[Congressional Record Volume 146, Number 125 (Tuesday, October 10, 2000)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10129-S10133]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                CHINA'S THREAT TO U.S. NATIONAL SECURITY

  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, I would like to talk about something this 
afternoon that I think is of great importance to this country and one 
of the biggest challenges we are going to face in the coming years; 
that is, the challenge of how the United States manages our 
relationships with countries that potentially present threats to our 
national security.
  While few would like to admit it, I think China cannot be omitted 
from this scrutiny, and I, therefore, would like to discuss that 
question with respect to China today.
  As my colleagues know, it was not long ago that the bill to grant 
permanent normal trade status to China passed through the Senate 
without amendment. I voted for this bill because I recognize the 
economic benefits it will have for many American workers, businesses, 
and consumers. That said, it is of utmost importance that we not lose 
sight of the fact that trade alone does not define our relationship 
with China. The actions and the heated rhetoric of China's communist 
leaders should be of great concern. So now, in the aftermath of our 
recent decision to grant PNTR to China, we are obligated to face the 
other challenges presented by the communist Chinese government.
  Time and time again, Chinese officials and state-sponsored media have 
made bellicose and threatening statements aimed at the United States 
and our long-standing, democratic ally, Taiwan. They have even gone so 
far as to issue implied threats to use nuclear weapons against the 
United States. The question is, will we take them at their word on 
these defense matters as we did when they made trade commitments.
  For example, in 1995, General Xiong Guangkai warned a visiting U.S. 
official that China could use military force to prevent Taiwan's 
gaining independence without fear of U.S. intervention because American 
leaders ``care more about Los Angeles than they do about Taiwan.'' An 
editorial in a military-owned newspaper this March was more blunt, 
warning that, ``The United States will not sacrifice 200 million 
Americans for 20 million Taiwanese.''
  In February of this year, a state-owned paper again warned the United 
States against becoming involved in a conflict with China over Taiwan. 
The People's Liberation Army Daily carried an article which stated, 
``On the Taiwan issue, it is very likely that the United States will 
walk to the point where it injures others while ruining itself.'' The 
article went on to issue a veiled threat to attack the U.S. with long-
range missiles, stating, ``China is neither Iraq or Yugoslavia * * * it 
is a country that has certain abilities of launching a strategic 
counterattack and the capacity of launching a long-distance strike. 
Probably it is not a wise move to be at war with a country such as 
China, a point which U.S. policymakers know fairly well also.''
  Not only has China warned against U.S. military intervention in the 
event that Taiwan declares its independence, Chinese officials have 
also issued threats against U.S. sale of theater missile defenses (TMD) 
to Taiwan. In February 1999, China's top arms control official, Sha 
Zukang, was interviewed by a reporter for the publication Defense News. 
When asked if U.S. assistance on theater missile defense for Japan, 
South Korea and possibly Taiwan could cause damage to U.S.-China 
relations, he replied, ``If the U.S. is bent on its own way on this 
issue, it will not, to put it lightly, be conducive to the development 
of legitimate self-defense needs of relevant countries.'' When further 
questioned about theater missile defense for Taiwan, he stated, ``In 
the case of Taiwan, my God, that's really the limit. It constitutes a 
serious infringement of China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. 
It also represents a deliberate move on the part of the United States 
to provoke the entire Chinese people. Such a move will bring severe 
consequences.'' (Emphasis added) According to the Washington Post in 
July, that same Chinese official warned that the sale of U.S. 
technology to Taiwan for a smaller scope theater missile defense system 
would ``lead to serious confrontation'' because it would be tantamount 
to restoring a military alliance between Taipei and Washington. He 
stated, ``This is of supreme national interest. It will be defended at 
any cost.'' (Emphasis added)
  These are not examples of isolated threats. They are a small sample 
of the bellicose statements that China's government has made recently. 
I have compiled dozens of such statements and am disappointed at the 
sparse attention they have received. Mr. President, I have compiled a 
document containing 14 pages of threats issued by communist Chinese 
officials. It is by no means a comprehensive compendium of such 
statements, and is merely a sample. I ask unanimous consent that it be 
printed in the Record at the conclusion of my statement.
  The PRESIDENT OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See Exhibit 1.)
  Mr. KYL. Mr. President, the rhetoric from Beijing has also been 
accompanied by troubling actions. China has long-range nuclear-tipped 
missiles targeted at American cities, and is already increasing its 
arsenal of such weapons. It is greatly increasing the number of short-
range missiles aimed at Taiwan, and has taken steps to improve its 
ability to invade or blockade the island.
  China has also been the world's worst proliferator of missiles and 
weapons of mass destruction. It has sold ballistic missile technology 
to Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya, and Pakistan, despite promising to 
adhere to the Missile Technology Control Regime. It has sold nuclear 
technology to Iran and Pakistan. It has aided Iran's chemical

