Top Chinese general warns US over attack

By Alexandra Harney in Beijing and Demetri Sevastopulo and Edward Alden in Washington

Published: July 14 2005 21:59 | Last updated: July 15 2005 00:03

China is prepared to use nuclear weapons against the US if it is attacked by Washington during a confrontation over Taiwan, a Chinese general said on Thursday.

"If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons," said General Zhu Chenghu. Gen Zhu was speaking at a function for foreign journalists organised, in part, by the Chinese government. He added that China's definition of its territory included warships and aircraft.

"If the Americans are determined to interfere [then] we will be determined to respond," said Gen Zhu, who is also a professor at China's National Defence University. "We . . . will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all of the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds . . . of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese." Gen Zhu is a self-acknowledged "hawk" who has warned that China could strike the US with long-range missiles. But his threat to use nuclear weapons in a conflict over Taiwan is the most specific by a senior Chinese official in nearly a decade.

However, some US-based China experts cautioned that Gen Zhu probably did not represent the mainstream People's Liberation Army view.

"He is running way beyond his brief on what China might do in relation to the US if push comes to shove," said one expert with knowledge of Gen Zhu. "Nobody who is cleared for information on Chinese war scenarios is going to talk like this," he added.

Gen Zhu's comments come as the Pentagon prepares to brief Congress next Monday on its annual report on the Chinese military, which is expected to take a harder line than previous years. They are also likely to fuel the mounting anti-China sentiment on Capitol Hill. In recent months, a string of US officials, including Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary, have raised concerns about China's military rise. The Pentagon on Thursday declined to comment on "hypothetical scenarios".

Rick Fisher, a former senior US congressional official and an authority on the Chinese military, said the specific nature of the threat "is a new addition to China's public discourse". China's official doctrine has called for no first use of nuclear weapons since its first atomic test in 1964. But Gen Zhu is not the first Chinese official to refer to the possibility of using such weapons first in a conflict over Taiwan. Chas Freeman, a former US assistant secretary of defence, said in 1996 that a PLA official had told him China could respond in kind to a nuclear strike by the US in the event of a conflict with Taiwan. The official is believed to have been Xiong Guangkai, now the PLA's deputy chief of general staff.

Gen Zhu said his views did not represent official Chinese policy and he did not anticipate war with the US.

phew! well, that's ok then, eh!!!! - FT.com

U.S. slams threat by China to use nuclear weapons

Friday 15th July, 2005 - The Bush administration Friday labeled as "highly irresponsible" a Chinese general's reported threat to use nuclear weapons if the United States became involved in a conflict over Taiwan. The State Department said it hoped the remark did not reflect official Chinese policy.

Officials in Washington were responding in measured tones to an assertion by a Chinese general that Beijing would resort to the use of nuclear weapons if the United States became involved in a cross-strait conflict over Taiwan. Two newspapers quoted Chinese Army Major General Zhu Chenghu as making the remarks Thursday in Beijing to a group of Hong Kong-based correspondents. The general, on the faculty of China's National Defense University, said he believed China would have to respond with nuclear weapons if the United States used precision conventional arms against Chinese forces near Taiwan.

He said he was expressing his personal views and not the official policy of Beijing, which has long said it would not initiate the use of nuclear weapons in any conflict.

At a news briefing in Washington, State Department Spokesman Sean McCormack called the remarks "highly irresponsible" and said he hoped they did not reflect the views of the Chinese government:

"The United States is not a threat to China," said McCormack. "We have a broad and deep relationship in which we try to work closely with the Chinese government on a variety of issues. The secretary has talked about the fact that this relationship is probably the best U.S.-China relationship we've seen in quite some time. There are mixed elements to it. But again she was just there and had good discussions with the Chinese leadership."

McCormack called overall relations with China good and constructive and said the remarks of General Zhu were unfortunate. A senior official who spoke to reporters in Washington said he was unaware of any U.S. diplomatic complaint about the general's remarks beyond the spokesman's comments.

