Posted on 07/16/2004 6:36:27 AM PDT by milestogo
WASHINGTON, (UPI) July 13 , 2004 -
The United States must cease its interference with Chinese internal affairs over the question of Taiwanese independence or face a serious deterioration of U.S.-China relations, China warned Tuesday.
In an official statement delivered to the press at the Embassy of the Republic of China, embassy spokesman Sun Weide spoke of China's grave concern regarding recent U.S. actions on the Taiwan question.
He urged the United States to halt all arms sales to the country, terminate military links, end official exchanges with Taiwanese authorities, and stop supporting Taiwan's efforts to join international organizations that require statehood.
Such actions, Sun said, violated the one-China policy to which U.S. leaders pledged adherence in three joint communiqués signed by the two countries in 1979 and 1982.
In the final communiqué, the United States reiterated its official recognition that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China. The United States also stated the intention to gradually reduce arms sales to Taiwan over a period of time, leading to a final resolution.
Twenty-four years have passed, said Sun. It is time for the U.S. to honor its commitments.
If those commitments are not honored, he said, ... the reactions will not be in favor of the bilateral relations. ... It will affect our cooperation and China-U.S. relations as well.
Recent visits to China by U.S. national security adviser Condoleezza Rice and Vice President Dick Cheney were successful, he said, and on the whole, China-U.S relations have been steadily progressing.
However, it was made clear to Rice during her visit, Sun reported, that the importance of the Taiwan issue in China's relationship with the U.S. cannot be overemphasized.
The Taiwan question bears directly on China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, he said. We don't need any foreign countries to play any roles in their regards.
Sun rejected Cheney's suggestion during his April visit that there was a link between Chinese conduct over Hong Kong and the Taiwan question, saying China would not accept such interference from the U.S. government.
A senior administration official told the Washington Post in April that Cheney's message to China's leaders had been that Beijing's efforts to stifle democracy in Hong Kong might further kindle Taiwan's moves towards formal independence.
There is not, said Sun, any basis for American government officials to accuse China of eroding freedoms in Hong Kong.
Expressing Beijing's dissatisfaction over recent comments and actions by U.S. government officials and congressmen, he said democracy is expanding in Hong Kong, and people are enjoying freedoms more than anytime in the past.
China, he said, welcomes international dialogue on human rights on a basis of mutual respect. The recent breakdown in such dialogue, he said, is the sole responsibility of the United States.
He pointed to the anti-China resolution tabled by the United States at the U.N. Human Rights Commission in Geneva this April. The defeat of the resolution, the 11th such defeat since 1990, shows the international community recognizes Chinese progress in this area, he continued.
The fact that Taiwan is part of China is also a fact recognized by the international community, said Sun.
A State Department spokesman declined to comment on Tuesday's statement, pointing to the April testimony of James E. Kelly, assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, in which he outlined to the House International Relations Committee U.S. official policy on Taiwan.
The United States is committed, said Kelly, to the one-China policy based on the three joint communiqués. However, it will not support any unilateral move that alters Taiwan's status, and should China threaten force or coercion against Taiwan, the United States would use its capacity to resist that threat.
In addition, the U.S. government will continue to sell Taiwan defensive military equipment in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act, introduced in 1979.
China strongly opposes this act as a violation of the one-China principle and the three joint communiqués, Sun noted at the press briefing.
However, if Beijing fulfills its obligations in adopting a military position that supports peaceful approaches to Taiwan, the defensive requirements will also change accordingly, according to Kelly's testimony.
China currently has short-range ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan, which have been increasing by 50 to 75 missiles per year, Kelly stated.
Taiwan views this threat as a major obstacle to reunification. Taiwanese President Chen Shui-Bian said in his May inaugural speech:
If (China) continues to threaten Taiwan with military force, ... this will only serve to drive the hearts of the Taiwanese people further away and widen the divide in the Strait.
The chairman of Taiwan's Mainland Affairs Council, Joseph Wu, said in a June statement that under such military pressure, Taiwan must reinforce its own defenses.
The Taiwanese position has been to call for peaceful and amicable negotiations on the issue of independence. Chen stated in his May speech that the Taiwanese government would not exclude any possibility as long as the people consented, and that the country understood China's insistence on reunification based on historical and ethnic concerns. However, he also called for a reciprocal understanding on the part of Beijing of the Taiwanese people's democratic concerns.
Sun, however, cited the refusal of the Taiwanese authorities to recognize the one-China principle as the main obstacle to reunification, which, he said, is the common wish of all Chinese people, including our compatriots in Taiwan. China will never tolerate Taiwanese independence, he added. We know that there is only one China in the world.
Such statements further confirm that Beijing's patience is beginning to wear thin, Ted Galen Carpenter, a leading foreign policy analyst, told United Press International Tuesday.
Beijing is becoming increasingly frustrated that the United States does not regard this matter as urgent, said Carpenter, vice president of defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute in Washington.
In fact, he said, We've reached the point where the status quo is unsustainable for more than a few years.
The United States is caught in the middle of an increasingly tense situation, said Carpenter, and is currently heading for a nasty confrontation.
We're likely to have a major crisis within the next few years, he said.
