By Benjamin Shook
Recent crises raise some interesting questions about the strength of China’s non-interventionist principles.
Despite Chinese Foreign Minister Hong Lei’s unequivocal denial of Myanmar’s assertions of Chinese involvement in the Kokang conflict, the notion of tacit Chinese support may bring up broader questions for observers and leaders alike. Some under the SCO umbrella may be asking, when it comes to protecting its citizens, will China truly respect the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention? Will possible future action against Chinese migrants in our sovereign territory face active opposition by the Chinese government?
The “New Silk Road” concept – which has taken over Chinese foreign policy of late – is dependent on these non-interventionist principles to maintain stability in Beijing’s lucrative relationships, particularly in Central Asia. After a Jordanian pilot was notoriously executed by ISIS, many in China wondered what the government would do if a Chinese citizen were in a similar situation. How would Beijing’s decision-making proceed should the leadership have to choose between its citizens’ safety and its political and strategic interests?
The Kokang conflict itself constitutes a suggestive example: As refugees poured into China, it became clear that the government had detailed, extensive plans for distributing aid and managing security concerns. The response demonstrated China’s “resolve to protect its territorial integrity and regional security interests and indicated how China might respond to contingencies elsewhere,” wrote (PDF) Drew Thompson of The Nixon Center in Washington, D.C. This resolve was also reflected after the accidental bombing of Chinese territory, when the PLAAF ordered air patrols and radar surveillance to protect Chinese airspace.
Read the full story at The Diplomat