Japan Embassy protests over Singapore editorial

MobyDog SG

Why would the Japs point missles at Taiwan ? The political situation is different to China.

At least, for the moment, china would not pull those political stunts like the US does.

I mean... bait pearl harbour to be attacked, fabricated Tonkin Gulf incident for Vietnam War, possibly Iraq war as well. Not to mention, starting coups, toppling demoratic countries, cambodia, sukarno (indonesia), el salvador, tahiti, grenada, Angola, Chile and many more.

Looking at the current US behavior.. it seems they above all international law. Never stop them from invading anyone.

At present I'm more wary of US. Lets say if we disagree and reluctant to play along a certain policy and the US claim that Suntec city is a terrorist target. I might wonder if they would actually plan for one.. if it did not happen.

It is much to be concern

boy in blues SG

"The best prophet of the future is the past. Lord Byron

ndmmxiaomayi SG

During the war, the Japanese were "enjoying" themselves, torturing innocent people, have comfort women and all.

It is only before the end of war and after the war they suffered because US dropped two atomic bombs. They suffered the effects of the atomic bombs. Physiological effects when compared to psycological effects, which is more?

And why can't Singapore have an editorial on it? Singapore is one of the countries being colonized during the war. We have the right to voice it out. However, if it is Africa, do you think the Japanese want a country that is not affected to speak up? Probably as an outsider's point of view, but not directly commenting on who's right and who's wrong.

boy in blues SG

i agree with that 100%.
+ 1

boy in blues SG

http://www.shanghaidaily.com/art/2005/12/09/225050/Qin_urges_Japan_to_explain_military_moves.htm

Qin urges Japan to explain military moves
Zhang Liuhao
2005-12-09 Beijing Time
JAPAN should explain its recent military moves to its Asian neighbors, Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang said yesterday.

Japan's cabinet yesterday decided to extend its troop involvement in Iraq by a year to December 14, 2006.

Qin's remarks were in response to a speech by Japan's Foreign Minister Taro Aso in Tokyo on Wednesday. Aso said China should boost the transparency of its military expenditure to the same level as Japan to reduce questions from the Asia Pacific region.

At a press conference in Beijing, Qin said China's military expenditure is open and transparent. He said he didn't understand why Japan always raised this issue.

"China has made its position clear in a national defense white paper," Qin said. "If Minister Aso hasn't read the paper, we can send one to him."

He said Japan's recent moves in military affairs have raised concerns among its neighbors and the international community. Japan should explain.

Qin added the key to improving relations between Japan and its neighbors including China and South Korea is to remove the political obstacle for friendly cooperation.

An annual tripartite summit of China, Japan and South Korea has been postponed because of Chinese and Korean anger over Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's visits to a war shrine.

boy in blues SG

"Smug calculations" lack sincerity, analysis

At the upcoming 11th ASEAN Summit in Kuala Lumpur, the annual trilateral meeting of Chinese, Japanese and South Korean leaders gets aborted for the first time. Both China and South Korea believe that the three-party conference will be meaningless given the Japanese Prime Minister's continuous shrine visits. However, Tokyo responded not by reflecting on its improper behavior but by accusing China of playing "diplomatic card" and "shunning Japan out", in an attempt to cover up the fact that Japan lacks fundamental sincerity towards the promotion of East Asia cooperation.

Under the proposal of Japanese former Prime Minister Keizo Obuchi, leaders from China, Japan and the ROK specially held an informal breakfast meeting when attending the ASEAN 10+3 summit in 1999. The same thing happened the next year. In 2001, proposed by then Korean President Kim Dae-Jung, the breakfast was upgraded into an annual formal conference, and six of them have been held by now. The two-hour close-door talks have become a gathering ground for dialogue, communication and discussion for cooperation among the three parties.

However, a looking back on Japanese acts in East Asia cooperation in recent years reveals easily that this country, from the bottom of its heart, has never treated this gathering very seriously.

Against the backdrop of continuously deepening economic globalization and regional cooperation, East Asia has attained fresh vigor after experiencing "miracle", "crisis" and system innovation. Meanwhile, Japan, who has long been given a "lift" under a multilateral free trade system, has been enveloped in economic bubbles over the past decade. Japan is craving a "return to Asia", and the kernel of its regional strategy is to "Japanize" regional policies, legal system, industrial division and financial and monetary fields. It mainly targets some ASEAN countries, at the same time avoiding Free Trade Agreement (FTA) but bending on Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA).

