Flashpoints | Diplomacy | South Asia

China’s Emergence as a Backroom Mediator 

Reading the tea leaves in South Asia and the Middle East, Beijing is positioning itself as a peacemaker and a stabilizing force in the present geopolitical flux. 

On April 3, the spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs appeared to be self-certifying her country’s role in the active conflict between Pakistan and Afghanistan,  which has resulted in 800-1000 deaths, depending on the partisan sources one relies on. Mao Ning said that both “Pakistan and Afghanistan value and welcome China’s mediation efforts and are willing to sit down again for negotiations, which is a positive development.”  

Using the often characteristically ambiguous language of Chinese diplomatic communications,  she referred to China’s mediation and facilitation of talks through “close communication,” “multiple channels,”  and “various levels,” which have led to a “consensus” and “specific arrangements regarding operational modalities.” 

On April 5, Pakistan’s Information Minister Attaullah Tarar provided an update on Operation Ghazab Lil Haq, his country’s war on Afghanistan. He said, since its launch in early March, 796 Afghan Taliban operatives have been killed and more than 1043 injured. Pakistan has destroyed 249 tanks, in addition to armored vehicles and artillery guns. While the details of Tarar’s claims remain unverified, it certainly points to the intensity of the “open war” Pakistan launched in Afghanistan. 

The Afghan Taliban, militarily far weaker than Islamabad, has likewise claimed to have inflicted losses on the Pakistan military by engaging in asymmetric warfare. In addition, they have repeatedly highlighted the loss of civilian lives in Pakistani attacks, including 400 deaths in an attack on an addiction treatment hospital in Kabul on March 16.  While Pakistan denies that it attacked the hospital,  independent estimates cite more than 100 deaths in the nighttime strike on the facility, which before 2016 used to be Camp Phoenix, an American military base.

While it appears to be a herculean task to decipher the true meaning behind Beijing’s characteristically vague language of achievement, the on-the-ground situation is simpler to interpret.  Senior officials from the three countries met in Urumqi on April 2, following which cross-border firings and drone attacks by both Afghanistan and Pakistan,  and aerial assaults by Islamabad, have halted, albeit temporarily. 

Beijing claims to have delivered peace when the conflict seemed intractable, although given the prevailing animosity and the deaths involved, there is no guarantee of recurrence, given the conflict’s fragility. Many Middle Eastern countries, like Saudi Arabia, the UAE, and Turkiye, have mediated in such conflicts in the past; their preoccupation with the ongoing war in Iran may have provided the space for Beijing to play the role of the most responsible, if not sole, interventionist.

While Beijing has showcased its success in halting the conflict, a few pertinent questions do remain unanswered. Why did it, despite its enormous clout in both Islamabad and Kabul, allow the conflict to reach such proportions in the first place? Why didn’t it intervene earlier, especially when its economic projects like CPEC are at stake? Is its influence, conventionally understood in terms of the deep economic and defense linkages with Pakistan, and with Kabul, especially in the........

© The Diplomat