Discussion on the future of China (including discussions on Taiwan)

The Economist

Worries about weapons, contd

Feb 24th 2005
From The Economist Global Agenda


America is angry that the European Union plans to lift an embargo on sales of weaponry to China, which in turn is angry that Japan and America have identified Taiwan as a joint security concern

DESPITE all the fence-mending that has taken place during George Bush¡¦s tour of Europe, some transatlantic disagreements could not be prevented from spilling into the open. The most awkwardly visible of these is the European Union¡¦s planned lifting of its embargo on arms sales to China, which the United States opposes. On Tuesday February 22nd, Mr Bush said that: ¡§There is deep concern in our country that a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to China which would change the balance of relations between China and Taiwan.¡¨ If the EU went ahead with the lifting of the ban, he added, it would have to ¡§sell it¡¨ to America¡¦s Congress, which, he suggested, might retaliate with restrictions on technology transfers to Europe.

The EU will lift its Chinese arms embargo, introduced after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, later this year. This, the Union hopes, will open the door not only to profitable weapons sales but to closer trade relations in general with an emerging economic superpower. In an effort to assuage American concerns, the Europeans say they will limit the transfer of advanced technology by strengthening their ¡§code of conduct¡¨ for arms sales; and that they will inform the Americans of any arms sales that would have been prohibited under the embargo. This week, France¡¦s President Jacques Chirac said the embargo would be lifted under conditions that Europe and the United States ¡§define together¡¨.

That looks like wishful thinking. American opposition to lifting the ban runs deep. The Bush administration fears that it might enable the Chinese to develop the kind of sophisticated military systems used in Iraq by America and its closest allies. It also worries that these could be passed from China to rogue states or groups. Earlier this month, Congress voted overwhelmingly to condemn the EU¡¦s planned lifting of the embargo. Some American politicians point out that the Chinese human-rights abuses that led to the embargo, such as the detention of dissidents, remain a serious worry. Others focus on regional security. Writing in the Wall Street Journal this week, Henry Hyde, chairman of the House of Representatives¡¦ international-relations committee, said: ¡§EU security policy toward China is on a collision course with America¡¦s extensive security interests in Asia.¡¨

At the centre of those interests lies Taiwan. Since the mid-1990s, China has been engaged in a rapid military build-up on the coast facing the island, which Beijing views as a rebellious province. This has increased tensions with America, which is legally committed (under the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979) to provide Taiwan with the means to defend itself. Although the Americans have recently appeared to play down this obligation, military confrontation with nuclear-armed China over Taiwan is all too possible. Some worry that all it would take is a miscalculation or misunderstanding.

In 1995 and 1996 China staged large-scale military manoeuvres in the Taiwan Strait, including firing unarmed missiles close to Taiwan's two main ports. China has fired no more missiles since, but has positioned large numbers of truck-mounted short-range ballistic missiles along the coast. It has also increased deployments of longer-range missiles that could target American bases in Japan or on the Pacific island of Guam, about 1,500 miles from Taiwan. And it is working to develop land-attack cruise missiles, which could be fired across the 100-mile strait and penetrate even the most sophisticated anti-missile defences that Taiwan is acquiring from America.

Under Bill Clinton, America stepped up contacts with the Taiwanese armed forces. In 200

 

The EU will lift its Chinese arms embargo, introduced after the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, later this year. This, the Union hopes, will open the door not only to profitable weapons sales but to closer trade relations in general with an emerging economic superpower.

I'm not surprised the EU is putting economic interests above security interests. Certain EU nations did that with the Iraq situation.

With the decline in the dollar and the rise in the economic superpower that is China, the balance of power is shifting a bit. Although the US has long done business with China in the retail sector, we don't deal arms to them. It's simply not wise.

The Taiwan situation could be a powder keg if China decides to use force against it. Such an event could kick off a full scale war, but I doubt the American people would want to go through a full scale war with the Chinese. There are too many economic interests at stake.

