India's last Defense Minister, George Fernandes said publicly that India's new nuclear arsenal was aimed at deterring China. All this made possible by Bush and with his blessings.
Remember there is no more ‘war on terror’ it has been renamed the ‘long war’ and officially includes a military confrontation with China, a conflict Bush has been pushing for a long time.
The new Chinese budget comes after the publication last month of the Pentagon's Quadrennial Defense Review, which described the new priorities of the U.S. military as preparing to conduct a "long war" against terrorists worldwide, to improve homeland security capabilities, and to prepare for possible confrontation with China as an emerging superpower rival.
BEIJING - With the dispute over Iran's controversial nuclear program moving this week to the United Nations Security Council, the stage is set for a perilous confrontation between the Islamic Republic and the international community - a showdown that not only Tehran but also world powers China and Russia have fought to avoid.
While reporting Tehran to the Security Council is being executed in the name of preventing nuclear proliferation, China has voiced fears that the whole non-proliferation system has been destabilized by the freshly inked nuclear deal between the United
States and India.
"The United States' making an exception to accommodate India, driven by geopolitical considerations, has sent repercussions through the international non-proliferation infrastructure," Hu Shisheng, a fellow of South Asian Studies at the China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, wrote in the China Daily of March 7.
"The double standards will very likely complicate the nuclear issues of Iran and the Democratic People's Republic of Korea all the more," he argued. "Now the international community is presented with a big question: How can the effectiveness and binding power of the non-proliferation system be guaranteed?"
The official line from Beijing on the nuclear-cooperation agreement signed last week between Washington and New Delhi has been more restrained, but the Chinese Foreign Ministry has questioned the gains for global nuclear-non-proliferation efforts.
Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said the deal came at a time when the international community was working to enhance the authority and effectiveness of the international non-proliferation regime. Nuclear cooperation between the United States and India must conform to the rules of the global non-proliferation regime, he emphasized.
Speaking of the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), Qin Gang said: "As a signatory country, China hopes non-signatory countries will join it as soon as possible as non-nuclear-weapons states, thereby contributing to strengthening the international non-proliferation regime."
The remark was clearly aimed at New Delhi, which without signing the NPT has now been given the rights enjoyed by the members of the Nuclear Suppliers Group, and also the five nuclear powers.
Under the deal sealed between US President George W Bush and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh in New Delhi, India retained the right to deny UN inspectors access to its fast-breeder reactors capable of producing weapons-grade fissile material.
As India didn't agree to cap its production, it means there could be unlimited expansion of its nuclear arsenal, sparking fears this could lead to a new regional arms race.
Critics of the deal have charged the US with gambling away its chances of success in the global campaign to limit the spread of nuclear weapons for the questionable benefit of counterbalancing China.
It was a point emphasized this week in an editorial in the Chinese Communist Party's flagship publication, the People's Daily. "The United States, accustomed to view problems with Cold War mentality and from the perspective of geopolitics," said the editorial, "saw the power of India'' as being able to ''help it achieve balance among powers in Asia.''
The paper went on to warn that there could be consequences for the "two deadlocked nuclear talks [with Iran and North Korea] and the non-proliferation system".
Over the past two years China has been trying to prevent both its allies Iran and North Korea from being referred to the Security Council but has found it increasingly difficult as all major world powers from France to Japan had started thinking aloud about the consequences of allowing Iran to build a nuclear weapon.
Although China has huge oil stakes in the Middle Eastern country, in recent months Beijing has sided with the US and Europe in their combined efforts to curtail Iran's nuclear ambitions. Chinese Foreign Ministry officials have called on Tehran to observe all obligations that go with the NPT so that the crisis can be resolved without moving it to the Security Council. China, which has veto power in the council, would be forced to make an uncomfortable choice between its international standing and economic interests should developments lead to a vote on sanctions against Tehran.
Agreeing to UN sanctions would potentially destroy the value of many investments Beijing has made. In Iran, where US companies are prohibited from investing more than US$20 million annually, Chinese companies have signed long-term contracts totaling $200 billion, making China Iran's biggest oil and gas customer.
