we really should take the attitude
Wang (China’s former ambassador to Bahrain, Jordan, Iran’s Ambassador): we must first understand the US-Iran relations in the end what is the problem, look in the end, Da Buda up. First question, some said uncomfortably nuclear issue, and some say it is a question of democratization, I do not think so. Iran is a major obstacle to dominate the Middle East, this is the real problem.
<- more ->
Dangerous tone of the war both sides are high, but I think both sides have a virtual place. The Iranian economy is very difficult, has announced that Europe Iran to block Strait of Hormuz, have this ability, but can not be sustained. The clamor was the United States is also very powerful, and has been a part of right-wing support, but the power of the United States today not as good as the eve, really want to fight, Obama should think twice before calling will his election smashed.
Huihou (China before the conflict in Algeria, Tunisia, Palestine, Lebanon, Egypt Ambassador): Iran and the United States is a structural contradiction between the two countries’ strategic intent, strategic significance of tit for tat. U.S. to fight Iran, nearly every burst necessary to speculation, speculation among the N times this year only. But Da Buda, I think the choice of the United States there are three possibilities, one is the same as the war on Iraq, sending troops to fight. The second is to blow up Iran’s nuclear facilities. The third is to maintain the sanctions to block Iran’s oil exports, an attempt to cut off Iran’s economic lifeline, the internal difficulties, so that people revolted, and again pick up the pieces. The first two undesirable for U.S., Iran is vulnerable, it is impossible to take the initiative to provoke a war.
Ding Hong (former Chinese Ambassador to the United Nations, Switzerland, Belgium, in the EU head of delegation): Iran’s nuclear issue has been going on for 33 years, is a manifestation of the political struggle between the United States and Iran, the nature of their struggle, in essence, is subversion and subversion. Although Europe with the United States appears to stand together, in fact, the policy of the European countries with the United States there is a difference, they do not support the United States simply to put pressure. Using the nuclear issue to achieve many purposes, to put pressure on Iran, but also to contain the country to maintain normal relations with Iran, including China, Europe. Any punitive measures against the losses caused by U.S. sanctions point loss is someone else. As for the war, from the U.S. do not want to play and do not want to play, at least in the general election phase, and Iran do not want to play, and now everyone is worried that Israel hit, if you really want to make, there is no co-ordination of the United States, Israel not dare to. I feel that in foreseeable circumstances, not a war.
Wang Sheng (China in Nigeria, Ambassador of Colombia in the APEC Senior Officials): appears to war clouds hanging over, but in reality it is psychological warfare, propaganda war, diplomatic war, sanctions and anti-sanctions, tough and anti-tough domestic and international general worry about The outbreak of war, misfires, actually working on the weapons may not escape.
Far, Pei Ying (China in India, the Ambassador of Poland): If the United States to fight Iran, is tantamount to suicide, but now the possibility of violent conflict between the United States and Iran is increasing. The United States has a lot of heart disease, afraid of the formation of a Shiite center in the Middle East, outside in addition to Iran, now those in power in Iraq is also a Shiite, Syria. Iran is bigger, Iraq to attract in the past, Syria for their own safety, but also to be attracted to the United States to maintain hegemony in the Middle East is a big obstacle. I see the possibility of hands in the increase. The pressure change agents can not go on how to do action, sending the aircraft carrier, to talk about with Georgia, said that in order to obtain military channel.
The United States in the Middle East is still the leading?
Ding Yuan Hung: The United States previously to promote the purpose of so-called Greater Middle East Initiative, there are two, one to maintain the dominant position of the United States in the region, the second, to maintain Israel.
Wang: U.S. Middle East has never been simpler Greater Middle East Initiative, has been the two parts of the strategy, dumping US regime is to foster, does not meet it strategic plan, and walked away. The New York Times said, in line with the interests of the United States, uniformed democracy; does not meet the interests of the United States, non-uniformed dictatorships. The Greater Middle East Initiative is a cover of the United States to promote its values.
Wang: The values are secondary, hegemony is the main. U.S. dominant position in the Middle East, hegemony, the dominant position has been a serious challenge, not only from the Iranian challenge, not only the challenge from Syria, and from the Arab’s own challenges. But the U.S. is now reason to Iran, Syria to take a moment of such a policy is to ensure that its dominant position. Obama spoke of change of the trend sweeping the East and North Africa, the outcome of this change is still uncertain, but the results, especially with the United States.
Pei Ying far: the Greater Middle East Initiative now looks like there are two basic points, an overall strengthening of the control of the Middle East, which is its main goal. Second, the promotion of American democracy, hope that the Arab, Islamic ideology give way to the West. The United States or dominant, but did not like the plan of it, further strengthened, but is being challenged, the first is the challenge of Iran.
Huihou: the dominant position of the United States in the Middle East is to strengthen or weaken? On one hand, indeed it is certain aspects of weakening, on the other hand, the United States remains a dominant position with the Middle East, this dominant position is not fundamentally shaken, so in some countries in the Arab turmoil or change for the U.S. gains and losses, not all is lost. United States and Western countries have a strong side, Gaddafi to overthrow the United States and Western manifestation of the will of the
China have what kind of Middle East strategy?
Wang: We want to make a difference in the Middle East, should also be clearly seen in the Middle East or the rising star, also limited the strength still keeping a low profile. First observe their own and do their own, and then gradually increase the investment in the Middle East. Our Middle East policy, there are many areas for improvement, based on the principle of noninterference in internal affairs, for example, more extensive contact with local factions people. In the economy, we need to consider future increases in the gold content of the project, can not just send the labor, which is also a problem of restructuring.
Huihou: First of all, the United States is the leader in the Middle East, China is unlikely to replace the dominant position of the United States, we can not do this. Secondly, why in the Middle East issue is always negative and passive response, rather than proactive, it is because we can not be mass response in the Middle East, we do not have this intention. Third, the problems in the Middle East, the impact is not China. But also to see that after the turmoil of the Arab countries, even the Muslim religious forces came to power, bilateral relations between China and these countries will not be much change, because we have no conflict of fundamental interests, non-interference in domestic affairs. In dealing with Iran and Libya, more and more difficult to make a determined effort to take care of all aspects of our Chinese. There are some people really appreciate Russia’s aggressive, in fact, the Russian approach we can not copy.
Ding Yuan Hung: Our foreign policy is different from Western countries. What is the U.S. foreign policy, The United States can do, we absolutely can not do, we do not do not all take the West as a benchmark. China also does not have the strength to make a difference, a warship sent to you, troops can be sent to you, far worse.
Pei Ying far: the Middle East issue, we really should take the attitude, I think a tactical level, a strategic level. At the strategic level, some principles that we should consistently adhere to the Do not peaceful coexistence out of date. Also, keeping a low profile now questioned a lot, but this one still have to adhere, but do not always hang in the oral. Also, a strategic vision, do not see the immediate interests of a little penny contention also half a day to look at long-term, comprehensive look at, depending on the political gains, but also our influence. Foreign tactical level, the practices of India, there are some we can learn from India is also facing a contradiction, on the one hand it is to try to do a good job in its relations with the United States, it is to become the world’s big powers, without the support of the United States is not. In addition, Iran it is very important, its energy depend on Iran. India is how to reconcile these two contradictory goals, worthy of our consideration.