22/04/2015 China’s Middle East Tightrope | Foreign Policy

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/20/china­middle­east­saudi­arabia­iran­oil­nuclear­deal/ 1/6

China’s Middle East TightropeBeijing is walking a fine line between Saudi Arabia and Iran. But, in this region, even a

big checkbook can't buy friends in both places.

APRIL 20, 2015BY , ILAN GOLDENBERG ELY RATNER

To understand China’s role in the Middle East, consider one recent event, and one recent non-event. In

late March, Beijing made headlines by sending warships to rescue hundreds of Chinese and foreign

nationals from conflict-torn Yemen. Yet in early April, Chinese President Xi Jinping canceled what was

supposed to be his first official trip to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, reportedly as a result of the fighting in

Yemen — underscoring that Beijing would rather get out of the kitchen than stand the heat of Middle

Eastern politics. Indeed, it is China’s considerable absence, rather than burgeoning influence, that

continues to define its role in this turbulent region.

China has good reasons to care about events in the Middle East: Roughly half of its oil imports come

from the Persian Gulf. Moreover, Beijing worries about extremist elements in the region providing

training and inspiration to Muslim separatists in western China.

22/04/2015 China’s Middle East Tightrope | Foreign Policy

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/20/china­middle­east­saudi­arabia­iran­oil­nuclear­deal/ 2/6

However, in stark contrast to Xi’s ambitious domestic agenda — reforming key sectors of the economy,

including banking and agriculture; easing restrictions on China’s outmoded household registration

system; and relaxing its infamous one-child policy — he has done little in foreign policy that would

merit a memoir like Hillary Clinton’s Hard Choices. In fact, despite Xi’s call for a more “proactive”

Chinese foreign policy, Beijing has still only contributed to the safe and soft domains of international

politics, such as economic development, anti-piracy, global public health, and U.N. peacekeeping.

China doesn’t expend significant blood or treasure abroad combating violent extremism, settling

bloody civil wars, or mediating major regional conflicts. Beijing has instead remained allergic to

confronting tough political and security issues overseas, acutely limiting its geopolitical influence. As

a result, China’s persistent appeals for “win-win” cooperation, which may make sense in economic

affairs and other dispassionate realms, hold little water where political battles are zero-sum and fought

over indivisible and deeply contested stakes.

Nowhere is this more evident than in the Middle East, where China’s influence on regional issues is

surprisingly marginal, even as its growing energy dependency is compelling deeper partnerships with

the likes of Saudi Arabia.

Unwilling to put teeth behind its positions, China has made tentative forays into the Middle East

morass that have largely fallen flat. In October 2012, China’s then foreign minister, Yang Jiechi, rolled

out a “Four-Point Plan” for Syria that called on all sides to stop fighting, end the crisis, and initiate a

political transition. The Associated Press noted that the plan generated little international interest:

Most observers found it “vague, and likely aimed at bolstering China’s reputation following criticism of

its moves to join Russia in blocking U.N. resolutions aimed at ending Syria’s bloodshed.” Needless to

say, this was a failure.

22/04/2015 China’s Middle East Tightrope | Foreign Policy

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/20/china­middle­east­saudi­arabia­iran­oil­nuclear­deal/ 3/6

The problem is that Beijing does not want to choose sides in a region that regularly demands it. By

contrast, Washington has made considerable commitments in the region: The United States remains

the de facto guarantor of external security for Saudi Arabia and the rest of the states in the Gulf

Cooperation Council. The dominant American naval presence safeguards the free flow of oil resources

out of the Middle East, underwriting the economic prosperity of many of the region’s actors, and

Washington remains deeply engaged in the thankless task of trying to mediate between Israelis and

Palestinians. And yet, despite America’s significant investment, its partners in the Middle East have

criticized the Obama administration for refusing to take even more decisive actions across a range of

regional conflicts. The region is very demanding of a superpower: If China wants to play at that level,

it’s going to have to take sides.

It is hard to see how a deeply risk-averse China could step into a leadership role in any of the region’s

fiery disputes. Beijing’s most difficult balancing act will be trying to maintain good relations with both

Riyadh and Tehran amid escalating regional and sectarian competition. Saudi Arabia’s greatest

concern about the Iranian nuclear agreement, which may be completed by the end of June, is that the

removal of banking and oil sanctions will give Tehran the resources to wreak even more havoc through

its proxies in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon, and Iraq. The majority of new money pouring into Iran would

come from China — Iran’s largest trading partner. Indeed, only days after the Iranian nuclear

agreement was reached in early April, Iran’s oil minister, Bijan Zanganeh, was on his way to Beijing.

Can China really supplant the United States as the guarantor of the Gulf states’ security when it is

bankrolling their most significant threat?