The EU is trying to play both sides of the game for its own interests. It's a bit disingenuous on their part, but I can't say I'm honestly surprised at this. The US spent trillions defending Western Europe, and I seriously doubt the same consideration would be given to us were we to need it. Example relevant to today: the EU making military deals with the Chinese.

With the Russians now selling nuclear technology to Iran, these realities are a setup for serious problems in the future.

 

The EU is clearly an amoral, corrupt insitution, and Australia should withdraw it's membership immediately!

By which I mean: I don't know enough about this to have a reasonably informed opinion, so I thought I'd waste everyone's time with a dumb joke. Ho-hum.

In a half-arsed attempt at relevency...
It'll be interesting to see what China will do with it's emerging power and influence... I don't think China represents much of a security threat to anyone but Taiwan, really... but then, all them zany treaties...

Yeah. Interesting.

 

The big thing is how Japan is stepping up. If China attacks Taiwan, Japan jumps in and brings a very capable Navy alongside the Seventh Fleet.

Japan builds modern diesel-electric subs, which Taiwan is looking to buy. Japan might also be a useful cutout when it comes to selling other technology, too (like, say, Aegis).

 

I actually side with the US on this issue, not just because of the threat to Taiwanese sovereignty, but because the implications of an upset to the balance ofpower regionally intrinsicly leads to an upset of the balance of power globally. In short, it could spark a major war.

That power is already out of balance. China would merely be playing catch up.

Personally, I think the countries in the EU are executing their sovereign right to trade with who they want. If the US is allowed to decide policies without any outside interference, so should everyone else.

Besides... if we sell them the arms at least we'll know how many they have

 

Balance of power globally?

***? Does the U.S. have some god given right to be at the top of the power heap? Hell no. So to achieve global power balance, there should be at least one nation or alliance of nations that can militarily and economically stand up to the Americans.

*=you need to star profanity completely out.

 

So what are people's opinions of the best solutions to the problem here? Short of attacking China

What's the "man on the street" take in Taiwan? You should be getting a wonderful chance for front line opinions.

For me, I don't see a realistic way that this would spill over to global war.

First and formost, China is lacking any kind of power projection capabilities. Nothing the EU is planning on selling to China eliminates this problem.

Secondly, it would be extremely shortsighted for China to risk its international economic status.

Lastly, the physical reason Taiwan itself exists is no longer valid, even if the Taiwanese would never admit that.

 

Taiwan will be a part of China again, I believe.

From there it will go in one of two ways.

Another generation of the Cold War II.

Or, due to my faith in humanity, they'll embrace capitalism and know an era of prosperity they can't even fathom at this point in their history.

 

J-Rod, there's one of two schools of thought about this here.

One group follows the Guomindang (KMT) philosophy of eventual reunification, on the belief that the government here in Taipei is the legitimate government, albeit in exile.

The other says Taiwan is and will forever be independent.

Most Taiwanese cautiously support the latter.

What's the "man on the street" take in Taiwan? You should be getting a wonderful chance for front line opinions.

[image=http://www.computex.com.tw/computex2004/images/mrt_map_big0.jpg]

I live just near the Nanking/Nanjing/Nanching E Road MRT stop, on the brown line. I teach in Muzha, which is the opposite end of the brown line. Taiwanese who live in Muzha, which is aways out of town, consider it a big deal to go to Taipei city.

So in answer to your question = Taiwanese don't seem to care too much about the outside world, but my Mandarian is minimal so I can't say for sure.

E_S

 

One group follows the Guomindang (KMT) philosophy of eventual reunification, on the belief that the government here in Taipei is the legitimate government, albeit in exile.

Well, If China gets as strong as I believe they will, it'll be reunification or destruction. That isn't what I want to happen, but that don't count for much.

The US and China will then go into frosty relations, leading to a new Cold War.

