International Response:  Chinese Opposition to Code of Conduct Might Inspire Others

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — China’s decision to not participate in a proposed international code of conduct to halt ballistic missile proliferation might prompt other countries to do the same, experts told Global Security Newswire this week (see GSN, Nov. 12).

Beijing announced Tuesday that it probably will not participate in a signing ceremony for the code scheduled at The Hague later this month.  The action could create a domino effect, disrupting the political momentum of the code and creating a precedent for other countries of concern such as India and Pakistan, according to experts.

India might choose to reject the code now because it has historically been wary of Chinese missile capabilities, said Mark Smith of the Mountbatten Center for International Studies at the University of Southampton in the United Kingdom.  In turn, a rejection by India could prompt Pakistan to do the same, he said.

The code “will need to be signed by states like China, India, Pakistan, Iran ... or else it will simply be a club of EU members, the U.S. and their allies — in which case it will struggle to establish itself,” Smith said in a written response to an inquiry by GSN.

At the very least, China’s refusal to sign could provide other countries with political cover for other reasons for rejecting the code, said Tim McCarthy, a senior analyst at the Monterey Institute of International Studies.

Reasons for Refusal

Experts have outlined several reasons why China has decided to abandon the code, including a perceived lack of involvement in its creation, disappointment over its scope and transparency concerns.

Beijing’s stance might be a “philosophical” position arising from concerns that Chinese officials had little input in the code’s development, McCarthy said.  While China may agree with the goal of the code, it sees little reason to support the code’s provisions because Beijing had little say in their creation, he said.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry Tuesday indicated its concern that several Chinese proposals have been rejected.

“We support the principle of anti-proliferation in the code,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said.  China, however, “is very regretful that the final document of the code did not absorb or adopt the Chinese suggestions, making it difficult for China to participate in the code,” he added.

China had hoped the code would create a more far-reaching missile nonproliferation regime that would have ultimately superceded the Missile Technology Control Regime, the current international missile control regime, said Steve LaMontagne, an analyst at the Council for a Livable World, citing a Chinese Foreign Ministry memo issued during negotiations.  Beijing has believed that the MTCR, to which it does not belong, is imperfect and discriminatory, he said.

Disapproval with an agreement that prohibits some but not all transfers contributed to China’s decision to reject the code, LaMontagne said.  Beijing had wanted the code to prohibit technology transfers that it views as threats to Chinese national security, for example, transfers of U.S. anti-missile technology to Taiwan, he said.

China also objects to certain transparency and confidence-building measures in the code, Smith said.  The code calls on members to provide each other with advance information on missile policies, test sites and launches, which China regards as “the handing over of free intelligence,” Smith said. 

China had proposed that the code’s provisions be implemented voluntarily, a condition that the European Union members — which were a primary force in creating the code and have guided it through its development — were not likely to accept, Smith said.

“I think that modifying the code to make its transparency measures a ‘take your pick’ smorgasbord was beyond what was acceptable,” Smith said.  “A balance has to be struck between a code that as many states as possible can join, and a code that holds out the promise of doing something meaningful,” he added.

“Organic Growth”

Experts agreed that China’s rejection of the code does not necessarily doom it to failure.  The move could diminish the code’s chances for success, but it is not a “fatal blow,” Smith said.

The EU has envisioned an “organic growth” process for the code’s acceptance, McCarthy said.  The MTCR began with seven members and has seen its membership grow to 33 countries, he added.  The EU did not expect the code of conduct to be universally accepted at its onset, he said.

For further information, see:

Draft International Code of Conduct (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute)

Missile Technology Control Regime (U.S. State Department)

Back to top

International Response:  China Hesitates to Sign Missile Code of Conduct

China said today that it probably will not sign a proposed international code of conduct to halt ballistic missile proliferation, which is set to be finalized at a conference at The Hague later this month (see GSN, Aug. 23).

“We support the principle of anti-proliferation in the code,” Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Kong Quan said yesterday at a press conference in Beijing.  China, however “is very regretful that the final document of the code did not absorb or adopt the Chinese suggestions, making it difficult for China to participate in the code,” he added.

China is still committed to working with other countries to prevent the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, regardless of its position on the code, Kong said.

“Whether we participate in this code of conduct will by no means influence the determination and practice of the Chinese government’s firm opposition to large-scale destructive weapons,” Kong said.  “Nor will it influence cooperation between China and the international community in this field,” he added (Reuters/Yahoo.com, Nov. 12).

It would be “unfortunate” if China decided to not sign the code, a U.S. State Department official recently told the Wall Street Journal.  “It is our belief that the requirements for disclosure are quite modest.  We feel there’s nothing in the text per se that would affect their national security,” the official added.

A Chinese Foreign Ministry official has told European diplomats that China would like to send a senior official to address the Hague conference, according to the Journal.  China would attend the conference in an observer capacity, however, and the organizers of the conference so far have no provisions for observers, the Journal reported (Susan Lawrence, Wall Street Journal, Nov. 8).

For further information, see:

Draft International Code of Conduct (Stockholm International Peace Research Institute)

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP