According to Pakistani newspaper the Daily Times, Pakistan’s decision to crack down on the Jammat-ud-Dawa, the charity linked to the Laskhar-e-Taiba, came as the result of pressure from China. Jammat-ud-Dawa was blacklisted by a UN Security Council committee this week.
The Daily Times noted that earlier attempts to target the Jamaat-ud-Dawa at the Security Council had been vetoed by China. “It is the Chinese “message” that has changed our mind. The Chinese did not veto the banning of Dawa on Wednesday, and they had reportedly told Islamabad as much beforehand, compelling our permanent representative at the UN to assert that Pakistan would accept the ban if it came,” the newspaper said. “One subliminal message was also given to Chief Minister Punjab, Mr Shehbaz Sharif, during his recent visit to China, and the message was that Pakistan had to seek peace with India or face change of policy in Beijing. Once again, it is our friend China whose advice has been well taken…”
This is intriguing, all the more so given how much attention has has been focused on what the United States has been doing to lean on Pakistan to curb militant groups blamed by India for the attacks on Mumbai. So what has been going on? Has China, with its growing economic power, become a pivotal player in global diplomacy even as the United States continues to hog the limelight?
We’ve always known that China has had a major role in South Asia. But in the past it was a seen as the ultimate all-weather ally of Pakistan, to be used if necessary against India, with which it has vied for influence in Asia and against which it fought a border war in 1962. Is this call for peace an example of it taking on a U.S.-style role of regional policeman, as I discussed in a post back in June about India, Pakistan and China?
The Times of India quotes Shashi Tharoor as saying that there was a feeling in China that its opposition to India on the issue of terrorism would “no longer be compatible with its being seen as a responsible player in the system”.
The Asia Times Online, in a report datelined Bangalore, put China’s decision to support the crackdown on Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) in a more pragmatic context. “An official in India’s Ministry of External Affairs (MEA), who spoke to Asia Times Online on condition of anonymity, said that in the wake of the international outrage triggered by the Mumbai attacks, the Pakistan government realized that whether or not the UN body designated JuD as terrorist, it would be compelled by the US to act against the group,” it said. “In the circumstances, it felt it would be better to be seen to be acting under UN orders rather than pressure from India or the US. Hence the Pakistan-China decision to go along with the other Security Council members this time,” it quoted the MEA official as saying.
Personally, I don’t really understand what is going on in the India-Pakistan-China equation (largely because I don’t know much about China). So instead, I’ve drawn up a list of questions on which I’d appreciate comments and which I aim to address in subsequent posts:
1) Has China decided that given its growing stake in the global economy, it has a greater interest in encouraging peace between India and Pakistan?
2) Has it become as important, or more important, a player in South Asia than the United States?
3) If it is aiming now to become an even-handed arbiter between India and Pakistan, why are there still so many problems along the Indian-Chinese border?
4) Why, if China was such a reliable friend of Pakistan, did it refuse to bail out its economy and leave the civilian government there with no option but to turn to the IMF?
5) What do we make of the fact that Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani made his first visit to China, while President Asif Ali Zardari went to the United States?
6) What is the long-term gameplan? And what does this mean for South Asia and the rest of the world?
Are there other questions out there that need to be asked?
(Pictures: Reuters October file photo of Presidents Hu and Zardari in Beijing/David Gray)
Trackback
53 comments so far
Previous | 3 | 2 | 1 | Next
Shahzad: Good points from the Pakistani perspective. I do not know enough about China either, but simply from my observations of China, here are some points from my Indian perspective:
1) Has China decided that given its growing stake in the global economy, it has a greater interest in encouraging peace between India and Pakistan?
What does such peace give China? As Vernon observed, true peace does not benefit China. China realizes also that there will not be true lasting peace in any case in this region. China is keen to avert war to (a) prevent an inevitable dilemma as to whether to materially support Pakistan in the war and thereby get pulled into the war itself, (b) prevent the disruption of a burgeoning trade with India that is even conservatively estimated during recession times to hit $75 billion by 2010 (Source: http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/View _Point/The_future_of_India-China_trade/a rticleshow/2697720.cms), (c) crack down on the linkages between the Pakistan based terror outfits and the Uighar secessionists that threaten to undo its cities now and not just the beleaguered Xinjiang province, (d) crack down on such terror groups targetting Chinese within Pakistan (as some attacks 2 years ago proved). China may also need India’s help in containing Tibetan secessionists resorting to violence in recent times.
2) Has it become as important, or more important, a player in South Asia than the United States?
I think the importance is based on situations. As long as the US is in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and they are patrolling the Indian Ocean, and in view of their trade with India and China, besides Pakistan, I think the equation is tough to define. China has some cards to play and when it plays them right it gets the upper hand. In this situation, China has few options.
