PRC MEDIA DEBATE CHINA'S ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BEIJING 000218

SIPDIS

E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/27/2035
TAGS: PREL PGOV NATO ECON CH PK AF XD ZK
SUBJECT: PRC MEDIA DEBATE CHINA'S ROLE IN AFGHANISTAN

Classified By: Political Minister Counselor Aubrey Carlson for reasons
1.4 (b,d).


1. (C) SUMMARY: Following President Obama's December 1
announcement at West Point to send 30,000 additional troops
to Afghanistan, Chinese Communist Party(CCP)-affiliated media
and the PRC's official television network CCTV began airing
disparate views on the proper PRC response to the situation
in Afghanistan. With the exception of an MFA official who
denied that the PRC media reflected government views,
contacts at government-affiliated think tanks, Beijing
University and the Afghan and UK Embassy separately concurred
that media-based discussion mirrored behind-the-scenes debate
within the PRC government on Afghanistan policy. Contacts
offered differing explanations of the public debate, with
some suggesting the debate reflected differences between
"internationalists" and "conservative" elements in the PRC
leadership, while other scholars suggested the media debate
reflected a PRC leadership effort to shift the Afghanistan
narrative focus from U.S. pressure on the PRC to assist in
Afghanistan to the PRC protecting its national interests in
South Asia. END SUMMARY.

Contours of Media Debate
--------------


2. (C) On December 8, the Global Times (Huanqiu Shibao),a
Chinese-language newspaper affiliated with the Communist
Party mouthpiece Renmin Ribao, took the uncommon though not
unprecedented step of publishing two competing articles on a
single subject, in this case Afghanistan. One article
advocated sending non-combat PLA peacekeepers to Afghanistan
to protect China's economic interests and bolster China's
international image; the other argued against sending PLA
forces in order to avoid giving impetus to the "China threat
theory" or attracting the ire of terrorists. Since December
8, the airing of differing views on the proper PRC response
to the situation in Afghanistan has continued and spread to
the official television network CCTV, the English-language
edition of Global Times and Renmin Ribao.

Public Debate Might Mirror Debate within Party
-------------- -


3. (C) With the notable exception of an MFA official, Embassy
contacts suggested that the media discourse on Afghanistan
reflected a behind-the-scenes debate inside the PRC
government over what role China should play in Afghanistan.
MFA Asia Department Afghanistan Division First Secretary Chen
Feng January 8 acknowledged a public discussion of China's
proper role in Afghanistan, but stated that the PRC media did
not represent the views of the PRC government. In contrast,
MFA-affiliated China Institute of International Studies
(CIIS) South Asia scholar and media commentator Rong Ying
told PolOff January 12 that the CCP would not have allowed
the public debate to proceed for over a month unless it
reflected a divergence of views on the issue within the
Party. Independently, a contact at Ministry of State
Security-affiliated China Institutes of Contemporary
International Relations (CICIR),scholars at Beijing
University, and counterparts at the Afghan and UK Embassy all
expressed that same conclusion in separate meetings in
January.

Differing Explanations of Cause of Debate
--------------


4. (C) Our contacts offered three explanations for the
emergence of the debate in the media. The Afghanistan
debate, according to one view, was part of a larger ongoing
and unresolved competition for influence over Chinese foreign
policy decision-making between "internationalists" and
"conservatives." Beijing University South Asia scholar Han
Hua told PolOff January 5 that "internationalists" in recent
months had privately urged PRC policymakers to take active
measures to promote stability in Afghanistan in order to
protect China's economic interests in that country and
preserve China's ability to access Central Asia through
Afghanistan. "Conservatives," including but not limited to
the PLA, had countered that the PRC would not derive benefit
from helping the United States out of its Afghan quagmire and
suggested that a greater PRC role in Afghanistan would damage
China's peaceful image and ignite speculation about PRC
strategic intentions. While noting that the continued
presence of a public debate signaled that there was a
constituency within the Party in favor of an expanded PRC

BEIJING 00000218 002 OF 002


role in Afghanistan, Han speculated without further
elaboration that "conservatives" still held the upper hand.


5. (C) A related explanation suggests that the ongoing public
arguments in favor of greater PRC participation in
Afghanistan constituted an attempt to publicly challenge
justifications that opponents of greater PRC involvement in
Afghanistan used privately, according to Beijing University
Associate Professor Wang Dong. Wang pointed out January 4
that recent media commentary had directly rebutted central
arguments against greater PRC involvement, such as the
proposition that increased PRC involvement in Afghanistan
would incur the wrath of Muslim extremists, as well as the
suggestion that the PRC should not support a U.S. strategy to
encircle China. PRC commentators' focus on these "central
issues" in discussions of Afghanistan suggested a
coordination of efforts to build a case for greater PRC
involvement in Afghanistan, according to Wang. (NOTE:
Wang's comment accurately suggests that recent comments in
favor of a greater PRC role have followed similar lines of
reasoning; however, much of the recent PRC media commentary
has not favored increased PRC involvement in Afghanistan,
notably on the question of whether to send PLA forces to
Afghanistan.)


6. (C) A third explanation held that the media debate was
intended to shape PRC public opinion by highlighting Chinese
interests in stability in Afghanistan, thereby marginalizing
the United States as an element of discussion. CICIR
Afghanistan scholar Wang Shida told PolOff January 19 that as
long as the narrative on Afghanistan remained that the United
States was pressuring the PRC to make a larger contribution
to stability in Afghanistan while at the same time continuing
to sell arms to Taiwan, then it would be impossible for any
PRC leader privately or publicly to support increased PRC
involvement in Afghanistan. If, however, the PRC public
discourse minimized U.S. requests for assistance and instead
highlighted the importance to the PRC of protecting its
interests in Afghanistan, then there would be political space
for PRC policymakers to consider an expanded role. CIIS
South Asia scholar Lan Jianxue separately concurred, and
added that major public rifts in U.S.-China relations would
make it increasingly difficult for policymakers to de-link
Afghanistan from the United States.
HUNTSMAN