Editorial: China moves in where angels fear to tread

This briefing first appeared in the 30 May 2023 issue of our newsletter, Central Asia Concise. If you would like to subscribe to Central Asia Concise, or any other of our newsletters, please click here.

It seems as if you cannot be respected as a superpower unless you burn your fingers trying to pacify Afghanistan, writes commonspace.eu in this editorial. The British in the heyday of the Raj, tried it in the 19th century; the Soviets tried it at the peak of their power in the 20th century, and the Americans had a go at a time when they were the only superpower, in the early 21st century. Now it seems it's China’s turn, and of course it is being done the Chinese way. There are no armies swarming across the Khyber Pass, nor forward military bases established across Central Asia. Instead, the Chinese are using their time tested tool – the Belt and Road Initiative.

The first announcement came on 8 May following the 4th round of the Pakistan-China Strategic Dialogue in Islamabad with the participation of Chinese foreign minister Qin Gang and his Pakistani counterpart Bilawal Bhutto Zardari. In essence, the two sides agreed that the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC), a part of the Belt and Road Initiative, will be extended into Afghanistan. At that meeting it was also agreed that both sides will “continue their humanitarian and economic assistance for the Afghan people and enhance development cooperation in Afghanistan”.

A statement by Pakistan’s foreign ministry immediately after the meeting stated that, “both sides called on all stakeholders to work together for a peaceful, stable, prosperous and united Afghanistan, which would firmly combat terrorism and live in harmony with its neighbours. The two sides underscored the need for the international community to provide continued assistance and support to Afghanistan including through unfreezing of Afghanistan’s overseas financial assets.” Following the withdrawal of US troops from Afghanistan in 2021, Washington froze the overseas assets, including gold and foreign reserves of the Afghanistan Central Bank and placed the country under sanctions. 

In recent days, the Taliban’s de facto foreign minister, Amir Khan Muttaqi, travelled to Islamabad to meet his Chinese and Pakistani counterparts and seal the agreement. Reports suggest the Taliban also want China to boost investments in the country’s natural resources, estimated to be worth US$1 trillion. The Taliban signed its first China contract in January this year with Xinjiang Central Asia Petroleum and Gas Company (CAPEIC), a subsidiary of China National Petroleum (CNPC). Worth US$541 million, the agreement is a 25-year contract to extract oil from more than 1,700 square miles of the Amu Darya basin in Afghanistan and provides the Taliban with a 20% stake for no investment, involvement or risk.

Image
a
Qin Gang, China’s Foreign Minister, with Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, Pakistan’s Foreign Minister, and Afghanistan’s Foreign Minister Amir Khan Muttaqi.

All-in-all, this appears to be a win-win situation, except that this is Afghanistan, and things are not quite as simple.

Up to now Chinese businesses have been wary of investing in Afghanistan due to attacks by the Islamic State group (ISIL) which is locked in a conflict with the Taliban and which in December, took credit for an attack at a Kabul hotel popular with Chinese diplomats and businessmen. The East Turkistan Islamic Movement, a Xinjiang-based separatist group, is also present in Afghanistan.

By engaging with Afghanistan through Pakistan, China is taking a big gamble

Tribal and ethnic rivalries make Afghanistan a place difficult to navigate, as previous empires and superpowers have found out over the centuries. Pouring in money for development is not a new strategy. The Soviets did it in the 1980s, the Americans, even more recently. Most of it ended up being stolen or squandered. There is no reason why the same will not happen with Chinese money. China is hoping that engaging with Afghanistan through Pakistan will make its task easier. Only up to a point. It is true that Pakistan is the only country that has influence over the Taliban, and Islamabad can navigate Afghan politics better than most. But Pakistan is also a nemesis for many non-Pashtun Afghans, and if the Chinese are perceived by Afghans as being, rightly or wrongly, proxies of Pakistan, their presence will be less than welcome by many.

There is no doubt that China’s main concern and interest in Afghanistan is security. Like the rest of the international community China does not want Afghanistan to become again the epicentre of Islamist-inspired terrorism. That can result in a serious security threat for China, as well as for Chinese interests in Central Asia. But China also wants to make sure that Afghanistan is not a vacuum that can be filled by others, so it is using the current ambiguity in the world’s engagement with the Taliban government in Kabul to fill that vacuum.

India and Russia are wary of increased Chinese presence in Afghanistan

Not everyone will be pleased. India has for long had a policy of trying to deny Afghanistan to Pakistan. Denying it to China is an even higher priority given the potential of a Sino-Indian confrontation in the future. The Russians too, whilst glad to see the backs of the Americans in 2021, were hoping to increase their influence in the country. They are now too busy in Ukraine to be able to put much effort and resources in that endeavour. The new awkwardness in Russia-Central Asian relations also reduces the number of cards Russia can play. So Moscow watches Beijing’s push into Afghanistan with a forced smile.

