Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

China Warrants an Arms Embargo
New York Times ^ | March 28, 2005 | Masthead Editorial

Posted on 03/28/2005 1:30:38 PM PST by RWR8189

It is hard to imagine what China's leaders figured they had to gain by pushing through a law authorizing an attack on Taiwan if it moves toward formal independence. Beijing has been threatening such an attack for years, and the Communist Party's all-powerful leaders hardly need to get their toothless legislature's permission if they ever decide to plunge ahead with such lunacy.

But it is easy enough to see what damage this gambit has already done to China's international reputation and objectives. By reminding the world that Beijing seriously thinks about launching a shooting war across the Taiwan Strait that could conceivably draw in the United States, China has persuaded Europe to slow down its ill-advised drive to lift the arms embargo it imposed after the violent suppression of the Tiananmen Square democracy movement.

President Bush had been urging just such a reconsideration on European leaders without much result. It took China's legislative authorization of war to prove that Mr. Bush was absolutely right. The embargo was initially ordered to demonstrate that what happened on Tiananmen Square was totally unacceptable. To this day, China has not shown the slightest regret for those bloody events, nor has it given any guarantees that they will not happen again.

But the most compelling reason for keeping the embargo involves Taiwan. The island's official status is best deferred to another day, when passions on both sides of the Strait are cooler than they are right now. Independence-minded political leaders in Taipei need to restrain their rhetoric and gestures, while mainland leaders needed to stop brandishing threats.

Until that happens, selling China weapons that might be used to shoot down United States aircraft assigned to defend Taiwan is a terrible idea, and one that could lead Congress to restrict the sharing of American military technologies with European arms exporters.


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: armsembargo; armssales; bush43; china; embargo; eu; europe; europeanunion; redchina; redchinese; rice; taiwan; tiananmen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

1 posted on 03/28/2005 1:30:47 PM PST by RWR8189
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Memo to NYT: After the Clintons, this is a little late.


2 posted on 03/28/2005 1:31:52 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #3 Removed by Moderator

To: Eric in the Ozarks
"Memo to NYT: After the Clintons, this is a little late."

Memo to you people who keep repeating similar thing: Bill Clinton is not President. This administration has done NOTHING but cave to corporate interests when it come to dealing with China and the technological and wealth transfers thereto. So Condi attended a church service there...BFD.
4 posted on 03/28/2005 1:52:41 PM PST by OneTimeLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: OneTimeLurker

I gather the Memo was an accurate portrayal of what actually happened regarding the Clintons, the Red Chinese, the Lippo Bank, the DNC, the Buddhist nuns, Loral Space, etc.


5 posted on 03/28/2005 1:56:59 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: OneTimeLurker

"This administration has done NOTHING but cave to corporate interests when it come to dealing with China and the technological and wealth transfers thereto"

It is simply amazing to watch the degree to which fortune-100 corporate interests dictate our policies towards China. The issues of the trade imbalance and the currency peg are particularly onerous.

I think the bush administration works within the reality that they are not going to simply cut off trade with china, or start a trade war, as they would have NO corporate support for such an action.

Given that, they are doing quite a bit in the region on the military and political side compared to the previous administration, and are clearly aware of the growing threat of the chinese military towards taiwan and our forces in the region.


6 posted on 03/28/2005 2:06:57 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks

"I gather the Memo was an accurate portrayal of what actually happened regarding the Clintons, the Red Chinese, the Lippo Bank, the DNC, the Buddhist nuns, Loral Space, etc."

What memo are you talking about?


7 posted on 03/28/2005 2:22:32 PM PST by OneTimeLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: WoofDog123

I don't know how much more they have done in the region than the previous admin. What is particularly annoying is the F16 sale to Pakistan. India is the best check on China in the region and we give F16s to Pakistan. Not to mention we may end up having them used against us someday.


8 posted on 03/28/2005 2:24:23 PM PST by OneTimeLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

RE: It is hard to imagine what China's leaders figured they had to gain by pushing through a law authorizing an attack on Taiwan if it moves toward formal independence.

I can more than imagine it. What they are doing is testing us. They want to see if we would really defend Taiwan, or, would talk ourselves out of it in order to maintain the flow of trade from the PRC.


9 posted on 03/28/2005 2:34:17 PM PST by GOP_1900AD (Stomping on "PC," destroying the Left, and smoking out faux "conservatives" - Take Back The GOP!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: theheebrewhammer

Got news for you: they're here. COSCO has a port facility at Long Beach that drew scant media attention a few years back when they staffed their own 'security guards'.

Their security guards were fully uniformed PLA soldiers with full-auto weapons.

There's a handful of people who've written about it before the Chinese got wise and changed the uniforms and guns so it is out there on the web.

But the point is that if they want to invade all they have to do is load up the troops and come on over.

