SPEAKING
FREELY Making the bamboo
bend By Michael Chang
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say. Please click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
The aborted visit to
the United States by Chinese President Hu Jintao
last autumn will now take place in April,
following intensive
behind-the-scenes negotiations
between Beijing and Washington after President
George W Bush's November visit to China.
However, as the Iran nuclear crisis comes
to a head, it could torpedo Hu's visit.
The United Nations Security Council is due
to receive the International Atomic Energy
Agency's (IAEA's) report on Iran's nuclear program
next month, after which it will raise the issue of
possible sanctions against Iran for non-compliance
over its nuclear development program. The US and
others in the West claim that Iran plans to
develop nuclear weapons, something it denies.
As a Security Council permanent member,
China has the power of veto, which means it could
block any moves against Iran. China gets 13.6% of
its oil flow from Iran. If Beijing uses its veto,
it would put China on a direct collision course
with the US. The Iran crisis has placed China
between a rock and a hard place, and it can't
possibly escape unscathed.
Hu's September
visit was postponed at the last minute by the US,
the official reason being the devastation caused
by Hurricane Katrina. However, other heads of
state were allowed to visit and Bush also embarked
on a series of visits to foreign countries.
It was therefore widely speculated that
the real reason for the postponement was that the
two governments could not agree on how the visit
should be arranged. The US wanted it to be
informal, simple and to-the-point, with the two
leaders engaging on a personal level, China
insisted on a state visit with all the trappings
normally accorded to a head of state. Neither side
would compromise, and negotiations became heated.
So Katrina came at an opportune time.
In
announcing Hu's April visit, the US didn't give
any details as to what type it would be. China
still wants a formal visit with all the honors - a
21-gun salute on the White House lawn, guest of
honor at Blair House, a state dinner and a speech
at a joint session of Congress.
Hu has
been in power almost three years, with seemingly
increasing popularity among the people, yet he
still doesn't have a firm grip on the nine-member
Politburo, the center of power.
More than
half of the Politburo members were appointed by
Hu's predecessor, Jiang Zemin, who may still have
clout over China's direction in an ongoing power
struggle. A case in point, Hu has been trying for
months to remove the mayor of Shanghai, Han Zheng,
a Jiang protege, but without success. To help
consolidate his power, a full-blown state visit to
the US would send a powerful message to Hu's foes
within China.
The US, however, may not
want to comply with Hu's wishes unless it receives
certain favors in return. The US has long
criticized China for its record on human rights,
press censorship, religious persecution, currency
undervaluation, military buildup without
transparency, violation of intellectual property
rights, etc.
Yet Washington has made
little headway in any of these areas. Each side
knows precisely what the other side wants; the
question is to what extend they are willing to
accommodate each other.
Presumably, the
sides had settled on details of the April visit
before the announcement was made last month.
However, the Iran crisis has now escalated, and
China's veto has become a major issue.
If
Beijing uses its veto, the visit could be placed
in jeopardy as the US and its allies would boil
over China's defiance of the near-world consensus
on Iran. Or the visit could be watered down to
such an extend that it would be an insult if Hu
accepted the conditions.
An abstention
would win the United States' gratitude, and Hu
would get his trappings and honors. But then
China's oil imports and investments in Iran would
be threatened. It's a seemingly hopeless
situation, being so boxed in.
For decades,
China has trodden the globe, courting countries
that have been either outcasts or neglected by the
West, and by the US in particular. Beijing has
just begun to reap the benefits of this, signing
energy agreements, doing infrastructure projects,
making investments, and selling Chinese goods in
the four corners of the world.
China
stands high in the Arab world because of such
commitment, but an abstention in the Security
Council or, worse, a veto would shatter this
towering image - something China simply can't
afford to throw away.
It would send the
wrong message to those countries that have sided
or intend to side with China to resist the United
States' arrogance and bullying.
Indeed,
China surprised many when it, along with the four
other permanent members of the Security Council -
the US, Russia, Britain and France - plus Germany
met in London on January 30 and agreed that the
IAEA should report Iran to the UN.
The
proviso was that the Security Council wouldn't
take action until after receiving a comprehensive
report from the IAEA, due on March 6. This could
be interpreted as a delaying tactic on the part of
China, acknowledging the reality that there were
not enough votes in the IAEA's then-upcoming
meeting to block referral.
Iran reacted by
threatening to end all cooperation with the UN and
to proceed with its uranium-enrichment program,
while the US must have realized that Beijing could
simply have been waiting for the Security Council
before revealing its hand.
One cannot deny
that how China uses its veto and Hu's visit to
Washington are closely linked.
Hu and his
brain's trust must be burning the midnight oil,
trying not only to balance between Iran and the
Arab world on the one side, and the US and the
rest of the West on the other, but also between
domestic hardliners who advocate using the veto,
and moderates who want to press Iran into
submission.
China is tiptoeing on a
tightrope, and any slight misstep will have major
repercussions in the years to come.
In a
nutshell, the West, the US in particular, is
alarmed and troubled by the massive military
expansion and unprecedented economic growth in
China, wanting to use every peaceful means to slow
it down.
Thus the Iran crisis has come at
a opportune time for the West to use it as a
pretext to cut off Iran's oil supply to China.
Beijing, on the other hand, will maintain its
military modernization program and economic
growth, so keeping the Iranian oil flow is a
matter of vital national security importance. But
China also desires to improve relations with the
West, the US in particular.
Events at the
Security Council may only provide a partial answer
as to how this tightrope walk plays out. The full
picture could be revealed when and how Hu is
received in Washington - if at all.
Michael Chang was born in
Shanghai and grew up in Taiwan. He received a BA
degree in liberal arts from National Taiwan
University and an MBA from San Francisco State
University. He is owner/president of General
Realty and Investment Inc in California.
(Copyright 2006 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact us for information
on sales, syndication and republishing.)
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times
Online feature that allows guest writers to have
their say. Please click hereif you are interested in
contributing.
