As political
difficulties of US President George W Bush mount,
China has decided that it should have its own poke
at him. In an article published in the
international issue of People's Daily of February
1, Ye Xiaowen, director of the State
Administration for Religious Affairs, was critical
of Bush regarding his conduct of the "global war
on terrorism".
It is not what Ye said in
his essay that is raising a lot of eyebrows.
Rather it was the timing of it, and the fact that
a Chinese official attempted to establish his own
better understanding of one of world's great
religions, while his country continues to suppress
the Muslims of Xinjiang Uyghur
autonomous region in the name
of fighting its own "war on terrorism". This
duplicity notwithstanding, it is clear that Islam
is emerging as an issue of "high politics" for
leaders in Beijing.
Ye criticizes Bush for
his slip of tongue in the immediate aftermath of
the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the
United States, when he depicted the impending "war
on terror" as a "crusade". Of course, he
apologized for that. However, Ye notes that
"Muslims were still not satisfied, sensing
violation of the authority of Allah". Ye also
points out that the "scope" of Bush's "war on
terror" has evolved from "reforming Islam" to
nakedly opposing "Islamic fascism".
There
is little doubt that Bush's use of phrase "Islamic
fascism" did not sit well in the world of Islam.
Muslims never got tired of reiterating that while
Islam has no record of creating a holocaust
against a people (such as Jews) because of their
religion, the Christian world does. They also
point out the double standards in the West for not
calling Irish terrorists "Christian terrorists" or
"Christian fascists", while there is an ostensible
zest to apply the title of a nefarious ideology,
which was the product of its own culture, to
denigrate Muslims who are violating their
religious precepts by indulging in terrorism.
China's own Marxist interpretation of
Islam is perceptible in Ye's observations about
religion in general. He writes, "Although a form
of social ideology, religions are simply
reflections of social and economic contradictions.
Conflicts caused by religious issues in today's
world mask economic and political struggles."
No Muslim scholar would agree with this
dialectical, materialistic interpretation of
Islam.
Ye goes on to note, "The 'clash of
civilizations' is simply a fig leaf of real
interest clashes, but in social and economic
contradictions religion often plays a unique role.
Religion can summon the masses. Conflicts for real
economic and political benefits often borrow the
sacred cloak of religion, and wars are fought in
its name. Religion, however, once entangled in
such conflicts, sharpens and complicates the
matter significantly."
Muslims would
certainly agree with the last sentence.
Why has China become so concerned about
Bush's handling of the "global war on terror"?
After all, despite all the mistakes, abuses and
mishandlings in Iraq, the United States has not
deprived Muslims of freedom or suppressed them, as
China itself has been doing in Xinjiang.
One explanation is that since a popular
explanation - not necessarily a correct one, but
certainly an explanation that has found millions
of sympathizers in the world of Islam - of the
"the war on terror" is that it is in reality a war
against Islam, China simply is trying to make
political capital. And there is a lot of political
capital to be made on that issue.
Ye,
quite deftly, also uses the phrase "unilateralism"
to criticize the Bush administration at a time
when the general perception in the Middle East is
that the United States is getting ready to strike
Iran, which has been an important strategic
partner of China.
As much as the Arab
regimes of the Persian Gulf do not wish to see
Iran develop nuclear weapons, they certainly do
not want to see another round of military
operations - even in the form of air strikes -
which are bound to destabilize the region further.
They are also afraid that if military action is
taken against Iran by the United States or its
proxy, Israel, Iran will trigger its own series of
asymmetric actions against both.
So by
condemning "unilateralism", China is also winning
friends from the Arab side as well as Iran. At
least in Ye's essay, China is placing terrorism
and unilateralism on the same plane as destructive
forces. While one can seriously question the moral
equivalency of these issues, one must also
understand why that equivalency is so needed at
this time.
China has always rejected the
notion of unilateralism of other great powers, and
especially of superpowers. In the post-Cold War
and post-September 11 eras, it has perceived that
option as one of the tools in the hands of US
decision-makers to threaten military action
against China if it were to attack Taiwan.
By condemning unilateralism to fight
terrorism, China also hopes to win some sympathies
in the streets of Muslim countries, from Malaysia
to Mauritania. Muslims have directly linked
unilateralism to regime change in Afghanistan and
Iraq. They also abhor it as a source of
establishing US hegemony on the world of Islam.
Even when the United Stated does not act
unilaterally, they believe, it gives a wink and a
nod to Israel, as was the case during the 34-day
war between Hezbollah and Israel last July and
August.
From the perspective of balance of
power, China's condemnation of unilateralism also
underscores its desire to see the evolution of a
multipolar global order in which the United States
will no longer decide when or whether to use force
to impose its will. A multipolar global order will
also enable China to influence, if not veto,
America's decision to be unilateral.
China's conduct of foreign policy is
highly calculated and calibrated. In this sense,
by allowing one of its officials - especially an
official who deals with religious affairs - to
make such public remarks, China is indulging in an
exercise of winning friends in the world of Islam.
As a rising power, leaders of that nation know
only too well how important it is for their
country to signal to the Muslim world that it is
ready and willing to emerge as an important actor,
especially if the United States loses its presence
and prestige in the Middle East.
(Copyright 2007 Asia Times Online Ltd. All
rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