When it comes to another critically important arena in Middle East diplomacy — the Israeli-

Palestinian conflict — the Chinese are similarly absent. The other four permanent members of the

U.N. Security Council play important roles in the peace process. While the United States is the primary

mediator, key European states including France and Britain have led the charge in the European

Union to offer both significant economic incentives and disincentives to both sides, while the Russians

regularly advocate for the Palestinians. China is the only member of the Security Council failing to step

up to the plate.

22/04/2015 China’s Middle East Tightrope | Foreign Policy

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/20/china­middle­east­saudi­arabia­iran­oil­nuclear­deal/ 4/6

Meanwhile, in Syria and Iraq — where state failure, civil war, and the rise of the Islamic State (IS) have

combined to create the region’s most severe crisis — few good options remain. The Arab states have

concluded that the most meaningful way for foreign powers to contribute in Syria and Iraq is through a

military intervention that targets IS and overthrows President Bashar al-Assad. They argue that only

an intervention including a combination of airstrikes, training and arming of opposition forces, and

potentially even more direct military options, could at this point save Syria. But China won’t go there

either. Instead, Beijing has sided with Moscow at the Security Council, blocking resolutions that would

have increased pressure on Assad. At the same time, hedging its bets, China has repeatedly hosted

Syrian opposition groups in Beijing, and in March 2012 it sent a special envoy to meet them in

Damascus.

Notably, China has embarked on more proactive diplomacy in the region. This includes increased

high-level visits, including the first by a Chinese foreign minister to Iraq in 23 years, in February 2014;

enhanced engagement with regional organizations like the Arab League; and the successful

recruitment of nine countries in the Middle East, including Egypt, Iran, and Saudi Arabia, to sign up as

founding members of the new China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. But this doesn’t

overcome the fundamental issue that it is nearly impossible to please all sides and still be a major

player in the Middle East.

Of course, few would disagree with President Barack Obama’s characterization that the Chinese “have

been free riders for the past 30 years and it’s worked really well for them” in the Middle East. In that

sense, Beijing may be prudent not to get involved in the region’s seemingly intractable conflicts.

Nevertheless, China cannot continue pursuing a risk-averse foreign policy and simultaneously emerge

as a leader in the rough-and-tumble arena of Middle East politics. For Xi, it will be an either-or

decision.

LINTAO ZHANG/AFP/Getty Images

Democracy Lab Weekly Brief, April 20,

22/04/2015 China’s Middle East Tightrope | Foreign Policy

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/20/china­middle­east­saudi­arabia­iran­oil­nuclear­deal/ 5/6

2015

ABRIL 20, 2015 - 1:37 PM ILYA.LOZOVSKY @ICHBINILYABY ILYA LOZOVSKY

To keep up with Democracy Lab in real time, follow us on Twitter and Facebook.

Yuliya Bila urges Ukraine to decentralize, arguing that devolving power to local authorities will

strengthen the quality of governance and bolster democracy.

Robert Looney warns that Ethiopia’s economic miracle threatens to run out of steam unless the

government introduces meaningful democratic reforms.

Daniel Lansberg-Rodríguez explains how Venezuelan president Maduro’s body double raised

eyebrows at the Summit of the Americas.

Christian Caryl argues that German author Günter Grass, who died last week, will be remembered for

his art — not his politics.

And now for this week’s recommended reads:

The latest issue of the Journal of Democracy contains several must-reads, including Duncan McCargo

on the problems of transitional justice, Lilia Shevtsova on deepening political stagnation in Russia,

and Javier Corrales on Venezuela’s autocratic legalism.

The Carnegie Endowment’s Michele Dunne describes how President Sisi is ushering in a new era of

resurgent nationalism, while Shana Marshall looks at what the country’s military has gained,

politically and economically, under the new regime.

In a new report for the Atlantic Council, Frederic C. Hof, Bassma Kodmani, and Jeffrey White make the

case for a new national stabilization force in Syria.

22/04/2015 China’s Middle East Tightrope | Foreign Policy

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/20/china­middle­east­saudi­arabia­iran­oil­nuclear­deal/ 6/6

An investigation by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, the Huffington Post,

and other media partners reports on development projects funded by the World Bank that have

displaced millions of people from their homes.

Writing for African Arguments, James Copnall covers Sudan’s elections and finds low turnout, putting

their legitimacy into question. (In the photo, election workers wait for a polling station to open in

Khartoum.)

Roman Olearchyk and Neil Buckley of Financial Times report on how the Ukrainian government is

appointing foreigners to high-level posts to boost reform.

The International Crisis Group calls Burundi’s upcoming elections a “moment of truth” for the

country’s fragile peace agreement.

Photo credit: PATRICK BAZ/AFP/Getty Images