3) If it is aiming now to become an even-handed arbiter between India and Pakistan, why are there still so many problems along the Indian-Chinese border?
China isn’t an even handed arbiter, much less an arbiter at all. The way in which India and China are discussing their problems could be exemplary though. I do not think the Chinese are maturing in their relationship with India, but I think they are realizing that this method is the only one that works now that their own investments in terror are coming home to roost. Chinese are pragmatic, and whatever works wins. Right now power doesn’t flow from the barrel of a gun.
4) Why, if China was such a reliable friend of Pakistan, did it refuse to bail out its economy and leave the civilian government there with no option but to turn to the IMF?
China had to bail out its own economy with over $500 billion. In such a situation I’m not sure if China actually could bail out Pakistan which in any case is struggling with economic misdierction and political uncertainty.
- Posted by VijaiOne answer to all the above questions is China has no permanent friends, but only foes. China and India share a mutual distrust dating back to 1962 when China back-stabbed Jawahar Lal Nehru, the idealist first prime minister of India,and attacked India to cut it down to size. Since then it has always tried to equate Pakistan and India to avoid India emerging as a counter to China itself. The current position of China may be due to two reasons, it believes the public opinion the world over against China about Tibet will manifold if it continue to support Pakistan on the terrorist issue. Secondly, China itself has muslim separatist issues, which it may think, will spread to those regions if unchecked.
- Posted by ManuChina still supports the country of Pakistan but has an interest, as most nations do, to see terrorism vanquished. It wants Pakistan to be ever more forceful in fighting terrorism since, among other reasons, it Xinjang province seeths with Islamic unrest.Yes, it would like to see India and Pakistan at peace to avoid excessive US influence in the region and especially in India.
But China historically is always willing to wait for long periods for an eventual outcome. It sees on the horizon, however distant, the rise of the Muslim world as an international power entity,economically and militarily, and Pakistan a leading power among that group.
- Posted by Fluffy IITerrorist group were supported by USA against Soviet Union and then USA left the region idle,USA is also responsible for these terrorist groups.Regarding the ban on organizations in Pakistan by UN, should someone ask where are UN resolutions for plebicite in Kashmir so that Kashmiris can decide their own fate.Where are UN resolutions for Palestine? Double standards and double faces with dual interests.Who killed Kurkuray who unfolded the hindu terrorists and Indian army who killed many Muslims and blame was put on Pakistan.China has its own interests, and now I do not thinki China will support Pakistan anymore in future as it has big markets in face of India and USA.Also China now does not depend on Pakistan for its diplomatic support.
- Posted by ZahoorThe right move at this time for both China and Pakistan. China has guided Pakistan to concentrate their energy for countering hegemonic design of US and India on its west border.
- Posted by HindukushThe solution to all such problems is to root-out the behind-the curtain-founders and financial supporters of terrorist groups. Today Pakistan banned Jamaat-ud-Dawa (JuD) the next day it shall operate under another name just under the nose of ISI and with its very own support. Why are we blind to the fact that: it is such units within the very sovereign state the sends terrorist to infiltrate in another sovereign state. If we want peace throughout the world, we should look for the root-causes rather than cleaning the surface of the problem.
- Posted by HanifChina not vetoing ban on Jamaat-ud-Dawa this time in UN is remarkably a smart move. In my view China has saved Pakistan from further destruction and witnessing future violence. China has played its card in a very smart way and has hit many targets with only one shot. China has given a strong message to Pakistani establishment to refrain from militancy. The part of Pakistani establishment, that happens to support militancy as the second line of defence, has to rethink its strategic planning while keeping the fresh new world order in their perspective.
Had china vetoed this move once again it would have turned Pakistan as a battle field against China; a similar battle ground as West enjoyed against Russia in Afghanistan. Now, all of a sudden neo-con forces will have to roll out a new plan; however, in my view they don’t have much time to do so and that’s exactly what China has taken into consideration. A right move at the right time!
Additionally, another dimension of current South-Asian situation must be really shocking for the existing world players; that is ‘China rolls out a plan in South Asia’ as a regional power. China telling India and Pakistan what to do in this fragile situation; and surprisingly India and Pakistan not only listening to it, they are acting accordingly too!
India becoming a strategic partner with US is like ‘a dream comes true’ situation and as always Indian establishment wanted to wipe out Pakistan from global map by one way or another and that’s due to the widely accepted ‘Hinduatva / Akahand Baharat ideology’. This time India was really serious to launch an attack on Pakistan and wanted to get started with surgical strikes or hot pursuit thinking they had American back up with them. However, China played one card in UN and all of a sudden it’s a totally new situation for all the players in the region.
