ESPM 2022.2: Inglês

The China-Iran Strategic Partnership: 40 Years in the Making

The Middle East continues to be one of the most dynamic regions of the world as it undergoes economic, geopolitical, and security changes influencing not only countries in the Persian Gulf, but also global powers that are vying for influence. Relations between Iran and China are key drivers in the changes currently underway.

Cooperation between these two nations is not new and has been developing in its current context since the Iran-Iraq War (1980-1988). Their pragmatic friendship took root during this war, establishing the foundation for a partnership that today is strengthening Iran’s economic and regional position and gives China a strategic foothold in the Middle East. With China’s growing influence in Africa and East Asia, its enhanced position in the Middle East adds another dimension to its challenge to U.S. hegemony and its global reach.

China’s growing influence, coupled with its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), have major strategic implications as Beijing seeks to link its economic, geostrategic and security interests. Nowhere is this more evident than in its relationship with Iran, as it helps China enhance its points of interest and link the Middle East, Central, and South Asia together. It also gives Iran a much-needed boost to its worrying economic situation as its population continues to grapple with financial and public health challenges. The growth of the China-Iran relationship established during the Iran-Iraq War will not only reshape the political landscape of the Middle East, it will also strengthen each government’s position within their respective country.

How this was done is very important. China’s pragmatic post-Maoist leaders used the Iran-Iraq War to enter the international arms market and cultivated strategic diplomatic relations with key regional players. However, its reach extended beyond the arms market, especially with Iran, as Beijing established the groundwork for a longterm relationship. Interestingly, while the Chinese government had expressed concern over the Iran-Iraq War and stated China’s strict neutrality with the conflict, Beijing also strategically utilized the war to its advantage, maintaining relationships with both sides as it lay the foundation for its later endeavors. This approach allowed China to develop relationships with both Iran and Iraq.

China-Iran relations were also essential from an economic perspective, their trade relationship was so extensive that Iran became China’s number one trading partner in the entire Middle East. This mutually beneficial relationship was extremely important for Iran as it grappled with issues related to the war and other economic and political challenges.

Given their 40-plus year relationship, China and Iran believe in the strength and durability of their partnership and sustained cooperation working toward their mutual interests. While rapprochement between the two countries grew gradually out of wartime necessity and economic needs, their increased diplomatic ties helped foster a strategic relationship that today is vividly clear in Iran’s recently-approved bid to join the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), the 25-year strategic agreement between Iran and China, and Iran’s participation in China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). Each aspect of this agreement is directly linked to the goals and strategic intentions of Xi Jinping’s BRI, as Iran’s centrality in the Middle East and political power in the region will prove vital to the initiative’s success. In its current state, the China-Iran partnership is integral to both sides: to China, it represents the progression of the BRI in the Middle East, and to Iran it is the key to the success of a heavily sanctioned Iranian economy.

Some Iranians have been cautious in their view of Iran’s relationship with China, arguing that it is more beneficial to China than Iran. Some have gone further, equating it with the 1813 Treaty of Gulistan and 1828 Treaty of Turkmenchay, under which Iran ceded parts of its territory in the Caucasus to Russia. These treaties have become a symbol of defeat to many Iranians. Nonetheless, Iran’s relationship with China, including the recent cooperation agreement is a win for Iran. It will likely strengthen the country on multiple levels, including its negotiations with the U.S. and others in the long term.

Given the extension and scale of influence that this relationship has on Iran, China, and the region it is important to understand its modern context. Unpacking the influence of the Iran-Iraq War on current trends and Iran’s and China’s long game, is an important facet in developing a comprehensive conceptual framework of the current landscape.

*Satgin Hamrah is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of History at Tufts University and the founder of the Iran-Iraq War Project. Her regions of focus are the Middle East and South Asia, and her research areas include Islamism, sectarianism, state and non--state conflict and violence.

**Alexander Eliasen is a graduate of Tufts University with a B.A. in International Relations. Currently, he works in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Disponível em: https://thediplomat.com/2021/12/the-china-iran-strategic-partnership-40-years-in-the-making/; Acesso em: 18 Jan 2022 (adaptado)

41. (ESPM 2022) The article above:

1. criticizes the American hegemony in the Persian Gulf.
2. is mainly about the Iran-Iraq war.
3. was published at the start of the negotiations between Iran and China.
4. talks about the Iran-China diplomatic relations in a positive tone.
5. was written by two university professors.

42. (ESPM 2022) According to the article, the Iran-China partnership:

1. is more beneficial to China than to Iran.
2. benefits the United States.
3. benefits both China and Iran.
4. is more beneficial to Iran than to China.
5. was not meant to benefit any nation.

43. (ESPM 2022) The article mentions:

1. two wars and two diplomatic agreements.
2. one war and four international agreements.
3. several armed conflicts in Eurasia.
4. an agreement sealed between China and the USA.
5. a peace treaty between Iran and Iraq.

44. (ESPM 2022) The expression ‘in the making’ in the title of the article points to:

1. a cooperation in progress for decades.
2. a partnership ended in the 1980´s.
3. a frustrated attempt of understanding.
4. the construction of Chinese factories in Iran.
5. a threat of conflict between Middle Eastern and Asian countries.

45. (ESPM 2022) In the third paragraph, when the article mentions the growing influence of China, it says: “Nowhere is this more evident than in its relationship with Iran (...).

