26 August 2002
Armitage Says U.S. Does Not Support Taiwan Independence
(Armitage also discusses South Asia, nonproliferation, terrorism)
(4420)
The United States does not support independence for Taiwan, says
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.
In an August 26 news conference in Beijing, Armitage told reporters
that while Taiwan is "one of the questions" where Washington and
Beijing "have a difference of opinion," the U.S. approach to relations
with Taiwan "is based on our One-China Policy, the Three Communiqués,
and the Taiwan Relations Act."
Armitage added that U.S. policies and actions are "predicated on" the
Beijing regime's "continuation of the policy of peaceful resolution of
the question."
The United States expects that the policy of peaceful resolution
regarding Taiwan will "continue to be the policy of the People's
Republic of China," he said.
Armitage told reporters that cooperation between the United States and
China in the field of counter-terrorism is good. He noted that the
United States and China will be participating in a meeting on
terrorist financing and are "about to have a discussion about
container handling security and container security."
Regarding North Korea, Armitage said both the United States and China
"share an interest in continued stability on the peninsula of Korea."
Armitage noted that Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing had
briefed his delegation on China's "promulgation of missile-related
export control regulations and China's plans to strictly enforce these
new rules and regulations."
Armitage said the United States "welcomed the news," and added that
the regulations are modeled on the Missile Technology Control Regime
(MTCR) guidelines.
Turning to South Asia, Armitage said he thanked his Chinese
counterparts for the "strenuous efforts" of President Jiang Zemin,
along with Russian President Vladimir Putin, in Almaty earlier this
year to lower the tensions between India and Pakistan.
"I don't think there's any difference of opinion on the absolute need
to contain the tensions and try to bring about a better situation,"
Armitage said. "We know the historical relationships between China and
Pakistan."
"We did note that the present relationship between India and China is
better than it has been in the past and we certainly expect that to
continue," Armitage said. "For our part, we are going to continue to
consult closely with the Chinese as we move forward and continue our
involvement surrounding the tensions" in that region.
Following is a transcript of Armitage's August 26 news conference in
Beijing:
(begin transcript)
Transcript of
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage
Press Conference - Conclusion of China Visit
Beijing, China
August 26, 2002
ARMITAGE: I just completed a very full day of positive discussion with
Chinese leaders. My primary focus was on making preparations for the
meeting between Presidents Bush and Jiang in Crawford scheduled for
October 25. My meetings included calls on Vice President Hu Jintao,
Vice Premier Qian Qichen, Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan, my host Vice
Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing, Deputy Chief of the General Staff
General Xiong Guangkai.
In these talks, we discussed a wide range of bilateral and regional
issues. With Vice Minister Li, we reviewed our cooperation and recent
exchanges on counter-terrorism, human rights and religious freedom,
nonproliferation, and regional and economic issues. Vice Minister Li
briefed us on China's promulgation of missile-related export control
regulations and China's plans to strictly enforce these new rules and
regulations. We welcomed the news. On human rights and religious
freedom, we discussed ways in which we in the U.S. hope to convert
these irritants to a more positive force in U.S.-China relations. Vice
Minister Li and I spent a significant amount of time discussing South
Asia, including my just-concluded visit to Sri Lanka, India, and
Pakistan. These talks were aimed at continuing to lower the tensions
and promote peace and stability in that very important region.
As you can imagine, my calls on Foreign Minister Tang, Vice Premier
Qian, and Vice President Hu were especially important for underscoring
the broad areas in which our two great nations cooperate on a daily
basis. I am encouraged by all my Chinese hosts' strong commitment to
standing with us in the international fight against terrorism. In each
call, we talked of opportunities and shared hopes for stronger
relations in the future. Of course, we also exchanged views on areas
in which we did not see eye to eye. On every issue, these exchanges
were constructive as well as candid.
QUESTION: Is there any linkage between your visit and the ongoing
Iraqi Foreign Minister visit to China? Did you have an exchange of
views with the Chinese officials that you met on the Iraq issue? Thank
you.
ARMITAGE: There was nothing but coincidence in the Iraqi Foreign
Minister's and my visit here. I was informed by our Chinese friends
here this morning that the Iraqi foreign minister was in town.
I think the second part of your question was, did the Chinese and I
exchange views on Iraq? Yes, we did.
QUESTION: My question is about whether you have talked with the
Chinese leaders about the Taiwan issue. Do you think Chen Shuibian's
"one side and one country" opinion will have some bad influence on
President Jiang Zemin's visit to the U.S. Thank you.