China has again proved that China is Pakistan’s all weather alley and has saved Pakistan from Indian aggression, internal turmoil and being an escape goat for NATO failure in Afghanistan. China has taken a step ahead in gaining a hegemonic situation at least in South Asia at the moment, where presently Americans unfortunately have failed.
Pakistan has a great geographical location advantage at its side that means Pakistan is the only corridor for West and US to access Central Asia. However, now it can’t get done with out prior Chinese approval. So I assume its going to be a tit for tat situation between China and West mainly US. For instance, if China feels its supplies form any where in the world are being pressurised by the West, they can always play the Pakistan card.
I think it’s up to Pakistan to play its card right since it’s the moment. If Pakistan puts its weight into American side they have all the chances to create an hegemonic situation, however, if Pakistan puts into Chinese side then China surely wouldn’t need any one else in the region to keep its self in a controlling situation.
- Posted by ShahzadChina is merely trying to be a friend to all. It is moving toward a more harmonious world rather than a more competitive world, especially in its neck of the woods but really internationally. For the time being, Pakistan is a client state of the US and China wants to limit its involvement there lest it too becomes embroiled in Pakistani politics. Not very complicated really, but the West will try to make a bigger deal of it, conjuring up scenarios to make China look as if it has an ulterior motive for everything and the US as the world’s moral leader. The US goose has been cooking for many years now — and on “high” for the past 8 years — and even a great new president will not be able to undo the damage immediately.
- Posted by Alain RostokerIn fact China is afraid of USA. USA stopped importing goods from China, the main export country. Chinese economy is totally depending on USA. Another important thing is that USA is against the working of Pakistan underground agencies and if China tries to support them USA will go against China seriously. More over Zardari is un-reliable for USA & China.
- Posted by Askari KazmiI think China has changed its policy of supporting Pakistan and is more friendly towards India and also submitted to the new world order. Chinese have also started behaving like the white man of Asia. It is just like everybody else in the world. Seems like west would keep occupying asian minds and lands. Controls would be in the hands of western powers.
- Posted by Qasiman edit to my post above, that point 5) should have being point 6)
my answer to point 5)
- Posted by V- I don’t know, so no answers from me
1) Pls stop wishful thinking, politics is never about feeling good and idealologies.
- Posted by V2) What is with the absurdity of this question? Anyone working on logic should take it as a given that a nation residing in Asia, and also being the largest nation in said continent, should always have being be a ‘player’ in his own neighbourhood, no?
3) Because it is in China’s interest also to foster better relations with India, not a very hard conclusion to come to, is it?
4) Who in their right mind would bail out something if prudent economic judgement would say it is not worth bailing? hmmm, don’t answer that question…
5) Why don’t you ask China instead of us, guessing just creates more guessing and all it does is display the stupidity of those who make guesses, or was that your plan from the beginning?
On that note, what is the long-term gameplan of India and Pakistan regarding their houses? better they come up with a gameplan first before we ask for someone else’s gameplan.
But since we are guessing, here’s a guess, how about those muslim separatists in China that we don’t hear about, maybe it also has an interest in controlling muslim extremists because they could affect its own muslim regions too?
1. Hidden Dragon, Crouching Tiger. China is buying time, and it has 5,000 years of patience to do it.
2.Dragon Fire. When and if it’s cornered and its national interest at stake, China will, as it has always been, fight with no fear. Remember fighting Japan, Korea, Vietnam, and India, in at order?
3. Kongfu Panda. Ultimately it’s China’s objective. Mild, smiling, kind, innocent, don’t-mess-up-with-me kind of tough guy.
4. Before becoming KP, it has one thing to clean up: Taiwan. China will do it “at any cost.” — Chinese Premier Wen’s exact words.
- Posted by SimonI believe, a country has two types of interests in affairs of other countries: economic and strategic.
China’s interest in Pakistan is mainly from the point of view of containing India’s influence in the Indian Ocean (the strategic interest). China has established bases near Andaman Nicobar Island (part of territory of India) and is in the process of creating one of the biggest ports for Pakistan. Note that there is no let down in activities on this front: they have been kept low profile. These activities are moving full stream ahead. Relationships with Pakistan will be maintained friendly to serve this strategic intent of China. Pakistan, now economically crippled, will always welcome Chinese ‘investments’; implying that China no longer needs to cajole Pakistan.
Perhaps the most significant shift is coming from the growing influence of China in Africa. If China is able to establish ports in Africa (which it will in no time), it will no longer need the Pakistan base for its blue water dreams.
China never had economic interest in Pakistan beyond that required to fulfill its strategic intent viz-a-viz other world powers. Of late China has been able to gain economic leverage with US, it being the largest creditor of USA. It has got the leverage with USA that it always wished for.
