China Menace -- How China's secret deals are fuelling war (With some
enlightening readers comments)

The Times August 08, 2006

How China's secret deals are fuelling war

Stephen Pollard

As Israel and Hezbollah exchange bombs and missiles, oil-hungry Beijing
plays out its sinister strategy

THE STORY behind the story in the Middle East today is the proxy war, as
Israel, on behalf of the US, takes on Hezbollah, which fights on behalf
of Iran and Syria. Indeed, one can widen it further and describe the
participants as proxies for the West versus militant Islam.

This analysis of the conflict sometimes mentions, in passing, Russia’s
declining influence. But there is another player that has somehow
received almost no coverage.

For decades China has been building up influence in the Middle East. It
suits China’s strategy well that coverage has been almost non-existent.
As Deng Xiaoping once put it, China must “hide brightness and nourish
obscurity . . . to bide our time and build up our capabilities”. As
China develops into the role of global power, its influence on the
region is no longer obscure; it cannot now be ignored.

The original postwar Middle East proxies were the US and the Soviet
Union. Washington supporting Israel and the Kremlin sponsoring enemy
regimes and their terrorist offshoots. But the Sino-Soviet split, which
began in the 1960s, meant a lifting of the constraint on China getting
involved, and it soon began to develop ties to countries that were not
under Soviet influence, such as Egypt under Sadat.

A brilliant analysis of China’s role by Barry Rubin, in the Middle East
Review of International Affairs, describes China’s first steps thus: “As
hope for global revolution faded and Beijing switched its partners from
tiny opposition groups to governments, China now projected itself as
leader of the Third World, struggling against the hegemony of the two
superpowers, the USSR and the United States. Lacking the strength and
level of development of other great powers, China would try to make
itself the head of a massive coalition of the weaker states.” That
meant, in the Middle East, Israel’s enemies.

Today countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Pakistan ― all key
states in the region ― have strong ties to China, which they are all
likely to see as a counterbalance to American power in the Middle East
and beyond.

As President Jiang Zemin put it in 1994, US “hegemony” should be
opposed, in part by helping countries such as Iran, which were already
fighting that battle. But China’s strategy dovetailed geopolitics with
economic necessity. Without access to oil markets, China had to fuel
economic expansion by turning to more neglected suppliers, such as Iran,
Iraq and Sudan. And with a growing consumption of Gulf oil, so China has
had to direct its security policy towards ensuring that the US will not
be able to interfere with the flow of oil. This means developing ever
stronger political and strategic relationships with oil exporters.

Jiang’s state visit in 1999 to Saudi Arabia cemented what he termed a
“strategic oil partnership”. In 1996 Saudi exported 60,000 barrels per
day to China. By 2000 exports stood 350,000 bpd (17 per cent of
Beijing’s oil imports). Iranian oil exports rose even faster, from
20,000 bpd in 1995 to 200,000 bpd in 2000.

The Middle East is now China’s fourth largest trading partner. But its
trade is hardly traditional. As Rubin puts it: “Being so late in
entering the region ― and having less to offer in economic or technology
terms than the United States, Russia, Japan, and Europe ― China must go
after marginal or risky markets . . . supplying customers no one else
will service with goods no one else will sell them.” What that means, of
course, is arms.

In the war-by-proxy analysis, Iran is rightly said to be the power and
arms supplier behind Hezbollah. But the issue of where Iran’s arms come
from has been ignored. China has sold Iran tanks, planes, artillery,
cruise, anti-tank, surface-to-surface and anti-aircraft missiles as well
as ships and mines. It is also Iran’s main supplier of unconventional
arms and is thought by almost all monitors to be illicitly involved in
supplying key elements in Iran’s chemical and nuclear weapons programme.
This is despite China being a signatory to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation
Treaty and the Chemical Weapons Convention.