Taiwan has long been a point of friction between Washington and Beijing. The United States has no formal defense commitment to Taiwan, which China considers a renegade province. But it is committed to providing Taiwan with defensive weapons under an act of Congress approved in 1979 at the time U.S. diplomatic recognition was switched from Taiwan to the mainland. U.S. officials have long stressed the need for a peaceful resolution to the China-Taiwan dispute, while being vague about what the United States might do in the event of hostilities between them.

Secretary of State Rice visited Beijing as part of the Asian trip she completed earlier this week. Spokesman McCormack said Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick would be traveling there later this month to begin a strategic dialogue with the Chinese leadership. - BNN

Japan's dangerous move in E.China Sea

China Daily Updated: 2005-07-16 07:15

Japan is muddying the waters of the East China Sea. It is stamping on China's maritime rights by granting Japanese firm Teikoku Oil Co the right to test drill for gas and oil in a part of the East China Sea disputed by the two countries. Japan's move could lead to confrontation with China.

Our government's sincere calls to solve the dispute through negotiation have fallen on deaf ears in Japan . Giving Teikoku the go-ahead to test drill is a move which makes conflict between the two nations inevitable, though what form this clash will take is hard to tell. Teikoku will conduct experimental drilling in the East China Sea near natural gas fields currently being explored by a Chinese consortium.

Japan's attempt to force gas exploration in an area beyond the Okinawa submarine trench has many motivations. Japan's need for oil is not a new issue. The island country has secured several oil suppliers. Gas resources in the area near the Diaoyu islets are unlikely to quench its thirst for oil. Japan's unilateral action to start drilling, which flies in the face of international maritime laws, is not simply about new sources of energy. It reveals plainly the country's intention to take our Diaoyu islets for good.

China and Japan have long been divided over the demarcation of the continental shelf of the East China Sea. China has insisted on negotiation and appealed for joint exploration but Japan drew a "median line" without consulting China.

Japan has unilaterally demarcated a controversial exclusive economic zone (EEZ) along the "median line," which sits on the Chinese side of the continental shelf, and on which China enjoys exclusive rights. China has never accepted the line. But Teikoku's test drilling will be conducted east of the "median line." China's oil and gas exploration in the East China Sea is being carried out in this country's indisputable coastal waters and is a matter within the scope of China's sovereignty.

The Japanese oil firm originally applied for exploration rights in the area in 1969 and again in 1970. The Japanese Government shelved the applications because of the unsettled EEZ demarcation in the waters dividing the two countries. With the issue inconclusive, the nod from today's Japanese leaders will only serve to fan the flames of trouble. Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's calls for dialogue to solve the drilling dispute with China still ring loud in our ears. In April, Koizumi said we needed to continue talks from a broader perspective even though the Chinese and Japanese positions differed. The talks were aimed to "turn the sea of conflict into a sea of co-ordination."

The unilateral approval of Teikoku's exploration rights will accomplish the opposite.

Koizumi called for dialogue the day after Tokyo initiated procedures to grant Japanese firms the right to conduct test drilling for potential gas and oil fields to the east of the "median line" in the East China Sea. Lodging a protest over the issue with the Japanese side, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said China would "retain the right to further react."

Given the important role energy issues play in the two countries, communication on the subject is bound to have a huge bearing on state-to-state relations. Keeping a cool head and flexibility may be the way to shoot down disputes like this.

But Japan has strayed from the path of dialogue. If a confrontation were to result, the blame would sit firmly with Japan. chinadaily.com

Russia launches anti-terrorist exercise in Far East

www.chinaview.cn 2005-07-18 23:34:42

MOSCOW, July 18 (Xinhuanet) -- A large-scale anti-terrorist exercise was launched in the Russian Far East on Monday under the command of General Chief of Staff Yuri Baluyevsky, the Itar-Tass news agency reported from Khabarovsk. The exercise, code-named "Vostok 2005", was aimed at "combating international terrorism in all its forms and manifestations," said Col. Sergei Vasilyev, spokesman for the Far Eastern military district.

It will help "improve professional skill...to prevent the attempts of creating a threat to Russia's territorial integrity and security of its citizens in the Far Eastern region," Vasilyev added. "A wide spectrum of possible measures" are included in the training against "separatist and radical religious-nationalistic movements or international radical groups," according to the official.

The Russian Defense Ministry said earlier that over 5,000 men would join in the Vostok 2005 military exercise, scheduled for July 18-23 in two stages. The maneuvre, expected to improve combat readiness such as logistic and maintenance support to missile troops, involves units of ground troops, air force, railway troops and interior troops, the ministry said. Enditem - .xinhuanet.com

Japan Joins U.S. in Dangerous Space Race

Commentary/Analysis, Bruce K. Gagnon, Japan Focus, Jul 17, 2005

Space technology is developed for two primary reasons: to better coordinate warfare on Earth; and to profit from naturally ocurring elements found in space. Nations and corporations view space as the "new world," where gold can be found on asteroids, water and helium-3 on the moon, and possibly magnesium, cobalt, and uranium on Mars. Corporations intend to venture to these planetary bodies and secure massive profits in the years ahead. But first new space technologies have to be created that make it possible, and cost effective, to "mine the skies."

If citizens can be convinced that their nation must use space technologies to "protect them" from enemies, real or imagined, then this investment in space technology can also be used to create the infrastructure that will allow aerospace industries to mine the heavens. Thus space technology has a "dual use." With the development for military use comes development for corporate use. The question is: who benefits and who pays the costs?

Japan is now working on military and civilian space technologies, developing so-called "missile defense" systems, new generations of military spy satellites, and planning for manned stations on the moon. All of these programs will come at a tremendous cost to Japanese taxpayers and will set the course for a more aggressive foreign policy in the coming years.

Most important, Japanese military space developments dramatically link Japan and the U.S. military in a dangerous course of confrontation in the region as the United States moves to counter China's development as a global economic competitor.

The Washington Post reported that "The Pentagon is looking at Asia as the most likely arena for future military conflict, or at least competition." The article concludes that the United States will essentially double its military presence in the region.

All of this is being done to give the United States the ability to surround and neutralize China.

The U.S.-Japan Security Consultative Committee meeting in Washington DC on February 19, 2005, identified "new threats" emerging in the Asian-Pacific region and called for the "modernization of military capabilities" in response, notably ballistic missile defense (BMD).

Space in U.S. Strategic Planning

The United States is embarking on a dangerously destabilizing plan to deploy so-called ground-based "missile defense" interceptors at Ft. Greely, Alaska and Vandenberg AFB, California. Although the systems have yet to be successfully tested, they are already being deployed. We are told that these new interceptors will protect the United States from attack by the "rogue states" that so far have shown zero technological capability to hit the continental United States. with nuclear weapons. And why would they want to? The United States, with over 7,500 nuclear weapons, could easily annihilate any "rogue" that fired a missile its way. Even China, with 20 nuclear missiles capable of hitting the United States, would not ignore the strategic consequence, nor for that matter would it be oblivious to the economic consequences of attacking one of its best trade partners. Then what is this "missile defense" scheme really all about?

The logic is clear in Pentagon planning documents like the Space Command's Vision for 2020 that outlines the need for the United States to "control and dominate space" and to "deny" other countries access to space. Once it is recognized that all warfare on earth today is essentially coordinated and directly by space military satellites, the reader can begin to understand why the Pentagon is racing to control space and deny access to other nations.

U.S. military doctrine is predicated on Full Spectrum Dominance. This notion is that the United States will dominate conflict at every level - control the Earth with conventional military forces; control the seas with the Navy; control the sky with the Air Force; and now control space with new technologies under development today.

In a recent planning document, Strategic Master Plan FY06 and Beyond, the Air Force Space Command boldly states, "While our ultimate goals are truly to 'exploit' space through space force enhancement and space force application missions, as with other mediums, we cannot fully 'exploit' that medium until we first 'control' it." The report goes on to say, "The ability to gain space superiority (the ability to exploit space while selectively disallowing it to adversaries) is critically important and maintaining space superiority is an essential prerequisite for success in modern warfare."

Once you connect this language about space "control and domination" with the idea of mining the sky for precious and valuable resources you begin to understand the U.S. and Japanese rejection of the United Nation's Moon Treaty in 1979 that outlaws any "military bases" on the moon. The U.N. rightly was concerned about creating a body of international law in order to preempt any conflict in space as humankind inevitably moved off the planet.

