At the Shangri-La Dialogue last weekend, China was represented by its Deputy Chief of the Asia Department from its Foreign Affairs Ministry.
Compared to the other countries who were represented by their Defence Ministers and other senior military officials, Beijing's representative is seen as a low-level participation.
At the Shangri-La Dialogue last weekend, China was represented by its Deputy Chief of the Asia Department from its Foreign Affairs Ministry.
Compared to the other countries who were represented by their Defence Ministers and other senior military officials, Beijing's representative is seen as a low-level participation.
At last year’s dialogue, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld criticized China’s lack of transparency in its military spending.
He made the same criticism this year.
Could this be the reason why China is not taking an active participation at the annual dialogue?
Dr. Li Nan, Senior Fellow at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies at Singapore’s Nanyang Technological University, tells us more.
Dr. Li: The Shangri-La Dialogue was organized by the IISS, a British institution. Most of the defence ministers of western powers were going to attend and be there, so China was probably concerned that the forum would be dominated by western powers. The second concern is the agenda of the forum. US Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld was very critical of Chinese defence spending, particularly over the absence of transparency in its defence budget. So in that sense, China is probably concerned that the forum could be used as a place to criticize Chinese defence policy.
For the reasons that Dr. Li has just mentioned, reports have said that China does not trust the US and therefore did not actively take part in the Shangri-La Dialogue. Dr. Bo Zhiyue from the National University of Singapore’s East Asian Institute explains.
Dr. Bo: I think, to some extent, this is true because the US government leaders, especially defence leaders such as Defence Secretary Rumsfeld, keep saying the same thing about the so-called China threat over and over again. That does not help in getting China to be more active in terms of dialogue. But on the other hand, I do think that this is a great opportunity for China to send a higher level official to this dialogue in the future to explain China’s position.
Why didn’t China send a higher level official this time around then?
Dr. Bo: I think that is because of some misperceptions on China’s side because on the one hand, this is not necessarily an anti-China forum. It is really a dialogue about security issues by diplomatic means. Actually, the sponsors of the dialogue made efforts to reduce Taiwan’s participation by officials. In 2005, Taiwan’s government officials were no longer invited and in 2006, it was the same and only Taiwan scholars were invited to participate. So this is an indication that the sponsor and relevant countries are willing to accommodate.
AS he did at the 2005 Shangri-La dialogue, US Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld again criticized China’s lack of transparency in its military spending. Dr. Bo elaborates.
Dr. Bo: Donald Rumsfeld is, what we call, a hawkish person; he represents US military, so he tends to look at everything in worst terms, especially with regards to China, so it’s not surprising that he’s making such remarks all the time. However, you can see the fact that he is saying this, over and over again, is an indication of the lack of dialogue between the US and China over military issues. So that’s another reason why the Chinese side should send a higher level military official to be engaged in dialogue.
But could China have other reasons for not sending a military official. Dr. Li again.
Dr. Li: You may send somebody over to take a position, but that could make the guy politically vulnerable among the leadership as he may say something that may not be politically correct within the Chinese policy circle. But basically, I think the central concern is that they are not sure about the kind of objectives that the forum is supposed to serve. It’s organized by IISS and it has, traditionally, become a forum for the US Defence Secretary to talk about Chinese defence spending in a critical way. So in that sense, China has been skeptical about the usefulness of this forum.
Dr. Bo, however, believes that criticisms against China’s lack of transparency in its military spending can be addressed through dialogues with the US.
Dr. Bo: Well, in my opinion, no country’s military budget is completely transparent. Every country has some military secrets. My main point here is that because of the lack of dialogue, you basically turn Rumsfeld into a monologue. He keeps saying something he’s been saying for years without making progress for Sino-American relations. Therefore, I think it’s important for China to consider participating at a higher level next year.
That was Dr. Bo Zhiyue, visiting Senior Research Fellow at the East Asian Institute in National University of Singapore.
Earlier we also heard from Dr. Li Nan, Senior Fellow at the Institute of Defence and St
