Tracking Number: 428287
Title: "State Letter--Objections to Taiwan/PRC Resolution."
Text of letters from Rep Lee Hamilton to the White House and the administration's reply on the subject of US military intervention to protect Taiwan from Chinese aggression. (960320)
Date: 19960320
Text:
*PFS304
03/20/96
TEXT: 3/19 STATE LETTER -- OBJECTIONS TO TAIWAN/PRC RESOLUTION
(Response to HIRC Ranking Member's 3/15 letter) (820)
Washington -- The Clinton administration outlined its objections to House Concurrent Resolution 148, a resolution introduced March 7 by Rep. Christopher Cox (Republican of California) that recommends U.S. military forces defend Taiwan in the event of an invasion, missile attack, or blockade by the People's Republic of China.
In a March 19 letter to Rep. Lee Hamilton (Democrat of Indiana), ranking member of the House International Relations Committee, the administration cites concerns about paragraph 7 of the legislation.
"This passage, in stating that the United States should `assist in defending' Taiwan against invasion, missile attack or blockade by the PRC, could be interpreted as expressing an opinion taking us beyond the carefully formulated undertakings embodied in the TRA," the letter says.
Following are the texts of Hamilton's March 15 letter and the Administration's March 19 response:
(begin text of Hamilton letter)
COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Washington, D.C.
March 15, 1996
Hon. Warren M. Christopher
Secretary of State
Department of State
Washington, D.C.
Dear Mr. Secretary:
I am writing to express my concerns about H. Con. Res. 148, relating to U.S. policy toward Taiwan, which was adopted yesterday by the House Committee on International Relations.
In my judgment, this resolution changes in a substantive and obvious way the articulation of a twenty-four year policy supported by six presidents. The resolution appears to rachet up our commitment to Taiwan and to promise a level of support for Taiwan that we have declined to give for the past quarter century. It avoids any reaffirmation of the one-China policy. As a consequence, it appears to create a major difference between the Congress and the executive branch.
I am writing now to ask for more details about your views on this resolution. A representative of the State Department has testified that the administration does not support this resolution.
Why do you not support the resolution? Does this mean that you oppose it? What is the difference between not supporting, and opposing? Is paragraph 7 of the resolved clause the only provision to which the administration objects?
What precisely is the nature of your concerns about this paragraph? Will the resolution help U.S.-China relations, or act as a hindrance? If the latter, how much damage will it do to U.S.-China relations? I would appreciate an answer to this letter by Monday, since there is a good chance the full House will be asked to act upon this resolution early next week.
With best regards,
Sincerely,
Lee H. Hamilton
Ranking Democratic Member
(end text of Hamilton letter)
(begin text of administration response)
U.S. Department of State
Washington, D.C.
March 19, 1996
Hon. Lee H. Hamilton
House of Representatives
Dear Mr. Hamilton:
Thank you for your letter of March 15 asking for the Administration's position on H. Con. Res. 148 regarding the security of Taiwan.
The Administration agrees with the objective of the resolution's sponsors to make clear to the People's Republic of China that a resort to force with respect to Taiwan would directly involve American national interests and would carry grave risks. We believe there should be no uncertainties about this in Beijing, Taipei or anywhere else. It is important that the Congress and Administration speak in a unified fashion to make clear that the United States feels strongly about the ability of the people of Taiwan to enjoy a peaceful future.
However, the Administration cannot support the resolution as it is currently formulated. Paragraph 7 of the resolved clause uses language that does not appear in the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). This passage, in stating that the United States should `assist in defending' Taiwan against invasion, missile attack or blockade by the PRC, could be interpreted as expressing an opinion taking us beyond the carefully formulated undertakings embodied in the TRA.
Although the PRC military exercises have been provocative and have raised tensions in the area, they have not constituted a threat to the security or the social or economic system of Taiwan. It is our understanding that the Taiwan authorities agree with our assessment of the situation. Should there be a threat to Taiwan's security, we would promptly meet our obligation under the TRA to consult with Congress on an appropriate response.
We will continue to convey our deep concern to Beijing in unmistakable fashion through our statements and our actions. We support a similar resolution in the Senate which uses formulations we believe would be more helpful to our common efforts to restore stability and reduce tensions in the area.
We hope this information is responsive to your concerns. Please let us know if we can be of further assistance.
Sincerely,
BARBARA LARKIN
Acting Assistant Secretary
Legislative Affairs
(end text of administration response)
NNNN
File Identification: 03/20/96, PFS304
Product Name: Wireless File
Product Code: WF
Keywords: HAMILTON, LEE/Speaker; CHINA-TAIWAN RELATIONS; MILITARY INTERVENTION;
TAIWAN-US RELATIONS/Policy; SECURITY ARRANGEMENTS; TAIWAN RELATIONS ACT; CLINTON, BILL/Foreign Relations: East Asia & Pacific
Document Type: TXT
Thematic Codes: 1EA; 2FP
Target Areas: EA
PDQ Text Link: 428287
USIA Notes: *96032003.PFS
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
