Print

Mail

wiki links

China to try to cover up 'axis' ties

`If Iraq is defeated by the US, increasing US unilateralism would bode ill for Beijing's game plan against Taiwan. For Beijing, this scenario amounts to the loss of a potential strategic partner in China's blueprint for cross-strait relations. '

After weeks of threats to use military force against Iraq by the Bush administration, Bagdad suddenly handed over a letter stating its unconditional acceptance of the UN resolution on weapons inspections in Iraq. For a moment the military crisis seemed to ease.

Despite Iraq's concession, however, the US has not renounced its determination, nor halted its preparations to use military force against Iraq. In fact, the Iraqi concession and the unyielding position of the US reflect processes of delicate, strategic calculation on the part of both nations.

The possible war against Iraq is not an anti-terrorism move by Washington, but a tactical move against those countries on the President George W. Bush's "axis of evil" list. Although the three countries that make up that "axis" - Iran, Iraq, and North Korea - have had contact with terrorist groups to a certain degree in the past, they are not linked to the religious fundamentalist organizations involved in the Sept. 11 attacks.

Saddam Hussein's regime is one of quasi-military, secular dictatorship. Iran's former Islamic religious leader, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, said that Iran had three enemies. The first was the late Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi. The second was America, "the Great Satan." The third was Saddam Hussein and his ruling Baath Party.

North Korea is a tough, atheistic, communist state that allows no room for Islamic fundamentalism. There are no strategic relations, moreover, between the countries of the "axis of evil." In reality, Iran's strategic interests differ from those of Iraq; North Korea's differ from those of both Iran and Iraq.

The "axis of evil" countries are vulnerable to strategic US maneuvers because their strategic interests conflict with those of the US. They have become obstacles to US efforts to map out its regional strategies.

The basis for the clash of strategic interests between them and the US lies in their relations with China. It goes without doubt that it is their links to China that render them "evil" in the eyes of the US.

Beijing's lack of support for US action against Iraq is understandable, but expressing outright opposition to US policy may have political and economic consequences for China that are difficult to assess at this stage.

The only alternative for Beijing now is to abstain from voting on the issue. If Iraq is defeated by the US, increasing US unilateralism would bode ill for Beijing's game plan against Taiwan. For Beijing, this scenario amounts to the loss of a potential strategic partner in China's blueprint for cross-strait relations.

If the Iraqi situation remains unchanged, the US, in preparation for a second regional war, is likely to impose less strategic pressure on China in the Asia-Pacific region. Although the three countries of the "axis of evil" have not resorted to terrorism or "unlimited war" against the US, they could act in tandem with organizations that pursue these tactics -- such as al-Qaeda -- thereby bringing invisible pressure to bear on Washington and jointly containing the US.

The strategic direction of these countries is similar to Beijing's, as we can see from the increasing attention paid in China to the book Unlimited War (Editor's Note: a textbook authored by two People's Liberation Army officers and used by the PLA, advocating "war without rules" and alleged by some to have inspired the Sept 11. attacks. See also Paul Lin's "PLA an inspiration for attackers" Oct. 17, 2001, Opinion Page 8).

Beijing considers the doctrine of "unlimited war" important, although it understands very clearly that cyber-warfare is likely to have a very limited impact on the US. Psychological warfare is a flexible form of warfare that could offset China's inferiority in military hardware, but cultural differences and a lack of clear, objective strengths would likely make it difficult for China to quickly "subdue the enemy without fighting."　(不戰而屈人之兵 in Sunzi Bingfa 孫子兵法)

As far as Taiwan is currently concerned, however, what is being called China's "unlimited war" represents an extremely grave threat. Beijing closely watches how the terrorist organizations and the countries of the "axis of evil" make use of unlimited war and the nation hopes to gain political leverage in times of crisis such as those heralded by the Sept 11. attacks, as well as to gain knowledge should the country consider it necessary to resort to such tactics in the future.

The US, fully aware of Beijing's calculations, insists on using military force against Iraq. In addition to its wish to restrain the Hussein regime's ambition to redraw the strategic boundaries in the Middle East, the US has the more important aim of playing Xiang Zhuang (項莊) in the old Chinese proverb: "Xiang Zhuang performed the sword dance as a cover for his attempt on Liu Bang's (劉邦) life" (項莊舞劍意在沛公).

That is to say, by accusing Iraq of developing weapons of mass destruction, the US can quickly uncover the advent of any Bagdad-Beijing strategic planning.

To improve Sino-American relations and gain Beijing's support for military action against Iraq, Washington must improve. If Hussein's regime crumbles, the US would, of course, dominate the political scene in Iraq after the war.

Not only would China object to yet another US unilateral move, but whatever hand it has in the development of various weapons of mass destruction would be revealed for all the world to see. Both outcomes would certainly deal a strategic blow to Beijing.

If the US defeats Iraq, Beijing may very well find itself embarrassed in precisely the same way as it was by the military defeat three years ago of Yugoslav ex-president Slobodan Milosevic.

Lin Cho-shui is a DPP legislator. Translated by Grace Shaw
This story has been viewed 2467 times.