Signing FTAs with Asian countries, Japan believes, will help it neither in protecting disadvantageous sectors such as agriculture, nor in grasping dominance in investment, service, financial and monetary affairs and intellectual property rights. While EPA will not only enable it to protect weak sectors, highlight strategic advantages and grab the upper hand in negotiations, but will promote its policies and laws in East Asia and therefore dominate the process of system integration in this region.

To this end, Japan firstly signed an EPA with Singapore, and is now trying to promote it with ASEAN countries. At the same time, Japan never responded to the Chinese appeal to start FTA talks. Japan's smug calculations are clear: to skirt around China and build up a so-called "new order in East Asia" led by itself.

Japan's unwillingness to talk directly with China on FTA is out of the following considerations: first, the huge market released by China's WTO accession is enough for Japanese companies, and zero-tariff between the two parties are not needed now; second, once a FTA is signed, Japan will be forced to open its agriculture and labor markets; third, Japan believes a big part of the current non-governmental business network in East Asia is in the hand of Chinese, which is not favorable to efforts to "Japanize" this region; fourth, Japan is afraid that the Chinese influence may stand in its way towards a political power.

So far, China's regional cooperation strategy is characterized by equality, mutual benefit and common development. It has been regarded as a "strategic threat" by Japan since it runs counter to the Japanese appealing for economic, financial and monetary circles in this region.

Cooperation must be based on sincerity. If Koizumi really hopes to further discuss cooperation with China and the ROK at multilateral occasions such as the ASEAN summits, he should be better behaved and stop his shrine visits, for they will only keep the relations with the other two countries at the lowest ebb. "Smug calculations" lacking sincerity are no more than a one-sided daydream that will never come true.

boy in blues SG

http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/world/archives/2005/12/02/2003282616

Nationalist comics click in Japan

REINTERPRETING HISTORY: Controversial comic books attacking Chinese and Koreans and touting Japan's `war of liberation' have struck a chord among young readers

AP , TOKYO
Friday, Dec 02, 2005,Page 5

Takushoku University professor Ko Bunyu, who penned ``Introduction to China,'' speaks during an interview in Tokyo on Wednesday. The comic book says many of Japan's war crimes are lies spread by the Chinese government.
PHOTO: AP

In one book, crazed Chinese Communist guerrillas spray benevolent Japanese troops with cyanide. In another, savage Korean immigrants massacre innocent Tokyo residents in the wake of World War II.

If this sounds like a reversal of Japan's history of aggression in Asia, that is just what the authors intend. The scenes appear in two best-selling examples of a growing literary genre in Japan: nationalist comics.

The trend, typified by the runaway hits Hate Korea: A Comic and Introduction to China, has struck a chord among young readers who resent Japan being cast as the bully in 20th century history -- and say it is time for a change.

"These books finally depict history from a Japanese perspective, and there is nothing wrong with that," says Atsushi Iwata, 22, a student at Tokyo's prestigious Waseda University who attends a weekly seminar by a co-author of Introduction to China.

"It's the right of any nation to interpret history as it feels it should," he said.

The interpretation in the recent comic books is nothing short of provocative -- at a time of rising tensions between Tokyo and its neighbors, and as Japan takes a decided tilt toward an unapologetic view of previous military action.

Hate Korea tells the tale of wide-eyed Japanese college freshmen who discover that Japan's colonial rule over the Korean peninsula from 1910-45 -- seen in Korea as brutal subjugation -- was a well-intentioned attempt to bring civilization to a backward country.

"It's not an exaggeration to say modern Korea was built by Japan," one of the Japanese students, eyes shining, declares toward the end of the book. Her Korean debate opponent, fuming at the mouth, is unable to respond.

The China tome covers similar territory, vehemently denying Japanese atrocities in China during its invasion in the 1930s and 1940s, such as biological experiments carried out by the Imperial Army's top-secret Unit 731.

Even more venom is reserved for modern Chinese. The book accuses Beijing of distorting history, running crime syndicates in Japan and flooding the country with "AIDS-infested prostitutes," and calls for stricter immigration controls against Chinese workers.

The formula sells: The Korea book has gone through five reprints and sold more than 320,000 copies since its release in September. The China book has sold 180,000 copies since its appearance in August.

The comics build on a genre established by comic artist Yoshinori Kobayashi in the 1990s.

His Manifesto of New Pride series of comics -- which claim Japan waged a noble war to liberate Asia from a racist world order -- have sold over a million copies.

Proponents expect the trend to expand. But many Japanese are disturbed by the trend.

Toshio Hanafusa, an activist who has campaigned for compensation for Korean women forced to work as wartime prostitutes for Japan's Imperial army, blames the insecurity and disillusionment of younger Japanese for the popularity of the books.

"Perhaps they seek pride in the idea of a more assertive Japan," he said. "And cleansing Japan's history of any sense of guilt bolsters that pride."

boy in blues SG

http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,17517118%255E12250,00.html

US seeks new path to China
Editor-at-Large Paul Kelly from Washington
December 10, 2005
CONCEALED by the Iraq crisis, the Bush administration guided by Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick is engaged in potentially the most far-reaching redefinition of US policy towards China for many years.

In a 45-minute interview with Inquirer in his State Department office in Washington, DC, Zoellick repudiates any suggestion of containment as a basis for US policy. Zoellick throws into the dustbin of history the notion of containment, Cold War parallels or 19th-century balance-of-power concepts as the foundation for Washington's management of China's rise.

The Zoellick interview offers a new framework for the US's approach to China: that of shared stakeholder in the international system calling on China to accept the responsibilities as well as the benefits of the global system.

This is fresh US thinking and language about China. It has the potential to create a new platform for US-China relations. It should be music to Australia's ears, and it raises another possibility forgotten in Australia: that America's approach towards China is far more sophisticated than Australia's.

Zoellick's message is that "the US welcomes a confident, peaceful and prosperous China". He offers China an invitation "to work with us to shape the future international system".

For China's leaders, this is an invitation and a challenge. For the US political system, it presents China as an opportunity, not a threat. Zoellick's aim is to change the mind-set of the US-China debate; he is explicit about seeking a transformation.

While Zoellick would never concede this, his China vision stands as an alternative to the portrait of military rivalry depicted by Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, notably in his June 4 Singapore speech.

Rumsfeld and Zoellick, typical of the Bush administration, offer competing stories about China. But this term the State Department, under Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, is more formidable and Zoellick, officially described as Rice's "principal deputy, adviser and alter ego" has the running on China.

Zoellick's concept was first advanced in a September21 speech before the national committee on US-China relations and was expanded upon in his December6 interview with this paper. It is already the subject of intense debate within China's system and among its leaders.

Zoellick's framework dominates the US-China dialogue, inaugurated in Beijing last July and which had its second session in Washington last week involving Zoellick and China's executive vice-foreign minister, Dai Bingguo.

"What I tried to do in the [September] speech was set out why the Cold War logic of containment no longer applies," Zoellick says. "In fact, it's in direct contradiction with our efforts to integrate China. But I also take this a step further. I say that 19th-century balance of power logic also doesn't conform with the current process of integration.

"However, I point out to the Chinese that it is natural that as a rising power they will prompt questions about their intentions and if they are not successful in dealing with that, then it will lead to hedging strategies.

"So I'm not setting out a view that is all benign. I'm trying to engage the Chinese very seriously: on the one hand paying them the respect they're due for what they've accomplished but, second, urging them to recognise the larger responsibilities they now have in the international system."

Zoellick says the US must "encourage China to become a responsible stakeholder". This means working "with us to sustain the international system". It is a framework to encompass the entire US-China debate.

"Our discussions [with China] focus on how this concept can be applied across a whole range of policy issues: economic, energy, security, nuclear non-proliferation, terrorism and regional security. The challenge of the dialogue is not only to engage people at a conceptual level but start to connect it to operational implications," Zoellick says.

Highlighting this symbolism, Zoellick plans to take his Chinese counterpart Dai to former US president Franklin Roosevelt's Hyde Park home in New York.

"FDR was associated with developing a concert of powers after World War II," Zoellick says, pointing to the UN and Bretton Woods as examples. "What I am suggesting to the Chinese is that rather than keeping China contained or at arm's length or in balance, we are trying to urge China to play a role in this system of systems that has evolved."

For Zoellick, the threat to the US comes not from China but from Islamist terrorists. It comes from failing states, not a rising Asia.

"China does not want a conflict with the US," he says. "In my view the real security threat today is one of Islamic radical terrorism, part linked to weapons of mass destruction."

To highlight the real threat, Zoellick invokes the published letter intercepted by US intelligence from al-Qa'ida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri to his terrorist commander in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, and says: "It is a striking document that gives you insights into how these people view the world.

"Their goal is to set up a new caliphate, throw out all the infidels - that's us - throw out all the apostates, that's most of the Muslims in Southeast Asia. Now, this view doesn't accept the international system that exists. But that's not China's view."

He rejects the claim that China today is the Soviet Union of the 1940s. "I believe they are unlike the Soviet Union," he says. "China is not trying to challenge the fundamental system. The Soviet Union never accepted international partners in capitalism. The Soviet Union had a notion of imperial expansion. China has not taken that strategy."

Zoellick points to prominent Chinese such as chairman of the China Reform Forum, Zheng Bijan, who argues (Foreign Affairs, September-October) that China's strategy depends on peace. "Contrary to China challenging the international system, China is using the international system as part of its development path," Zoellick says.

boy in blues SG

"The 20th century was a tough century for China: wars, civil conflicts, poverty, the threat of dismemberment. But if you look at the Chinese over the past 25 years they have made a lot of progress. And there've made progress as part of an international system that our two countries [the US and Australia] have helped to create and sustain."

The Chinese have been thrown into a spin by Zoellick's "responsible stakeholder" concept. The Wall Street Journal of December 7 reported their difficulty in getting an adequate translation. What, exactly, did stakeholder mean? A mini-industry was created in China over its meaning and political implications.

Zoellick believes China cannot succeed just focused on internal development; it needs to confront the challenge implicit in its rise to power. "What I am first encouraging the Chinese to do is to join with us on the concept of using their influence in a constructive way to sustain and advance the international system," he says. "From a domestic [US] point of view I also had a purpose which is to try to counter some of the thinking that just sees China as a threat. I want to advance the thinking in the US that for seven administrations looked upon our goal as simply integrating China in the global system."

For Zoellick, that policy has succeeded; look at commodity markets, the UN Security Council and capital markets. It is now time for a new US policy. So what does it involve?

It means putting pressure on China. It means asking China to accept responsibility equivalent to its ambition. It means forcing China to think about its future and how it wants to be seen. It means recasting China's traditional view of international relations. It means broadening the scope of shared US-China interests. And it means a searching intellectual test for China's leaders. That's all.

In the interview and in his September speech Zoellick gives many practical examples of his thinking. Each has been or will be put to the Chinese. Here is part of the list.

Zoellick has raised the idea of "a true peace with regional security and development" on the Korean Peninsula. The North Korean problem transcends nuclear weapons: it is about economic and political reform, and China's diplomacy is pivotal to any lasting solution for a non-nuclear peninsula.

Next item: the threat of terrorism and a weapons on mass destruction capacity. "What will happen to the economic development of China if there is a serious terrorist incident some place with nuclear weapons?" Zoellick asks rhetorically. His message is that China and the US should do more in the global fight against terrorism. On the issue of state proliferation he says: "I will be suggesting to the Chinese they have a strong interest in stopping Iran getting nuclear weapons."

Take trade. As the former US special trade representative, Zoellick wants China to assume a greater role in global trade talks. "Australia has played an influential role historically in the world trade discussions," he says. "I've made the point to the Chinese that given their interest in the world trading system they're going to need to play a more active role."

Yes, he concedes it is asking a lot from such a new World Trade Organisation member. But, given China's size, it is essential.

Take human rights and foreign policy. Zoellick says that if China's energy policy "leads it to develop relations with governments like those in Sudan and Burma", then it risks being "the closest partner of international pariahs". China cannot ignore the costs, so Zoellick proposes a form of linkage. "I'm trying to suggest to them that they can develop energy resources in Sudan but help us deal with the genocide in Darfur," he says.

Take the most sensitive issue: China's mercantalism, manifested in an artificially low exchange rate, a compulsion to accumulate balance-of-trade surpluses, a preference for exports over imports. Chinese mercantalism, the flip side of American extravagance, is the joint source of the unsustainable imbalance in the world economy.

Zoellick issues a polite warning. He's not trying to be "hostile and faulting" but China, given its size, if it slips into these policies, then "the international economic system will be much less able to cope".

The further risk is a US domestic backlash against cheap China imports. Zoellick cautions China against "creating political stresses in this country and others that will eventually hurt their own strategy".