China has sold nuclear reactors to Algeria, Iran, Syria, and Saudi
Arabia, and Chinese nuclear weapons designs were found in Libya. It has
also negotiated with Syria on the sale of M11 ballistic missiles. China
is one of the few global suppliers of ballistic missiles. and can charge
a heavy price. It demanded of the Saudis, for instance, to whom it sold
CSS2 missiles, payment in cash, ensuring both the cementing of a key
strategic relationship and total deniability of the sale.

Both nations have kept the relationship as secret as possible, but one
expert, Robert Mullins, estimates that at least 1,000 Chinese military
advisers have been based at Saudi missile installations since the
mid-1990s. Such secret deals are handled by Polytechnologies
Incorporated, a defence firm controlled by the People’s Liberation Army,
which both installs weapons and trains handlers.

But like all the most successful illicit traders, China is ideologically
profligate in its relations. Keen to supply weapons to Israel’s enemies
in return for oil, it is equally happy to trade with Israel in return
for its technology. As Benjamin Netanyahu put it to the Chinese when, as
Prime Minister, he championed an Israeli investment in China: “Israeli
knowhow is more valuable than Arab oil.” The estimates are that there
has been between $1 billion and $3 billion of arms trade between China
and Israel. But in this case the flow of arms and weapons technology has
been from Israel to China.

In the immediate analysis of the present conflict, it is clearly Iran
and Syria that, as President Bush put it, should “stop doing this shit”.
But any deeper explanation of the realpolitik of the Middle East has to
include the insidious role of the Chinese, the 21st century’s next
superpower.

Stephen Pollard is a senior Fellow at the Centre for the New Europe,
Brussels.
Print this article Send to a friend Back to top of page
Have Your Say
+ Post a comment

Good article, Stephen. I think you've done an excellent job of
describing China's intentions, especially in regard to reducing American
hegemony. It is obvious to me that China plans to expand its
industrial-military complex at any cost, and will do whatever it takes
to become the dominant world power. This would be disastrous for the
free world, as China has consistently demonstated a disregard for human
rights and the environment. Your article makes it clear that the US
stands in the way of China's goals. To me, this is a good thing. I
shudder to think what would happen without an essentially benevolent
country like the United States "policing" the world. In reference to the
fall of the Roman Empire, James Cahill spoke of a proto-Mafiosi that
emerged, unrestrained. What followed was the Dark Ages. I suspect we
would experience something akin to Cahill's proto-Mafiosi if China or
any other oppressive government unseated the US in the global arena.

Reg Block, Vancouver, Canada

The first two commentators on this article have followed accusations
that it is one-sided with incredibly one-sided anti-US statements. They
have not even acknowledged, let alone sought to refute, the very strong
argument that the author has made, and totally missed the very point he
wanted to make. I think his point is simple: that China is having a
huge, negative influence behind the scenes of various international
struggles that is largely ignored, but shouldn't be. Their responses to
the article proves that point.

Ben Hurley, Sydney, Australia

The Chinese have surpassed the US in arms production and sales. They
produce high quality and in a mass that US regulation cannot allow. In
my humble opinion, all eyes should be focused East. The Chinese throw us
Yanks a bone with seeming cooperation while fuelling Iran's nuclear fire.

Jeremy Waters, Tucson, AZ, USA
Read all comments ( 31 )

Good article, Stephen. I think you've done an excellent job of
describing China's intentions, especially in regard to reducing American
hegemony. It is obvious to me that China plans to expand its
industrial-military complex at any cost, and will do whatever it takes
to become the dominant world power. This would be disastrous for the
free world, as China has consistently demonstated a disregard for human
rights and the environment. Your article makes it clear that the US
stands in the way of China's goals. To me, this is a good thing. I
shudder to think what would happen without an essentially benevolent
country like the United States "policing" the world. In reference to the
fall of the Roman Empire, James Cahill spoke of a proto-Mafiosi that
emerged, unrestrained. What followed was the Dark Ages. I suspect we
would experience something akin to Cahill's proto-Mafiosi if China or
any other oppressive government unseated the US in the global arena.