Or China discovering capitalism (as they are experimenting with now) and greater freedoms that capitalism mandates to be truely sucessful.

In which case relations will thaw and China will, possibly, take our role as the big boy, for a little while at least.

 

If China gets richer, why would it need Taiwan?

To save face? At what cost; they know they can't hope to take on America and her allies. They're a reason they use Australia so much as a conduit to the US...

E_S

 

To save face? At what cost; they know they can't hope to take on America and her allies. They're a reason they use Australia so much as a conduit to the US...

Yes, as a matter of pride, unless I am underestimating the Chinese Government.

See, with this new trade deal, they'll get stronger. And they don't have to be strong enough to take America and her Allies. They only have to be strong enough that we can't take them.

 

China, for all it's posturing and sabre-rattling, isn't a very expansionist power, nor is it likely to be.

They go through Australia to talk with the US because they can't/won't do it publicly, as it undermines their hardass image.

China won't attack Taiwan until after 2008, at any rate, and even then, it might just not be worth it. Marx, perversely, was almost correct, in that capitalism contains seeds of destruction, but it will destroy the CCP, not the capitalist revolution. By the time China could afford to come after this island, it may not need to.

E_S

 

China won't attack Taiwan until after 2008, at any rate, and even then, it might just not be worth it. Marx, perversely, was almost correct, in that capitalism contains seeds of destruction, but it will destroy the CCP, not the capitalist revolution. By the time China could afford to come after this island, it may not need to.

It sounds reasonable. I hope you are right. China scares the Hell outta me and I would love to see them move further in the direction they have been.

I think that is why the EU wants to open up more trade. And it may work.

It is just a Hell of a gamble.

 

You have no reason to be scared of China.

Simply because China has never really shown expansionist or imperial aspirations. They've enough trouble administering the provinces within their borders, without worrying about acquiring new ones.

What's more, China does have some claim to Taiwan. It was part of China, people recognise Beijing as the legitimate capital of China, and they don't recognise Taiwan as a state (though they treat it as such in practise). Now, I don't want to see this country handed to China on a plate - it's a beautiful land, really - and I recognise the Taiwanese case for their independence as equally legitimate and compelling.

I guess what I'm saying is that whilst I don't agree with China getting arms, I don't know exactly how to resolve the issue of Taiwan.

E_S

 

Well, Beijing's more or less talked themselves into a corner concerning Taiwan.

Incidentally, the EU last year issued over US $500 million dollars worth of export licenses for military/dual use equipment to China (submarine engines, avionics, sonar, etc.) And there's strong evidence to suggest that the Chinese WZ-10 attack helicopter has input from Eurocopter.

I think it's quite likely Taiwan will end up back in the fold of China, simply more for economic reasons that anything else (from where I sit in the Hsinchu, Taiwan ROC, the only thing pretty much guranteeing Taiwanese economic growth are every increasing trade with the Mainland). Assuming no one on either sides of the Straits pulls off anything rash.

 

The strange thing about China is its rulers seem to be handlng capitalism somewhat successfully, in that they've mixed it with a command economy and still remained in control.

OK, so they looked at Gorbachev's glasnost and perstroika programmes and resolved the result was not going to happen in China. Might it get undone? I don't know. If the Chinese continue being as cautious as they have been, it'll take a long time for the system to be undone....

Or is the supposed linkage of capitalism and freedom not always so? That is to say, you do not have to be free to be able to trade goods, your trading of goods may be more to do with surviving rather than an expression of freedom. If the market is satisfied, is freedom relevant or even needed?

A disturbing question perhaps, but one worth asking in light of China's progress over the last 15 years.

JB

 

A few points.

1. The EU arms embargo was not legally binding on it's member states anyway. Several EU states already sell arms to China.

2. It is absurd to argue against the lifting of the embargo because of human rights abuses, unless you also argue for such measures to be introduced against several other deplorable regimes which both the US and EU states are happy to sell arms to.

