China right to be cautious about overhasty Iranian sanctions
- Source: Global Times
- [23:21 March 10 2010]
- Comments
By Jin Liangxiang
As the US pushes for another round of UN sanctions against Iran as a result of Iran successfully producing 20 percent uranium enrichment, China's reservations regarding sanctions have drawn attention.
Despite criticisms from the West, China has good reason to be cautious on the issue of sanctions.
China's reservations reflect its different position on the means to address the Iranian nuclear issue. China shares the common concern about the potential danger of nuclear proliferation, but has consistently and persistently stood for peaceful resolution. As previously proven, the three rounds of sanctions have failed to push Iran into compliance.
Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, believes "that once the international community speaks in unison around a resolution, then the Iranians will come and begin to negotiate." But her statement is poorly based in reality.
Iran's intransigence is deeply rooted in its suspicion of the West. Iran regards Western policy as attacking its right to technological advancement and modernization.
Such considerations make Iranian decisionmakers immune to any pressure from the outside world. If the West continues to follow a hardline approach instead of confidencebuilding, a cornered Iran with misperceptions about the outside world might grow even more aggressive on this issue.
Ironically, however, it was the troika of France, Germany and the UK, the predecessor of the current P5+1 (the five permanent members of the Security Council plus Germany now dealing with Iran), that originally in 2003 initiated the principle of diplomacy as means to address the Iranian nuclear issue, yet it is China that has consistently adhered to the principle.
As soon as Gordon Brown, Nicolas Sarkozy, and Angela Merkel took office, they reversed such a principle by following a hardline approach.
Therefore, it is the EU that is to blame for the current division, though Ahmadinejad's provocative policies have also stirred up difficulties. This, however, was at least in part a reaction on his part to the EU.
Iran's counterproposal, though watereddown compared with the original 2009 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) uraniumfuelswap plan, in many ways demonstrates Iran's flexibility, allows for space for negotiation, and opens the door for confidencebuilding as well.
It is the West's rejection that has not only closed the door for further negotiations but also prevented an important step in confidencebuilding. There are reasons to blame the West for the current standoff.
Besides, the legitimacy of further sanctions is questionable. Any UNSC resolution should be based on solid evidence, instead of certain members' doubts.
Iran's nuclear program is not transparent enough, and its cooperation with IAEA insufficient. But no hard evidence has been found that Iran is weaponizing its program, The IAEA, the only authoritative institution in this regard, certainly doesn't think so.
Recent months also saw media reports about the threat of Iran. But Iran is no immediate danger. Even as Iran declared that it has produced uranium that can be potentially weaponized, it will take Iran a rather long time to reach the level and get the amount needed for a bomb.
In the end, China has every reason to think that it has no need to cater to the US for an issue the US defines closely relevant to its national security at a moment when the Obama administration has seriously undermined China's core national interests through the recent arms sales to Taiwan, Obama's meeting with the Dalai Lama and the Google affair.
Both time and concrete actions are needed to retrieve the momentum in the Iranian negotiations. Sanctions would have poor legitimacy.
The author is a research fellow with Shanghai Institutes for International Studies. forum@ globaltimes.com.cn