[[Page S10130]]

weapons program and sold that nation advanced cruise missiles. Because 
of China's assistance to rogue nations and its military advances, the 
American people, and our forces and friends abroad, face a much greater 
threat.

  Mr. President, as we craft effective national security policies for 
the United States, it's important that we look for warning signs of 
problems. As Winston Churchill said, in his ``Iron Curtain'' speech in 
1946, less than one year after the end of World War II, ``Last time, I 
saw it all coming and I cried aloud to my own fellow-countrymen and to 
the world, but no one paid any attention. Up till the year 1933 or even 
1935, Germany might have been saved from the awful fate which has 
overtaken her * * * There never was a war in all history easier to 
prevent by timely action than the one which has just desolated such 
great areas of the globe * * * but no one would listen * * * We surely 
must not let that happen again.''
  Now, more than 50 years later, we live in a very different world. The 
collapse of the Soviet empire, the spread of democracy and civil 
society in Eastern Europe and the Baltics, and the emergence of the 
United States as the sole-surviving superpower could lead some to 
mistakenly assume that the world is no longer a dangerous place.
  To the contrary, the threats we face today are even more complex and 
harder to predict than those we faced during and before the Cold War. 
We must now be more clear than ever in our own minds about our 
strategic intentions, and just as clear in signaling these to our 
potential aggressors.
  Obviously, China is not Nazi Germany, and it presents different 
challenges, yet the message delivered by Churchill about the need to 
heed warning signs is timeless. Many are quick to dismiss the rhetoric 
from Beijing as empty threats. This could be true, but I believe we 
must be prepared for another possibility--what if China's leaders mean 
what they say?
  China's proliferation of the technology for ballistic missiles and 
weapons of mass destruction has increased the threat faced by the 
United States and our allies. China is increasing the size and 
capabilities of its strategic nuclear force targeted on the United 
States. And furthermore, China has tried to use the threat of missile 
attack to coerce the United States into staying out of any future 
conflict in the Taiwan Strait.
  These are but three of the many compelling reasons why we need a 
national missile defense system to protect the United States and to 
guarantee our freedom of action. I disagree with those who claim 
China's objection to our proposed national missile defense, NMD, system 
will lead to an arms race with that country. As Secretary of Defense 
William Cohen testified to the Senate in July of this year, ``I think 
it's fair to say that China, irrespective of what we do on NMD, will in 
fact, modernize and increase its ICBM capability.'' Of course, that is 
precisely what China has done. Left with this reality, we have no 
option but to deploy a national missile defense system that will 
protect the United States.
  Frankly, I am disappointed that for the last eight years, the 
Clinton-Gore Administration has failed to pursue the most promising 
forms of missile defense and has underfunded the limited programs it 
has authorized due to loyalty to the ABM Treaty. For example, one of 
the Administration's first decisions in early 1993 was to return 
unopened proposals the Defense Department had requested from three 
teams of companies that had bid to develop a ground-based national 
missile defense interceptor. In 1993, the Clinton Administration also 
cut the budget for missile defense for fiscal year 1994 by $2.5 billion 
over the amount requested in President Bush's final budget, and has 
continued to underfund missile defense programs every year.
  I believe that the ABM Treaty is obsolete. It was made with an entity 
that no longer exists. In the words of former Secretary of State Henry 
Kissinger, this treaty ``constrains the nation's missile defense 
programs to an intolerable degree in the day and age when ballistic 
missiles are so attractive to so many countries.'' Dr. Kissinger has 
also stated that, ``Deliberate vulnerability when the technologies are 
available to avoid it cannot be a strategic objective, cannot be a 
political objective, and cannot be a moral objective of any American 
President.'' We must not allow loyalty to an outdated piece of paper 
called the ABM Treaty to stand in the way of a sound defense given the 
threats we face.
  In addition to the deployment of a national missile defense system, 
it is important for the United States to use the full range of economic 
and diplomatic tools to halt China's proliferation of the technology 
for missiles and weapons of mass destruction. I believe the Senate 
missed an opportunity when we failed to pass an amendment offered by 
Senator Thompson to combat this problem. I hope this legislation will 
be considered and passed next year. In addition, we need to ensure that 
strong export controls on U.S.-made products are in place so we don't 
inadvertently help China modernize its military.
  It remains to be seen whether the rhetoric from Beijing will become 
reality, but in light of China's troubling actions, prudence demands 
that we take steps to address China's behavior. We ignored warnings in 
the past and paid a high price. We surely must not let it happen again.