It is clear that planning is underway to create the military infrastructure to control the pathways, or shipping lanes, on and off the planet Earth. Whoever controls and dominates these pathways in years to come has the ability to determine which countries or corporations can profit from mining the sky. This military control would also determine who militarily controls the planet Earth.

The United States has spent well over $120 billion on space research and development since the creation of the space program following WWII. In a recent book called The Hunt for Zero Point, military journalist Nick Cook explains the Pentagon's "black" (secret) budget. For 15 years Cook has been a defense and aerospace writer for Jane's Defence Weekly. Cook argues that over $20 billion a year is spent on these programs outside the purview of the U.S. Congress.

Cook states, "It (black programs) has a vast and sprawling architecture funded by tens of billions of classified dollars every year. The height of its powers was probably in the Reagan era. But it has not stopped since then. In fact, under the Bush administration it is having something of resurgence. Stealth technology is a primary example...research into anti-gravity technology...has been going on for quite some time."

The aerospace industry has stated that plans for space control, popularly called Star Wars, will be the largest industrial project in the history of the planet. But how will it be paid for? In 2005 the U.S. Pentagon is spending $10 billion on space weapons research and development. Clearly the United States cannot afford to fund these programs alone. So far Japan, Australia, England, and Italy have signed up as part of this plan. In recent weeks Canada decided not to join the Bush "missile defense" scheme. Canada's Prime Minister Paul Martin, with strong urging from the aerospace industry, wanted to join Bush's program but popular opposition has thus far prevented cooperation.

The China Factor

China today has 20 nuclear missiles that could hit Los Angeles or San Francisco. But are 20 Chinese nuclear missiles enough to justify the U.S. spending another $100 billion or more on Star Wars?

Jonathan Pollack, director of the Strategic Research Department of the U.S. Naval War College, told the New York Times that while China did have the largest standing army in the world and was in the process of modernizing, "I don't see these capabilities as the leading edge of a more comprehensive, long-term plan to either supplement U.S. military power in the Western Pacific or challenge U.S. power on a global scale," adding, "Let's not make them out to be 10 feet tall."

The United States, with its new agreements to sell "missile defense" technologies to Japan, Australia, England, and Italy, and to upgrade its own offensive and defensive capability in Asia and globally, may force China to embark on an accelerated missile development program.

The Opposition Grows

In order to make Star Wars work, the United States is upgrading key radar facilities in Greenland, Germany, England, Australia and other locations around the world. In addition the United States is working to base missile defense systems in many countries including Poland, Romania, England, Japan, South Korea and Australia, offering many of those same nations a piece of the Star Wars bounty by extending an open hand to their aerospace corporations.

The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space was created in 1992 to build an international constituency that would work to protect the heavens from this new and deadly arms race. Today the network has over 170 local affiliated peace groups throughout the world. We believe that once people understand the issue about the militarization of space, they will move to block all nations from militarizing the heavens.

Space is a sacred place that must be protected. For the last several years an attempt has been made at the United Nations Conference on Disarmament in Geneva to create a new global ban on weapons in space. (The current U.N. Outer Space Treaty of 1967 is limited by its out of date definitions that prohibit weapons of mass destruction in space.) But each year the U.S. government has blocked the attempts, saying that there is no need for such a new treaty because there are no weapons in space today, and thus no problem. It is precisely the nation that is actively working to take "control and domination" of space that is obstructing the new international treaty and aggressively accelerating its nuclear development program. One thing is certain: moving the arms race into space will only make life here on Earth more insecure and at immense cost.

Bruce K. Gagnon works with The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space. He can be reached at globalnet@mindspring.com. This is a streamlined version of an article that appeared in Sekai, July, 2005. - pacificnews.org/

Rumsfeld: Russia helping to arm China

Wednesday 20 July 2005, 1:26 Makka Time, 22:26 GMT

The US is wary of China's military ties with Russia

China is gaining important new military capabilities from Russia and other countries, US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has said, arguing that a European arms embargo against the Chinese should be kept in place. Some members of the European Union, including France, have sought an end to the embargo, which was imposed after the Chinese military crushed student protests in Tiananmen Square in 1989. A new US assessment of China's military power "clearly points up the reason that the president and the United States government have been urging the EU to not lift the arms embargo on the People's Republic of China", Rumsfeld told reporters. At the White House, President George Bush said at a joint news conference with Australian Prime Minister John Howard that the United States has a relationship with China that is "very important and very vibrant. It's a good relationship, but it's a complex relationship".