ARMITAGE: Well, of course we discussed the issue of Taiwan. In my
opening statement I referred to issues on which we agreed and issues
on which we didn't agree. Of course it's well known that we don't
entirely agree on the issue of Taiwan. The statements of President
Chen Shuibian on August 3rd were a subject of our discussions. The
U.S. view has been put forward by spokesmen from the State Department
and the White House. That is that the U.S. does not support Taiwan
independence and I don't think that those statements of August 3rd
will in any way interfere with the third summit between President Bush
and President Jiang Zemin.
QUESTION: Could you please tell us the substance of your talks with
the Vice President, Hu Jintao?
ARMITAGE: In general I can. We exchanged pleasantries and mutual
respects between the Vice President and our Vice President, Dick
Cheney. Vice President Cheney has accepted a return visit under the
invitation of Vice President Hu Jintao for some time in the future. I
was able to convey his best respects and good wishes. We did talk
about the Taiwan question. We talked at length about areas in which we
not only can cooperate but areas in which we need to cooperate, such
as the World Summit on Sustainable Development which is going to take
place in Johannesburg. We also talked about South Asia and the
absolute need for China and the U.S. to continue our efforts to try to
contain the difficulties and lower the tensions.
QUESTION: On the subject of proliferation, now that China has
published these export controls and the list of dual-use technologies
subject to restriction, will the U.S. now go ahead with its part of
the November 2000 agreement and begin issuing permits for U.S.
satellites to be launched in China? Or, is there now going to be a
period in which the U.S. watches how these regulations are implemented
and enforced before doing that?
ARMITAGE: Well, part of the November 2000 agreement also, from the
U.S. point of view, required certain punishment for people who had
engaged in these sanctioned activities. What we did agree to do is to
have our experts get together as soon as humanly possible on our side,
this would be Assistant Secretary John Wolf, to not only fully
understand the regulations and enforcement mechanism but to talk about
a way forward. We view this as a positive step and a positive
development, and I hope that the talks that will be coming in the very
near future will lead to the undoing of some of those licenses which
have been held up.
QUESTION: Have you seen the list of the technologies and the products
that are covered under these regulations? If so, do they meet your
requirements or are there important technologies that aren't even on
the list?
ARMITAGE: During my meeting this morning with Vice Foreign Minister Li
he gave me the export regulations. Unfortunately for me, they were in
Chinese. So the answer to your question is, I've seen them but I
didn't understand them. I suspect that our folks are poring over them
right now. Someone who is much more expert on the ins and outs will be
able to give you a much more considered answer.
QUESTION: Sorry, but is that the list or is that just the regulations
and the list of the products will be coming?
ARMITAGE: I heard that that is the case but as I say I didn't tear
through it. It was quite thick and I had ongoing discussions.
QUESTION: You just mentioned that you discussed the issue of South
Asia with the Chinese leadership. How did the Chinese respond and what
was your view of this?
ARMITAGE: Well, in the first instance I thanked the Chinese side for
the strenuous efforts of President Jiang Zemin at Almaty a couple of
months ago to try to lower the temperatures, along with the efforts of
President Putin. Of course, the United States has been involved
throughout. I don't think there's any difference of opinion on the
absolute need to contain the tensions and try to bring about a better
situation. We know the historical relationships between China and
Pakistan. We did note that the present relationship between India and
China is better than it has been in the past and we certainly expect
that to continue. For our part, we are going to continue to consult
closely with the Chinese as we move forward and continue our
involvement surrounding the tensions in South Asia.
QUESTION: There have been many times since Mr. Bush was elected when
the mood in Washington seemed rather anti-Chinese. A lot of questions
have been raised about China. Even many in the administration are very
suspicious about the Chinese. The way you describe your visit, it's
like you're best friends. Can you talk a bit about this?
ARMITAGE: Well, I would note that whether you're in Beijing or whether
you're in Washington, there are voices who are not as favorable to the
relationship. It's not a phenomenon that's limited to Washington. I
note that President Bush has three times now, or will soon with
Crawford, have met with the leadership of China. Secretary Powell has
had significant interactions with his foreign minister counterpart;
Vice President Cheney with Vice President Hu Jintao. I think the
senior leadership of the United States is quite intent on developing a
good, solid relationship with the People's Republic of China. This is
not to deny that there are voices occasionally that question this
relationship in Washington and beyond in our country. Just as it's not
to deny that there are voices here in Beijing that question the
worthwhile nature of the relationship with the United States.
I don't think that your characterization of us as having had a
conversation as if we're the best of friends...(inaudible). Some of us
have been dealing with the Chinese leadership for 20-odd years, so
there is a certain basis of understanding. Even when we disagree, I
think there's enough, as we say here in Beijing, mutual trust and
confidence, to know that we can disagree without being disagreeable.
