Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China's Ties with 'Rogue States' Under Spotlight
Reuters via Yahoo ^ | Sep 15 2001 | Jeremy Page

Posted on 09/15/2001 9:47:00 AM PDT by Gritty

BEIJING (Reuters) - A U.S. declaration of war on global terror after deadly attacks on New York and Washington has thrown the spotlight on China's often murky ties with nations branded by Washington as ``state sponsors of terrorism.''

As President Bush (news - web sites) rallies a global coalition to respond to the worst-ever attack on U.S. soil, China is sure to come under pressure over its investment in and sales of arms technology to nations including North Korea (news - web sites), Iran and Libya.

A global stand against terrorism could represent a diplomatic coming of age for China, forcing it to subordinate private concerns to the interests of the international community, some analysts argue.

But while Beijing may offer tacit support for some form of retaliation agreed through the United Nations (news - web sites), it is unlikely to adjust its foreign policy to appease a wounded and angry United States, analysts said.

``There's certainly going to be more pressure but I'm not sure it's going to have much effect,'' said one Western diplomat. ``China is going to continue to do what it believes to be in its best national interests.''

``There's certainly potential for it to move them toward a more modern, multilateral, involved form of foreign policy but it doesn't have to go that way.''

CHINA BACKS WAR ON TERROR

China's President Jiang Zemin (news - web sites) has made a personal pledge to Bush to join the war on terrorism and analysts say the two share some common ground in that area.

Beijing faces its own threat in the northwestern region of Xinjiang from Islamic independence activists, some trained in Afghanistan (news - web sites), who have assassinated officials and set off bombs.

China is acutely aware of the terrorist threat as it prepares to host a meeting of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (news - web sites) forum in Shanghai and a U.S.-China summit in October, as well as the 2008 Olympics in Beijing.

But for years, China has pursued commercial and military ties with nations on a U.S. blacklist of ``state sponsors of terrorism,'' including Iran, Iraq, Libya, Sudan, North Korea, Syria and Cuba.

Chinese oil firms have invested in Sudan despite U.S. charges that they are aiding the Islamist government in Sudan's north by providing revenues to fund its war against Christian and tribal rebels in the south.

Chinese telecommunications firm Huawei Technologies Co recently withdrew from a project in Iraq following persistent U.S. accusations it was helping the regime of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) to bolster air defenses.

CIA (news - web sites) Director George Tenet told Congress this month Chinese ''entities'' supplied ballistic missile-related equipment and assistance last year to Pakistan and Iran -- branded the most active state sponsor of terrorism by Washington.

And China has been quietly forging ties with Afghanistan's Taliban regime, which is harboring Saudi-born multi-millionaire Osama bin Laden (news - web sites) -- Washington's chief suspect in the kamikaze airliner attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon (news - web sites).

The Taliban have only avoided the U.S. blacklist because the U.S. government does not recognize them as the Afghan government.

CHINA PLEADS INNOCENT

China insists it has not violated any international or bilateral commitments on terrorism or proliferation of conventional and nuclear weapons.

It is merely trying to safeguard China's oil supplies, counter-balance U.S. influence in world affairs and maintain good relations with its neighbors, Chinese analysts say.

``As a developing country, we have a right to maintain normal relations with these countries,'' said Liu Jingzhi, an expert on international relations at Peking University.

``Of course, if they have some polices that we can't support, especially on terrorism and nuclear weapons proliferation, then we will oppose them, but this won't affect normal relations.''

Such apparent contradictions lie at the heart of China's foreign policy, analysts say.

But they will not wash in a climate where U.S. officials utter words like those of Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage: ''You are with us or you're not. Are you on our team or not. There is no gray area.''


TOPICS: Breaking News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

1 posted on 09/15/2001 9:47:00 AM PDT by Gritty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Gritty
bttt
2 posted on 09/15/2001 9:48:29 AM PDT by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
I heard one commentator today say that many intelligence experts consider this as a move to sever the West's control over the flow of oil. I know many here think that China would not consider damaging its largest trading partner. Perhaps they should consider whether China would think it in their national interest to break the West's control over oil.
3 posted on 09/15/2001 9:52:07 AM PDT by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: independentmind
I heard one commentator today say that many intelligence experts consider this as a move to sever the West's control over the flow of oil.

We don't control it. We are held up to ransom by it. OPEC wants the West to consume oil today like Britain wanted China to consume opium in the 19th Century. It's time we controlled the "flow of oil".

