Atlantic Divide on China

President Bush warned European leaders on Tuesday that their plan to end a 15-year arms embargo on Beijing could upset the strategic balance between China and Taiwan, and he suggested that Congress might retaliate by limiting arms sales to Europe.

The U.S. has promised to defend Taiwan in the event of an attack by Beijing, and Washington fears that lifting the embargo would allow China to acquire sensitive military technology. Although the Europeans have pledged to develop an arms shipment plan that would prevent such transfers, Bush was openly skeptical that they would be able to allay America’s “deep” concerns.

“Now, whether they can or not, we’ll see,” Bush said at a news conference in the Belgian capital after talks with European leaders.

Bush is halfway through a four-day visit to Europe that the administration says was designed to heal diplomatic ruptures caused by the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq. But the clash on the Chinese arms embargo as well as a rift over how to deal with Iran and its nuclear ambitions indicate that the two sides have yet to agree on a common approach to several key international issues.

The U.S. and Europe imposed the embargo on China in 1989, several weeks after Beijing violently suppressed democracy demonstrations in Tiananmen Square.

Washington has steadfastly argued that China’s human rights record since then does not merit a lifting of the embargo. It also fears that weapons and military technology could end up in the hands of extremists or unstable governments. But Europe maintains that it is wrong to continue lumping China with Myanmar, Sudan and Zimbabwe, the only other countries facing such an embargo.

In his remarks here, Bush said he had told French President Jacques Chirac and other European leaders that they must “sell” their arms shipment plan not only to him, but to Congress.

“There is deep concern in our country that a transfer of weapons would be a transfer of technology to China, which would change the balance of relations between China and Taiwan,” Bush said at a news conference with NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer. Congress, he said, “will be making the decisions ... as to how to react to what will be perceived by some, perhaps, as a technology transfer to China.”

The House this month passed a resolution declaring that an end to the arms embargo would be “in direct conflict with U.S. security interests” and that such action would “necessitate limitations and constraints ... that would be unwelcome on both sides of the Atlantic.”

Chirac, who discussed the matter with Bush over dinner Monday, reiterated Europe’s intention to end the embargo but said that security guarantees could be worked out to ease U.S. concerns. “We intend to lift the last obstacles in our relations [with China] ... within a spirit of responsibility,” Chirac said.

The possibility that China could acquire new military technology is no academic matter, said Kenneth Lieberthal, a China specialist at the University of Michigan who was an advisor in the Clinton White House.

“There’s a legitimate question of whether the United States and China will end up shooting at each other over Taiwan,” he said in a telephone interview. “This is not all political symbolism. There’s a reality to this.”

Philip H. Gordon, a foreign policy analyst at the Brookings Institution in Washington, said the dispute over the arms embargo “really does have the potential to blow up into another U.S.-Europe crisis.”

“The idea that the Europeans -- in the view of many American critics -- for commercial or geopolitical reasons, would start selling weapons to China, where they have no strategic stake, is intolerable,” he added.

Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-El Cajon), chairman of the House Armed Services Committee, said he was highly concerned that an end to the prohibition would enable China to obtain precision-guided munitions and state-of-the-art “command and control” technologies.

In a telephone interview, Hunter said that if the Europeans ended the embargo, the U.S. would be “less inclined to work cooperatively with the Europeans on future weapons development.”

European officials have maintained that a strengthening of the European Union’s “Code of Conduct” could deter the transfer of weapons and technologies to other governments. According to one EU official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, 80% of Europe’s arms exports already are covered by the code, and a stricter code, without the embargo, would do the job in China’s case.

“Delinking the symbol of the embargo with actual sales is the key point here,” he said.

While Bush has been urging the Europeans to reconsider their stance on the Chinese arms ban, leaders on the continent have been seeking greater support from Washington on their approach to another contentious matter: Iran’s nuclear development program.

Britain, France and Germany have been trying to negotiate with Tehran to get it to give up nuclear technology that could be used to make weapons in exchange for trade benefits and security guarantees.

At a second news conference Tuesday, Bush said he was “getting good advice from European partners” on how to deal with Iran.

“After all, Great Britain, Germany and France are negotiating with the ayatollahs to achieve a common objective, something that we all want, and that is for them not to have a nuclear weapon,” he said. “It’s in our interests for them not to have a nuclear weapon.”

But Bush did not comment on a request from Chirac to support Iran’s candidacy for the World Trade Organization or let it purchase civil aircraft engines as part of a deal on its nuclear program.

“It seems to me legitimate to make a gesture in the area of Iran’s bid for WTO membership and wish to buy civil aircraft engines,” Chirac said, according to Reuters. “I don’t see why that shouldn’t be done, and I said so to the president of the United States.”

Bush’s reluctance to become more deeply involved in the European talks with Iran, and Washington’s repeated warnings to Tehran against developing nuclear weapons, has fueled speculation that the U.S. may want to attack the Persian Gulf nation.

On Tuesday, Bush declared that “this notion that the United States is getting ready to attack Iran is simply ridiculous.” But he elicited laughter by quickly adding, “Having said that, all options are on the table.”

The lingering divide on Iran was apparent to many Europeans.

“The one area crying out for better transatlantic coordination is Iran,” London’s Daily Telegraph newspaper said. “The Bush administration says it is seeking a diplomatic rather than a military solution. If that is so, it should either wholeheartedly back the attempt at mediation by ... Britain, France and Germany or negotiate directly with Tehran itself. The present position, where the administration ostensibly supports the [trio] while privately pooh-poohing their efforts, plays into Iranian hands.”

Earlier in the day, Bush met with British Prime Minister Tony Blair, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi and newly elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko, who made his first visit to the North Atlantic Treaty Organization headquarters in Brussels.

Today, Bush travels to Mainz, Germany, for a meeting with German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder and a round-table discussion with a small group of German citizens.

Bush is scheduled to meet Thursday with Russian President Vladimir V. Putin in Bratislava, Slovakia.

Times staff writer Janet Stobart in London contributed to this report.