Threatening or Bellicose Statements by Chinese Officials or Drawn From 
                        Official State-Run Media


                  MISSILE THREAT TO THE UNITED STATES

       The PLA could use military force to prevent Taiwan's 
     gaining independence without fear of U.S. intervention, 
     because American leaders, ``care more about Los Angeles than 
     they do about Taiwan.''--Remark by an officer in the People's 
     Liberation Army (PLA) to former Assistant Secretary of 
     Defense, Chas Freeman, Jr., ``As China Threatens Taiwan, It 
     Makes Sure U.S. Listens,'' New York Times, January 24, 1996.
       ``On the Taiwan issue, it is very likely that the United 
     States will walk to the point where it injures others while 
     ruining itself. As is known to all, if the `Taiwan 
     independence' elements openly and brazenly advocate 
     separatism, the PRC government will be forced to resort to 
     the use of force ultimately to resolve the Taiwan issue. Once 
     the cross-strait war breaks out, the U.S. government will 
     face a dilemma: If it chooses not to intervene, the United 
     States has to consider the `Taiwan Relations Act;' besides, 
     U.S. allies will doubt whether the promises made by the 
     United States will hold. If the United States chooses to 
     engage in substantial interventions, U.S. policymakers will 
     be left with no choice but to consider the possible enormous 
     pressure to endure and the possible exorbitant price to pay. 
     China is neither Iraq or Yugoslavia, but a very special 
     country: on one hand, China is a permanent member of the U.N. 
     Security Council; on the other hand, it is a country that has 
     certain abilities of launching a strategic counterattack and 
     the capacity of launching a long-distance strike. Probably it 
     is not a wise move to be at war with a country such as China, 
     a point which U.S. policymakers know fairly well also.--
     ``Safeguarding the One-China Policy is the Cornerstone of 
     Peace in the Taiwan Strait--Splitting the Motherland by 
     `Taiwan Independence' Elements is Bound to provoke a War,'' 
     People's Liberation Army Daily, February 28, 2000. (Emphasis 
     added.)
       ``The United States will not sacrifice 200 million 
     Americans for 20 million Taiwanese.''--Excerpt from article 
     in Chinese state-owned Haowangjiao Weekly, ``Chinese Military 
     Paper Warns Taiwan and U.S.,'' as reported by Philadelphia 
     Inquirer, March 21, 2000.
       ``China is a country that has certain abilities of 
     launching a strategic counterattack and the capacity of 
     launching a long-distance strike. [If the United States 
     intervenes in Taiwan it would lose the conflict and] even be 
     forced to have a complete withdrawal from the East Asian 
     region as they were forced to withdrawal from southern 
     Vietnam.''--Commentary in the People's Liberation Army Daily, 
     ``Threat By China Downplayed,'' Philadelphia Inquirer, March 
     1, 2000.
       ``Entitled, `The United States Will Suffer Disastrous 
     Blows,' the signed article [in a Chinese military journal] 
     quotes an expert as saying that if the United States dares to 
     obstruct China's reunification, China is bound to employ its 
     nuclear weapons, and that for the sake of its national 
     interests, China has made full preparations to fight a 
     nuclear war with the United States.''--``Beijing Military 
     Journal: Nuclear War Will Certainly Break Out If United 
     States Gets Involved,'' Hong Kong Sing Tao Jih Pao, April 11, 
     2000.


