• 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: We got into China a little bit yesterday, but you know the rhetoric is still rather ominous from Beijing. I wondered if the United States has any sort of a protective arm for Taiwan to offer as Taiwan is being buffeted, I suppose, by these threatening statements. Without saying one side or the other is wrong -

MR. RUBIN: Let me say we will be discussing the recent statements made by the Taiwan President, Lee Teng Hui, with the Taiwan authorities in Taipei. We're seeking further information on their position. As you know, our position on Taiwan's future is clear and unchanging: we believe that it is a matter for the Chinese people on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to resolve. As you know, and as we've said for some time, we have an abiding interest and concern that any resolution be peaceful. We have for some time encouraged both sides to engage in meaningful, substantive dialogue. We believe that face-to-face meetings are the best way to clarify misunderstandings between Taipei and Beijing. We do not think it is beneficial for either side to take steps which make holding this type of discussion or meeting more difficult to achieve.

We are not aware of anything beyond the public statements of concern that have been reported out of Beijing, and it's up to the Chinese to characterize their position. We continue to urge both sides to engage in meaningful substantive dialogue, and to continue efforts to achieve progress in the next round of discussions.

As you know, we have a one-China policy; that has been our policy for some time now. We also have certain commitments pursuant to the Taiwan Relations Act. I can detail those for you; they're pretty well-known, but I'd be happy to do that. We have conveyed these positions on our support for Taiwan and the Taiwan Relations Act for some time.

The bottom line is very simple: We want neither side to take steps or make statements that makes it harder to have the kind of dialogue which we think is the only realistic way to resolve problems between the two.

QUESTION: Statements have been made, not only by the President of Taiwan, but other senior officials. Within Beijing's response is that there's not much point, in view of this, to continue the discussions. Is the State Department saying that Beijing should look beyond this current flap and continue those talks?

MR. RUBIN: Well, we don't think that the response of Beijing, or the original statements, are beneficial to taking steps which would make the type of discussion possible. In other words, it's not just a question of the Chinese saying that these statements make it harder to have a dialogue; it's the statements as well. So we don't think either of them are beneficial.

QUESTION: Who exactly is communicating the message to Taipei? Are you sending a --

MR. RUBIN: Not special: It's through the normal channels.

QUESTION: Normal channels. Is the Secretary expected to see the Chinese Foreign Minister at ASEAN?

MR. RUBIN: I wouldn't rule that out.

QUESTION: Has she had any contacts with Beijing or the Taiwanese?

MR. RUBIN: No, I think we're first trying to clarify from Taipei what the significance, if any, of these statements are. Then we will decide whether additional contacts are necessary.

QUESTION: So the United States wasn't forewarned that this was coming?

MR. RUBIN: I don't think there's anything new about foreign leaders giving interviews that are then characterized a certain way, without being warned in advance of what specific statements would be made in a specific interview. It's very rare, in fact, in my experience, to be told in advance of what a foreign leader is going to tell a journalist. In fact, it's a practice I wish we'd have them pursue more often.

QUESTION: Jamie, is the US alarmed, concerned, disturbed by the statements by those senior Taiwanese officials? And does the US think that Beijing is warranted in its harsh response?

MR. RUBIN: Well, we're concerned about a situation like this; I think that's clear. We do not think it's beneficial for either side to take actions or make statements that have the effect of making it harder to resolve the problems. Whether that is statements on the Taiwanese side about their objectives, or new terminology, or whether it's statements on the Chinese side about what effect those statements may or may not have on the possibility of dialogue. That is our view.

QUESTION: But what about Beijing's response?

MR. RUBIN: As I said, we're concerned that it is not helpful for the Taiwanese authorities to make statements that would make it harder to have dialogue. We're also concerned that it's not helpful for Beijing to make statements that indicate that a dialogue is harder to achieve. So in both cases, we're concerned.

QUESTION: Would you want to go far as to say that Taiwan's President went too far, because the US has said all along that there is only one China?

MR. RUBIN: No, I wouldn't like to do that, despite your prodding. What I'd like to do is have our representatives have an opportunity to talk to the Taiwanese authorities. Remember, what we're reacting to - and what all of you are reacting to - is media reports about what he said, without the full transcripts, without the full context, and perhaps with translation issues. So it seems to us, before drawing fundamental conclusions, the appropriate course of action for diplomats is to go to the source, to ask them some questions, to find out whether there is a new clarification that can be made, or will be made, or won't be made to explain the words that have appeared in the newspapers.