Reg Block, Vancouver, Canada

The first two commentators on this article have followed accusations
that it is one-sided with incredibly one-sided anti-US statements. They
have not even acknowledged, let alone sought to refute, the very strong
argument that the author has made, and totally missed the very point he
wanted to make. I think his point is simple: that China is having a
huge, negative influence behind the scenes of various international
struggles that is largely ignored, but shouldn't be. Their responses to
the article proves that point.

Ben Hurley, Sydney, Australia

The Chinese have surpassed the US in arms production and sales. They
produce high quality and in a mass that US regulation cannot allow. In
my humble opinion, all eyes should be focused East. The Chinese throw us
Yanks a bone with seeming cooperation while fuelling Iran's nuclear fire.

Jeremy Waters, Tucson, AZ, USA

I have no doubt this is true. I would ask, is the author telling us that
Israel is selling technology to the Chinese who in turn develope weapons
and then provide these weapons to Isreal's sworn enemies?

J Cerquitella, Budapest, Hungary

It's clearly a case of "Do as I say, not as I do." Or dual standards.
When China has a record of foreign aggression to match that of the USA
(and its trusty sidekick the UK), then you will be entitled to complain.

David L, Leeds, UK

If China is helping Iran develop nuclear weapons the Chinese can kiss
the oil in Iran good bye. The United States will never again let a
communist regime influence world events, let alone become a major player
in the Middle East. Quite frankly, the US will either invade Iran just
to teach the Chinese whom they are dealing with - the one and only
superpower on the planet - or we might militarily destroy China in order
absolve our trillion dollars in debt.

Bradley Ambani, Houston, TX, USA

If the claims of this article are supported by facts, how is it shabby
propaganda? If supported by facts, this article is an investigative
reporting masterpiece given the secrecy in China. How do you know the US
still spends the most amount of money on arms? China's government is
secretive and nobody knows how much money they spend, nor do we know how
much slave labor is used to make such arms. It would seem to me that a
country attempting to match the US military might should be spending the
most on buildup. Buying Isreali technology, spying on US technology and
selling that technology to Iran and the nut job that runs it is shady
and should be cause for alarm in the West, in Europe and the Middle East.

Logan Gearheart, Houston, TX, USA

What the US has never understood and the chinese have, is that even
small countries have their dignity. China has been a good and true
friend to dozens of smaller countries around the world for decades. It
is only now (and too late for the USA) that people are waking up to this
fact.

Rajeev Shah, London

Daniel Guo from Shanghai's comment is a product of a Goverment
controlled media. Remember, China is a communist country, and we all
know how well communism grows in poor third world countries. We need
more articles like this one to bring China's "goings on" out into the
open. They are playing the world like an open chess game and as the
politicians and arm-chair intellectuals are incapable of thinking a few
steps ahead, I fear China will swallow us all up over the next 30-50
years. It's only a matter of time. Your exactly right.

Steve, San Diego, CA, USA

I've noticed many defensive comments coming from China or Chinese
readers. I don't know if they are genuine individuals or
state-sponsored, but I have my suspicions. It seems most comments do not
take into fact the danger posed by the Iranians to world stability.
Perhaps, being half a world away, they don't take the Iranian Shiah
caliphate dream too seriously. But most in the West are just begining to
realize that we are all in between two insane caliphate movements, al
Qaida and Islamist Iran, bent on destroying the Western world as we know
it. Each believes the one who topples the US or Israel will win the
prize. Perhaps the Chinese think they will pick up all the leftovers
once the smoke has cleared from the Ayatollah's long range missiles.
Perhaps they will.

