China: Shooting itself in the foot in Libya?

Let's begin with a mea culpa.


Throughout the Libya war, I have rarely missed an opportunity to take Vladimir Putin's (yes, you read that correctly, Putin's, not Medvedev's) Russia to task for its craven failure to support last March's UN Security Resolution 1973 authorizing military action in Libya.


At the same time, I have often given short shrift to China's supporting role as Russia's co-Resolution-basher-in-arms.


I downplayed Beijing's aloof position as part of a broader policy of not getting mixed up in a far-away democratic revolution that could raise awkward questions about China's own repressive ways.   


Russia is now engaged in a delicate diplomatic pas-de-deux with Libya's National Transitional Council. It's belatedly gone from snubbing the once-rebel leadership, to sounding them out, to formally recognising them as Libya's legitimate rulers.


China is laboring to follow suit - but it's making a hash of things, and perhaps digging itself a deeper hole in the process.


At a recent press conference, a foreign ministry official said China "respects the choice of the Libyan people and values the important status and role of the Libyan NTC in resolving the Libyan issue."


Documents in a trash bin


After hedging its bets until the eleventh hour - no scratch that, make that twelfth hour - China's sudden newfound respect for the democratic aspirations of Libya's once-silent majority smacks of craven (yes, that word again) hypocrisy.


For it turns out that China's "respect for the choice of the Libyan people and values" was no match for the opportunism of several state-controlled Chinese arms companies.


A reporter for the Toronto Globe and Mail unearthed documents in a trash bin in a Tripoli neighborhood indicating that Beijing offered to sell $200 million worth of rocket launchers, anti-tank missiles and portable surface-to-air Gaddafi's government.


Libyan security officials reportedly made what's been described as a shopping trip to Beijing in mid-July. The Chinese companies are said to have proposed delivering the arms through third-party countries such as Algeria or South Africa, with whom China has done business in the past.


All of this at a time when Beijing had formally endorsed UN Resolution 1970 calling for an arms embargo, and vowed to uphold a policy of strict neutrality. 


Of course, in China's sprawling bureaucracy, it's not unthinkable - actually, it's highly likely - that one part of the state apparatus (in this case, the arms manufacturers) could act with a mind of its own, in the absence of the state's approval or prior knowledge. 


Russia, hardly a paragon of good ethical foreign policy, says its support of the Libyan weapons embargo cost a Russian state-run arms supplier $4 billion worth of lost contracts.


Moscow also suspended its military contacts with Libya - a stance it failed to take during NATO's 1999 campaign to halt an assault by Serbian forces on ethnic Abanians in Kosovo. (At the time, Russia, and China, reportedly offered the Serbian forces of then-President Slobodan Milosevic arms, fighters and tactical advice.)


But...France armed the rebels


China apologists may be tempted to ask what's so wrong with Beijing supplying arms to Gaddafi when NATO and its allies were ferrying arms to the rebel camp? France acknowledged that it had dropped weapons to rebel fighters in Libya's western mountains.


But this is to ignore the fact that UN Resolution 1970 - the one imposing the arms embargo - referred explicitly to the Libyan Republic (of Muammar Gaddafi), and not to the rebels.


So these arms drops were not, in strictly legal terms, in contravention of international law.


So what's the upshot of China's double-dealing in Libya? Should we even pretend to be indignant given that  Beijing has made no bones about seeking lucrative business opportunities wherever they beckon in Africa and the Middle East or beyond - and putting political considerations second?


As my colleague, Eric Olander, tweeted on Monday, even Washington now seems to realise that its influence is being eclipsed in Africa by China.


Russia the nemesis


While this is a sign of fast-changing geopolitical times, China may find itself at a disadvantage in the short term as it jockeys for a share of Libya's potentially booming oil business.


Russia looms as a nemesis in this battle for petrodollars, and a possible beneficiary of greater good will on the part of Libya's new government given Moscow's just-in-time about-face.


Of course, China is a juggernaut in the new global economy that few can resist - or at least resist at their own peril. A major question going ahead is not whether China will insinuate its way back into a New Libya's good graces - but under what terms.


If Libya lives up to the democratic aspirations of its new (transitional) leadership, as outlined at last week's Friends of Libya conference in Paris, then the next generation of Libyans will want to work with the Chinese as equal partners - and under terms that ensure real jobs and opportunities for the Libyan people.

Comments or opinions expressed on this blog are those of the individual contributors only, and do not necessarily represent the views of FRANCE 24. The content on this blog is provided on an "as-is" basis. FRANCE 24 is not liable for any damages whatsoever arising out of the content or use of this blog.
China: Shooting itself in the foot in Libya? Not really. But it surely shoots its global antagonists in the foot! Of course China would arm Gadhafi and any anti-American leader or regime all the way to the end. That is why China was arming Zimbabwe's president Robert Mugabe at a time that all other countries had banned weapons sales to him. China is a major U.S. geopolitical antagonistic state -despite the major commercial ties with the U.S.- and it will arm and support any anti-American leader or regime, if it could do that clandestinely without damaging its commercial ties with the U.S. One striking example of this is the Chinese- Pakistan joint development of aircraft fighter jet, the passing to China information on the fallen secretive design helicopter that crashed during the Bin Laden operation by the U.S. Navy Seals, as well as the joint development of other weapons systems- even though Pakistan is said to be a major U.S. ally. But China knows that the U.S.-Pakistan alliance is semi-hostile at best, and that Pakistan's national interests, both commercial, geographical and strategic are connected like Siamese twins with China. Plus, China is a major foe of India - Pakistan's traditional nemesis and major war antagonist. China would be careful not to antagonize the U.S. publicly now because it depends on the U.S. trade to keep its economy booming. But it has already started major investments and developments all over Africa to wean off it economy from dependence on the U.S. market. And when that happens, China may start to become more assertive on its foreign policy. Until then, China would court and pamper all antagonistic to the U.S. states to establish a foothold around the globe. That is how the U.S. established its global supremacy after WWII, but the U.S. did it with military invasions and with clandestine operations and bribes that overthrew unfriendly to the U.S. regimes. Now China is on course to win the friendship and alliance of such regimes with free credits, construction, mining, industrial development, and support in banking and international institutions. Gadhafi, regardless of revelations that he had cooperated with the CIA and the British MI6, was generally hostile to all Western states. And if China could save his regime and keep him depended on China for his survival, it would have done it. Nikos Retsos, retired professor

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • No HTML tags allowed

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.