Many believe that it is not a question of if, but rather of when, the Chinese will follow in the footsteps of the Raj, the Soviets and the Americans, and also burn their fingers in a country that has in the past shown that it was allergic to good governance, modernisation, and to foreign influence. One thing is for sure: to deal with Afghanistan China has to be ready to allocate huge resources. The drain of those resources will ultimately determine the length and nature of the Chinese engagement.

source: commonspace.eu editorial team
photo: AFP via Getty Images
The views expressed in opinion pieces and commentaries do not necessarily reflect the position of commonspace.eu or its partners 

Related articles

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.
Editor's choice
News
Donald Tusk: "One for all, and all for one! Otherwise we are finished."

Donald Tusk: "One for all, and all for one! Otherwise we are finished."

Europe is rattled by events in Venezuela, and there are serious concerns that US disregard for international law may have consequences close to home.  The BBC diplomatic correspondent, James Landale, said, the question is how Europe may respond in the longer term to America's military operation in Venezuela. Will it provide a catalyst for the continent to take greater responsibility for its own security in the face of so much instability from what many see as an unreliable ally? Polish prime minister, Donald Tusk, appears to have answered the question, saying on social media: "No-one will take seriously a weak and divided Europe: neither enemy nor ally. It is already clear now. "We must finally believe in our own strength, we must continue to arm ourselves, we must stay united like never before. One for all, and all for one. Otherwise, we are finished." The US seizing of Venezuela's leader has faced strong criticism from both America's friends and foes at an emergency meeting of the United Nations Security Council, held on Monday, 5 January. Many member states agreed with the US that Nicolás Maduro had been an illegitimate and repressive leader. But many also condemned the US military action as a breach of international law and the UN Charter, and they demanded a democratic transition that reflected the will of the Venezuelan people. (click the image to read the full article).

Popular

Editor's choice
News
Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

Key European countries back Denmark in the face of Trump's continuing insistence on taking over Greenland

 Six major European countries have declared their support to Denmark following renewed insistence by the US that it must have control over Greenland. "Greenland belongs to its people, and only Denmark and Greenland can decide on matters concerning their relations," said the leaders of the UK, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain, in a joint statement, issued on Tuesday (6 January), together with Denmark. On Sunday, Donald Trump said the US "needed" Greenland - a semi-autonomous region of fellow Nato member Denmark - for security reasons. He has refused to rule out the use of force to take control of the territory, and Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen warned on Monday that an attack by the US would spell the end of Nato. The issue of Greenland's future resurfaced in the wake of the US military intervention in Venezuela, during which elite troops went in to seize the country's President Nicolás Maduro and take him to face drugs and weapons charges in New York. Following the raid, Trump said the US would "run" Venezuela for an unspecified period of time. He also said the US was returning to an 1823 policy of US supremacy in its sphere of influence in the Western hemisphere - and he warned a number of countries the US could turn its attention to them. The US military raid in Venezuela has reignited fears that the US may consider using force to secure control of Greenland. A day after the raid, Katie Miller - the wife of one of Trump's senior aides - posted on social media a map of Greenland in the colours of the American flag, alongside the word "SOON". On Monday, her husband Stephen Miller said it was "the formal position of the US government that Greenland should be part of the US". In an interview with CNN, he also said the US "is the power of Nato. For the US to secure the Arctic region, to protect and defend Nato and Nato interests, obviously Greenland should be part of the US." Asked repeatedly whether the US would rule out using force to annex it, Miller responded: "Nobody's going to fight the US over the future of Greenland." Stressing they were as keen as the US in Arctic security, the seven European signatories of Tuesday's joint statement said this must be achieved by Nato allies, including the US "collectively" - whilst "upholding the principles of the UN Charter, including sovereignty, territorial integrity and the inviolability of borders". Greenland's Prime Minister Jens-Frederik Nielsen welcomed the statement and called for "respectful dialogue". "The dialogue must take place with respect for the fact that Greenland's status is rooted in international law and the principle of territorial integrity," Nielsen said. Trump has claimed that making Greenland part of the US would serve American security interests due to its strategic location and its abundance of minerals critical to high-tech sectors. Greenland, which has a population of 57,000 people, has had extensive self-government since 1979, though defence and foreign policy remain in Danish hands. While most Greenlanders favour eventual independence from Denmark, opinion polls show overwhelming opposition to becoming part of the US.