistance against employing sanctions.”
Beijing feels solidarity with Tehran against Western influence. Ahmadinejad’s rant marked the 31st anniversary of the Islamic Revolution. Last year, Beijing marked the 60th anniversary of the revolution that gave the Communists control of the Chinese mainland. Both movements were motivated by anti-Western ideologies and both overthrew governments that were allied with the United States.
President Barack Obama came into office determined to reach out to both Beijing and Tehran. Obama thought he could find common ground with China on environmental policy, and that Iran could be turned away from weapons of mass destruction with the lure of expanded trade. By year’s end, Obama had discovered that both regimes place national ambitions above the trifles the U.S. administration was offering.
A February 8th Global Times editorial noted, “As part of his [Obama’s] conciliatory diplomatic approach, he took a soft line in dealing with China during his first year in the White House.” Its analysis went on,
Obama's soft line has upset American public. Conservative sections are especially infuriated by the president's seeming submission to Washington's competitor. So, now we are seeing the old issues emerge again.
President Obama is facing a public that is growing impatient with slow economic recovery and double-digit unemployment. In this situation, when the mid-term election is drawing near, he may continue to challenge China for winning political points at home.
Obama understands the point of policy swings in dealing with China. His test would be when and how to reverse the policy.
There is no recognition in this editorial that Beijing’s own behavior has alienated a liberal American president who wanted to cooperate with the PRC.
Beijing has concentrated its fire on Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, especially on her speech at L'Ecole Militaire in Paris January 29th. Advocating tougher actions against Iran, Clinton said,
As we move away from the engagement track, which has not produced the result that some had hoped for, and move forward on the pressure and sanctions track, China will be under a lot of pressure to recognize the destabilizing impact that a nuclear-armed Iran would have in the Gulf, from which they receive a significant percentage of their oil supplies.
So the argument we and others are making to China is we understand that right now, that is something that seems counterproductive to you, sanction a country from which you get so much of the natural resources your growing economy needs, but think about the longer-term implications.
Among the long term implications for China if it did not support the U.S. was “isolation” from the international community. Clinton’s suggestion that “engagement” had failed was significant because the term “engagement” has been for over a decade the code word for dealing with China in the spirit of cooperation rather than containment or confrontation. It has, in practice, been a synonym for appeasement. Clinton was not just talking about the failure of this approach with Iran, but also with China. And the choice of the French Military Academy for the speech was a not-so-subtle hint of what the alternative track could entail.
Global Times replied to Clinton’s argument in a February 10th editorial,
China has economic stakes in Iran, and China is determined to protect its interest through diplomacy. But the stand China adopts over Iran's nuclear issue is consistent with its long-held principle: To solve such issues through negotiations. Past instances have proved that sanctions only make matters worse. There will be no winner if sanctions drive Iran into a corner. Some voices have recently surfaced in the Western media asking for isolating China on the issue. These voices are extremely shallow and ludicrous.
As a major country, China’s interests should be respected, and its difficulties considered.
The central, insurmountable problem is that China’s interests in the Middle East, as perceived by the Beijing regime, are wedded to helping the anti-Western Tehran regime establish itself as the dominant regional power, complete with a nuclear capability that can deter any outside intervention. China’s increasing economic ties to Iran do more to undermine sanctions than a veto at the UN. Iran cannot be isolated as long as it has a connection to the PRC.
To successfully confront Iran, the U.S. and its allies must confront China, for Beijing’s actions have revealed that it is already bent on confrontation, as it will not be merely talked into backing down.
FamilySecurityMatters.org Contributing Editor William R. Hawkins is a consultant specializing in international economic and national security issues. He is a former economics professor and Republican Congressional staff member.
Reader Comments: Submit Your Comment (1) | Sign Up for FSM Updates!
In 1995 I started writing about the problems we would be having with China and Iran. To date, much of my predictions have come true. I shall not mention the title or use this forum as a self-serving vehicle. I am now in old man in my final months from SCC. Take heed my friends. I leave you a dangerous world. Michael.
posted by: Michael Squires
Tuesday, February 16, 2010 at 07:43 AM
