China - Articles

The much publicized meeting between US President Obama and Chinese President Hu Jintao on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit (NSS) has been hailed as a huge success by some in the West. An examination of the outcomes of this bilateral meeting may help understand the reasons that led to such a proclamation.

It has been reported widely in the Western press that “China Pledges to Work with US on Iran Sanctions.” This one development would certainly merit feting the Obama-Hu meeting. Reality however, is far from what headlines would suggest.

China has maintained that the world should be rid of nuclear weapons ever since 1964 (the year in which China tested its own nuclear device). It has moreover, been consistent in its ‘principled position’ on the Iranian nuclear issue. In Washington on Monday, President Hu did no more than reiterate this. No mention of ‘sanctions’ was made by the Chinese. While emphasizing that China and the US share the same overall goal on the Iranian nuclear issue, President Hu stated that “China hopes various parties will continue to step up diplomatic efforts and actively seek effective ways to resolve the Iranian nuclear issue through dialogue and negotiations.” It may be suggested that Chinese cooperation in enforcing stricter sanctions against Iran is implicit, but one can also wonder whether too much is being read between the lines, with too little reason for doing so. China has in the past (2006, 2007 and 2008) supported sanctions against Iran, but this has been after protracted negotiations and dilution of Western demands for tougher sanctions. It is unclear how and why this should change in the future. Even if the US does in fact manage to assure China of continued energy supplies from Saudi Arabia, in lieu of its imports from Iran, China may not be agreeable to entrusting its energy security on promises from the US and its allies. Also, a significant departure from China’s stated position on the utility of economic sanctions and the larger Iranian nuclear question will have repercussions on its relations with other good ‘friends.’

China’s reiteration of a ‘principled position’ on issues such as that of Iran recalls quite forcibly to mind that China has consistently championed the right of nations (even those with a questionable proliferation record) to develop facilities for nuclear energy. Indeed it has been known to extend support for such projects. Despite much talk about terrorism and the grave threat of nuclear materials falling into the hands of organizations like the al Qaeda, it is curious that the issue found no mention in the statement issued by China.

This when on Monday itself,  John O Brennan, Obama’s counter-terrorism adviser, had cited the meeting in August 2001 between Osama bin Laden and two Pakistanis with linkages to Pakistan’s nuclear weapons laboratories, as a clue of the persisting interest that al Qaeda had in obtaining highly enriched uranium or plutonium.

Beyond identifying counter-terrorism as one of the five points proposed for improving China-US relations, the Chinese side makes no mention of the threat of nuclear terrorism. It would seem that neither the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) nor Pakistan (in spite of recent rhetoric on a nuclear arms-race in South Asia) found mention. DPRK and Pakistan are, arguably, two countries with a very poor record on the non-proliferation front. They are also two states where China is deemed to have significant influence. That nothing more than a commitment to “upholding the international nuclear non-proliferation regime” was reiterated by China and no concrete measures announced to visibly further this goal, can well classify this meeting a failure – at least on the issue of nuclear non-proliferation.

Where then did the meeting succeed? Most certainly in the realm of China-US bilateral ties. Despite heightened rhetoric on both sides concerning the issue of Renminbi re-evaluation, veiled accusations of currency manipulation and the generally strained  atmosphere following US arms sales to Taiwan, the Obama-Hu meeting appeared cordial at all accounts. Obama reaffirmed American support of the one-China policy and accepted China’s sovereignty in matters concerning its currency. While Hu alluded to the arms sales to Taiwan, no mention of Obama’s meeting with the Dalai Lama was made. The Chinese media categorized the meeting as stabilizing bilateral ties and being representative of the shared long-term interests of the two countries.

All’s well that ends well. Unless of course, one was looking for decisive action to check nuclear proliferation.