The summer Olympics provided a high-wattage showcase for China'sascendance on the world stage, one nonetheless marred by ongoingconcerns about its support for the Sudanese regime's genocide inDarfur. These concerns will only intensify when China assumes thepresidency of the United Nations Security Council in October, where itwill nominally lead efforts to maintain peace throughout the world,even as it continues to underwrite the mass killings in Darfur.
This is because China is the largest supplier of small arms to Sudan,among other countries. Human rights organizations are calling forexpansion of an arms embargo that would eliminate loopholes China andSudan currently exploit to transfer arms into the hands of Sudanesegovernment forces and the Janjaweed militia, now responsible for thedeaths of more than 450,000 people. The same call has been echoed byCongress: last week [Sept 15], Sens. Bill Nelson and James Inhofeintroduced a Senate resolution calling for an expanded and enforcedarms embargo against Sudan, followed closely behind by a Houseresolution with the same aim introduced by Reps. James McGovern, BradMiller and Scott Garrett.
Yet expansion and enforcement of the embargo will not happen withoutconcerted pressure from other members of the UN Security Council,including the United States. And this time China must feel the heat.
The continued flow of arms, and small arms in particular, is fuelingviolence against Darfuris by the government of President Omaral-Bashir. Last month Sudanese government forces attacked one ofDarfur's largest camps for displaced people. Civilians using sticks,spears and knives faced down machine guns and automatic weapons of thekind sent by China. More than 30 people were slaughtered.Humanitarian workers have been detained, kidnapped, assaulted andkilled by criminals armed with such weapons, jeopardizing the deliveryof desperately needed aid.
Many countries are implicated in the continued supply of arms, but theprimary responsibility lies with two Security Council members: Russiaand China. While Russia is a major supplier of heavy weapons, Chinabears the distinction of providing an estimated 90 percent of Sudan'ssmall arms imports, the very weapons used to kill civilians. A recentBBC report indicated that China had also supplied military trucks andwas training pilots to fly fighter jets used in Darfur.
China denies that its actions contravene the arms embargo. It hastried to wash its hands of any role in the genocide with a shiftingdeck of denials: We are no longer supplying any arms to Sudan. Oursales comprised just a fraction of Sudan's imports. We do our best toprevent weapons from falling into the wrong hands. But in light ofKhartoum's refusal to cooperate with the embargo, China cannot ensurethat arms are not being transferred to Darfur. China's continuedsales of arms to Khartoum may constitute a breach of the GenocideConvention, which requires states to prevent and refrain fromcomplicity in genocide.
Why does China persist? Reports conducted by the StockholmInternational Peace Research Institute indicate that the revenuesChina generates through the sales of arms to Sudan are minimal.Rather, the weapons transfers serve to strengthen ties between the twocountries and ensure China's continued access to Sudan's oil reserves. In addition, China uses its permanent seat in the U.N. SecurityCouncil to provide Khartoum with diplomatic protection. China has,for example, abstained from voting on the arms embargo resolutions.
It is of course imperative that the U.S. press Russia and othersuppliers to suspend arms sales to Sudan, but particular attentionmust be paid to China because of its trade relationship and closediplomatic ties to Sudan. The United States can begin by introducinga resolution to expand the current U.N. arms embargo this October.
Stemming the flow of arms to Sudan alone won't stop the bloodshed. Butit is a profound and important step the world's nations can takeresponsibility for, right now, toward disarming criminals activelyperpetrating genocide. While it is not a substitute for peace, theembargo can and will save lives and improve the situation on theground in the immediate term. The international community -- Chinaincluded -- owes the people of Darfur at least that much.