                            MISSILE DEFENSE

       In reference to provisions in the Fiscal Year (FY) 1999 
     Defense Authorization Act regarding theater missile defense 
     cooperation with allies in East Asia: ``The US Congress has 
     gravely violated the fundamental norms of international 
     relations, interfered in China's internal affairs and 
     seriously hurt the feelings of the Chinese people.''--Chinese 
     Foreign Ministry Spokesman Tang Guiqiang, ``Beijing Rains 
     fury on Defense Umbrella,'' South China Morning Post, October 
     30, 1998
       When asked if U.S. insistence on theater missile defense 
     for Japan, South Korea and possibly Taiwan could cause 
     irreparable damage to US-Sino ties, he replied, ``If the

[[Page S10131]]

     U.S. is bent on its own way on this issue, it will not, to 
     put it lightly, be conducive to the development of legitimate 
     self-defense needs of relevant countries.'' When further 
     questioned about the TMD for Taiwan, he stated, ``In the case 
     of Taiwan, my God, that's really the limit. It constitutes a 
     serious infringement of China's sovereignty and territorial 
     integrity. It also represents a deliberate move on the part 
     of the United States to provoke the entire Chinese people. 
     Such a move will bring severe consequences.''--Ambassador Sha 
     Zukang, Director-General of the Chinese Foreign Ministry's 
     Department of Arms Control and Disarmament, Interview with 
     Defense News staff writer Barbara Opall-Rome, February 1, 
     1999.
       ``The US global strategy in Europe is to contain Russia's 
     revival and in Asia to contain China's growth, and is to 
     preserve US hegemony in the world . . . [NMD is a] hangover 
     from the Cold War . . . [the political cost of its deployment 
     will be] tremendous for the United States.''
       ``The rest of the world is wondering if the United States 
     could break the treaty it signed, shouldn't other countries 
     do the same? In other words, the United States will set an 
     example for others to dump other arms-reduction agreements if 
     it presses forward with NMD.''--Remarks by Luo Yuan, Director 
     of the Second Office of Strategy Studies, Chinese Academy of 
     Military Science, ``Experts: US plan could start new arms 
     race,'' China Daily, August 16, 2000.
       In reference to a national missile defense system: ``We 
     believe this idea of the United States will inevitably 
     support a new round of arms race and will compromise 
     international peace and stability. This issue is by no means 
     a dispute between China and the United States, but between 
     the United States and the international community.''--Remark 
     from Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan, ``Asian Forum 
     Ends in Chorus of Criticism of U.S. Missile Defense Plan,'' 
     Washington Post, July 30, 2000.
       ``China's government is standing up to U.S. attempts to set 
     up both a national anti-ballistic missile system and a 
     theater of war anti-ballistic missile system. Attempts [by 
     the U.S.] to make Taiwan join the creation and unveiling of a 
     theater of war anti-ballistic missile system are a serious 
     interference into China's internal affairs and will 
     necessarily be seriously repulsed by the Chinese people.''--
     Remark by Chinese Defense Minister Chi Haotian, press 
     conference, January 17, 2000.
       ``For its own defense needs, if the United States wants to 
     develop a [theater missile defense] system, that's its own 
     business. What we don't want to see is TMD covering Taiwan. 
     That would . . . damage U.S.-China . . . relations.''--
     Remarks by an unidentified senior Chinese official quoted in 
     the Washington Post, January 27, 2000.
       Placing TMD in Taiwan ``seriously infringes on China's 
     sovereignty and territorial integrity and will certainly meet 
     with strong opposition from the Chinese people.''--Remark 
     from Chinese Embassy spokesman Cui Jianjun, ``Chinese Warn 
     U.S. on Defense; Missile Umbrella Would Aid Taiwan,'' The 
     Washington Times, March 6, 1999.
       ``The inclusion of Taiwan into the theater-missile defense 
     system will severely harm the stability of the region, and 
     finally threaten bilateral relations.''--``Chinese Warn U.S. 
     on Defense; Missile Umbrella Would Aid Taiwan,'' Washington 
     Times, March 6, 1999.


                              arms control

       ``Any amendment, or abolishing of the [ABM] treaty, will 
     lead to disastrous consequences. This will bring a halt to 
     nuclear disarmament now between the Russians and Americans, 
     and in the future will halt multilateral disarmament as 
     well.''
       ``We are not rejecting the concept of missile defense 
     completely, such as air defense to protect troops. But it is 
     the advanced systems, in space and elsewhere, that are the 
     problem. These are a violation of the ABM Treaty. These may 
     disturb or destroy the strategic balance.''
       ``[The] United States . . . has been teaching the 
     international community that the ABM Treaty, though 
     bilateral, is a cornerstone for strategic stability, that 
     it's a precondition for further nuclear disarmament. Now 
     suddenly they are attempting to amend it and threaten to 
     abolish it. We have no words for this. Should we assume that 
     the United States monopolizes all the truth in the world? 
     This cannot be the case, I believe. So this will erode U.S. 
     authority and credibility.''--Excerpts of Remarks by Sha 
     Zukang, Chinese Director-General of the Arms Control and 
     Disarmament of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, press 
     interview, November 10, 1999.
       ``This decision by the United States [deployment of an NMD 
     system] goes against the trend of the times and is 
     detrimental to international arms control and disarmament 
     efforts. It will have an extensive and profound negative 
     impact on the global and regional strategic balance and 
     stability in the 21st Century. The Chinese side expresses 
     serious concern.''
       ``The Chinese side expresses serious concern over this 
     [U.S. deployment of NMD]. China believes that the 
     development, deployment, and transfer of anti-missile systems 
     with strategic defense potential will not enhance security or 
     curb missile technology proliferation. On the contrary, it 
     will only undermine security, and spur missile technology 
     proliferation. Moreover, it violates the Anti-Ballistic 
     Missile Treaty. The ABM Treaty is of great significance for 
     safeguarding the global strategic balance and stability and 
     for maintaining the momentum in the nuclear disarmament 
     process. It should be observed strictly.''
       ``This [the UN General Assembly resolution on the ABM 
     Treaty] demonstrates the international community's near-
     unanimous opposition to or disapproval of the attempts by 
     relevant countries to revise the ABM Treaty or to develop 
     anti-missile systems. China urges relevant countries to take 
     a serious approach toward the strong appeal from the 
     international community, think carefully before making any 
     move, and abandon the aforementioned programs for developing 
     anti-missile systems.''--Excerpts of Remarks by Chinese 
     Foreign Ministry Spokesman Zhu Bangzao, press conference, 
     January 13, 2000.
       ``The creation of such a system is strictly prohibited by 
     the ABM. Russia and China have suggested that the United 
     States is motivated by the ambition to gain unilateral 
     superiority in the military sphere and in security issues. 
     The realization of such a plan would undermine the security 
     of not only Russia, China and other countries, but also the 
     security of the US itself and global strategic stability in 
     the world. That is why China and Russia resolutely oppose the 
     plan.''
       ``The collapse of the ABM would lead to a resumption of the 
     arms race. Such a situation is not in the interests of any 
     country. Those countries, which support the US' proposal to 
     modify the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, would be held 
     responsible for undermining international stability and 
     security and for all the consequences of that decision.''--
     Excerpts from the joint statement of Russian President, 
     Vladimir Putin, and Chinese President, Jiang Zemin, July 21, 
     2000.
       When asked if China is setting the stage to recant on 
     commitments to the Chemical Weapons Convention, he replied, 
     ``What we object to is the existence of the Australia Group, 
     a smaller, more stricter group of nations with its own legal 
     provisions that have created a de facto split among to the 
     Convention. This has caused confusion, has undermined the 
     Convention, and has affected the normal international trade 
     of chemicals. This problem is compounded by the seemingly 
     irresistible inclination of certain countries to impose their 
     own standards or even their own domestic legislation onto 
     other countries, thus giving rise to unnecessary 
     international disputes.''
       ``There are only two ways I see to rectify this situation: 
     One is to do away with the Australia Group and the other is 
     to do away with the Chemical Weapons Convention.''--
     Ambassador Sha Zukang, Director-General of the Chinese 
     Foreign Ministry's Department of Arms Control and 
     Disarmament, Interview with Defense News staff writer Barbara 
     Opall-Rome, February 1, 1999.
       ``China will never be involved in any arms race at any 
     level. However, it has to consider necessary means to defend 
     its national security.''--Remark by Sha Zukang, Chinese 
     Director-General of the Arms Control and Disarmament 
     Department of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, reported by 
     Beijing China Daily, January 14, 2000.
       ``In pursuit of its own strategic interests and military 
     superiority and in disregard of the authority of the already 
     concluded international arms control legal instruments, a 
     certain country attempted to rectify the Anti-Ballistic 
     Missile Treaty. In light of this dangerous tendency, China, 
     Russia and Belarus co-sponsored the draft resolution of 
     Preserving and Observing the ABM Treaty which was adopted by 
     an overwhelming majority in the Committee of Disarmament and 
     International Security and the UN General Assembly 
     respectively. China's efforts to safeguard world peace and 
     security garnered the extensive support of the international 
     community.''--Excerpt of article by Chinese Foreign Minister 
     Tang Jiaxuan, posted on the official home page of the Chinese 
     Ministry of Foreign Affairs, January 14, 2000.
       ``We have always maintained that, as a country with 
     powerful military strength, the United States' development of 
     missile defense systems in violation of the Anti-Ballistic 
     Missile Treaty does not benefit global and regional strategic 
     balance and stability. I would like to point out once again 
     that the 54th UN General Assembly has passed, by an 
     overwhelming majority, a resolution on preserving and abiding 
     by the ABM Treaty, which shows that the international 
     community almost unanimously opposes or does not approve of 
     attempts by relevant countries to amend the ABM Treaty and 
     develop anti-ballistic missiles. We urge relevant countries 
     to take seriously the strong call of the international 
     community, to think carefully before acting, and to abandon 
     the aforementioned anti-ballistic missile plan.''--Remark by 
     Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesman Zhu Bangzao, press 
     conference, January 20, 2000.
       ``A certain country . . . practices expediency and double 
     standards toward arms control and disarmament agreements, 
     even trying to weaken or abolish relevant treaties.''
       ``The CTBT has been trampled on and faces an uncertain 
     future.''
       ``People cannot but ask: Do we prefer the common security 
     for all or the absolute security enjoyed by a single state at 
     the expense of all others?''--Excerpts of Remarks by Chinese 
     Ambassador Hu Xiaodi, speech to the 66-nation Conference on 
     Disarmament, January 27, 2000.
       ``In an attempt to seek absolute security for itself, a 
     certain country is stepping up its

[[Page S10132]]

     research, development and deployment of sophisticated anti-
     missile systems, even at the expense of violating the 
     international legal obligations to which it has committed 
     itself.''
       ``This move [U.S. violation of the ABM Treaty] will 
     undoubtedly inflict severe damages on global strategic 
     balance and stability, undermine the international security 
     environment, make it difficult to carry on the international 
     non-proliferation regime and may even trigger a new . . . 
     arms race.''
       ``For this, the international community cannot but express 
     deep apprehension.''
       ``China will never be a superpower or seek hegemony.''
       ``I hope that others will not overestimate Chinese 
     influence on North Korea.''--Remarks by Chinese Deputy 
     Foreign Minister Wang Guangya, Speech to the 36th Munich 
     Conference on Security Policy, February 6, 2000
       ``All these facts have demonstrated that China adopts a 
     clear-cut policy against the proliferation of WMD. This 
     policy will remain unchanged in the future.''
       ``[The U.S.] takes advantage of its economic and scientific 
     strength to develop a national missile defense system, in an 
     attempt to disrupt the global strategic balance, and to seek 
     absolute security and hegemony for itself.''
       ``It is a widely known fact that during the Cold War years, 
     the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty constituted a cornerstone 
     of global strategic stability, paving the way for the 
     limitation and reduction of offensive strategic weapons 
     between the United States and the former Soviet Union. 
     Despite the drastic changes in the international situation 
     following the end of the Cold War, the crucial role of the 
     ABM Treaty to international security remains unchanged. 
     Pending the elimination of nuclear weapons, any substantive 
     amendment to this treaty will undermine global strategic 
     stability.''
       ``It is true that what the ABM Treaty maintains is `the 
     balance of terror' and can only offer relative security--not 
     an ideal situation.'' ``[A]ny violation of this treaty is 
     bound to give rise to strong opposition from other countries, 
     and will inevitably have severe negative impacts on 
     international cooperation in arms control and non-
     proliferation.''
       ``Everyone is equal before the law. And treaty obligations 
     should be honored.''
       ``Yet one country takes a cynical view on arms control and 
     nonproliferation treaties and their legal obligations 
     undertaken therein.''
       ``The fundamental way to prevent the WMD proliferation lies 
     in the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of such 
     weapons.''--Excerpts of Remarks by Chinese Director General 
     of the Department of Arms Control and Disarmament of the 
     Ministry of Foreign Affairs Sha Zukang, interview with 
     Beijing Review, February 21, 2000