3. China is not going to be in a position to take Taiwan in the near future and even if it was the cost (in more ways than one) would be enourmous.

 

I agree on all points, DK.

On the train-ride from Taichung, which is more or less the centre of Taiwan, to Taipei I couldn't help but think that any attempt by the mainland to take Taiwan would result in an unwinnable guerilla war as the countryside is largely mountains and forests.

However, I'm not sure that arming China is necessarily a wise move yet...

E_S

 

The EU arms embargo was not legally binding on it's member states anyway. Several EU states already sell arms to China.

Except I'm not sure what you mean by "legally binding" then.

The EU adopted the weapons embargo back in 1989.

Perhaps you are thinking of the "dual-use" loophole?

As I'm everyone knows, dual-use technology is such that is sold for civilian use, but can easily be adapted for military purposes.

Heavy Diesel engines that can be fitted into submarines, or hurricane monitoring radars that can be modified into a anti-aircraft systems, etc...

Although it's not going to matter until China starts buying the EU version of the C-130 transport. Then we can worry.

 

" Taiwan will be a part of China again, I believe. "

That could lead to a little bit more than a cold war.

 

Even then, do you really think it's cause for concern, Mr44. I could be wrong, but it seems to me that China does alot of talking but not much doing, as it likes to appear to be tough but in reality lacks the will to do anything to back up it's sabre-rattling talk.

E_S

 

" I could be wrong, but it seems to me that China does alot of talking but not much doing "

You wouldnt be wrong if you were just talking about he last ten years. But history has proven over and over and over and over that China and whoever its ruling power may be at any given time is quite capable of world altering manuevers. And it seems no matter who runs China - Yuan, Ming, Manchu, Communists - whoever, repression of the poor and artisans seems to be the order of the day. Ask some Falun Dafa practicers - there the latest in the long list of groups of people that have suffered under the narrow mindedness of Chinas' ruler's.

 

Most Chinese I talk to are pretty sure about eventual reunification. Conversely, most Taiwanese are pretty certain regarding Taiwan's independence in perpetuity, while also denying that Taiwan will ever be reunited under a common government with Mainland China.

With all the fiery rhetoric and propagandized education of the Civil War and Maoist period, the Chinese government has kind of walled itself into a hardline stance on the issue. To acknowledge Taiwanese independence would be to acknowledge the weakness of the CCP and PLA which is something that the government is not prepared nor able to do.

As for the topic issue, the Arms Embargo being lifted sounds scary on the one hand in that it gives the Chinese access to a wide variety of modern military technologies, thus possibly facilitating an invasion of Taiwan. However, as was noted, the PLA is currently hardly capable of launching a war of such grand proportions at this time or in the near future. And what's more, Beijing, unlike the "rogue states" and terrorist organizations we're all so antsy about, would actually be concerned with its place in global society and would most certainly prefer not to see its citizens consumed in a nuclear holocaust. In other words, I believe we can trust the Chinese with military powers.

As someone else mentioned, the US does not have a god-given right to universal superiority and it might actually benefit the world to have a counter-balance to American power.

 

Even then, do you really think it's cause for concern, Mr44.

Do I? Not really.

I think the main reason why China wants updated weaponry is to counter the Russians, not the US. Yeah, there is Taiwan, but Taiwan has reached a stasis point.

After China attacked the Soviet Demansky garrison in 1969, and was soundly defeated by the Soviets, the Russian-Chinese border has been heavily fortified.

Technology-wise, I'd say China is about 4 generations behind the West, and 2 behind the Russians.

The most prolific Chinese tank is still the type 59, which is based off of the Russian T-54, and uses 50 year old technology. Man-portable anti-tank missiles would eat this tank alive, and it would be no contest if faced by modern Western tanks or AT aircraft.

Not only that, but 57% of China's army is still made of minimally trained conscripts, who are organized to protect China from dissent within, rather than protection from outside attack.