China’s Response to the Islamist Threat in Mali
June 21, 2013
China
has traditionally been relatively passive when it comes to dealing with
extremism and terrorism in Africa. China’s response this year in Mali
to earlier Islamist successes, which have at least temporarily been
halted by French and African military intervention, suggest that Beijing
may in the future pursue a more activist counter-extremism policy.
Mali
has faced a long-standing internal rebellion by the Tuareg
people, who demand an independent state of Azawad in the northern part
of the country. Partly as a result of
mishandling the Tuareg rebellion, Mali in March 2012 experienced its
first coup in 21 years. Al-Qaeda-linked groups took advantage of the
turmoil and effectively hijacked the Tuareg rebellion. Al-Qaeda in the
Islamic Maghreb (AQIM) and the Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West
Africa, which splintered from AQIM, controlled northern Mali by
mid-2012.
Since its
independence in 1960, Mali has had cordial diplomatic relations with
China. Mali’s recently deposed president had visited China four times
between 2004 and 2010. President Hu Jintao visited Mali in 2009. While
China-Mali trade is not significant for China, it is important for
Mali; China is its largest bilateral trading partner. China has
invested about $50 million in Mali and is a major supplier of aid. Some
1,500 to 1,800 Chinese nationals reside in Mali.
Following
the coup, China called on all parties in Mali to return to
normal order and to uphold national unity and stability, a traditional
Chinese response to such events. As the situation quickly worsened,
China urged the Economic Community of West African States to lead
mediation efforts in Mali, a response that is also in accord with its
policy of non-interference in a country’s internal affairs.
By
September 2012, there was a change of tone in China’s approach to the
deteriorating situation in Mali. China’s charge d’affaires in the
capital of Bamako commented on state television “we are going to bring
our assistance to the extent possible, specifically in the military,
where we already have a very old cooperation.” The clear implication
was that China was ready to support Mali’s army in its fight against
Islamist rebels in northern Mali. This was in keeping with another
Chinese principle:
maintaining a country’s sovereign integrity.
As
Islamist forces
threatened early in 2013 to take over most of Mali, France launched air
strikes against the rebels and quickly followed up by sending troops.
Li Jian and Jin Jing, both researchers at China’s Naval Military
Research Institute, in a Global Times commentary on 22 January
suggested that France’s intervention in Mali was aimed at controlling
gold mines and oil reserves. They accused France of being “the African
gendarme.” He Wenping, a frequent spokesperson for China on African
issues and director of African studies at the Chinese Academy of Social
Sciences, warned on 23 January that France’s involvement in Mali is
risky and that France may be repeating the missteps of the United States
in Afghanistan.
Yun Sun, visiting fellow at the
Brookings Institution, concluded on 23 January that China’s “tepid
response” to the French intervention in Mali stems from its concern
about potential abuse of the UN
mandate as happened in Libya. She argued that China believes French
intervention is a “dangerous challenge” to Beijing’s non-interference
principle.
By 29
January, a Foreign Ministry spokesperson outlined an African-focused
approach to Mali. He said China will support the International Support
Mission for Mali, provide humanitarian aid and called for the early
implementation of UN Security Council Resolution 2085, which emphasizes
political dialogue and deployment of an African-led force to respond to
the security threat. China also pledged $1 million in cash for the
African Union and “some other material” valued up to $5 million. These
steps follow traditional Chinese policy.
On
30 January, the same He Wenping who was critical of France’s policy a
week earlier stated in
an interview that no Chinese officials have opposed France’s
intervention in Mali. She added “I think the French
military intervention was necessary . . . because the situation was
very urgent; militias in the north of Mali were attacking strategic
strongholds not far from the capital city of Bamako.” This statement of
support for French military intervention in Mali was surprising
compared to earlier comments and previous Chinese policy on Western
military intervention in Africa.
After
French and African troops pushed the Islamist forces out of most of
northern Mali, China stepped up its engagement. In a major speech on 13
May on terrorism in Africa at the UN Security Council, Chinese
Ambassador Li Baodong said that the fight against terrorism in Africa
should not be fought by the African countries alone. While the
international community should respect the sovereignty and territorial
integrity of countries under threat, it should help African countries
build their capacity in
the fight against terrorism. He added that China
“resolutely supports” African countries and their regional
organizations in the fight against terrorism.
Within
two weeks of Li Baodong’s remarks, China offered to contribute as many
as 600 troops, including a civil engineering company, to the UN
peacekeeping force being assembled in Mali to replace the French force.
It will incorporate those African troops already in Mali. So
far, all Chinese peacekeepers assigned to UN operations in Africa have
been non-combat troops, usually engineering, medical and logistical
forces. China has not ruled out the sending of combat troops to the
operation in Mali.
In
just over a year, China has gone from a position of avoiding engagement
to counter
African extremist challenges to one of accepting French military
intervention and then offering to contribute troops to a UN peacekeeping
operation that includes in its mandate “steps to prevent the return of
armed
elements” to northern Mali. This begs the question whether China’s response in Mali portends a more activist approach to countering extremism elsewhere.
No comments:
Post a Comment