The development of a long-range weapon with pre-emptive strike capabilities signifies a fundamental policy shift in response to perceived nuclear threats from North Korea, China and terrorism.
More and more China is being listed in print as the enemy as we are conditioned to accept the dragon as our biggest adversary.
-Am
Japan seeks more hawkish military By Robin Gedye, Foreign Affairs Writer (Filed: 04/12/2004)
Japan plans to develop a long-range missile in a sweeping overhaul of its post-war military policy that dramatically changes its security strategy from pure defence to one with global reach.
A new mid-term defence plan for next year includes research into a surface-to-air missile with a range of several hundred miles, according to Japanese newspapers.
The development of a long-range weapon with pre-emptive strike capabilities signifies a fundamental policy shift in response to perceived nuclear threats from North Korea, China and terrorism.
North Korea's aggressive military posturing, which included the test-firing of a long-range ballistic missile over Japan in 1998, fuelled calls in Tokyo for a review of its defence strategy. The new 2005-2009 defence plan is scheduled for submission to the Cabinet early next week.
Japan overhauling its defence December 3, 2004 7:30 AM
By Masayuki Kitano
TOKYO (Reuters) - Japan is putting the final touches to a sweeping overhaul of its defence policy that will give its armed forces a greater role globally and could upset Asian neighbours such as China and North Korea.
The review of the National Defence Programme Outline -- the first since 1995 -- and a related five-year defence programme are expected to be approved by Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi's cabinet next week, unless squabbling over details causes a delay.
Defence Minister Yoshinori Ohno told a news conference on Friday he was hoping for approval by the cabinet at its next meeting on December 7.
The overhaul, which will include steps to improve defence against new threats such as terrorist and missile attacks, is likely to imply a shift away from Japan's purely defensive security policy.
Japan's post-war pacifist constitution renounces war and bans the maintenance of a standing army but has been interpreted as allowing a military for defence only. Such restrictions have been stretched in recent years, most recently with Japan's dispatch of troops to Iraq on a reconstruction and humanitarian mission.
The need to counter invasions of remote islands is to be highlighted in the strategy review, reflecting concerns about North Korea and an increase in activities by Chinese naval vessels in seas around Japan, the Yomiuri newspaper reported.
The 2005-2009 defence plan includes starting research on a long-range, ground-to-ground missile, the paper said.
Such a precision-guided missile would be developed to counter possible invasions of remote islands several hundred kilometres away from mainland Japan, the Yomiuri said.
There are concerns that any deployment would mark a shift away from Japan's purely defensive strategy, it said.
Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda said further discussions were needed on the matter.
"I think it is an issue for consideration, but more discussion is needed on whether it is required imminently," Hosoda told reporters when asked about such strike capabilities.
FINANCIAL BICKERING
In October, an advisory panel to the prime minister said Japan should consider whether to acquire the capability to carry out pre-emptive strikes, a sign of a possible departure from a purely defensive strategy.
The panel's suggestion reflected strong concerns over a ballistic missile threat from North Korea, which shocked Japan when it test-fired a ballistic missile that passed over Japan in 1998.
Japan-China relations have been chilled by a number of disputes including a spat over the intrusion of a Chinese nuclear-powered submarine into Japanese waters last month.
Japan and China are also at odds over a group of islands, which both claim as their own, known as the Senkakus in Japan and the Diaoyus in China.
Bickering between Japan's defence and finance ministries has delayed the unveiling of the new policy, media reports said.
Business daily Nihon Keizai said the ministries had finally agreed to cut the number of tanks to around 600 from 900.
Taiwan's tragedy lies in the fact that despite having almost no international support for independence, Taiwan's pro-independence leaders either genuinely or pretend to believe that out of strategic considerations countries such as the United States and Japan will lend their help if Taiwan formally declares independence.
Worse yet, these politicians continue to mislead many not-so-well-informed Taiwanese people, especially those in the south and rural areas, creating a myth that Taiwan can become a "normal country", permanently separate from China soon.
When everyone is taking advantage of the opportunity provided by China's growth, only Taiwan is trying to disassociate itself from China. The current Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) regime has been attempting to systematically delink Taiwan from China by political, economic and cultural means. The political and cultural atmosphere has been so poisoned in Taiwan that simply mentioning unification with China is often considered betrayal of Taiwan.
While having not changed the status quo across the Taiwan Strait legally, the DPP government has on many occasions verbally challenged it. President Chen Shui-bian's Double-Ten Day (October 10, National Day) statement that "the Republic of China is Taiwan and Taiwan is the Republic of China" is a direct challenge to the status quo and a verbal alteration of the constitution of the Republic of China (ROC).
Sensing the dire consequences of Taiwanese independence, top US officials, including President George W Bush, have reiterated America's policy of "one China" and non-support for an independent Taiwan. But the DPP government continues to insist unilaterally that there is one separate country on each side of the Taiwan Strait. US Secretary of State Colin Powell's recent remarks that Taiwan is not independent and that it does not enjoy sovereignty as a nation are yet another effort by the US government to curb Taiwan's independence movement.
Ordinary Americans do not seem to support Taiwanese independence either. A recent poll by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR) suggests that 61% of the respondents were opposed to US military involvement in a People's Republic of China-Taiwan conflict, and only 33% would support sending troops to defend the island. If a conflict were initiated by Taiwan, probably even fewer Americans would want to shed their blood to defend an independent Taiwan.
In the past few months, leaders from Australia, Singapore and France - all traditional and key allies of the United States - have openly cautioned Taiwan against moving toward independence, and have stated clearly that no country in the region will support Taiwan independence. Unfortunately, instead of appreciating the sound advice from other governments, some Taiwanese politicians have used strong and even vulgar language to blast all these countries.
If Taiwan's pro-independence leaders continue to turn a deaf ear to international concerns, the international community, especially the United States, should tell Taiwan unambiguously that Taiwan's pro-independence leadership will be held responsible for any consequences resulted from its unilateral change of status quo.
The US Department of Defense and arms dealers have been pressuring Taiwan's lawmakers to pass a special budget plan to finance an US$18 billion arms procurement from the US. Whatever intentions the United States may have regarding arms sales to Taiwan, they have often been misconstrued by some Taiwanese that the US will always stand by Taiwan in a cross-strait conflict. But there is no American blank check for Taiwan to fill out.
History shows that the United States only supports what accords with its own national interests. Since Taiwanese independence is not in the interests of the United States, it would be naive to believe that Uncle Sam is always ready to help a democratic Taiwan even if Taiwan provokes a cross-strait conflict by moving toward and formally declaring independence.
The US government, absorbed by the war in Iraq and the global fight against terror, has worked hard to keep down tensions across the Taiwan Strait. It is doubtful that the United States would directly choose conflict with China over Taiwan, especially in a cross-strait war triggered by Taiwan's unilateral change of the status quo. The United States must continue to promote cross-strait dialogue and state unequivocally to both sides that only a peaceful outcome acceptable to people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait will be supported by Washington. Instead of spending billions of dollars on purchasing weapons or changing the ROC constitution, Taiwan should make improving cross-strait relations a priority.
How to curtail the quest of some Taiwanese for independence without compromising Taiwan's democracy and way of life is a challenge for Taiwan, China, the United States and the international community as a whole. Realistically speaking, Taiwan's future lies in China both economically and politically. The DPP government's attempt to de-emphasize Chinese history, culture and links is a very short-sighted strategy. Taiwan cannot and should not lose the golden opportunity of China's rise. Instead of burning bridges with China, Taiwan should, as former DPP chairman Hsu Hsin-liang has suggested, boldly go westward and collaborate with China during the latter's modernization. Taiwan can help shape the future of China. A more prosperous and democratic China with which Taiwan is closely associated is in the best interest of the 23 million people of Taiwan. Taiwan's tragedy can and should be avoided.
Zhiqun Zhu, PhD, is assistant professor of international political economy and diplomacy at The International College, University of Bridgeport, Connecticut.
US to post military officers to Taiwan mission: Jane's
Ominous clouds gathering!!!
Clearly, ending NORTH Korea's nuclear crisis or even eliminating "evil" is not the ultimate goal of the US. What the US really wants, and is exploiting the NORTH Korea "crisis" to achieve, is to deploy sufficient military forces and resources in the western Pacific (especially close to Taiwan) so as to encourage Taiwan independence, thereby checking China's growth as a power that might compete with the US. Not long ago, the US and Japan were talking about using Japan's Shimoji Island as a military base. Only about 200 miles from Taiwan, Shimoji has a "runway capable of safely handling a fully loaded F-15C fighter jet", observed James Brooke in the New York Times.
If some day Taiwan becomes independent (or rather the 51st US state), it would not surprise the world. Yet it would reduce China to a state that may never be able to challenge the US. If that day comes, obviously the US should be grateful to NORTH Korea, for it has created a perfect smokescreen for the US to be well positioned to diminish China. #msg-4722542
China’s new ‘anti-separatism’ law may have something to do with this.
While continuing its military threats against Taiwan, Lu said, China had plans for an "anti-separatism" law which would be used to justify an invasion. #msg-4862576
-Am
US to post military officers to Taiwan mission: Jane's
TAIPEI (AFP) Dec 19, 2004 In a reversal of its long-standing policy, the United States will post military officers to its mission in Taipei for the first time since 1979, leading defense journal Jane's Defense Weekly said.
The move is expected to rile rival China as it would mark closer military ties between Washington and the island which Beijing claims as part of its territory.
From the middle of 2005 active duty military personnel will replace civilian contractors at Washington's effective diplomatic mission in Taipei, the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT), the weekly said in an article to be published on Wednesday.
US army Colonel Al Wilner, a former helicopter pilot, will be the first to arrive, Jane's Taipei correspondent Wendell Minnick told AFP Sunday.
The move marks a crucial reversal of the US defense department's long-standing policy of not assigning military officers to the island, the weekly said.
"Washington has become less concerned over any potential protest from Beijing amid growing unease over China's military ambitions in the Asia Pacific region," it said.
Washington switched its diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979, but has since remained the leading arms supplier to the island.
With a lack of diplomatic ties, military affairs between Washington and Taipei have been handled by contractors working for the US Defense Intelligence Agency and Defense Security Co-ordination Agency.
Jane's says the change results from a bill passed by the US Congress in 2002 allowing for the posting of US military personnel to Taiwan if it is deemed to be "in the national interest of the United States."
US government employees, including military personnel, are currently required to retire before they can be hired by the US mission in Taipei.
US personnel assigned to the mission will not wear uniforms and will serve for three years, compared with the two-year term offered to civilian contractors, the weekly says.
The change should also cut costs as civilian employees are higher paid.
The report comes as the Taiwanese government is pushing for a controversial special defense budget to purchase six US-made Pac-3 anti-missile systems, eight conventional submarines and a fleet of submarine-hunting P-3C aircraft, over a 15-year period from 2005.
The budget, already approved by the cabinet, has met opposition in parliament.
Some critics say Taiwan cannot afford the massive arms spending while others say the new weaponry will not be delivered in time to help the island fend off any attack from China in coming years.
Others say it could fuel an arms race with Beijing, which regards the island as a renegade province and has vowed to retake it by force if Taipei declares formal independence.
Interesting read: US policymakers seeking to contain China
The United States does not want peace between China and Taiwan.
"A hasty reconciliation between Taiwan and China does not match US interests in East Asia, so Washington may become more deeply involved in Taiwan's policy toward China," said Philip Hsu, an assistant professor of political science at National Taiwan University.
Reference: Clearly, ending North Korea's nuclear crisis or even eliminating "evil" is not the ultimate goal of the US. What the US really wants, and is exploiting the North Korea "crisis" to achieve, is to deploy sufficient military forces and resources in the western Pacific (especially close to Taiwan) so as to encourage Taiwan independence, thereby checking China's growth as a power that might compete with the US. Not long ago, the US and Japan were talking about using Japan's Shimoji Island as a military base. Only about 200 miles from Taiwan, Shimoji has a "runway capable of safely handling a fully loaded F-15C fighter jet", observed James Brooke in the New York Times. #msg-4722542
Note: This seems the same containment policy we have adopted toward Russia.
Perle, who believes that the White House should contain the Kremlin rather than cooperate with it, has criticized the campaign against Yukos shareholders from the beginning. http://www.sptimes.ru/archive/times/915/news/n_10814.htm
-Am
-Am
US policymakers seeking to contain China: academics
By Rich Chang STAFF REPORTER Sunday, May 01, 2005,Page 3
Taiwanese academics yesterday said that US policy toward China has returned to the "containment principle," and that Washington does not want to see Taiwan and China reconcile too quickly in the wake of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan's meeting with Chinese President Hu Jintao. "A hasty reconciliation between Taiwan and China does not match US interests in East Asia, so Washington may become more deeply involved in Taiwan's policy toward China," said Philip Hsu, an assistant professor of political science at National Taiwan University.
The remarks were made at a seminar held on cross-strait relations yesterday.
Hsu said he observed that US policy toward Taiwan has become increasingly intrusive.
He said that although the US opposed Taiwan's holding of a referendum during the presidential election in March of last year, the referendum still took place. Thus, Hsu said, the US learned that "pre-emptive diplomacy" was not sufficient to influence cross-strait relations, and US policymakers had since decided to take a more active approach in the Taiwan Strait.
As a result, the US is playing a more active role on Taiwan's domestic politics, Hsu said.
Hsu also accused the US government of clandestinely encouraging President Chen Shui-bian to sign a 10-point consensus with People First Party (PFP) Chairman James Soong -- a move regarded as curbing Taiwan's independence forces.
The US even publicly "directed" Chen to act moderately and reasonably while attending the March 26 demonstration against China's "Anti-Secession" Law, Hsu said.
On the other hand, as the US "war on terrorism" has generally eased, Washington's focus has been shifted back to Asia. The Bush administration sees China as its biggest challenger in this century, and as such, a kind of containment policy is being brought to the fore, Hsu said.
Hsu also noted that as China prepared to enact the Anti-Secession Law, Washington and Tokyo announced in February that the Taiwan Strait was a "common strategic objective."
In addition, the US has strongly opposed the EU's plan to lift its arms embargo against China. The US made it clear to the EU that it does not want to see China use European-made weapons to kill Americans one day, Hsu said.
He added, however, that as the US adjusted its policy to "contain" China, Taiwan's opposition leaders complicated matters by accepting invitations to visit high-ranking officials in Beijing.
Hao Pei-chih, an assistant professor of public administration and policy at National Taipei University, said the issue of containment is at the core of US-China relations.
According to Hao's version of the containment theory, powerful countries build economic, diplomatic and sometimes even military walls around their rivals, but also leave a door for negotiations.
North Korea is probably not preparing for an underground nuclear test and the United States does not want to end North Korea’s nuclear crisis.
South Korean officials have also reacted with skepticism to US media claims that North Korea is preparing an underground nuclear test and might conduct one as early as June. #msg-6287290
Clearly, ending North Korea's nuclear crisis or even eliminating "evil" is not the ultimate goal of the US. What the US really wants, and is exploiting the North Korea "crisis" to achieve, is to deploy sufficient military forces and resources in the western Pacific (especially close to Taiwan) so as to encourage Taiwan independence, thereby checking China's growth as a power that might compete with the US. Not long ago, the US and Japan were talking about using Japan's Shimoji Island as a military base. Only about 200 miles from Taiwan, Shimoji has a "runway capable of safely handling a fully loaded F-15C fighter jet", observed James Brooke in the New York Times.
If some day Taiwan becomes independent (or rather the 51st US state), it would not surprise the world. Yet it would reduce China to a state that may never be able to challenge the US. If that day comes, obviously the US should be grateful to North Korea, for it has created a perfect smokescreen for the US to be well positioned to diminish China. #msg-4722542
-Am
China Says U.S. Impeded North Korea Arms Talks By JOSEPH KAHN
BEIJING, May 12 - A senior Chinese diplomat on Thursday accused the Bush administration of undermining efforts to revive negotiations with the North Korean government and said there was "no solid evidence" that North Korea was preparing to test a nuclear weapon.
The comments by Yang Xiyu, a senior Foreign Ministry official and China's top official on the North Korean nuclear problem, were noteworthy because the Chinese authorities very rarely speak to journalists about the issue. The comments reflect growing frustration in Beijing with the Bush administration.
Even as the White House presses China to find a solution to the nuclear issue, Chinese officials say, it has hurled insults at North Korea and given its leaders excuses to stay away from the bargaining table.
"It is true that we do not yet have tangible achievements" in ending North Korea's nuclear weapons program, Mr. Yang said in an interview. "But a basic reason for the unsuccessful effort lies in the lack of cooperation from the U.S. side."
Mr. Yang said that when President Bush referred to the North Korea leader, Kim Jong Il, as a "tyrant" in late April, Mr. Bush "destroyed the atmosphere" for negotiations, undoing weeks of efforts to persuade North Korea that the United States would bargain in good faith.
China, which has used its diplomatic clout to try to broker a peaceful solution to the nuclear crisis, has struggled to restart six-nation negotiations, which stalled nearly a year ago.
Mr. Yang said formally on Thursday what diplomats here had been whispering for months: personal attacks against Mr. Kim by Mr. Bush, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice and other top administration officials had caused a "loss of face" for North Korean officials and created big obstacles to reaching any negotiated solution.
He urged the Bush administration to find some "informal channel" to talk with North Korean diplomats, perhaps over coffee or a meal, to build confidence. American officials have resisted any direct contact with North Koreans outside the six-nation talks. Mr. Yang said that without some new gestures the obstacles to resuming negotiations could prove insurmountable.
"I know the U.S. is reluctant to have even informal contacts" with North Korea, he said. "But as the world's superpower, I would hope it can show more flexibility and sincerity to make a resumption of talks possible."
The Beijing government is determined to head off a looming confrontation between the United States and North Korea, which it fears could prompt a regional nuclear arms race and shatter the stability that has underpinned China's own economic rise.
But the prospects for a negotiated solution have diminished after the recriminations between the United States and North Korea and warnings by American officials that North Korea has accelerated its development of nuclear bombs and may be preparing to test a nuclear device.
Mr. Yang said China would be "very concerned" about a nuclear test. But he said he doubted North Korea would take that step now, adding that China had made it "very, very clear" to North Korea that a test or any other provocative display of its nuclear capability would have serious consequences.
North Korea "understands the consequences very clearly," Mr. Yang said. "I do not think we should reach the conclusion that there will be a test."
Some American and Chinese analysts have speculated that North Korea may have made preparations for a test in full view of American spy satellites to create a sense of urgency about its nuclear program and lay the groundwork for demanding greater concessions if negotiations resume. But others say they believe North Korea is determined to become a full-fledged nuclear power and is prepared to weather penalties that may be imposed as it pursues that goal.
The United States and China worked closely together to organize multiple rounds of talks with North Korea that also included South Korea, Japan and Russia. Not since the two countries coordinated strategies against the former Soviet Union in the 1980's have they cooperated on a diplomatic project for such an extended period.
But tensions have risen as North Korea has appeared to be continuing to develop its nuclear arsenal and has resisted returning to the talks. Bush administration officials contend that China must begin using more economic and political leverage to pressure North Korea. China has rejected "strong-arm tactics" and suggested, usually in private, that the United States stop demonizing North Korea.
Mr. Yang expressed some puzzlement as to why the United States had pushed China to cut off oil or fuel supplies to North Korea - part of its lifeline of support for the government, which is in need of money - at the same time that it professed to want to resume negotiations.
"If you look at history you cannot find many successful cases in which sanctions achieved a successful result," he said.
Mr. Yang disputed an account of a meeting he held with Assistant Secretary of State Christopher Hill that was carried last week in The Washington Post. In that account, Mr. Yang was quoted as rejecting American demands to cut off North Korea's fuel supplies, but as indicating that China might withhold food aid as a way of forcing North Korea to resume talks.
Mr. Yang said Thursday that he did not discuss those options with Mr. Hill. He said he did not see the need for any penalties, involving food, oil shipments or other measures, as long as the six nations involved in talks were still trying to keep the negotiations alive. He also rejected the idea, put forward by the United States and Japan, of involving the United Nations Security Council in the matter.
But he also said China was opposed to imposing penalties "for now," leaving open the possibility that it could change its mind if North Korea exploded a nuclear device or abandoned its commitment to pursuing a peaceful settlement.
In an exclusive interview with ABC News correspondent Bob Woodruff, North Korea's Vice Foreign Minister Kim Gye Gwan said the country is in the process of building additional nuclear bombs and would neither confirm nor deny the missiles' ability to hit the United States.
Woodruff is part of an ABC News team recently granted rare access to the country. During the interview, Gwan -- the country's chief nuclear negotiator -- spoke openly about North Korea's nuclear ambitions:
BOB WOODRUFF: Do you have a nuclear bomb?
KIM GYE GWAN: We do have.
WOODRUFF: How many do you have?
GWAN: I should say that we have enough nuclear bombs to defend against a U.S. attack. As for specifically how many we have, that is a secret.
WOODRUFF: Are you building more bombs now?
GWAN: Yes.
Despite those claims, many analysts are not convinced North Korea has nuclear weapons because it has not conducted any nuclear tests. In the past several years it has tested long-range missiles, however.
WOODRUFF: Do have a missile capable of hitting the mainland United States?
GWAN: I think I've said our nuclear program is are not aimed at attacking the U.S.
WOODRUFF: It's not aimed there, but does it have the capability of reaching there?
GWAN: We don't have any intention at all of attacking the U.S. So you can't even speculate about that kind of thing.
WOODRUFF: Do have the ability to put a nuclear warhead on your long range missiles?
GWAN: I want you to know that our scientists have the knowledge, comparable to other scientists around the world.
WOODRUFF: Is that a yes or a no?
GWAN: You can take it as you like.
Struggles of Daily Life Life remains very difficult in North Korea, where food shortages and occasional blackouts are common occurrences. To save power, the traffic lights in the capital Pyongyang have been turned off for more than four years. Highly trained police direct the traffic at intersections instead.
The campus at Kim Il Sung University, normally teeming with 12,000 students, is empty. The students, along with an estimated 3 million other North Koreans, were ordered out of the cities this month and directed into rice fields to help plant the new crop.
North Korea is in the midst of a major food crisis, and is working to boost its agricultural production.
"Our leader Kim Jung Il told us to mobilize," one North Korean engineer-turned-farmer told ABC News. "A person cannot work without food."
The North Koreans can not return to the city until the farming is done, and they work without farming equipment -- using only their hands.
ABC News' Bob Woodruff filed this report on "World News Tonight."
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