This sentence contains an inversion of the standard position of ‘subject + verb’ to ‘verb + subject’. Identify below the phrase that DOES NOT USE the same syntactic structure:

1. Never has he committed such a heinous crime.
2. Down the stairs came the prime-minister.
3. Only after entering the room did she realize that she was in danger.
4. Times have changed and so have we.
5. Who is responsible for the organization of the event?

More than 100 members of the global super-rich called on Wednesday for governments around the world to “tax us now” to help pay for the pandemic response and tackle the gulf between rich and poor.

The group of 102 millionaires and billionaires, including Disney heiress Abigail Disney, said the current tax system is rigged in their favour and needs to be rewritten to make taxation fairer for hard-working people and restore trust in politics.

“As millionaires, we know that the current tax system is far from being just,” they said in an open letter published on Wednesday. “Most of us can say that, while the world has gone through an immense amount of suffering in the last two years, we have actually seen our wealth rise during the pandemic – yet few if any of us can honestly say that we pay our fair share in taxes.”

The super-rich signatories, who brand themselves as “patriotic millionaires”, called for the introduction of “permanent wealth taxes on the richest to help reduce extreme inequality and raise revenue for sustained, long-term increases in public services like healthcare”.

“Restoring trust requires taxing the rich,” they said in the letter, published as world leaders and business executives meet for a virtual Davos World Economic Forum. “The world – every country in it – must demand the rich pay their fair share. Tax us, the rich, and tax us now.”

The group, which also includes Nick Hanauer, a venture capitalist who made an almost $1bn fortune from an early bet on Amazon, said an annual “wealth tax” on those with fortunes of more than $5m (£3.7m) could raise more than $2.52tr.

That would be enough, they said, to “lift 2.3 billion people out of poverty; make enough vaccines for the world and deliver universal healthcare and social protection for all the citizens of low and lower-middleincome countries (3.6 billion people).”

The proposed tax would see those with more than $5m pay 2%, rising to 3% for those with more than $50m and a 5% rate for dollar billionaires.

Taxing the UK’s wealthiest 119,000 people at these rates would raise an estimated £43.7bn, a year, according to an analysis by campaign groups Fight Inequality Alliance, Institute for Policy Studies, Oxfam and the Patriotic Millionaires.

Gemma McGough, a British entrepreneur and founding member of Patriotic Millionaires UK, said:

“At a time when simply living will cost the average household a further £1,200 a year, our government cannot expect to be trusted if it would rather tax working people than wealthy people. If they do anything in the next few months, they should do this: rather than raising national insurance, tax the rich – tax us – instead.”

Jenny Ricks, global convenor at the Fight Inequality Alliance, said: “The insane reality is that while billions face a daily struggle to survive during this pandemic, billionairewealth is spiralling out of control. This cannot be right. The multiple crises we face from vaccine inequality to climate breakdown have a vice-like grip on people’s lives that is not letting up. For years Davos has shown us the elites cannot and will not end the virus of inequality they have helped to create and built their fortunes on the back of.”

Disponível em: https://www.theguardian.com/business/2022/jan/19/millionaires-call-on-governments-worldwide-to-tax-us-now Acesso em: 25 Jan 2022 (adaptado)

46. (ESPM 2022) According to the article above:

1. A group of around 100 global super-rich claim the taxes they are demanded to pay are unfair on them.
2. However much Davos struggles for income equality, that doesn’t seem to be ever happening.
3. The current tax system is instrumental in restoring political confidence.
4. The super-rich group’s main contention is that a fairer taxation on them would boost a much more just welfare system.
5. A fairer taxation system is a worldwide request despite the meager improvement it will bring out.

47. (ESPM 2022) The title of the article implies that:

1. there is an abyss between the rich and the poor that must be dealt with.
2. Tax may hinder solidarity between the rich and the poor.
3. The group of 102 wealthy people advocate for being taxed at a lower rate.
4. Taxing the rich may cause an uproar among the poor.
5. Wealthy and destitute people should be taxed alike.

48. (ESPM 2022) One of the reasons for the claim of the super-rich group is that:

1. The trust in politics stems from the current tax system.
2. The current tax system is not in tune with the super-rich's most important needs.
3. Despite the super-rich's fair share in paying taxes, this group is not yet helping to decrease world inequality.
4. A worldwide tax rise is the only way to help an otherwise unequal society.
5. The current tax system is manipulated for the super-rich's gain.

49. (ESPM 2022) According to the article, it is INCORRECT to assert that:

1. Higher taxation of the super-rich is very likely to help restore the trust in governments.
2. The foresight made by the superright signatories of the letter is that a progressive taxation, proportional to people’s wealth, will guarantee better welfare to the most deprived.
3. The super-rich are unanimous in the thinking that they must devote higher attention to an otherwise unequal society.
4. The British government priorities are not in accordance with what Gemma McGough believes to be a priority.
5. An unequal society paves the way for capital accumulation of a few.

50. (ESPM 2022) The verbs ‘rise’ and ‘raise’, both used in the article, apparently have a similar meaning. Is there any difference in their use?

1. No, they can be used interchangeably, as both refer to ‘something going up’.
2. Yes, ‘rise’ is intransitive, whereas ‘raise’ is transitive.
3. Yes, ‘raise’ is intransitive, whereas ‘rise’ is transitive.
4. No, they are different spellings of the same verb, just as it happens with ‘enquire’ and ‘inquire’.
5. Yes, while ‘rise’ is used before animated objects, ‘raise’ is used before unanimated objects.