We now know how the bureaucrats in the European Commission will
mark the death of Zhao Ziyang, the general-secretary of the Chinese
Communist Party who fought against the crushing of China's
democracy movement at Tiananmen in 1989 and was purged for his
troubles. They will apologize to China's new leaders for making
such a fuss about it.
As Zhao lay on his deathbed in a Beijing hospital, with the secret
police stationed outside his door, the European Union's new
external affairs commissioner, Benita Ferraro-Waldner, was in
Washington gently breaking the news that the European Commission
intended to end its Tiananmen-era arms embargo on China.
She mentioned nothing about the Beijing regime's continuing and
systematic violations of civil, political and religious rights.
Human rights don't seem to matter in Brussels these days. The State
Department's reaction was a shrug of the shoulders. "I don't have
anything further," the department spokesman said.
The Pentagon reacted with a bit more alarm, but their concern was
"the strategic balance in the Taiwan Strait," a worry that
Ferraro-Waldner soothingly reassured her American friends the
European Union would accommodate. Clearly, the message
Ferraro-Waldner will take back to Brussels is that the Americans
are resigned to the evaporation of the embargo.
Yet, a day after Ferraro-Waldner's meetings in Washington, the
European Parliament in Strasbourg passed a resolution which called
on members to "maintain the European Union embargo on trade in arms
with the People's Republic of China and not weaken national
restrictions on such arms sales."
China's diplomats have found the key to persuading the Eurocrats in
Brussels to compromise the traditional democratic values of the
European Parliament in Strasbourg: money. More importantly, the
Chinese are disrupting the Atlantic alliance by forcing the
Europeans to choose between Beijing and Washington - and the
Europeans are tilting to Beijing.
The arms embargo was never about arms. The Chinese got all they
need, cheaper and more appropriate, from Russia. Instead, the issue
is China's national dignity.
The embargo was levied on the Chinese communists as a result of
Tiananmen, and the Chinese regime believes that after 15 years the
Europeans should forget about it. Now that Zhao, the last hero of
Tiananmen, is dead, Beijing wants the Chinese people to forget,
too.
A lot has happened in the years since the bloody 1989 crackdown.
China has become the EU's second-largest export market (after the
United States) and the world's third largest trading nation (after
the United States and Germany). With promises of vast trade
largesse, Beijing has been wooing the EU's two core members, France
and Germany, to abandon the 1989 embargo and strive for a new
"comprehensive strategic partnership" with China.
The Chinese have convinced the eager French and German leaders that
EU protests of Beijing's dismal human rights record is the sole
remaining obstacle to this partnership. Besides, as Chinese Vice
Foreign Minister Zhang Yesui pledged to European journalists in
December, the arms embargo is solely symbolic; dropping it will
have no real effect because it will be replaced by tighter EU arms
export controls.
Unlike the Soviets of the 1980s, the Chinese have the economic
clout to wrench the EU's elbow and force Europe to accept China's
human rights record as the norm for the post-Cold War environment.
In December, according to The Wall Street Journal, a Chinese
aviation official confirmed the linkage between China's contract to
buy $1.3 billion worth of Airbus's new A380 jumbo jets and the
embargo's end with the shrugged comment, "It's understandable.
Politics and economics can never be separated."
Shortly afterwards, a French official confirmed that Chinese
President Hu Jintao linked Airbus and the embargo in a Sunday
morning phone call to French President Jacques Chiraq.
Although Washington has been fighting a delaying action against
easing the embargo for the past year, U.S. officials say privately
they have little hope that it can be delayed much longer. And no
wonder. Their main argument is U.S. self-interest, that the only
possible use the Chinese would have for European weapons is to
fight U.S. forces defending Taiwan. This logic is unpersuasive to
Europeans like French President Jacques Chirac, who seem to see a
grand strategic realignment of democratic Europe and communist
China against U.S. unilateralism.
But consider this. When Britain's Foreign Secretary Jack Straw
recently sympathized with Chinese complaints that they were being
"lumped in" with such other dictatorships as Zimbabwe and Burma,
Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without
Borders and a host of lesser human and civil rights groups in the
Atlantic community issued shocked press releases.
EU leaders tried to persuade their Chinese counterparts at the
Brussels summit to ease up on political and religious repression,
hinting "concrete steps" were needed to help justify easing the
arms ban.
Frustrated Chinese leaders quickly followed up with a series of
"concrete steps." Two days later, Beijing ordered the arrest of a
well-known Protestant house-church pastor in Zhengzhou. Four days
later, police detained three well-known dissident writers and after
their release (the writers told American friends), police were
stationed outside their doors and followed them and their families
wherever they go, "walking just two or three steps behind."
Arrests of several other human rights activists and journalists
followed, in what was clearly becoming a post-EU summit crackdown
on independent intellectuals.
If the Bush administration truly wants to derail the EU's efforts
to lift the embargo, it should ignore Brussels, where France and
Germany dominate, and focus on the EU's member states, particularly
the new ones, that still feel the sting of communist tyranny.
The U.S. position should pound on one fact: The EU arms embargo was
levied on Beijing for massive human rights abuses in 1989, and
since then the human rights situation has only gotten worse.
Lifting the embargo will do nothing except tell the Chinese people
that Europe has forgotten Tiananmen, so why can't they?
John Tkacik is
research fellow for China, Taiwan and Mongolia at the Heritage
Foundation, Washington.
First appeared in DefenseNews Online