China's Deadly Investments

co-authored by David Sullivan

Tomorrow, China assumes the Presidency of the U.N. Security Council, a position that it last held in July 2007 when it led the authorization of a U.N. peacekeeping force for Darfur. At that time, Beijing appeared to be responding to a global campaign by activists, in advance of the Olympics, to shame China into using its influence to address human rights crises in locales in which it has significant economic investments. But China's actions have belied its rhetoric, and it has continued to protect its favorite deadly dictators in places like Darfur, Burma, and Zimbabwe. A revised strategy must put greater focus on China's wallet.

China's rapid emergence as a global economic powerhouse has come about in part due to its willingness to do business with despotic regimes. This bad behavior is often considered good business, but China's current policy towards these ticking political time bombs poses a major threat to its longer-term economic interests.

China backs its dictator allies with new investments, weapons sales, and diplomatic cover. Illustratively, with more than $8 billion invested, Chinese companies dominate Sudan's oil sector, and Chinese military assets keep turning up in Darfur. When Zimbabwe's dictator Robert Mugabe decided to retain power through rigged elections and state violence, China sent him arms, donated midnight blue tiles for the roof of his palace, and vetoed targeted U.N. sanctions against his cronies. And when Burma cracked down on the peaceful protests of the Saffron Revolution, China steadfastly supported the junta, shipping artillery cannons and running interference for the regime in the Security Council.

To change this pattern, a new administration in Washington and activists around the world need to focus on Beijing's investment strategy, demonstrating how its economic interests are undermined by its present foreign policy and offering China real alternatives. A more sober examination is required in order to ascertain how the Chinese government might be motivated to become a more constructive actor in support of peace and human rights. There are two points of leverage: one positive and one negative.

On the positive side, as China increasingly integrates into the global economy, Beijing must play by the rules if it wants others to do so. China's entry into the World Trade Organization in 2001 was based on the calculation that the economic benefits of globalization outweighed the cost of abiding by international norms. But today an emboldened China skirts the rules on everything from underage gymnasts to product safety and intellectual property rights. The U.S. should remind China that defying basic human rights, environmental and labor standards will rebound negatively on its commercial interests, particularly by using multilateral mechanisms like the W.T.O. to impose a cost on China's errant practices.

On the negative side lurks the greatest threat to China's long-term growth potential. By allying itself with some of the world's worst dictators for the spoils of today's resource grab, the bill will be paid tomorrow by rebels and opposition officials who will remember who kept their enemies in power.

The blowback in Sudan could be explosive. A return to full-scale civil war would directly threaten Chinese oil interests, as rebels there would make their first target the China National Petroleum Company. No less worrisome is the future of Zimbabwe and Burma. Mugabe cannot cling to power indefinitely, and Zimbabwe's economic meltdown provides a preview of Burma's future under the junta. China's support to these regimes has eviscerated the infrastructure, necessary for a healthy business environment, from educational opportunities to property rights. Putting the human suffering aside, none of these countries will remain profitable for long on their present trajectories.

Therein lies the opening. China ultimately has an economic interest in peace in Sudan, and in stable transitions in Zimbabwe and Burma. If China can positively support these outcomes, some of its most egregious sins will be forgiven. The Beijing government should launch such an effort this month, as China literally sets the agenda for the Security Council, by focusing on a peace deal for Darfur that will end the suffering there. Bringing China into a more direct role in peacemaking will require deft diplomacy from Washington and intelligent advocacy from activists, who can help affect Beijing's calculations further by ramping up stock divestment campaigns and calls for arms embargo enforcement and targeted sanctions.

The Chinese government is not entirely a lost human rights cause. We just need to revise the roadmap.

Comments

[kaski]

As if America has never supported a despotic government or put dictator puppets in place. I suggest you learn about Freidman economics, here and abroad.

[joebaggadonuts]

The result of a race to the bottom in lack of oversight in China led to melamine in dog food and baby formula and anything with protein from China. Shoddy oversight led to lead in toy paint, beads with date rape drugs in them and on and on. Why would you expect a regime which cannot control its exports to be able to control its foreign policy?

[consumetheconsumer]

Re: "China backs its dictator allies with new investments, weapons sales, and diplomatic cover."

Substitute "The United States" for "China" and you have realpolitik. Until the US gets its own house in order, and starts treating the dictators it supports differently, I don't really think it'll do much good to go lecturing others on how other countries should prop up their dictator allies who graciously provide them with the raw materials needed to keep their emerging economies going.

Look at the cast of characters the US has backed over the years to keep its fix on oil and to (incompetently) try and stem its fix on drugs. Thugs, dictators and gangsters almost all.

Let's all remember, you reap what you sow: "By allying itself with some of the world's worst dictators for the spoils of today's resource grab, the bill will be paid tomorrow by rebels and opposition officials who will remember who kept their enemies in power." Iraq, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Pakistan, etc., etc., etc.

[designer4africa]

to get an active citizens movement to put pressure on china i think approaching the religious community would be a good move. They are already wary of the chinese government & their lack of freedoms especially where religion is concerned... if we can get them to put pressure on as well as get their focus on the direct relation to humanitarian issues & how they too need to be equally as important to the religious community as the freedom of religion has been in that community we have a good chance on long lasting pressure not only from the student aged level but in older americans & as many religious institutions here also teach activism to their children thru projects & fundraising this will bring in future americans into the fold

The Christian Companion to Not On Our Watch is a good idea but I think having a more open religious title to include other faiths would be better or doing outreach to all faiths will be more productive

Its not just the "activist" or "Christians" job to advocate for the end to human suffering its all our responsibility.

I think Mr. Prendergast has spent most of his life on getting the information & bringing it to the people & now its our turn to take even 10 min. of our time or more & sign petitions do anything & everything we can to stop the human abuses in Africa , China & everywhere it exist.