Dave, New York, USA

It seems that this is how the network of movement of arms and technology
has been functioning: USA has trade deficit with China, so USA is
willling to sell arms to China to reduce the trade deficit. Chinese
defence experts have visited the Pentagon. Israel is willing to sell
armament and the related technology to China because that is the only
thing they can sell in return for Chinese goods. Arab countries and Iran
sell oil to China in return for Chinese arms and Chinese goods, Chinese
nuclear knowhow,and power plants. Therfore Israeli and US technology and
arms end up with Arabs and Iranians in exchange for oil. Therfore Israel
and USA are helping their adversaries in the Middle East by supplying
their technology, conventional and nuclear, through the services of the
Chinese middlemen. Because the USA and Israel have no control over
China. Thus USA and Israel are cutting their own throat by supplying war
technology to the enemies of Israel. No future for Israel?

Paul Weston Jones, Port of Spain, Trinidad

In my opinion, I would think that this article is a very one-sided
anti-Chinese article. The author has forgotten that it is not only the
Chinese who have been providing arms that fuel this war, but the US, too.

Adrian Tan, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia

This is shabby propaganda. China's armaments industry is tiny compared
to the US's. The US spends more than all the world together on the
military. It is the world's largest arms dealer and war profiteer. The
US that supplies Israel with billions in credits every year - the
largest single "assistance" program in the world. This is so Israel can
buy US arms. Israel gets a pass when it violates its written agreements
on using these weapons. They are supposed to be used strictly for
defence, but Israel's activities in Lebanon make a joke of these agreements.

John Chuckman, Toronto, Canada

China is set to be the next superpower and we in the Eest can expect
nothing less than to see her political and military power increase.
However, it is the arming of countries such as Iran with increasingly
sophisticated weapons which should cause us alarm. Whether we like it or
not, oil is essential and without it our homes will be cold and
supermarkets empty. Iran has already threatened to turn off the taps. As
a matter of self-interest, if not preservation, we must deny Iran
nuclear technology. In the long term, this is as much to the benefit of
China as it is to Europe and the US.

Timothy Glover, Weymouth, Dorset

If the figures for oil imports are correct then China could be hurt just
as much if not worse than the US by a Iranian blockade of the Persian Gulf.

Paul Nuttall, UK

Yeah, the US has been doing everything right, including missiles on the
Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. Would you guys agree?

Ryan ChenN, Fuzhou, China

At Brymbo, North Wales, Wilkinson the Iron Master manufactured canon for
both the British and French armies. They were used aganist each other.
During the Falklands war British ships were hit by British-made bombs.
We have recently used billion-pound weapons contracts to buy favour. Are
we much different to China? Trade in weapons blackens us all.

Robert, Wrexham, Wales

Stephen Pollard's conclusion that China must be enemies of Israel is
alarmingly over-simplistic serving only to fuel that old Yellow Peril
chesnut which still to this day haunts Russia. In context with America's
continual abuse and indifference to international treaties, China has
barely started to flex its political and economic muscle and surely it's
way too premature to jump to conclusions based on a series of oil deals
and arms trades.

Tom Nguyen, Moscow, Russia

All the comments seem to be directed at the last two paragraphs of the
article while ignoring the preceding 12. The point to be made is clear:
China has been doing a lot of trading with regimes that are considered
dubious, which has not been reported while the US's links with these
regimes are well documented. The Chinese are merely acting as rational
economic entities as required by capitalism, securing the resources they
require by commercial contract. The major difference between the Chinese
and the US however is that the Chinese do not bother about human rights
provisions on trading deals. In this it could be claimed that they are
being more honest as the US and Europe have for many years paid only lip
service to these ideals and with China now around as a more pliable
partner, human rights will surely take a further back seat.

Nick Dommett, London, UK

Ann Popelka - and what of Spain's "goings on"? Or any other country for
that matter? Are you trying to tell me that any country anywhere around
the world is totally innocent of trading arms (or any other number of
heinous materials)? As some have already mentioned, what of US selling
arms to Iraq and sponsoring the Mujahadin in Afghanistan? Oh, and one
doesn't normally go to war with trading partners (ref. Fukuyama), so
anyone "swallowing up" anyone else would be not only unlikely but
downright stupid. Good luck in your armchair!

