Thursday, March 28, 2024

Sudan Tribune

Plural news and views on Sudan

Disaccord on Sudan could poison China-US ties

By Drew Thompson, The International Herald Tribune

WASHINGTON, Nov 17, 2004 — Whatever its outcome, the United Nations Security Council’s extraordinary meeting on Sudan, to be held in Nigeria on Thursday and Friday, could presage a potentially difficult period for U.S.-Chinese relations. Its discussion of the north-south peace process in Sudan, and the possible motion to pass new sanctions against Sudan over Darfur, may well see the interests of the two powers diverge.

After the re-election of George W. Bush and the enlargement of the Republican majority in both houses of the U.S. Congress, many in China are concerned about Bush’s self-perceived mandate and its implications for U.S. foreign policy. They foresee an aggressive United States increasingly focused on ostensible security threats in Sudan, Iran, Syria and North Korea. China maintains friendly relationships with each of these countries, a reflection of its historic and evolving national interests. This does not necessarily represent part of a grand strategy to aid and support “rogue nations,” but rather China’s rapidly growing demand for oil and the channeling of Chinese investment to markets with little competition from multinational corporations.

China’s increasing dependence on imported oil and its efforts to invest in production capabilities overseas has resulted in its importing 6 percent of its oil from Sudan, almost 60 percent of Sudan’s oil output. China is very concerned about U.S. efforts to impose sanctions on Sudan, potentially disrupting this supply, which would drive the cost of oil higher, aggravate inflation in China and threaten its investments in Sudan’s energy sector.

While China is not eager to seem “irresponsible power” by blocking international efforts to prevent genocide in Darfur, a steady supply of oil is necessary to ensure its continued economic growth and domestic stability. Because of this, China and the international community share a common interest in defusing the crisis in Sudan, a fact that has prompted China to lift its initial silence and raise the matter with Khartoum, encouraging Sudan to comply with the international community and two UN resolutions on the issue. The Darfur crisis represents an opportunity for the Bush administration to exploit China’s relationship with Sudan, assuming that it sees China as part of the solution and not part of the problem.

Cooperating with the United States to pressure Sudan, however, could be a slippery slope for China, particularly with a newly energized U.S. president who might be eager to tackle unrepentant rogue states. China has been instrumental in using its leverage to bring North Korea to the negotiating table and has won U.S. praise for doing so. But China particularly wants no part of the U.S.-Iranian standoff, largely because 14 percent of its imported oil comes from Iran, making any U.S. effort to disrupt Iranian oil shipments disastrous for its economy. U.S. pressure on Iran could potentially be perceived by China as an act of “containment,” or worse, as an act of war.

The second Bush administration will increasingly realize that China’s presence in the energy and infrastructure sectors of Sudan, Iran and Syria is largely a result of longstanding sanctions that have largely marginalized multinationals and the “supermajor” oil companies in these markets, providing a niche where Chinese companies can compete more effectively to “lock up barrels” and win contracts.

With less access to capital and little concern about lawsuits at home, Chinese companies are naturally more likely to invest in projects and engage in trade with countries where companies based in the United States and Europe are reluctant to do business.

If approached carefully, China could be a productive international partner in Sudan. But without assurances that its interests will be respected, both there and elsewhere, China is likely to resist international pressure and potentially be seen as a roadblock to global security and possibly come into conflict with the United States.

The vital question is whether the Bush administration and the international community will see China as a partner in their effort to bring about behavior change not only in North Korea, but in Sudan, Iran and Syria as well.

(Drew Thompson is a China expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, Washington.)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.