If United States wants to avoid the line of fire, according to Carpenter, we should make clear to Taiwan that although we support negotiations, we will not defend Taiwan in the event of a military conflict.
We don't want to fight a war with China over Taiwan, he concluded, and that may be the bottom line.
I just realized I should have said that China could not win a war with us now. That might change in the future if things keep going the way they are.
...Beijing is becoming increasingly frustrated that the United States does not regard this matter as urgent, said Carpenter, vice president of defense and foreign policy studies at the Cato Institute in Washington.
If United States wants to avoid the line of fire, according to Carpenter, we should make clear to Taiwan that although we support negotiations, we will not defend Taiwan in the event of a military conflict.
We don't want to fight a war with China over Taiwan, he concluded, and that may be the bottom line.
I cannot believe a member of the Cato Institute is spewing this defeatist blather. China is playing the blustering bully as usual. Do any of US need reminding of how one deals with bullies? For pete's sake, it's quite obvious in history's hindsight (both ancient and recent) that a strong show of resolve is what's needed. Simply talk a quiet game while showing them through our actions that we don't give a damn for their crude saber-rattling. Pay lip service to the One China policy while letting it linger on in name only, reinforcing Taiwan's defences for all we're worth, while paying them every diplomatic courtesy possible; welcoming their officials and citizens to our shores and carrying out joint defensive exercises and so on. It would also be a good idea to systematically cut off their access to our dual-use technology and eliminate any military cooperation with the PRC.
If we are serious about avoiding war in the Taiwan Straits than a good, solid show of firm resolve is the only guarantor of "peace" that has ever been shown to work (hello Mr. Chamberlain, hello?),
Does this mean no more cheap furniture?
"If United States wants to avoid the line of fire, according to Carpenter, we should make clear to Taiwan that although we support negotiations, we will not defend Taiwan in the event of a military conflict."
Taiwan = Sudetenland of the 21st Century. All Chinese must be included in the greater Chinese Reich.
Right now, they don't even HAVE to use military power against us. All thye have to do is embargo all sales to the U.S.
Nearly EVERYTHING we buy is made there.
Thanks Richard Nixon, George Bush I and all the Libs, Dems and greedy conservative businessmen who approved of dealing with the devil.
I know it is tracked but it does not take to long to fire its missiles. I hope we have two hunter-killers on it anytime it leaves port.
Thanks for the ping...
Oh, please don't throw me in the briar patch!!!
Do your thing now,,,I'm counting on you.
Not to be a dick or anything, but is the use of the word "chink" really necessary to make your point? Somehow, I don't think so...
They'll go into financial collapse.
BTW, use of vulgarity to describe male genitalia is counter to posting guidelines, you might want to clean up your act.
History has proven that once an aggressor state has struck a staggering blow, others will follow suit. America's wealth and technology are a prize worth gambling for. Any power with enough balls, whiskey and weapons would gladly jump into the maelstrom.
"If we are serious about avoiding war in the Taiwan Straits than a good, solid show of firm resolve is the only guarantor of "peace" that has ever been shown to work (hello Mr. Chamberlain, hello?),"
I agree with your entire post, especially the final observation.
That said, I've noticed for the past decade the Chinese offer up vague mutterings, vague threats, on a regular basis. I suspect its designed much more for internal comsumption than anything else.
Even the Chinese admit, grudgingly, that they have no viable means of attacking Taiwan sucessfully at this time, nor will they for another half dozen years, minimum. Short of nuking Taiwan, there isn't anything they can do but mutter ongoing threats of "doom" for Taiwan, and any that interfere.
Big sign of weakness, in my opinion. After fifty years of this stuff, eventually you gotta take it with a big grain of salt.
Tienanmen should be a huge clue.
The Beijing leaders
REALLY DO NOT
CARE
that much
if they lose even 800,000,000 or more people in a war.
They feel justified seeing China as abused and hemmed in the last 200 years. They consider this slated to be the CHINESE CENTURY if not the CHINESE MILLENIUM.
They figure that regardless of their population losses, there would be at least proportionate losses to their opponents.
They figure they can easily dominate the world that's left.
Part of that is cultural and personal arrogance. Part of it is not that far fetched logic from their perspective.
Of course, they have little clue--in spite of God's massive moves in China--they have little clue that God has a lot more options and a lot more accurate perspective than they do.
This will NOT be the Chinese century.
This will certainly NOT be the Chinese millenium.
This century and the rest of eternity belongs to THE KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS, JESUS, THE CHRIST.
China will meet more than it's match when it descends on Israel as The Bible declares it will--given the givens, in our era. Only the percentage of very authentic Christians in China will be any hint of it's saving grace. China is a more Christian nation in raw numbers than the USA is. Their continued persecution increases their prayer clout.
Chinese leaders also likely believe that we don't have enough nukes to cover their vast country very adequately.
Get over yourself. I used no vulgarity in my post.
Now, keeping in mind that this is the first time I've seen this FReeper post something like that, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt until I see more stuff like it.
When I called YOu a racist, it was because of a continual pattern. But, I don't expect you to grasp the differences.
And besides, looks like the mods pulled the offending post by Lowell, so what more need be said?
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.