But encouragement of Tehran in its controversial nuclear program would make China appear an outcast in the eyes of the White House, and the international community.
Hoping to avoid clear-cut choices, Beijing has argued vigorously that continued negotiations are the best, if not the only, way to resolve the nuclear dispute in Iran, as well as the one involving North Korea.
A similar appeal came just hours before the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ended its meeting on the Iranian nuclear program in Vienna, sending the file to the UN Security Council in New York.
"The Iranian nuclear issue is at a critical juncture," Zhang Yan, director of the arms control department of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, told the IAEA board members. There exists both a risk of deterioration and chances of improvement, he said.
"The key is whether all concerned parties choose dialogue instead of confrontation. China believes that the continuation of the diplomatic efforts remains the wise option for the solution of the Iranian nuclear issue," Zhang concluded.
India is a longtime ally of Russia and friendly to China with whom the Pentagon is preparing to go to war and has observer status in the SCO. #msg-10147226 #msg-10051566
Shaking my head.
-Am
US Invites Indian Officers To STRATCOM
by Staff Writers Washington DC (UPI) Mar 30, 2006 The United States has invited India to appoint military officers to liaison posts in the U.S. Strategic Command, or STRATCOM, its largest and most critical defense set-up mandated to control strategic nuclear assets, space and missile defense and global deterrence against weapons of mass destruction, India's Financial Express newspaper reported Tuesday.
STRATCOM, whose area of operation spans the globe, controls all U.S. nuclear delivery platforms, including ballistic missile submarines, B-52 strategic bombers, Minuteman-III intercontinental ballistic missiles and Tomahawk land attack systems. Having an Indian liaison officer on board will allow a more efficient link between Stratcom centers and India's relatively new Strategic Forces Command that controls Indian military nuclear assets, Financial Express said.
The possibility of posting Indian officers at STRATCOM headquarters in Nebraska first came up when U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld broached it with Indian counterpart Pranab Mukherjee on June 28, 2005, the day the new Indo-U.S. defense framework was signed. Nine months later, the offer is now formal, the newspaper said.
China and the US: Moving beyond talking By Zhiqun Zhu
Apr 18, 2006
Though one should not expect major substantive results from the summit between President George W Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao on Thursday, such meetings between the leaders of two powers are necessary and helpful.
Outstanding issues such as trade will certainly be on the agenda, while other less prominent but not less important issues will also be covered in the talks.
Most likely to appear on Hu's list are the following major issues.
The US and China: Friends or foes? The Chinese prefer to discuss specific issues under some general principles or guidelines. Paramount to the Beijing leadership is to determine the nature of US-China relations in the future.
The Pentagon issued its quadrennial defense review in early February, officially and explicitly identifying China as a military rival for the first time. According to the review, China is the power most likely to "field disruptive military technologies that could ... offset traditional US military advantages". China has "the greatest potential to compete militarily" with the United States and Beijing's military buildup "already puts regional military balances at risk".
Though the defense report also states that "US policy seeks to encourage China to choose a path of peaceful economic growth and political liberalization rather than military threat and intimidation", it underscores America's genuine concern about the rise of China and the potential threat from that country.
Since the Pentagon report serves as a guideline for military planning for the next few years, it remains to be seen how the US military will readjust its resources and overseas deployment to deal with the perceived Chinese rivalry in the near future.
It is an open secret that the US and Chinese militaries consider each other the greatest potential threat and have developed contingency plans for actual conflict between the two, but it is diplomatically unwise and politically damaging for Washington to reveal the secret in an official report. (The Pentagon admits to preparing for war with China. #msg-10051566)
Hu is likely to seek Bush's clarification of the intentions of this report and his view of bilateral relations in general. To soothe America's concerns, Hu will explain to his host his vision of China's peaceful development and the harmonious society it will create.
On a related issue, Hu is likely to question the purpose of the strengthened US-Japan alliance. He is also likely to seek Bush's help to persuade Japan to take a less confrontational policy toward China and to address China's concerns seriously, given that Bush and Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi enjoy a cordial relationship.
An independent Taiwan: To be or not to be? In the much improved US-China relationship, the contentious Taiwan issue should no longer dominate the summit agenda. Yet since New Year's Day, President Chen Shui-bian of Taiwan has thrown several political bombs into the otherwise calm Taiwan Strait, pushing the Taiwan issue back to the US-China summit table.
Despite his denial, Chen continues to tighten cross-strait trade and other exchanges, ignoring the popular wishes of the majority of the people on both sides of the strait. At the end of February, Chen declared that the National Unification Council would "cease to function" and the Guidelines for National Unification would "cease to apply". He has also suggested that Taiwan should apply for UN membership under the name "Taiwan".
In addition, he has proposed to revise Taiwan's constitution and hold a referendum on the new version next year. These policy initiatives smack of unilaterally changing the status quo across the Taiwan Strait and clearly run counter to his previous pledges.
Though the unpredictable Chen has lost much of his political credibility and his inflammatory remarks should not always be taken seriously, his radical policy declarations are still very disturbing to Beijing, Washington and many others both inside and outside Taiwan and are potentially disruptive to the political economy of East Asia.
What will the US do, since Taipei has repeatedly attempted to alter the status quo and ignored warnings from Beijing and Washington? Beijing leaders realize that the shortest cut to Taipei is via Washington. Though lower-level US officials and many American scholars have expressed displeasure with Chen, it is unclear where Bush stands on the recent developments.
Since Taipei has not done enough to alleviate Beijing's or Washington's concerns so far, Hu will most likely press Bush to rein in Chen and publicly utter his opposition to Taipei's unilateral challenge to the status quo, much like what Bush did during his summit with Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao in December 2003.
China hopes that the US will take concrete measures and work together with China to prevent Taiwan from continuing to be a destabilizing factor in US-China relations. To a large extent, the success of Hu's visit hangs on whether he can win a public statement or at least private reassurances from Bush regarding Taiwan.
Trade: Free or fair? Tensions over trade have become a regular irritant in US-China relations and risk overshadowing the Bush-Hu meeting. The US Congress has proposed different versions of punitive bills against what it perceives as "unfair" Chinese trade practices. But the Chinese government has suggested that the two countries need to ease trade frictions through consultations and negotiations as equal partners.
Hu is likely to reiterate China's decision to revalue the yuan gradually and reasonably. In fact, most countries, including European Union members and China's major trading partners in Asia, support a gradual approach to the yuan's revaluation. Hu will also promise to continue the crackdown on piracy to protect America's intellectual-property rights.
On the other hand, Hu will also ask the US to conduct fair trade with China, not just so-called free trade. One major cause of the huge trade imbalance between the two sides is that the US still maintains its Tiananmen-era economic sanctions against China, prohibiting US companies from selling high-tech and military/civilian dual-use equipment and know-how to China.
The US side cannot expect its trade deficit with China to be reduced by only selling apples and oranges to China. Hu is likely to appeal to Bush and US businesses that America's discriminatory policy is harmful to trade and bilateral relations in general. Punitive measures or trade wars do not help to resolve trade disputes.
Meanwhile, the following issues are most likely to top Bush's list.
Trade: Ready to be tough The 2006 Economic Report of the president released in Washington in mid-February claimed that China's "tightly managed pegged exchange rate" and "foreign-exchange-market intervention to limit currency appreciation" were partly to blame for America's record trade deficit. The report, while acknowledging that US exports to China had grown dramatically faster than overall US exports since 1990, warned that there were "areas that require further progress" on China's part to address the trade issue between the two countries.
Tensions between the two countries in recent years have grown over US accusations that China is undervaluing its currency to boost its exports, hurting US manufacturers' competitiveness. Though China increased the yuan's value by 2.1% last summer, many in the United States believe China has not done enough.
The Bush administration has so far consistently resisted calls from Congress and some business leaders to name China a currency manipulator and impose on it related sanctions. Several bills currently moving through Congress would impose additional tariffs on Chinese imports unless Beijing relaxes its currency-exchange regime.
To address his domestic audience, Bush is likely to press the Chinese president to revalue the yuan further to help reduce America's trade deficit and job losses. If China does not move swiftly in the next few months, it is likely that the Bush administration will be compelled to get tough with China over trade disputes, including naming China as a currency manipulator.
Bush may also raise the issue of political freedom in an increasingly capitalistic China, echoing congressional concerns about US companies' alleged bending to Chinese laws and helping China block Internet information and oppress political dissents. Several US technology companies, including Yahoo and Google, have been accused of complying with China's censorship rules to enter the Chinese market. Bush is likely to reiterate his claims that political and religious freedom goes hand-in-hand with economic freedom and is beneficial to China in the long term.
North Korea and Iran: No nukes allowed Curbing North Korea's nuclear ambition and pressuring Iran to give up its plans for uranium enrichment remain the dual challenge for Washington's non-proliferation efforts.
North Korean leader Kim Jong-il's January tour of China highlighted the solid bond between his country and China. Apparently only Beijing has the persuasive power to ask Pyongyang to return to the negotiation table and to behave reasonably. Bush will take the opportunity to prod China to restart the six-party talks as soon as possible. Washington's patience may be running out, but its options are also limited. China's leadership role is vital to the resolution of North Korea's nuclear issue.
Washington's accusation of North Korea's counterfeiting of US dollars and Pyongyang's strong denial have complicated the six-party talks. Hu is likely to respond by persuading Bush to drop America's accusations of North Korea's illegal financial activities and remove it as an obstacle to the six-party talks.
On Iran, China, along with Russia, has unexpectedly backed the proposal by the United States and the European Union to refer Iran to the United Nations Security Council if it fails to account for its alleged nuclear activities to the International Atomic Energy Agency, much to the delight of the US. Bush is likely to thank China for its decision and will also ask it to use its diplomatic and economic clout to push Iran further to abandon its nuclear ambition. Hu is likely to affirm China's opposition to nuclear proliferation, but he will also reiterate his country's long-standing position to resolve the nuclear issue peacefully.
Global energy security: From competitors to cooperators Bush in his 2006 State of the Union address proposed that the US should cut its dependence on Middle East oil by 75% by 2025. Regardless of whether this is feasible, China's deep reach into the Middle East and other oil markets has already caused great concern in the United States. China's energy foray into different parts of the world and especially its deals with some of America's "nightmare countries" - such as Sudan, Iran, Venezuela and Nigeria - are deeply unsettling to Washington.
Bush wants to wean the United States off imported oil, and China has an insatiable appetite for energy to sustain its growth. The country's economic growth in the first three months of this year is estimated to be 10.2% higher than in the same period of 2005. Obviously, the two countries can cooperate to develop alternative energy sources. Bush may well take the opportunity to propose ways the two countries can work together to ensure global energy security. The two nations can also cooperate in areas of energy conservation, efficient consumption of natural resources, and environmental protection. These issues on their respective lists are obviously important. But the two leaders must have the vision and the political will to raise relations to a new level. Since US Deputy State Secretary Robert Zoellick first put forward the idea last September that China was a "stakeholder" of the current international system, and should take its responsibilities in international affairs, both countries seem to be embracing the concept and are establishing a new framework for international cooperation.
Bush and Hu should strike while the iron is hot and turn this summit into a momentous meeting about the future of the two great powers. Relations between China and the US will largely determine the trajectory of the 21st century. The two leaders must be conscious of their historic responsibilities and map out a future in which their countries can work together to promote peace and prosperity around the world.
Zhiqun Zhu (zzhu@bridgeport.edu), PhD, is assistant professor of international political economy and diplomacy at the University of Bridgeport in Connecticut. He is the author of US-China Relations in the 21st Century: Power Transition and Peace (London and New York: Routledge, 2006).
(Copyright 2006 Zhiqun Zhu.)
Speaking Freely is an Asia Times Online feature that allows guest writers to have their say. Please click here if you are interested in contributing.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
