Washington’s Soft Line on Chinese Weapons Sales

26 April 2012

On Friday, the New York Times revealed that the Obama administration is planning to relay to Beijing its concerns about the apparent sale by a Chinese enterprise of six missile-transport vehicles to North Korea. The eight-axle TELs (which stands for transporter-erector-launchers) were spotted in a Pyongyang military parade on April 15th, hauling what looked to be a new long-range missile.   

An unnamed White House official, speaking to the Times, noted that the Obama administration believes China sold the chassis and other parts for the missile-transport vehicles but that the transfer did not constitute a clear violation of Security Council measures imposed in 2006 and 2009. “We think this is poor Chinese performance in sanctions implementation, and not willful proliferation,”said the official. “The Chinese system is so sprawling and poorly organized that they are not good at enforcing sanctions.”

In one sense, it is right for the Obama administration to be initially cautious, as we do not at this time know exactly how the North Koreans came into possession of the launchers. Yet, on the other hand, it is premature—reckless, even—to immediately come to the conclusion that China merely sold the chassis and that its proliferation has not been “willful.”

In fact, there are many reasons to suspect that Beijing’s proliferation has been with malice aforethought.  For one thing, why would North Korea have to buy a chassis from China if it in fact had developed, on its own, a sophisticated missile and the intricate launcher assembly? It makes more sense to believe that Pyongyang bought the whole package, the missile and its associated launcher, from China. And Richard Fisher, of the International Assessment and Strategy Center, points out that China has sold similar missiles and TELs to Pakistan.  

Unfortunately, Beijing appears to have stepped up its transfers of ballistic missiles in the last few years, as reports of sales to Iran indicate. Moreover, it is hard to conceive how Beijing could have thought that its sale of the vehicle would be for peaceful purposes when it is configured for only one purpose, the launch of multi-stage missiles. In any event, the seller of such expensive items—about $1 million apiece—would generally know its clients and their intentions.  

This sale to Pyongyang does not appear to be an isolated matter. As Anthony Cordesman of the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies told CNN, “There is no question that there is a long history in the past of Chinese and North Korea cooperation on missile technology.” We should not be surprised, because for decades Beijing has been the world’s arch proliferator of missiles and nukes. In short, it stretches credulity to believe that this was an “off-the-shelf” sale to an anonymous customer for peaceful purposes. 

Ted Parsons, of IHS Jane’s Defense Weekly, said that such a sale “would require approval from the highest levels of the Chinese government and the People’s Liberation Army.” That conclusion sounds right, but even if it were not, Beijing should still be held accountable for the sale of the vehicle, as it has undertaken international obligations that bind all inside China. 

In any event, Chinese diplomats ensure us that a rogue sale cannot happen in their country. “We have our own export-control regime, which has been strictly implemented by all agencies and ministries of the Chinese government,” noted Geng Shuang, Chinese embassy Embassy spokesman in Washington.

If we want China to stop supplying North Korea with weapons technology, we need to give Beijing the right incentives. Making up implausible excuses for the Chinese is not the way to change exceedingly irresponsible behavior.