Reports of a shift in European plans to lift an arms embargo on China have sent a sobering message to China's new leadership, underscoring the sensitivity of its Taiwan policy and the continued dominance of the United States, Chinese analysts say. American and European officials said this week that the European Union might now delay its plan to lift the embargo, imposed after China's crackdown on democracy protests in 1989, until next year at the earliest, dealing a blow to one of China's major foreign policy goals. European diplomats cited China's newly adopted antisecession law and intense American opposition to easing restraints on weapons sales to explain the shift. The Chinese law adopted this month threatens military action if Taiwan pursues formal independence from the mainland. Few in China have openly criticized passage of the antisecession law, which Beijing leaders argue is needed to stop Taiwan's drift toward independence. But some foreign policy experts said the country was paying a high price for codifying its longstanding threat to use force into law. "No question, the antisecession law had a strong impact on European sentiment," said Song Xinning, a professor at People's University who is one of China's most prominent experts on European policy.[...]Privately, some Chinese analysts say they now reckon that the law may have been mishandled by the leadership under Hu Jintao, the Communist Party chief, who has sought to strengthen his credentials by taking a tougher posture toward Taiwan.
I'm glad to see the European changing their tune. Had they not reconsidered, they would be sending a very dangerous message to China that they were not concerned about Taiwan and the threat of war. They might also have interpreted the move as a break in the NATO alliance.
Complete Article
The New York Times
March 23, 2005
Europe's Shift on Embargo Places Taiwan at Center Stage
By JOSEPH KAHN
BEIJING, March 22 - Reports of a shift in European plans to lift an arms embargo on China have sent a sobering message to China's new leadership, underscoring the sensitivity of its Taiwan policy and the continued dominance of the United States, Chinese analysts say.
American and European officials said this week that the European Union might now delay its plan to lift the embargo, imposed after China's crackdown on democracy protests in 1989, until next year at the earliest, dealing a blow to one of China's major foreign policy goals.
European diplomats cited China's newly adopted antisecession law and intense American opposition to easing restraints on weapons sales to explain the shift. The Chinese law adopted this month threatens military action if Taiwan pursues formal independence from the mainland.
Few in China have openly criticized passage of the antisecession law, which Beijing leaders argue is needed to stop Taiwan's drift toward independence. But some foreign policy experts said the country was paying a high price for codifying its longstanding threat to use force into law.
"No question, the antisecession law had a strong impact on European sentiment," said Song Xinning, a professor at People's University who is one of China's most prominent experts on European policy.
"The Europeans have said all along that the embargo is a problem they would like to solve and that it is just a question of timing," Mr. Song said. "Now, this has become a very bad time."
China's official position, repeated by a Foreign Ministry spokesman on Tuesday, is that the European arms embargo and the antisecession law have no connection. China says it wants the embargo removed because it amounts to an anachronistic form of political discrimination. The antisecession law, according to the official line, is aimed at maintaining peace in the Taiwan Strait.
Privately, some Chinese analysts say they now reckon that the law may have been mishandled by the leadership under Hu Jintao, the Communist Party chief, who has sought to strengthen his credentials by taking a tougher posture toward Taiwan.
It came as a discordant note at a time when relations with Taiwan were widely viewed as improving. Some Chinese moderates on the Taiwan question argued that the National People's Congress, the Communist Party-controlled legislature, might have simply discussed a new law rather than enacting one, which was done with little public debate.
"I think the leadership anticipated that they would get a strong reaction from the parties most directly concerned, like Taiwan and the United States," said Shi Yinhong, a foreign policy expert in Beijing. "But I'm not so sure they anticipated second- and third-degree reactions, as from Europe. So I think to an extent this comes as a surprise."
Just a few weeks ago, Beijing seemed close to achieving its ambition of removing the embargo, which it views as inappropriate for a country of its rising stature. After persistent Chinese diplomacy, France, Germany, Britain and other European countries all signaled their willingness to remove the embargo by this summer.
But sentiment shifted after President Bush visited Europe in February, where he lobbied against the lifting of the embargo while also backing a highly restrictive code of conduct on arms sales to replace it. Congress has appeared ready to increase the stakes, threatening to punish any European companies that sell arms to China and seek defense business in the United States.
Though European officials cited the antisecession law as the reason for maintaining the embargo for the immediate future, some Chinese analysts say it was the United States that played the decisive hand.
"The United States is worried about China's rise," said Pan Wei, a political theorist at Beijing University. "Most people think this is not really about European opinion, but rather another strong indicator that the U.S. has an unfriendly policy toward China."
Mr. Pan argued that the antisecession law did not appreciably increase the risk of war with Taiwan and may have diminished the risk if the law has the effect of persuading Taiwan's leaders to refrain from seeking to legalize Taiwan's independent status. But he said the United States used its sway to persuade Europe not to upset the balance of power in a region that the United States views as its military domain.
Mr. Song of People's University agreed that American influence had proved effective. He said that even as some Chinese officials welcomed the prospect of lifting the embargo earlier this year, he doubted it would occur anytime soon.
The reason, he said, is that the European Union must act by consensus. The United States would not have a hard time persuading at least a minority of member countries to keep the embargo in place, he said.
Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company
No comments:
Post a Comment