China will need to find an exit path and that involves, sooner or later, a new exchange rate system. Paul Keating has called on China's authorities to move to a float, Reserve Bank of Australia governor Ian Macfarlane says a higher exchange rate is necessary and Zoellick says, in effect, that he wants China and the US to negotiate this outcome.

His aim is to "get my Chinese counterparts to recognise that it is in their interests and our mutual interests to address these problems" not as a "zero-sum negotiation" but as a mutual benefit.

Next item: the freedom and democracy debate, so beloved by President George W. Bush. "I've tried publicly and privately to explain to the Chinese why our advancement of freedom, rule of law and democracy should not be seen as a threat to China but rather as part of China's own development," Zoellick says. "My main point is that the values we believe in are not only our essence as a country but, equally important, we think they lead to stronger societies. The lesson of September 11 is that dysfunctional societies and failing states are the location, if not the source, of security problems. So rather than see a pluralist political system as a weakness, we believe it's a strength."

Zoellick, who lived in Hong Kong 25 years ago, says a generational transformation in China has occurred. He rejects any notion that democracy is limited by culture or civilisation.

On regional relations Zoellick warns that "concerns will grow if China seeks to manoeuvre towards a predominance of power". He plays down but does not dismiss that closer US ties with Japan and India are motivated by the need to balance China. He wants to explain to the Chinese "why tension between China and Japan isn't in our interest". He seeks greater co-operation between the US, China and Japan.

Those people who interpret the new US-India concord as "just a power-balancing ploy against China, failed to recognise that India is not going to allow itself to be a chesspiece that's moved around the board".

Zoellick dismisses any analysis of Asia in 19th-century balance-of-power terms.

Asked to confirm his framework is a Bush administration policy, Zoellick laughs. "Well, yes, I do work in the administration," he says. "I wouldn't just put out a speech that didn't have the general support and backing of the rest of the administration. Secretary Rumsfeld was in China recently and he referred to stakeholders. I'm sure the Chinese took close note of that."

The starting point to understand US-China relations lies in the realisation that they encompass many stories and many policies. There is no single US policy towards China. But Zoellick, who oversees the US-China dialogue, offers a compelling new story founded in optimism about the most vital relationship of the coming century.

boy in blues SG

http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-12/09/content_501851.htm

FM: Japan military 'gossiping' hides issue
By Cao Desheng (China Daily)
Updated: 2005-12-09 06:05

Japan should explain its own military tendencies to the world before gossiping about other nations' national defence expenditure, a Foreign Ministry spokesman said yesterday.

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang answers a question at the ministry's routine press briefing in Beijing December 8, 2005. [fmprc.gov.cn]
Referring to Japanese Foreign Minister Taro Aso's remarks about China's military budget, Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said it was Japan's recent moves that should cause serious concern among the international community.

Aso said in a speech in Tokyo on Wednesday that China needs to embrace political transparency and be more open about its military budget to ensure its rising economic and diplomatic power is not seen as a threat in Asia.

"China has repeated that its military budget is open and transparent," Qin said. "A white paper on national defence published last December clearly mapped out the military expenditure last year."

He added China adopts a defensive national defence policy. "I feel Japan should interpret its military tendencies to the world."

Japan's Liberal Democratic Party has been pushing for the post-World War II pacifist constitution reform to begin by calling government troops the Japanese Military instead of the Self Defence Force.

The constitution drafted by US occupation forces and unchanged since 1947 bars the use of military force in settling international disputes and prohibits maintaining armed forces for warfare.

Meantime, Japanese troops have taken an increasingly high-profile role in recent years, prompting some critics to accuse Tokyo of moving away from its post-war pacifism.

Earlier in 2001, Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi pushed through special legislation to let the navy provide logistical support to forces in Afghanistan for the US "war on terror."

Analysts say such efforts are chipping away at the pacifist society Japan has built since World War II.
China on Sunday delayed the annual summit meeting with Japan and the Republic of Korea (ROK), usually held on the sidelines of a conference of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, scheduled for December 12-14 in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.

"We hope the Japanese Government could take actions to remove the political barriers that thwart the diplomatic relations with its Asian neighbours including China and ROK," Qin said.

Speaking of China's role in the second phase of the implementation of the Kyoto Protocol, which is being discussed at the 11th annual United Nations Climate Change Conference in Montreal to be concluded today, Qin said China is ready to play a positive role in this regard within a multilateral framework.

"China chooses to develop its economy in a sustainable way, paying great attention to the harmony between man and nature and environment," Qin said.

The UN summit on climate change going on in Montreal was billed as the next step in advancing the controversial Kyoto Protocol to limit production of greenhouse gases.

Military spending transparent

Foreign Ministry Spokesman Qin Gang said here Thursday that China's military spending is open and transparent when asked to comment a speech by Japanese Foreign Minister Aso Taro urging China to increase military transparency.

Qin said at a routine news conference that China adheres to peaceful development and a defensive national defence policy, adding its military expenditure should not only cover the livelihood and training expenses of those serving in the army but also meet the country's current national defence requirements in a world with numerous complicated changes.

China has already written clearly about its military expenditure in a white book on Chinese national defence, openly giving details on its military growth, said Qin.

"The Japanese side should not make a fuss over the military spending of China over and again but explain, as soon as possible,to its neighbors as well as the international community about its own military moves," said the spokesman. "Some of its recent moves have caused concern to both the neighboring countries and around the globe."

The most important thing, as Qin acknowledged, on the Japanese side, should be making substantive efforts by taking actions to overcome the political hurdles impeding the growth of friendly and cooperative relations between Japan and its Asian neighbors, including its relationship with China and the Republic of Korea (ROK).

Qin denied the possibility of discussing defence issues at the upcoming ASEAN (the Association of Southeast Asian Nations) plus China, Japan and the ROK Summit and the East Asian Summit by saying that the main focus of the summits would be on the economic and social issues of the region.

He added that there was no arrangement for a meeting to bring together the foreign ministers of China, Japan and the ROK in the near future for reasons known to all.

boy in blues SG

http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2005-12/09/content_3901249.htm

China, US hold working meeting on military relations

www.chinaview.cn 2005-12-09 22:40:18

BEIJING, Dec. 9 (Xinhuanet) -- The Chinese defense ministry and his US counterpart ended a two-day working meeting here Friday, discussing China-US military relations and future exchange programs.

Zhang Bangdong, director of the Foreign Affairs Office under the Chinese Ministry of National Defense, and US Deputy Under Secretary of Defense Richard Lawless frankly exchanged views on China-US military relations, covering such issues as exchange programs in 2006 and bilateral negotiation on maritime military security.

China's Deputy Chief of the General Staff of the Chinese People's Liberation Army Xiong Guangkai said Friday when meeting with Lawless that the current Sino-American relations enjoy sound development and the relations between the two armies also grow steadily.

Xiong said US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld paid a successful visit to China in October this year. Chinese and US armed forces have maintained smooth contacts in various fields, including personnel and technology exchanges, security policy consultations and warship visits.

"All these activities have played an active role in strengthening mutual understanding and closing relations between the two sides," said Xiong, noting that China is ready to work with the US side to further expand exchanges and cooperation, in an effort to push forward the relations between the two armed forces.

Noting the Taiwan issue remains the crucial factor affecting China-US relations, Xiong said China hopes the United States will honor its commitment, work with China in opposing and containing "Taiwan independence", won't send wrong signals to Taiwan in a bid to safeguard peace and stability across the Taiwan Straits, which accords with the common interests of both China and the United States.

Lawless said the United States would like to make a concerted effort with China to further expand the exchange fields and push forward relations between the US and Chinese armies.

YaoRockets SG

this Zoellick carries an oliver branch and speaks with a dove's coocooing ... if he really means what he said, China ought to listen to him. he makes a lots of sense and sounds sincere. Americans have a saying, "If you can't beat them, join them". The neo-con must've realized now China will not be threatened by a stick, so they are dangling a carrot instead.

or this could be just another good-cop bad-cop trick.

boy in blues SG

they seem quite serious though. could be they're wising up already.

http://tokyo.usembassy.gov/e/p/tp-20051209-23.html

Senior Dialogue Examines Framework of U.S.-China Relationship

High-ranking U.S. and Chinese officials concluded their second round of "Senior Dialogue" meetings December 8. The talks are billed by the State Department as "strategic discussions" that are designed "to look across the spectrum" of the U.S.-China relationship, anticipate issues and discuss a conceptual framework for a "shared future."

According to a statement released the same day by Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick, the Senior Dialogue grew out of a suggestion by China President Hu Jintao to President Bush at an Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum meeting in 2004 requesting talks "to look over the horizon and discuss the strategic framework of U.S.-China relations." The first round of discussions took place in Beijing in August. (See related article.)

The topics Zoellick and Executive Vice Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo explored at the second set of talks, held in Washington, included:

Cooperative efforts for a secure and prosperous world that respects human rights and the rule of law;

Ways in which China could work with the United States and others on challenges such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea and in Africa, Latin America and South and Central Asia;

Overlapping interests in fighting terrorism, preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, building energy security and reducing the risks of pandemic disease; and

Problems regarding trade imbalances and the protection of intellectual property rights.

For more information on U.S. policy, see The United States and China.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Following is the text of the State Department release

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
Office of the Spokesman
December 8, 2005

MEDIA NOTE

Deputy Secretary Zoellick Statement on Conclusion of the Second U.S.-China Senior Dialogue

Following is a statement by Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick on the conclusion of the Second U.S.-China Senior Dialogue, held in Washington, D.C.

(begin statement)

The second U.S.-China Senior Dialogue concluded today. We have had extensive discussions over two days. Tomorrow, Executive Vice Foreign Minister Dai and I will travel to Hyde Park to visit the home of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, one of the architects of the international system after World War II. I believe we have had a constructive interchange about how China and the United States can cooperate in the present international system, so as to work for a more secure and prosperous world that respects human rights and the rule of law.

I want to thank Chinese Executive Vice Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo for his leadership and open engagement. I also want to thank Mr. Zhu Zhixin, the Vice Chairman of China's National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), who joined us for part of the dialogue and who also held economic discussions with a U.S. delegation led by Josette S. Shiner, Under Secretary of State for Economic, Business and Agricultural Affairs.

The purpose of the Senior Dialogue, which grew out of a suggestion by President Hu to President Bush last fall at an APEC meeting, is to look over the horizon and discuss the strategic framework of U.S.-China relations. Following an initial round of discussions in Beijing in August, I outlined the U.S. approach to Sino-American relations in a speech in New York in September. I noted that for more than thirty years the United States worked with others to draw China out of isolation and into the international system. As it becomes a major global player, we are now encouraging China to become a "responsible stakeholder" that will work with the United States and others to sustain, adapt, and advance the peaceful international system that has enabled its success.

This concept has spurred a useful debate in China about its role in the world and, in particular, China's relations with the United States. This strategic framework can help us identify mutual interests and guide our cooperation with China in a number of areas. For example, during this week's dialogue we discussed how China could work with the United States and others on challenges such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea. Without always pursuing the same policies, we can still pursue the same policy goals with complementary approaches. We discussed our overlapping interests in fighting terrorism, preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, building energy security, and reducing the risks of pandemic disease. We noted that by anticipating challenges and discussing problems openly, including in those areas where we may not agree, we are more likely to advance our mutual interests and manage our differences.

We also reviewed recent sub-dialogues on how the United States and China can better cooperate in Africa, and on the dangerous mix of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. We agreed to conduct similar discussions about Latin America and South and Central Asia. In all of these discussions, we will continue to urge China to consider how it can contribute to positive development. We also want to listen to the perspective of our Chinese colleagues.

As President Bush did when he traveled to China, we had discussions about the importance of freedom and human rights. We explained that the United States does not raise these issues to threaten or destabilize China, but rather because we believe expanded freedom is a natural and integral part of China's development. I noted that China itself has recently stressed that building the rule of law is central to its development strategy.

In the economic area, we discussed the problem of persistent imbalances in our trade and financial relationship, and areas of friction such as the protection of intellectual property rights. We noted that both of us share an interest in maintaining an open international trading system, while ensuring an open, fair two-way economic exchange between our countries.

The work between China and the United States - in a host of fora and exchanges - is important and ongoing. Strategic discussions such as the one we've just completed are designed to look across the spectrum of our relationship, anticipate issues, and discuss a conceptual framework for how we can make our shared future better for the American people, the Chinese people and the world. We hope this shared approach will lead to greater cooperation at the operational level.

We've agreed to continue the Dialogue next year. I want to thank Executive Vice Minister Dai and his delegation for their strong involvement and I look forward to our continued work together.

NuLife SG

It only showed that the Japan still has the same
wartime imperialism mentality til this very day.

A wake up call to those who think Japan is different now.

NuLife SG

Should we take their government words or its peoples??

LazerLordz SG

I choose to have faith in the global civil society movement as a check against rogue state policies.

« Previous Page