France, Germany Seek End to Arms Embargo against China

French President Jacques Chirac was in the Far East over the week-end trying to convince Japan that lifting the EU arms embargo against China won't harm Japanese interests. He and German Chancellor Schroeder want to lift the embargo that the EU imposed on the People's Republic of China after the 1989 murders of demonstrators in Tiananmen Square by elements of the People's Liberation Army. "The conditions are not the same as when it was put in place," the French leader said in a press conference. On this one, the American refusal to side with France is the right move.

President Chirac observed that the reason for lifting the ban was political, maintaining that Europe would not increase its arms sales once the embargo went. In Washington, a few wondered why Europe wanted to lift the embargo if the idea was to avoid selling weapons. And indeed, the French president is either disingenuous or simply wrong. Lifting an embargo always leads to market forces stimulating trade. However, the diplomatic point is missed. Dropping the embargo would be a sign to China that Europe is over the 1989 events and that Europe wants better relations ahead.

However, while the specific conditions are not the same as they were 16 years ago, there are good diplomatic reasons to retain the embargo on the PRC. First and foremost, the unpleasant law China recently unveiled saying that it could use force against Taiwan if legal independence for the island moved forward is more than adequate reason to keep European guns out of Chinese hands. Moreover, there is the entire question of North Korea's nukes. Beijing has immense influence over Pyongyang, and it could pressure the North Koreans to behave. Lifting the embargo gives up leverage in this area. And above all, the security situation in Northern Asia is not enhanced by more advanced weapons entering the picture.

Washington and London, as well as Tokyo, would prefer to keep things as they are. Chinese diplomacy has always been sensitive to slights and to genuine offers of better relations. Beijing is a rather predictable partner in negotiations if one is prepared to have those negotiations fail in the short-term. The least constructive argument against lifting the embargo is the western fear that China will acquire advanced weapons. China has had The Bomb for a generation, and it put a man in space in October 2003. That's all the technology one needs to nuke countries on the other side of the globe.

Far better for the west is to use the European embargo as the bargaining chip that it is. When the North Koreans start playing ball for real or when Taiwan receives adequate assurances about the future, the embargo can go away. Or, if Europe wants to be truly daring, the embargo and human rights in China can be linked. Having promised China that the embargo would die by June, Europe has lost some leverage, but there is still a chance to get a quid pro quo. Still, it would have been better to side with Mr. Bush on this one.


© Copyright 2005 by The Kensington Review, J. Myhre, Editor. No part of this publication may be reproduced without written consent.
Produced using Fedora Linux.

Home