4 posted on 09/15/2001 10:07:11 AM PDT by Praxeologue
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kennard
We may not control the physical flow of oil, but the West controls the financial mechanisms that largely determine how it is distributed throughout the world.
5 posted on 09/15/2001 10:10:45 AM PDT by independentmind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
China connections
6 posted on 09/15/2001 10:19:04 AM PDT by piasa
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: independentmind, Black Jade, j_accuse, The Kitten, ALOHA RONNIE, backhoe, flamefront
In all of this -- I sure am glad China CONTROLS THE PANAMA CANAL...yes, isn't that 50 year contract with Whampoa-Hutchison so nice.....
7 posted on 09/15/2001 10:20:22 AM PDT by ChaseR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: piasa, Ragtime Cowgirl, abigail2, KLT, Bigg Red, ALOHA RONNIE
BEIJING (Reuters) - A U.S. declaration of war on global terror after deadly attacks on New York and Washington has thrown the spotlight on China's often murky ties with nations branded by Washington as ``state sponsors of terrorism.''

Oh, I'm relieved now - China would never send any weapons to Panama - since Panama isn't a state that sponsors terrorism.....yep, the Hutchison-Whampoa - 50 year contract - is no big deal.

8 posted on 09/15/2001 10:24:30 AM PDT by ChaseR
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
I think you're going to find in the next few days that China and Iran are our best buddies.

Prepare to come about on a new tack.

9 posted on 09/15/2001 10:34:11 AM PDT by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Alamo-Girl, Yellow Rose of Texas, Frog Mom, Bump in the night, 68-69TonkinGulfYatchClub
heads up
10 posted on 09/15/2001 10:36:51 AM PDT by amom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
I was thinking this morning that the hawks among Chinese policymakers may be urging Zemin to move on Taiwan while the U.S. is otherwise engaged.
11 posted on 09/15/2001 11:11:49 AM PDT by beckett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
One thing I thought when china decided they were going to back the fight against terrorism is, and I hope i'm way off base, that they would be more than happy to verbally support us getting into a large scale war and then we have no way to help tiawan when they decide to jump the puddle.

Noslrac

12 posted on 09/15/2001 11:12:34 AM PDT by Noslrac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Noslrac
Most likely we need China help in getting Pakistan on side. If getting China's cooperation required an "off the record" understanding that we would not back a Taiwan independence movement, I would be that we would make that trade. Expect to see more support for a "one China, two systems" solution for Taiwan out of Washington. After all, Hong Kong isn't doing too badly.
13 posted on 09/15/2001 11:20:22 AM PDT by Lessismore
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
MEGA-BUMP!

China's fingerprints?

14 posted on 09/15/2001 1:27:51 PM PDT by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gritty
MEGA-BUMP!

China's fingerprints?

15 posted on 09/15/2001 1:27:52 PM PDT by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: piasa
Bump to you, piasa.
16 posted on 09/15/2001 1:28:49 PM PDT by FReethesheeples
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Lessismore
Most likely we need China help in getting Pakistan on side. If getting China's cooperation required an "off the record" understanding that we would not back a Taiwan independence movement, I would be that we would make that trade. Expect to see more support for a "one China, two systems" solution for Taiwan out of Washington. After all, Hong Kong isn't doing too badly.,

Absolutely the wrong approach.

If this is the thinking in the US, then we will lose this war and deserve to.

Taiwan has a modern military, mainly comprosed of our technology.

We need to use it. We had bases in Taiwan for decades, we know the place.

This means the "one China" make believe days are over.

The Communists must put aside their empty claims.

The US also needs China, as well as anyone. Recognition of Taiwan for practical purposes in this war does not mean Taiwan and China do not have to unite in the future.

In fact if China can act like a responsible nation there could be a fair amount of coordination between Taiwan and China's militaries whcih would do a lot for future reconciliation.

The Chinese government is not trustworthy at this time. Their best assest is proximity to Afghanistan. Japan and Taiwan have better military infrastructure we can use now.

If China does not come on with the agreement that there is no longer a "Taiwan problem" and the recognition that the Republic of China is one of the allied states, then Japan needs to be the ket ally in the region.

We are moving back to Philippine bases as well.

China can end their belligerance to Taiwan and the Philppines with respect to the Spratley Island and come on board or they will be isolated fully from the economic system and nations they want to benefit from.

This really is their only choice.

17 posted on 09/15/2001 2:35:58 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: ChaseR, Fabian
Thanks ChaseR and bump
18 posted on 09/15/2001 3:46:00 PM PDT by abigail2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

Comment #19 Removed by Moderator

To: Gritty, Black_Jade
Black Jade could you comment on what China will do if we identify the Sudan and a state with close ties with Ben Laden? My assumption has been that China was forming relations with the Sudan in order to get access to its oil supply.
20 posted on 09/15/2001 6:06:05 PM PDT by Ranger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-35 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson