A flurry of recent Sino-US military exchanges has attracted much attention. Beijing and Washington decided to resume military exchanges during Chinese Vice President Hu Jintao's (胡錦濤) US visit in late April. Two fleets of US warships later anchored off Hong Kong in late August and last month. The US destroyer Paul F. Foster also visited the port of Qingdao late last month.
The exchanges between high-ranking US and Chinese military officials became even more frequent this month. First, a delegation from China's National Defense University visited Washington, followed by a visit by Deputy Chief of General Staff Xiong Guangkai (熊光楷). Second, Admiral Thomas Fargo, the head of the US Pacific Command, arrived in China last week and visited the sensitive Nanjing Military District of the People's Liberation Army.
Among these contacts, Xiong's US trip attracted the most attention, as it indicated a resumption of the negotiation mechanism between deputy defense ministers -- a mechanism which had been on hold ever since the EP-3 collision in April last year.
During his US visit in October, Chinese President Jiang Zemin (
During the recent talks, Xiong presented China's defense White Paper to Washington in order to show Beijing's goodwill. Of course, his true intention was to implant the White Paper's perspective in Washington. According to the US, the talks included various issues, from Taiwan to North Korea and Iraq.
Although the US said China's missile deployment is a threat to regional peace, China did not bring up its proposal to remove missiles aimed at Taiwan. US National Security Adviser Condoleezza Rice warned Xiong during a meeting that the US cannot accept his 1995 remarks, in which he threatened to launch nuclear missiles at Los Angeles if the US came to the defense of Taipei. According to other sources, Washington believes Jiang's proposition was just propaganda. Besides, US arms sales to Taiwan are carried out in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act.
One could say that China gained nothing from the recent round of discussions. No doubt Beijing didn't want to propose conditions for an exchange directly to the uncompromising US Department of Defense because any setback would then have made the proposal difficult to peddle. Instead, Beijing sought to influence government policy by setting its sights on Washington's think tanks.
After the talks, when Xiong had lunch with China specialists from the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and the Brookings Institution, he raised the possibility that China could consider adjusting its missile deployment and also the hope that the US would consider reducing and ultimately halting arms sales to Taipei. Some "old China hands" in the West are easily manipulated by China because of their affinity for the country.
For 63-year-old Xiong, who is in charge of contacts with the US military, however, the good times are nearly over. He was promoted rapidly in the early 1990s when Jiang was purging Yang Shangkun (楊尚昆) and his half-brother, Yang Baibing (楊白冰). At that time, Jiang was virulently anti-US, so Xiong resorted to nuclear extortion in order to cater to Jiang. As a result, Xiong was promoted to his present job.
Prior to the Chinese Communist Party's 16th National Congress, there was a rumor that Xiong would become defense minister, but instead he is now in his third term as an alternate member of the Political Bureau. Moreover, his standing among the alternates is very low. Clearly he has fallen from favor. The next time China undertakes important policy-making work regarding Sino-US military relations, Xiong will not play a key role.
US President George W. Bush sent a congratulatory telegram to Jiang shortly after the conclusion of the National Congress, saying he "treasured" working with Jiang on improving bilateral ties and promoting world peace and prosperity. Moreover, Bush added that he "anticipated further cooperation" with Jiang as the latter continues to serve as chairman of the Central Military Commission.
According to the clues that have come to light thus far, Jiang achieved his goal of retaining the position of commission chairman by inciting the military to carry out a thinly disguised coup. If Bush appears too fervent in his approval, it will only encourage Jiang to follow the path of Adolf Hitler. In the future, it will be Western countries that bear the terrible consequences.
It's important to remember that China's 1.3 billion people and enormous resources are manipulated by the Chinese Communist Party. Those factors are exactly what Hitler was lacking.
Paul Lin is a commentator based in New York.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG AND ETHAN HARKNESS
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
RSS