QUESTION: Did the U.S. side have any input into the drafting of the
export controls which have been issued here? Was anything presented by
the U.S. side that the U.S. would like to see happen?
ARMITAGE: We certainly have had discussions. John Wolf and
Undersecretary Bolton have had discussions with their Chinese
counterparts. Whether they actually turned over a list I can't say.
DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY KEYSER: I think it's modeled on the MTCR
(Missile Technology Control Regime) guidelines.
ARMITAGE: There it is. And the answer is that it's modeled on the MTCR
guidelines.
QUESTION: A second question, did China and the United States see eye
to eye with regard to the countries that should not get this kind of
technology or is there disagreement regarding to Iran or Pakistan?
ARMITAGE: First of all, the United States is in the midst of
developing quite a good congenial, constructive relationship with
Pakistan. We didn't, in my discussions, get into individual countries
and eligibility for different technology.
QUESTION: Just a follow-up on the proliferation issue. In the months
that the U.S. and China were going back and forth about the November
2000 agreement, after the November 2000 agreement, the subject of
grandfathering existing contracts came up. Is that issue now behind
both sides, and how has it been dealt with?
ARMITAGE: I did not discuss it today. Much more time was spent on the
regional issues. From our point of view, grandfathering was not on.
This is one of the things that Assistant Secretary Wolf is going to
have to discuss when he arrives here in Beijing. Or, perhaps we'll
meet in New York. Wherever we can do it, as quickly as possible, with
the Chinese.
QUESTION: (Inaudible)
ARMITAGE: Between the United States and the Shanghai Cooperation
Organization? With China? Oh, absolutely. The question had to do with
counter-terrorism cooperation and whether there was anything to expect
in the U.S.-China relationship regarding counter-terrorism. We're
going to have, I believe it's our second meeting on terrorist
financing. We're about to have a discussion about container handling
security and container security. The Chinese side noted with
satisfaction the U.S. determination to put the ETIM (East Turkestan
Islamic Movement) on the foreign terrorist list, something we've had
discussions with China about over the past several months. So, I think
we certainly noted with satisfaction the cooperation we had in
Washington, where, with China's assistance, we put together U.N.
Security Council Resolution 1373, which covered the matter of
terrorist financing. All in all, I think the counter-terrorism
cooperation is a pretty good picture for the U.S. and for China.
QUESTION: The road to the release of these regulations on missiles
today has been slow and rather bumpy, with some charges along the way
that China continued to export this sort of technology. Given that
background, how would you assess the significance of what happened
yesterday? Does it mean the U.S. is still extremely wary and cautious?
Or, this is a new chapter, and things are much better?
ARMITAGE: I don't know how a guy who can't read Chinese could
characterize just what was contained on the list. Being a
non-technical person myself, I don't think I can characterize us as
being wary of it, or cautious. We're businesslike in our approach to
the problems of export controls and proliferation. I certainly see
this as an effort on China's part to move forward, and I fervently
hope that that's what our experts will determine. I suspect they will.
But I don't care to characterize.
QUESTION: Could you brief us a little bit more about what kind of
talks you had on Iraq? Especially, have you touched upon the
possibility of a U.S. attack on Iraq?
ARMITAGE: I discussed the fact that Iraq left untended, we felt, was a
threat to us and to Iraq's neighbors. I discussed some of our
President's comments, to the effect that he has all options before him
and he's made no decisions. I discussed, with our Chinese friends, the
fact that we will consult with them as we move forward, and that no
final decisions have been made now. Finally, we discussed sort of the
theory of having U.N. Security Council Resolutions existent, and the
specter of a nation basically thumbing their nose at the United
Nations Security Council, and what this augured for the body.
QUESTION: You mentioned the ETIM, and discussed putting it on the
terrorist list. Does this mean that the U.S. considers the ETIM to be
a terrorist organization, and would support putting it on a list of
terrorist organizations?
ARMITAGE: We did.
QUESTION: You already have?
ARMITAGE: Yes. It's done. It was done several days ago. We also
discussed, I might add, not only the fact that we put the ETIM on the
terrorist list, but the need, as China moved forward itself, in the
very difficult counter-terrorism fight with the ETIM, that there's
absolute necessity to respect minority rights, particularly the
Uighurs, in this case.
QUESTION: I would like to follow up on the BBC question about ETIM.