Universal values

Bush said the United States and Australia "can work together to reinforce the need for China to accept certain values as universal: the value of minority rights, the value of freedom for people to speak, the value of freedom of religion - the same values we share". "To the extent the political system does not (open up), it will inhibit the growth of their economy and ultimately the growth of their military capabilities"

Also, the president said, Australia can press on China the need to be an active regional player, for instance by exerting its influence on North Korea to end its drive to become a nuclear power.

New report

The new assessment of China's military, the latest in an annual series required by US Congress, will be made public late on Tuesday, Rumsfeld said. He called it a straightforward account prepared by the Pentagon in close coordination with the CIA, the State Department and the White House's National Security Council. "As I see it, China is on a path where they are determined to increase their economy, the opportunities for their people, and to enter the world community," Rumsfeld said, adding that the Chinese have been doing "a number of things to leave the world with the impression that they are a good place for investment".

At the same time China has rapidly increased spending on defence. Its annual military budget, estimated last year by the Pentagon at between $50 billion and $70 billion, is dwarfed by the Pentagon's $400 billion-plus budget. China needs to be more open, politically as well as economically, Rumsfeld said, in order to be seen internationally as a more welcome partner.

Criticising China

Chinese missiles can "reach targets in many areas of the world"

"To the extent the political system does not (open up), it will inhibit the growth of their economy and ultimately the growth of their military capabilities," Rumsfeld said. Rumsfeld had previewed major conclusions of the report on China's military power when he spoke at an international conference in Singapore on 4 June. He said then that it would conclude that China's defence spending is much higher than Chinese officials have reported publicly and that China is expanding its missile forces, "allowing it to reach targets in many areas of the world".

Taiwan issue

China is one of the few major countries that Rumsfeld has not visited during his 4 1/2 years as Bush's defence chief. The potential for military confrontation is periodically highlighted by tensions over Taiwan, the island that split from the mainland in 1949 after the communist revolution. China claims Taiwan as part of its territory and has threatened to invade if the self-governing island declares formal independence or puts off talks on unification.

aljazeera.net

China not capable of Taiwan attack: US report

China's rapidly modernising military could pose a long-term threat to other regional armed forces but its ability to project conventional power beyond its borders remains limited, the Pentagon said.

In its long-awaited annual report, the Pentagon said Beijing's military build-up has already begun to put the regional balance at risk.

It also concluded that China does not now possess the military capability to attack Taiwan. It described China as being at a strategic crossroads that could lead down three paths but "not yet set immutably on one course or another". One path is peaceful integration and benign competition in the world or China would exert dominant influence in an expanding sphere. A third path sees China as a less confident, inward-looking state focused on challenges to national unity and the Chinese Communist Party's claim to legitimacy.

"Questions remain about the basic choices China's leaders will make as China's power and influence grow, particularly its military power," the report said.

The Pentagon has been raising alarms over China's military modernisation for several years. The annual report, always controversial, is the focus of even more attention this year because of increasingly vocal concerns in Washington over China's trade, currency and proliferation trends, as well as the military build-up.

It went through considerable vetting by US agencies besides the Pentagon and included the personal involvement of Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, who in the past often left the task to his deputy, a former administration official said. "As I see it, China is on a path where they are determined to increase their economy, the opportunities for their people and to enter the world community," Mr Rumsfeld told a news briefing before the report was released. "They want the (2008) Olympics to go well. They are doing a number of things to leave the world with the impression that they are a good place for investment and a good economic partner."

While US-China ties have improved since 2001 - when a US surveillance plane collided with a Chinese fighter jet off the Chinese coast - the military build-up underscores why Washington opposes European Union military sales to Beijing, he said.

Asked if he saw "gathering clouds" and a threat similar to what Europe faced from Germany in the 1930s, Rumsfeld replied: "I guess the short answer is no."

-Reuters