Thus the strategic and economic intent of China are now being easily with diminishing role for Pakistan. In fact association with Pakistan now carries risk of aiding a state that is associated with terrorism, which is bad for the image of China. China also realizes that terrorism is knocking at its door steps as Pakistan is its immediate neighbor. Hence, on matter of terrorism it is more prudent for China to take the stand with rest of the world battling terrorism has taken.
- Posted by Vikram KumarAs far as the Mumbai Carnage is concerned none of the Pakistanis is happy with that;everyone has condemned that heinous crime.Pakistan,already bleeding, has lost much and India has lost a little but gained much.So the eyes should be towards the gainer and not the loser.Just in order to divert the attention of its people from its inefficient security system and to put the Kashmir issue and the Security Council’s Resolution about the right of self-determination of the Kashmiri people India is playing all this nasty stinking drama and getting curbs put on to the Muslim charities which care for the needs of poor.
- Posted by Sultan Khan1) Has China decided that given its growing stake in the global economy, it has a greater interest in encouraging peace between India and Pakistan?
I doubt it. China has no interest in peace between India and Pakistan. But it has interest in avoiding a war between the two countries. As long there is tension between India and Pak without a war, China will be happy.
2) Has it become as important, or more important, a player in South Asia than the United States?
Not just in South Asia. More credit balance, more power in times of peace; more military strength more power in war times.
3) If it is aiming now to become an even-handed arbiter between India and Pakistan, why are there still so many problems along the Indian-Chinese border?
It is a myth that any big power will be even-handed. Pretending to be so is a different matter.
4) Why, if China was such a reliable friend of Pakistan, did it refuse to bail out its economy and leave the civilian government there with no option but to turn to the IMF?
Because as long as there are sucker nations in the West China would be foolish to come to the aid of any country.
5) What do we make of the fact that Pakistan Army chief General Ashfaq Kayani made his first visit to China, while President Asif Ali Zardari went to the United States?
That for talks and money nations Third-World countries come to the West (for which they have only disdain and no trust), while for military support they go to China (which they fear and for which they have more respect).
6) What is the long-term gameplan? And what does this mean for South Asia and the rest of the world?
The lomg term gameplan is to replace the U.S. in the world arena.
7. Are there other questions out there that need to be asked?
Not a question but a comment: Contrary to appearances, the peace and security of the US will not be compromised if it leaves Islamic countries and stops being a world policeman. In anything that will be the only way of stopping Islamic terrorism in the West
December 12, 2008
Vernon I
- Posted by Vernon RogersChina is an aspiring long term player in south asia. It has critical influence with pakistan.
- Posted by vickIn the case of the ban, i think the anonymous off. view of MEA official is correct. Something was probably going to happen. if not UNSC ban, then perhaps U.S led selective strikes inside pakistan. This is because of the unusual level of condemnation from the U.S, along with the fact that the Pak economy is now really depending on the U.S IMF money.
And beijing might have seen the reports in indian newspapers that it had previously voted to veto the dawa ban, and this would have caused many people to see china as an enemy in india, something it may have wanted to avoid right after the mumbai terror attack - especially with the active and strong U.S support.
So in the final analysis, i think the U.S played a critical role here, and forced China to end up doing what it did.
I dont think china is really interested in peace between pak and india, it would much rather keep the pot boiling.
An alternative view might be that it would like to see peace because that would lessen U.S influence and thereby increase its own. Keep in mind that China has border disputes with India as well, and that Pak. has ceded a chunk of kashmir (Aksai chin) to china that is not recognized by india. So, the Kashmir problem is really a india-pak-china problem. anyways…
iN FIRST PLACE, One has to wonder WHY ARE CHINA AND PAKISTAN “FRIENDS”??? Do they share any language, culture, history…anything? the answer is none.
The one and only reason China had a friend in pakistan simply to use it as a tool against India. It has looked the otherway knowing very well Pakistan’s jehadi terror war on India.
- Posted by Victor1971China is slowly realizing it is unbecoming of its civilizational status, major economic and global power status to continue this support for Pak sponsored terrorism.
Please dont bring China into this, they have their country secured by numerous government paid paincloth police and informers inside and in other countries. They dont care anything as long as their interests are safe. It is Pakistan, who is the wolf in sheeps clothing. Their own agency ISI and Army are thinking that they are safe as long as USA needs them against Talibans. But I guess it will be soon be like Iraq, and joint multinational armed invasion headed by India will cleansed of its corrupt generals & ISI.
- Posted by SavvyTo answer your question 4):
The new government in Pakistan came to power with American support, and the coup was part of the reason of Pakistani turmoil. China did not want to pay for the American coup, and thought the Americans should pay for it.
Regards,
- Posted by Passingby