Executive magazine - Special Report
           China's first aircraft carrier, the Liaoning, is not yet in active service    
   
The consequences of China’s economic interests in the Middle East and 
North Africa involve a layer of investments on political and security 
levels. One such cost is in securing the safety of energy transports and
 another is in the provision of defense forces around the region with 
military hardware. An assessment of these investments reinforces the 
view that China is not yet playing a large role in the Middle East as 
either a naval policing force or supplier of arms, especially not when 
compared to the United States. 
There is a lot of talk as to whether this is an Asian century: that 
China is destined to knock the US off its pedestal at the top of the 
global order. When it comes to the Middle East and North Africa, will 
Beijing’s involvement in the region move beyond ensuring energy 
security? 
Greater Chinese involvement in the region beyond economics is in MENA 
interest, but politically it is more to Beijing’s advantage to have 
stronger economic ties as a booster for political connections. With 
political pundits suggesting the US is rolling back its MENA presence as
 it “pivots toward Asia,” this, some opine, has cracked open the door 
for China to get a foot in.  
“Until recently the Chinese thought MENA was the Americans’ [turf], who
 would use force and protect energy supplies; [the Chinese government 
is] a practical government that could live with the US’ effective 
leverage over oil supplies as long as it was getting the oil,” said 
Derek Scissors, an Asia Economist at the Heritage Foundation. “But if 
the US cannot ensure oil gets to the rest of the world, it is a problem 
for China.”
Straits and horizons
Currently, MENA accounts for around 50 percent of China’s energy 
imports, and the region is only set to become more crucial to Asian 
economies, with the International Energy Agency predicting that
 over the next decade more than 90 percent of the MENA region’s oil and 
gas trade will be heading to Asia. This requires stability in MENA, and 
that the Strait of Hormuz remains open for oil tankers. The US has been 
the dominant player in ensuring that this oil continues to flow, and has
 paid a lot to do so, with the costs of projecting military force in the
 Gulf estimated at $6.8 trillion between 1976 and 2007, according to 
research by Princeton University’s energy policy department.
“What if the US is only willing to spend $1 trillion 
and not $2 trillion; is that enough? Who will step in? If there is 
long-term partial US disengagement from the region, China needs to do 
something to offset that risk, and they are not making decisions for 
now, but for a world that will be radically different in 2020 than in 
2013,” said Scissors.
China’s People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) still has
 only limited military capacity. China is not yet up to the task, with 
two aircraft carriers yet to be seaworthy, and its long-range naval 
capabilities limited. 
More importantly, any attempt by China to assume a 
greater role in policing the international sea lanes could be met with 
suspicion and international resistance. Indeed, China has only recently 
been involved navally in the region, with the PLAN over the last four 
years deploying nearly 10,000 personnel on warships off the East African
 coast as part of multinational anti-piracy operations. Unilateral moves
 would likely not be so welcome, but if China were to seek expansion of 
its naval presence, it would be a different story. “An increased PLAN 
presence in MENA could be seen as a military intrusion in what is seen 
as Western territory. I don’t think many Western countries would like 
them roaming the Gulf, the Mediterranean and the Red Sea,” said Ghanem 
Nuseibeh, founder of Cornerstone Global Associates.
In the regional defense markets, China is a minor 
player and does not measure up to the arms-for-oil alliances that have 
cemented ties between the West and MENA countries. In terms of arms 
sales, China had a 4 percent stake between 2004-2007, dropping to 1 
percent between 2008-2011, according to statistics released by the US 
Congressional Research Service. The US on the other hand accounted for 
78.9 percent of all arms agreements with the Middle East between 
2008-2011, at almost $92 billion.
A changing world
Yet in a fluctuating global order, anything is 
possible down the line. “If you asked people 15 years ago if China would
 be building power plants around the world, people would’ve said no. In 
10 years time China may be selling drones. So you don’t extrapolate from
 the past. Maybe there will be a Chinese presence in MENA that is not 
currently anticipated,” said Scissors.
The drop in Arab willingness to sign weapons contracts
 with China shows that Beijing’s credibility is dwindling as a result of
 attempts to stay neutral in MENA politics “It is hard for Beijing to 
stay neutral. In Syria, they’re trying to do nothing, but in the MENA 
region people feel China is pro-Assad, which is hurting China’s image 
among the majority of Arabs that support the rebels. If Beijing doesn’t 
veto US sanctions on Syria, then Iran and Russia are mad at China. This 
is what happens when you become a global economic power — it is hard to 
stay in the middle,” said Jacob Zenn, an analyst of African and Eurasian
 affairs at the Jamestown Foundation.
This resonates with the view that China faces 
fundamental limits with regard to ascending to top dog in the 
geopolitical order. As US elder diplomat Henry Kissinger said in a 
debate two years ago, “I have enormous difficulty imagining a world 
dominated by China and I indeed believe that the concept that some 
country will dominate the world is in itself a misunderstanding of the 
world in which we now live.”
An indicator of the current state of play in how Arab 
governments see the Chinese question was given in a recent speech by 
Yahya bin Abdul-Kareem al-Zaid, Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to China: “To 
understand China’s relations with Gulf states, one must understand 
Sino-American relations.” 
“I think that statement is important, as the US is 
very cautious about remaining the number one power in the Gulf, and 
there is a clear goal on Iran,” said Zenn. “If China starts to upset 
that strategy or hegemony in the Gulf, then this will ultimately affect 
US-Chinese relations.” 
Scissors concurred. “I assume what the ambassador said
 is that the Chinese will not do anything to upset the US when it comes 
to Saudi Arabia, but we will see what happens, as maybe that is the old 
world.”
The future of China’s involvement in the region may – 
like in the past few decades – be decided in the halls of power in 
Washington as part of a greater game, as the US and Beijing vie for 
global supremacy.

 
 
No comments:
Post a Comment