Maybe you could tell us what ETIM stands for. Chinese officials in
Xinjiang have actually said that there is no room for a peaceful
independence movement, any sort of independence movement, in Xinjiang
for the Uighurs. So, if the U.S. government is classifying the
non-peaceful independence movement as a terrorist organization, where
does that leave any independence movement?
ARMITAGE: The ETIM is the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement. After
careful study we judged that it was a terrorist group, that it
committed acts of violence against unarmed civilians without any
regard for who was hurt. I'm not sure what the second part of your
question was.
QUESTION: Basically, no peaceful resistance is allowed in Xinjiang, so
from a human rights point of view, if no peaceful resistance is
allowed, and we classified the unpeaceful resistance as terrorism,
what is left for anyone who wants independence?
ARMITAGE: I think I tried to make clear that as we discussed with our
Chinese hosts, the placement of ETIM on the terrorist list, we also
discussed the need to respect minority rights, particularly the
Uighurs, and recognize that this is difficult, but it's absolutely
necessary, as we move forward.
QUESTION: (Translated.) Ever since Chen Shuibian made the statement
about one country on each side of the Straits, the United States has
not really commented on that statement. Why is that?
ARMITAGE: We have indeed commented. The United States said, in
response to that, both from the State Department spokesperson's desk,
as well as the White House, that the United States does not support
Taiwan independence.
QUESTION: (Translated.) (Inaudible)...the difference of opinion
between Bush and Jiang Zemin...(inaudible)...image of Chen Shuibian,
whether these differences...(inaudible)...can be
resolved...(inaudible)...by the next summit?
ARMITAGE: I think I understood the question to be, would the
differences of opinion between Mr. Bush and President Jiang Zemin be
resolved before the next summit?
QUESTION: (Inaudible)
ARMITAGE: I don't think I can comment on the image of President Chen
Shuibian. I think I would note that Taiwan is one of the questions
that, I think everyone knows, we have a difference of opinion with our
Chinese friends on. It's a situation that has existed for a long time.
I made it clear that our own approach to relations is based on our
One-China Policy, the Three Communiqués, and the Taiwan Relations Act,
and note that all of our activities are predicated on China's
continuation of the policy of peaceful resolution of the question,
when we certainly expect that to continue to be the policy of the
People's Republic of China.
QUESTION: You just mentioned that the administration doesn't support
Taiwan independence. Can you explain why the administration is taking
a position on the final outcome in the Taiwan Strait? And, what could
happen if, this would shock us all but, if the people on both sides of
the Strait decided that Taiwan could go independent? Would Washington
continue not to support Taiwan independence? Could you flesh out this
policy a little more, so we'd understand it more?
ARMITAGE: The wording is important. By saying we do not support, it's
one thing. It's different from saying we oppose it. If people on both
sides of the Strait came to an agreeable solution, then the United
States obviously wouldn't inject ourselves. Hence, we use the term we
don't "support" it. But it's something to be resolved by the people on
both sides of the question.
QUESTION: Describe your remarks regarding Iraq. Could you tell us a
bit about what you heard in response from the Chinese side?
ARMITAGE: No, I think that's for our Chinese friends to say.
QUESTION: Can I just ask, then, whether you were surprised by anything
that you heard from that side?
ARMITAGE: No, I was not.
QUESTION: (Inaudible) What kind of pressure did China and America make
on the ETIM issue?
ARMITAGE: On the ETIM issue? The cooperation is, we have put them on
the foreign terrorist list. This will, we believe, have some effect on
helping to dry up the funds that exist for this movement, therefore
making it much more difficult for the movement to continue to engage
in violence. We notice that when the United States put the LTTE of Sri
Lanka on the foreign terrorists list, a short time later it became
very much more difficult for them to act with the same impunity in Sri
Lanka. Hence, there's been a movement, or at least the beginnings of a
glimmer, of hope for peace in Sri Lanka. One would hope that the same
type of result would be here.
QUESTION: (Inaudible)
ARMITAGE: LTTE, what? (Inaudible question) No, not by the United
States.
QUESTION: By the government of Sri Lanka?
ARMITAGE: No, the government of Sri Lanka, which we support, can make
any decision they want regarding -- they've got the nearest equities.
For our part, the United States' part, the LTTE remains on the list.
QUESTION: Were you able to discuss China's position on North Korean
asylum seekers? I'm not sure if you're aware that today, seven North
Koreans were arrested outside the Foreign Ministry?
ARMITAGE: We discussed the question of North Korea, the fact that both
the United States and China share an interest in continued stability
on the peninsula of Korea. I was unaware of that incident, the seven
to which you refer. That did not come up in my talks today.
Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much.
(end transcript)
(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S.
Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