The only thing in their way is 60 million armed Americans.

But the UN is working hard to fix that.


10 posted on 03/28/2005 2:36:59 PM PST by PeterFinn ("Tolerance" means WE have to tolerate THEM. They can hate us all they want.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OneTimeLurker

"Not to mention we may end up having them used against us someday."

If we face a war with Pakistan we'll shoot down the F-16s the same way we've shot down scores of Iranian F-14s over the years. We know how to build 'em and we know how to break 'em.


11 posted on 03/28/2005 2:39:23 PM PST by PeterFinn ("Tolerance" means WE have to tolerate THEM. They can hate us all they want.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: OneTimeLurker

You must've had too much iced tea, eh ?


12 posted on 03/28/2005 2:41:28 PM PST by Eric in the Ozarks
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Eric in the Ozarks
Your "Memo" was to the NYT, my "Memo" was to you.

There is a 3rd memo you are referencing and I don't know what it is!
13 posted on 03/28/2005 2:43:26 PM PST by OneTimeLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189

Why have an international arms or anything embargo? Crap countries like france,germany, russia, china will all break an embargo to make a buck. Yo gotta know that by now?


14 posted on 03/28/2005 3:20:13 PM PST by Joe Boucher (an enemy of islam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Boucher

In regards to China, I believe the discussion should involve two questions:

1) If China's government fell away due to internal political unrest, and free elections took place, would this do anything to change the current trade deficit?

2) If not, then is the primary reason that China is a considered a threat is because of their lack of human rights and political freedom?

I believe the first answer is no, and in fact, if the communists did fall away and in absence of a long-term civil war, the economic engine would more than likely speed up and really wouldn't change the equation much in our favor. Although workers would slowly demand more money than what they currently get. A change in government is not going to bring back manufacturing jobs to the U.S., however, it may make it easier for the U.S. to combat copyright and patent fraud if they desire to be considered a rational trading partner. Plus they need our food.

The answer to the second is yes, their penchant for controlling a designed destiny, crushing religious freedom and basic political rights are the primary causes for concern. This is what may spiral out of control in light of their responses to Taiwan. They have a big military and they have slowly built their confidence up since the 1950s and are now showing a willingness to flex their might against psuedo, popularized fear (As Richard Pryor once said "I am afraid of a billion of anything.") What better place to do it, than a recalcitrant little island off the coast?

The main thing is the Chinese communist government has to go, and their people set free. A symbiotic(?) relationship needs to emerge somewhat similar to the U.S. and Puerto Rico. (Those fervered few that feel inclined to respond to symbolic analogy can hold off. I am fully aware of its poor analogy but you get my point. Please feel free to respond to my overall comment.)


15 posted on 03/28/2005 6:45:18 PM PST by Tulsa Ramjet (home of the free because of the brave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: theheebrewhammer
Better start learning Mandarin now so you'll be ready when they roll up.

In such a remote and unlikely event that PLA troops occupy the United States I will just get my rifle and start popping some heads off.

16 posted on 03/28/2005 6:50:16 PM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: OneTimeLurker

"What is particularly annoying is the F16 sale to Pakistan"

You gotta wonder what the real reason for that sale is. I don't see the value of the pakistani regime given the possibility the head of state will be assassinated successfully at some point in the not far future, given the number of attempts in recent years.


17 posted on 03/28/2005 7:22:16 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Paul_Denton

on the other hand, I have wondered on what value having young children learn mandarin as a second language would have, given the huge role china will play in the world economy in 30 years. Having a kid learn japanese 20 years ago certainly wouldn't have helped the vast majority of college graduates.


18 posted on 03/28/2005 7:26:28 PM PST by WoofDog123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RWR8189


The Russians when crtitisized for selling jet-fighters, subs and destroyers to China, said, "a few SU-30, Sovremmennys, KILOS are NOT going to change the strategic balance with China" How right they are

China may well already have developed successfully MOLECULAR NANOTECHNOLOGAL WEAPONS ( Post nuclear bombs weapons), Laser, EMG, MIcro-wave etc etc
A few European conventional weapons might well NOT have any impact on the overall strategic balance of power


19 posted on 03/28/2005 8:39:04 PM PST by Smiling-Face TIGER
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Smiling-Face TIGER
China may well already have developed successfully MOLECULAR NANOTECHNOLOGAL WEAPONS ( Post nuclear bombs weapons), Laser, EMG, MIcro-wave etc etc

I am sure the United States has something even better. Already the USAF is working on gamma-ray weapons that work like neutron bombs but use gamma rays. I am sure there is other more exotic stuff that we are not being told about.

Gamma ray weapons

20 posted on 03/29/2005 1:25:42 PM PST by Paul_Denton (The UN is UN-American! Get the UN out of the US and US out of the UN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson