• Military

• WMD Menu                           

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

U.S. Department of State

Daily Press Briefing

QUESTION: New but familiar "we'll-smash-you" rhetoric coming from Beijing to Taiwan. You've just had extensive talks with the Chinese, presumably asking them to lower their rhetoric. Any reflections on the new tough tone?

MR. RUBIN: Well, I don't know how to characterize it. Clearly, China has never ruled out the use of force, and they continue to adopt that view. We continue to believe that this conflict must be resolved peacefully, and we continue to believe that neither side should make statements or take actions that would make the Cross-Strait dialogue more difficult to occur. So we do not support statements that make that dialogue more difficult.

QUESTION: What about the ship -- (inaudible) --

MR. RUBIN: With respect to the ship, we are aware of the reports of the seizure and are waiting for greater clarification.

I would note that the vice chairman of the Taiwan Straits Exchange Foundation indicates that Taiwan does not believe there is a relationship between the controversy over Taiwan's recent statement about state-to-state relations and this particular seizure.

We hope the two sides will resolve this matter in an appropriate fashion, as they have similar incidents involving the seizure of vessels in the past.

QUESTION: Can you give a reaction to China's testing of a ballistic missile today?

MR. RUBIN: With respect to the missile, let me say that this missile involves technology that we're quite familiar with. It's a new missile - but its range is similar to already existing missiles developed by China. We have expected this test for some time. We have no indication that China intends to sell or otherwise transfer technology used in this missile. So it's a test - we expected it's part of their intercontinental ballistic missile program that we're quite familiar with.

QUESTION: Can I just follow up? On the one hand we're trying to prevent the North Koreans from test launching a ballistic missile and we have the Chinese now test launching. Is there no stronger reaction from the US that we feel that this is something that's unhelpful in light of the fact that we want the Chinese to put pressure on the North Koreans?

MR. RUBIN: Well, I think there's nothing new about China having medium and long range missiles; they've had them for a long, long time. What we're trying to do is to stop a situation before the genie gets out of the bottle, or the missile gets out of the program, that would prevent North Korea from becoming a country that could have long range missiles. China already has long range missiles, and therefore the fact that they've tested a new missile is not a dramatic new development that requires massive effort and diplomacy to try to deter.

On the North Korean side, we also are dealing with the regime that has not shown responsibility in a number of cases around the world - a regime that we have major problems with. So that's the difference.

QUESTION: Except the North Koreans have also launched a missile.

MR. RUBIN: Right. Again, if you want to do statistics with me, I'll do it. If you've tested missiles thousands of times and you have hundreds of missiles and you do another test, you haven't dramatically improved the capability of your missile program. If you've only tested a missile once in a particular mode and then you test a missile again in a different mode, you are now developing a missile capability. That is the essence of missile technology.

QUESTION: Can we put it in the context of things we've been talking about? Does the State Department get any impression that nerves are jangled - Japan, et cetera? I mean, this is having an effect, isn't it, on that area?

MR. RUBIN: Which missile?

QUESTION: No, no, not just the North Korean missile; the various things China is doing.

MR. RUBIN: We have no - there haven't been any extraordinary military developments in this area, in our view. We do not think it would be beneficial for either side to take steps to increase tensions, and we've urged dialogue. So we haven't seen any extraordinary military developments in the form of exercises or other preparations that we watch very carefully.

QUESTION: One thing that is unusual is that the Chinese announced this test of this ground-to-ground missile, which is unusual. Is that the sort of thing that you consider to be unhelpful? The announcement itself?

MR. RUBIN: Well, let me say this - the more that China is open about its military programs, the better for the world. This is not a country that's used to providing a lot of information about its own programs. The more they do that, the less unusual it will appear to you or anybody else.

We do not have any basis to conclude that the timing of this launch is linked to the issues with Taiwan. This test firing has been expected for some time, and why they specifically chose today is something for them to explain. But it's not an unexpected development in the course of their modernization program.

QUESTION: Do you have anything on the US missile tracking vessels patrolling Northeast Asia, presumably with an eye toward watching what the North Koreans do?

MR. RUBIN: Well, let me say this - it should be no secret that we have trained a number of assets for a long time on the question of trying to detect developments in North Korea in the missile and nuclear area. I wouldn't be in a position to comment on any specific asset, but clearly that's something we watch closely.

QUESTION: The fact that you haven't seen any extraordinary military developments on behalf of China, do you consider that significant?

MR. RUBIN: That's a good question. I'm just trying to process it through my brain. It's certainly significant that they have not taken any significant development, in the sense that we're all watching very closely what's going on in this part of the world and if they did take an extraordinary action, that would be significant and we would obviously have to take that into account in formulating our day-to-day policies.

Whether this means that China will eventually and Taiwan will eventually find a way to resume the dialogue that we have been advocating, or whether this is the beginning of slow steps by China to move away from those dialogue is a question that can only be answered over time. The fact that there have not been extraordinary military developments isn't a definitive indicator that they're going in either direction.

QUESTION: You said it's not a new missile, but do you have any other information about what kind of missile it was; what its range was and whether, in fact, it was only launched on Chinese territory - where it was launched from?

MR. RUBIN: I can tell you that the reported range of the missile is in the 5,000-mile category and it's apparently capable of carrying a 1,500 pound weapon. The Dong Feng 31 is its nomenclature by the Chinese. This was put out by the Chinese news agency. I don't have additional information of our own to offer you.

QUESTION: Have the Chinese reacted angrily to the announcement on Friday that the US is going to sell, or proposed sale of, fighter planes? (Inaudible.)

MR. RUBIN: Well, with respect to this issue, let me say that we should have our guidance better organized. I'll be right with you. Ah-ha, it was well organized; it was the briefer who was badly organized.

We do make available to Taiwan arms of a defensive character to enable Taiwan to make a sufficient self-defense capability. We notified Congress on Friday of our intent to sell E-2T early warning aircraft and aircraft spare parts to Taiwan. The estimated cost for these two sales is approximately $550 million.

We believe these sales are fully consistent with the Taiwan Relations Act and the various communiqués. We have supplied aircraft spare parts to Taiwan for 20 years; Taiwan already has E-2T aircraft in it's inventory. So there is nothing of a new character here that's a dramatic new development.

It is common and expected for China to complain about any transfer of parts or aircraft like this. They have done so, and we have responded that it's fully within our policy of providing for Taiwan's self-defense pursuant to the Taiwan Relations Act. We regularly receive their complaints about such sales and transfers and we regularly respond, as I just did.

QUESTION: Okay, I'm curious why the Chinese have complained about this -- especially given the current tensions. Why isn't the US, then, taking any kind of a stronger position on this Chinese missile? It would seem to me to somewhat related in the fact that it's taking place in the same environment; and in fact the Chinese themselves - or some analysts in China - have said that the Chinese know or the Chinese were expecting no protests from the US over this missile test simply because of the fact that Washington is so eager to mend its relations with Beijing. Is that at all true?

MR. RUBIN: Well, the previous question you were asking me about sending announced transfers of aircraft and spare parts to Taiwan that irritated China, and now you've asked me why we're being nice to China about the other missile. So obviously we're doing what these analysts are suggesting.

Let me say that analysts have to analyze because otherwise they wouldn't get paid. But what we've tried to do is to pursue the same policy that we have for some time, which is to use available ways and means to encourage dialogue, to continue to provide Taiwan the defense it needs, to judge developments based on the facts and not speculation. As I indicated, we have no reason to believe or no basis to conclude that the long-expected long-range missile test was related and is related to the Taiwan situation. Therefore, we can't make policy or judgments based on speculation the way analysts can.

QUESTION: On one of the talk shows over the weekend it was suggested that the situation with General Clark is --

MR. RUBIN: Let's just make sure that everybody's done with Taiwan. Is everybody done?

QUESTION: This is related to China.

MR. RUBIN: Related to China?

QUESTION: You'll like this one. It was suggested that his being moved out - for lack of a better word - from the position was the head that China was looking to have roll as a result of the bombing of its embassy in Belgrade. Can you comment on that?

MR. RUBIN: I've heard a lot over the last week and in the aftermath of this announcement and that's the first time I've ever heard that from anybody inside or outside of the government.

QUESTION: Israel and the Palestinians --

MR. RUBIN: And are we done with Taiwan and China?

QUESTION: I have a China question. Two more members of the China Democracy Party were apparently just sentenced to long prison terms. I wonder whether you have any comment on that situation.

MR. RUBIN: We do deplore this sentencing of citizens merely for their pursuit of the right of free expression, for exercising their internationally recognized freedoms. We have made our views known for some time when these sentences were first received. We continue to be deeply concerned by the crackdown of organized political dissent in China that is ongoing.

According to available information, in recent weeks there have been five political activists sentenced since May. None of these activists have done anything other than exercise rights protected by international human rights instruments. These new arrests continue the steps that China has already taken - steps that we have identified as steps in the wrong direction.

..............

(The briefing concluded at 1:00 P.M.)

[end of document]