The regime of former Syrian president Bashar al-Assad — whose family ruled Syria for half a century — collapsed under continued pressure from rebel forces led by the alliance Hayat Tahrir al-Sham (HTS), ending with the panicked al-Assad escaping from Damascus. Given al-Assad’s close relationship with Beijing, the rebel victory might very well impact China.
Located at the end of the Silk Road’s eastern section, Syria historically served as a vital passage for Eastern goods traveling to Europe. On the eve of a coup led by then-Syrian minister of defense Hafez al-Assad in 1969, a Syrian envoy was sent to Beijing. In the midst of the Cultural Revolution, China had implemented a foreign policy of exporting revolution and therefore Chinese leader Mao Zedong (毛澤東) committed to providing Hafez al-Assad with substantial military aid.
After successfully gaining power in 1970, Hafez al-Assad became an important supporter of China in the Middle East. In 2000, after Bashar al-Assad inherited his father’s position, he welcomed the even more rapid development of economic relations with China.
Having spent many years living in the UK, Bashar al-Assad has always admired Western culture, yet he remained deeply cautious about suddenly opening up to the Western market. Therefore, he tried his best to emulate former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s (鄧小平) policy of “reform and opening up.”
Syria in 2006 followed China’s example by implementing its 10th “Five-Year Development Plan,” bringing in substantial Chinese investment. Prior to the outbreak of Syria’s civil war in 2011, China was Syria’s fifth-largest trading partner. After the war began and many nations cut trade relations with Syria, China became Syria’s largest trading partner.
After 2017, as the Syrian military gradually regained control of lost territory, China rapidly increased its investment in Syria. On several occasions, Bashar al-Assad expressed support for Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative and welcomed China’s participation in post-war reconstruction plans.
Before the start of the 19th Asian Games in Hangzhou, China, last year, Bashar al-Assad visited China and met with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the first time — he even toured important historic sites across Hangzhou.
Now that the regime of Bashar al-Assad has collapsed, will the interim government recognize previously approved Chinese investment projects? Will it confiscate Chinese assets? These are just two of the unknowns.
Aside from the economic aspect, China’s diplomatic strategy in the Middle East also faces several challenges with the change in Syria. Following the protests, uprisings and armed rebellions of the Arab Spring, the regional system in the Middle East was characterized by the confrontation between Sunni Muslims — led by Saudi Arabia — and Shiite Muslims — led by Iran.
Quite unexpectedly, the rivals came to a mutual agreement under China’s mediation.
The two nations on March 10 last year announced the resumption of diplomatic relations after discussions in Beijing and they even negotiated the formation of a naval alliance in the Persian Gulf, creating a rare, united atmosphere in the Islamic world.
However, HTS forces supported by Saudi Arabia have defeated the Iran-backed regime of Bashar al-Assad in the Syrian civil war. This illustrates that last year’s historic agreement between the two nations might have simply been about China saving face. In reality, both nations still have their own hidden agendas.
Yang Chung-hsin is a civil servant.
Translated by Kyra Gustavsen
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion