Economist suggested that Chinese president HU JINTAO should facilitate the deployment of a UN-led peacekeeping force in Darfur, where 300,000 people were killed in Sudan`s bloody riot[1], rather than turning a blind eye to the country`s civil war for its energy interests.

This reminds me of another article in Economist a month ago, like many other western media, questioning China’s “new colonialism” in Africa and generous help to “inhuman country”. Indeed, the ways that China aids Africa are far different from the Western helpers, the most significant difference among which is the policy of “no intervene of Africa’s politics”.

Will China continue sitting out of Sudan`s politics? I don’t think so. Chinese leaders are extremely pragmatic nowadays. Yes, they are thirsty for oil, but they are also reluctant to be described as an irresponsible rising power and become the target of the world`s criticism.

Pragmaticism makes Mr. Hu embrace the “no intervene” policy; it will also make him change stance, as long as stronger voices rise in the world urging him to do so. There is no romantic relationship between China and Sudan. They just take what they want from each other.

It is believed that China is able to mediate the civil war in Darfur with its growing influences in Sudan. But how soon can the negotiation bear fruit?

It is noticeable that most of the bitter accuses on China`s foreign policies in Africa are from the media, yet the Western governments haven’t exerted much pressure on China as they used to. China`s economy growth needs oil, world`s economy boost needs China. As globalization deeply embedded in today`s world, politics is more like an art of balance.

Still, China is playing a crucial role in Darfur crisis and will resolve the problem between Sudan and the UN, with the premise that its energy security is guaranteed.

---

[1] Economist  – February 3 2007