Ian Renwick, Beijing, China

Beware of the sleeping giant at your peril. China, in years to come,
will make the US look like a side show in industry, commerce and
military might. The difference is they don't advertise what they do, but
keep a "lower than dust on the floor profile".

Mike Moran, Leeds, England

Why is it right for the US to supply death-dealing military aid to
Israel and wrong for Beijing to do ditto to people who may, in the
future, become "statesmen"? More specifically, just what is China
supposed to do in the modern world? Ask the US and its poodles if it may
please have some energy? Shun energy supplies from the Middle East (so
that these become available only to the US and its satellites)? Stall,
or even abandon its growth so that it is not an economic threat to the
Behemoth and her poodles? Get real mate!

Bill McCann, Suzhou, China

What a world - Israeli technology sold to China and applied to its arms,
then resold to the mad mullahs to kill Israelis. Thanks for the
enlightenment.

Penny, Vancouver, Canada

Netanyahu's saying that Israeli knowhow is more valuable than Arab oil
is utterly foolish. We all know what a valuable commodity oil is, upon
which the global economy relies. No wonder it is called black gold.
Further, Israeli knowhow is used in producing dangerous weapons which
will bring misery to mankind in the end.

Don M Perera, Melbourne, Australis

I am by no means an unquestioning supporter of China, but isn't it about
time the oil-for-war conspiracy theories were laid to rest? The US is a
self-interested brute. If the hegemonic international organisations, the
institutions of US dominance, had their way, then countries such as
Syria, Iran and Saudia Arabia would be absolutely defenceless in the
face of unparralalled US agression. As always, the war-for-oil analysis
is over simplistic. Of course, economic determinants play their part,
but the question we must ask is, would Iran still need to buy arms and
build up its military if it did not face the threat of imminent American
aggression, if American policy consisted of friendship building and the
development of mutual understanding, instead of invasion and domination?
Iran, unlike the US is unlikely to set upon a course of imperialist
world conquest, so why shouldn't it have arms for its own defence? Let
China look out for those who can't defend themselves.

Ian Woollard, Liverpool, UK

I do not agree with this point of view. China must not do the things
that the artical mentioned, because China's growing up is based on
peaceful development, not on the dirty treaties with other countries.
China can not do anything to harm other ones for its own sake.

Daniel Guo, Shanghai, China

Is that true ?

Xu Xiao Yu, Beijing, China

You are saying that China is supplying weapons and providing nuclear
technology to many Middle Eastern countries. On the other hand Israel is
selling between 1 to 3 billion dollars of arms to China. Wouldn't be
surprised that all these Israeli weapons could end up in enemy hands and
bring untold misery to Israelis in the end.

Don M Perera, Melbourne, Australia

As an overseas student from China who has been studying in England since
I was 17 years old, I have to say that most of the author's views are
heavily biased and thus sound quite ignorant, at least to me. I have
just thought of several simple questions. Is the US the world's biggest
arms seller? Does the US sell arms to any Middle-Eastern countries or
many other countries worldwide? If the US does, why is it so
unacceptable for China to sell arms to them or only some of them? What
exactly is the difference? Is the US interested in Middle-Eastern
oil?The answer is just obvious. Why is so unacceptable for China to be
interested in Middle-Eastern oil? Why is it called "insidious" when
China trades with them over oil? Also,why did the US supply arms to
Saddam over the Iraq-Iran war? Why?

Dong Lee, Lancaster, UK

We need more articles like this one to bring China's "goings on" out
into the open. They are playing the world like an open chess game and as
the politicians and arm-chair intellectuals are incapable of thinking a
few steps ahead, I fear China will swallow us all up over the next 30-50
years. Hitler told the world what he was going to do in the early 30s
and the Chinese have also expressed their intent, wants and desires. Its
only a matter of time.

Ann Popelka, Madrid, Spain

And don't forget the secret arms deals between Israel and China.

Z, New York, USA