Good News On The EU / China Arms Embargo

Bush/Rice diplomacy works!  (For now).  The threat a unified, angry Congress clearly helped the US, and the subtle Chinese diplomatic maneuverings clearly hurt France.

Yielding to pressure from President Bush and threats of retaliation from Congress, the European Union has put off plans to lift its arms embargo on China this spring and may not press the issue until next year, American and European officials said Monday.

The officials said that in addition to American pressure, European nations have been shaken by the recent adoption of legislation by the Chinese National People's Congress authorizing the use of force to stop Taiwan from seceding. The Chinese action, they said, jolted France and undercut its moves to end the embargo before June.

Comments

[Max]

Oh good. Now 'mmurican firms can keep the business.

[Lurking Observer]

Max:

Your comment reflects breath-taking ignorance of the arms sales situation regarding China.

At present, the only nation that sells weapons systems to the PRC is Russia. The United States has and retains an embargo on weapons sales, similar to that of the EU and Japan. These were imposed in the wake of Tiananmen.

Indeed, there is less high-technology cooperation between the US and the PRC (e.g., there are no serious space cooperative efforts) than there is between EU and the PRC.

To presume that the US has a corner on Chinese arms sales suggests that you have little idea what the People's Liberation Army actually has in its inventories. Hint: Su-27 and Su-30 fighters are made by Sukhoi, a Russian arms manufacturer. The Kilo submarine and Sovremennyy destroyer are made in Russian yards.

[TM]

I'm going to guess that he was kidding. Eventually, however, someone will mention that we sold Hummers to China.

[Pouncer]

I seem to recall that during the Clinton years there was a mini-scandal over a US civilian commercial rocket-launch company selling technology to the Chinese Space program that had potential military application. (Uh, Duh. A rocket might be used as a missile? Go figure.) Anyhow, there was some effort to link campaign contribution to major Democrats by the Chinese to questionable decisions by the Commerce Department allowing the company to do whatever it was. Anyhow, it seemed to me at the time the US in general was pretty careful about watching and trying to prevent sales of weapon stuff to China...

[MattJ]

At present, the only nation that sells weapons systems to the PRC is Russia.

When did Israel stop selling arms to China?

[Lurking Observer]

Pouncer:

The Loral-Hughes business is precisely why there is so little cooperation on space matters---the Congress put the kibosh on the Chinese launching any US satellites or satellites with major US components aboard them (which pretty much means the vast majority of commercial satellites are now off-limits to the PRC).

MattJ:

The Israelis killed the Phalcon deal (thanks to enormous US pressure). There've been some sales in the background, some air-to-air missiles iirc, but no major systems on the order of fighter aircraft or naval combatants.

Like most other countries, Israeli sales to China are of technology that is dual-use. Unlike Max's snark, however, the US and Israel have no corner on that market---the Europeans, the Japanese, the South Koreans, even the Taiwanese have a piece of the Chinese technology market.

TM:

Perhaps Max was simply being sarcastic. Or, as w/ the liberal mantra of "The US armed Iraq," perhaps Max believes that it's the EEEEEEvil 'Murricans who are behind all the death and mayhem in the world?

[The Apologist]

Well done Lurk.Obs.

[richard mcenroe]

Didn't the Brits sell China a series of upgrades to their tank firecontrol systems back in the 80's and 90's?

[Max Sawicky]

Lurker -- Pardon my harsh language, but you are a silly billy. The Peoples Republic of China is going to get any damn thing they want as far as weapons go, not least because U.S. trade deficits with China have helped to build up their economy, and more specifically their aircraft industry. They are an 800 pound gorilla. That's why they could down a U.S. military aircraft and return the parts to us, boxed up, with impunity. If freakin Pakistan can become a nuclear power, what do you imagine the PRC can do?

As for arming Iraq and wreaking death and destruction throughout the world, please do not succumb to the Osama Bin Ladin error of confusing the American people with the machinations of the State. That 'they had it coming' thing is just so wrong.

[Lurking Observer]

Max Sawicky:

This is easily resolved:

Please note which US weapons systems are currently in use in the PLA.

If there aren't any, please explain the basis of your comment that the US, by compelling the EU to retain its arms embargo, would be able to "keep the business."

As for the Chinese aircraft industry: please specify what aircraft the Chinese currently produce that competes on the world market. Bonus points for listing civilian aircraft. Extra bonux credit points for providing any cases where the "800 pound gorilla" of the Chinese aerospace industry has beaten out a US manufacturer.

Hint: Su-27s and Su-30s are Russian systems that the Chinese have purchased. They are not Chinese produced, and they are not exporting said aircraft.

As for comparing with Pakistan: You are aware that China became a nuclear power in 1964? And that that, rather than some putative claim on US arms exports, is why they could down a US aircraft and return it in pieces?

Silly billy indeed.....

[Max Sawicky]

'keep the business' was facetious, as the all-knowing moderator discerned.

My remarks had nothing to do with Chinese competitive cability, but with manufacturing and technological capability, and general economic power.

It's not obvious that Chinese nuclear capacity had anything important to do with turning USAF property into a Revell kit.

[Lurking Observer]

The Peoples Republic of China is going to get any damn thing they want as far as weapons go, not least because U.S. trade deficits with China have helped to build up their economy, and more specifically their aircraft industry. They are an 800 pound gorilla.

My remarks had nothing to do with Chinese competitive cability, but with manufacturing and technological capability, and general economic power.

So, Max, if your original comment had nothing to do w/ competitive capability, why specifically cite their aircraft industry?

And if you think the Chinese could down a US aircraft (US Navy, btw, NOT USAF) "with impunity," why don't you tell us exactly what you think the Bush Administration should have done about it---and whether you would have supported that, or brayed that it was irresponsible of the US to have over-reacted?

I would suggest that China's nuclear capacity is a significant element influencing both what Beijing thinks it can do, and what options Washington is prepared to exercise. It might be a factor in keeping us from simply landing the Marines on Hainan Island and reclaiming our crewmen and aircraft.

More to the point, China is a major power, not just economically, but militarily and diplomatically. We want the Chinese to pressure North Korea; we work w/ the Chinese in countering terrorism. Just as the Soviets could shoot a US Army officer "with impunity" in East Germany (MAJ Nicholson), and regularly played "chicken" with US Navy vessels around the world (see INCSEA), major powers w/ nuclear arsenals often can get away with a lot more than those without.

[Max Sawicky]

Because the ability to build aircraft has an obvious dual-use military implication. There was nothing Bush et al could have done about the ac downing, whether the PRC was nuclear or not. That China's nuclear capacity is an important strategic fact in other contexts is incontrovertible.

More to the point, China is a major power, not just economically, but militarily and diplomatically. We want the Chinese to pressure North Korea; we work w/ the Chinese in countering terrorism.

Exactly. So yakking about the EU arms thingy is dumb.