Enter The Dragon! An Empirical Analysis of Chinese versus US Arms Transfers to Autocrats and Violators of Human Rights, 1989-2006¹

Abstract

de Soysa, Indra and Paul Midford. (2012) Enter The Dragon! An Empirical Analysis of Chinese versus US Arms Transfers to Autocrats and Violators of Human Rights, 1989–2006. International Studies Quarterly, doi: 10.1111/isqu.12028 © 2012 International Studies Association The rise of China has led to a spate of scholarly and journalistic speculation about the future of a liberal world order. Apparently, the rise of a nondemocratic, Asian rival to US hegemony potentially undermines the growth of democracy throughout the system. Many see a resource‐hungry China engaging itself globally out of purely self‐interested motives, and Chinese business and aid offer a viable alternative to Western influence. Using the Stockholm Institute for Peace Research’s (SIPRI) data on arms transfers since the end of the Cold War, we test the proposition empirically by assessing the nature and strength of Chinese politico‐military support, measured as conventional arms transfers, globally and to African regimes. In short, we find that China relative to the United States transfers greater amounts of arms to democracies rather than autocracies, whereas the United States seems to prefer more autocratic regimes, despite rhetoric that claims an ethical foreign policy. The same result holds when we assess this relationship using human rights data. Moreover, Chinese arms transfers to countries suffering civil wars are much lower than the United States’. The findings are robust to the inclusion of several control variables and alternative estimation techniques. The findings show that popular perceptions about China’s role in Africa do not match reality, particularly when assessed against the current hegemon’s behavior.

China, Autocratic Patron? An Empirical Investigation of China as a Factor in Autocratic Survival

“…Indeed, commentators note that Western corporations and banks frequently do business with authoritarian regimes and other states with questionable human‐rights records (Brautigam :Chapter 11). The United States, for example, seems no less inclined to sell arms to authoritarian states than does China (De Soysa and Midford ). Such patterns raise serious questions about whether Chinese engagement in the developing world undermines liberal order.…”

“…Otherwise, it reinforces existing imbalances. For example, even though the Chinese guidelines for arms transfers stipulate that they should not interfere in the domestic affairs of the recipient (Taylor :1, in De Soysa and Midford :845), one should expect them to be supportive to the incumbent when the latter relies on repression to underline claims to power—as was the case in Myanmar, Sudan, or Zimbabwe (BBC News ). Similarly, the provision of development projects should be beneficial for incumbents when they enjoy a decision‐making monopoly and can choose projects strategically.…”

Under the influence Of arms

“…The sale of U.S. arms to Yemen illustrates that the pressures of military alliances and other geopolitical concerns (questions of power related to realism) can outweigh the more liberal concerns for human rights and democracy when arms sales decisions are made by states. This is consistent with other recent scholarship that finds that the United States is more likely to sell arms to states with poor human rights and democracy records than is China (De Soysa and Midford 2012). This brief case illustrates some of the reasons why the stated policy goal of avoiding sales of weapons to such states is difficult to do.…”

The Political-Military Foundations of China’s Global Ascendency

“…At the same time, it is having real impacts on the domestic politics of China's arms trade partners. A growing body of literature contends that China is playing a very contradictory role in Africa with mixed consequences for democratization in the region (Brookes 2007;Campbell 2008, De Soysa andMidford 2012). In some African countries, China's arms sales, along with its contribution to peacekeeping and peacebuilding activities, are critically needed in an era when "UN peacekeeping is severely overstretched" (Gill and Huang 2009:9).…”