QUESTION: Apparently, though, Jamie, translation isn't really that much of a problem. Beijing - there are people in Beijing that speak Chinese, even the brand of Chinese that they speak in Taiwan. So this is not just an interview with a journalist; this is also statements that Lee made today with the visiting president from Central America. So I'm unclear why it is that one, we're waiting - you're waiting to try and find something in error in whatever reports --

MR. RUBIN: We don't look for errors in the media. On the contrary, we never do that. We hope and we expect that the media is perfect, just like government. But -- as a responsible player here, before reacting dramatically one way or the other, it seems appropriate to us to have a conversation privately with the person involved, and that is what we're going to do.

QUESTION: Jamie, you began your statement - and I assume it has priority, because you began the statement with the fact that it's up to the Chinese to decide their future. You didn't get around to mentioning one-China until well into your statement. Now, the one-China policy has its origin - it's usually - it was stated not simply we have a one-China policy, but we recognize the Chinese people believe there is one China and we support that. That became the one-China policy. Now if some of the Chinese people, like the people doing very well on their own on Taiwan, with a flourishing economy and a democracy and all of the above, don't want to be a part of that other China - which they find reprehensible in lots of ways - will the US continue to insist that there's only one China, if the Chinese themselves say there isn't one China anymore?

MR. RUBIN: We do not support Taiwan independence; we do not support Taiwanese membership in organizations where statehood is required; we do not support a two-China policy or a one-China/one-Taiwan policy. That's the answer to your question.

QUESTION: There are things in between which have been mentioned by the people in Taiwan - some sort of a federation. And this isn't the place to split those hairs, but your one-China policy is based, isn't it, on the wishes of the Chinese people?

MR. RUBIN: Our one-China policy is based on our national interest.

QUESTION: It's an election season - or close to one - in Taiwan. Do you think that might have something to do with this statement of nationalist -

MR. RUBIN: It's very hard for me to speculate on that prior to the conversation that I said is expected to happen tomorrow.

QUESTION: Tomorrow? Hadn't heard that.

MR. RUBIN: The conversation where we would seek further information on their position tomorrow.

QUESTION: Different subject?

MR. RUBIN: Appropriate diplomatic channels in country - in Taipei. Let's not over-dramaticize that.

QUESTION: Who will be having this conversation tomorrow?

MR. RUBIN: We have a dialogue with Taiwanese authorities in Taipei through our offices there that are called unofficial offices.

QUESTION: Will it be the -

MR. RUBIN: The head of our unofficial office.

QUESTION: The head of that, yes.

QUESTION: And the president?

MR. RUBIN: I would not be describing who precisely he'd be seeking this kind of clarification with.

QUESTION: But presumably there might be a translation error if they spoke to someone that was other than the president, right?

MR. RUBIN: No.

QUESTION: No?

QUESTION: I'd like to follow up on what Barry was asking you. It now appears that the United States adheres to its one-China policy. Beijing adheres to -

MR. RUBIN: Adhering to our policies is good practice.

QUESTION: And Beijing is also adhering to a one-China policy. But according to the Taiwan National Security Advisor, Taiwan now has a two-China policy. Does that imply that the US and mainland China's views on Chinese sovereignty are closer together than the views of the United States and Taiwan?

MR. RUBIN: Again, you're drawing conclusions - grand ones, I might add - from a couple of interviews and a couple of statements. We are not going to draw those kind of grand conclusions until we've had an opportunity to talk to the Taiwanese about these issues, to find out if there has been a significant change. From our standpoint, our view remains that we have a one-China policy. Barry asked me about other options and I indicated that as a corollary to our one-China policy are the views of the United States that we do not support Taiwan independence, we do not support Taiwan membership in organizations where statehood is required, and we don't support a two-China or a one-China/one-Taiwan policy. That is our view.

Now, to the extent that there are further clarifications coming as a result of our diplomats' discussions with Taiwanese authorities and to the extent we're in a position to discuss any such clarifications, I would be happy to discuss further with you what grand conclusions might/might not be drawn from this episode.

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

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

(The briefing concluded at 1:30 P.M.)

[end of document]