                                 TAIWAN

       ``Our policy on Taiwan is a consistent one. That is, one, 
     peaceful unification, one country-two systems. However, if 
     there were to be any foreign intervention, or if there were 
     to be Taiwan independence, then we would not undertake to 
     renounce the use of force.''--Remark by Chinese President 
     Jiang Zemin, exchange with reporters prior to discussions 
     with President Clinton, September 11, 1999
       This threat, reportedly on the front page of almost every 
     newspaper in Asia, was aimed at turning Taiwanese voters away 
     from opposition candidate Chen Shui-bian: ``Do not just act 
     on impulse. Otherwise you will regret it very much and it 
     will be too late to repent.''--Chinese Prime Minister Zhu 
     Rongji, ``Bully in a China Shop,'' The Wall Street Journal, 
     March 17, 2000
       . . . the sale of U.S. technology to Taiwan for a smaller-
     scope theater missile defense system would ``lead to serious 
     confrontation'' because it would be tantamount to restoring a 
     military alliance between Taipei and Washington. ``This is of 
     supreme national interest. It will be defended at any cost.''
       ``Instead of enhancing your security, your security policy 
     will be further compromised. The United States will play the 
     role of a fire brigade. Rushing from one place to another to 
     extinguish fires.''
       Asked if China would reconsider its commitment to nuclear 
     disarmament and a halt in sensitive weapons sales, Sha 
     responded, ``To say the least, our enthusiasm and our 
     participation in all of those regimes, particularly in 
     cooperating with the United States, our mood, let me say, 
     would be severely dampened.''
       When asked if a decision to deploy missile defenses would 
     also affect China's existing arms control treaties, Sha 
     responded, ``To say the least, it would seriously dampen our 
     interest . . . We have not yet reached a stage to say we will 
     forget our commitments . . . yet.''--Remarks by Chinese 
     Director General of the Foreign Ministry's Department of Arms 
     Control and Disarmament Sha Zukang, ``China: Missile Shield 
     Threatens Arms Control,'' Washington Post, July 13, 2000
       A U.S. shield against ballistic missiles would ``aim to 
     absorb Taiwan into the American sphere of protection, which 
     we consider a gross interference into China's domestic 
     affairs.''--Remark by Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji in Rome, 
     ``US Ready to Discuss Objections to its Missile Defense 
     Shield,'' Agence France Presse, July 6, 2000
       In reference to TMD: ``The system would aim to put Taiwan 
     in a sphere of protection. This would be blatant interference 
     in Chinese affairs.''--Remark by Chinese Prime Minister Zhu 
     Rongji, ``Taiwan May Get Antimissile Technology,'' Washington 
     Post, July 9, 2000
       ``If a grave turn of events occurs leading to the 
     separation of Taiwan from China in any name, or if there is 
     foreign invasion and occupation of Taiwan, or if Taiwan 
     authorities indefinitely refuse to peacefully resolve the 
     cross-strait unification problem through negotiations, then 
     the PRC government will only be forced to adopt all possible 
     drastic measures, including the use of force, to safeguard 
     China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, and fulfill 
     the great cause of China's unification.''--``The One China 
     Principle and the Taiwan Issue,'' English version published 
     by Xinhua, February 21, 2000
       Washington ``bears unshakeable responsibility for the 
     tension in the Taiwan Straits'' and it was vital the US 
     stopped arms sales to Taiwan.--Chinese Foreign Minister Tang 
     Jiaxuan, Agence France Presse, March 16, 2000
       The Chinese military made the statement that it would 
     ``spare no effort in a blood-soaked battle'' to protect 
     China's territorial integrity and that China would not be 
     tricked into negotiations with Taiwan leaders who secretly 
     apposed rejoining the motherland.
       Prime Minister Zhu Rongji stated that China ``will not sit 
     idly by and watch and serious separatist activity.''
       General Zhang Wannian, a top military leader, echoed this 
     thought stating, ``The two sides of the strait cannot remain 
     perpetually divided,'' and ``Taiwanese independence means 
     war.''--``China Army Renews Threat Against Taiwan,'' New York 
     Times, March 7, 2000.
       ``Taiwan Independence means war and splitting (with the 
     mainland) means no peace.''
       ``Anyone who pays no heed to this important information 
     from us and insists on Taiwan independence will push Taiwan 
     into the abyss of war and bring disaster to the Taiwan 
     people.''
       It warned those who ``underestimate the strong 
     determination of China's government and the People's 
     Liberation Army to safeguard national territorial integrity 
     and put at stake the happiness of 23 million Taiwanese people 
     that the great strength of the PLA will solve the Taiwan 
     problem.''
       ``The consequence will be worse than anything imaginable. 
     We are not willing to see that.''--Editorial in People's 
     Liberation Army Daily, Agence France Presse, ``China keeps up 
     war-rhetoric as Taiwan prepares changing of guard,'' April 
     15, 2000.
       ``If the Taiwan authorities indefinitely refuse to 
     peacefully settle the reunification issue through dialogue, 
     the Chinese government will be forced to adopt all possible 
     drastic measures, including military force.''
       Proposals to extend a theater missile defense system to 
     Taiwan are ``a gross interference in China's internal affairs 
     and a grave threat to China's security . . . no country 
     maintaining diplomatic relations with China should provide 
     arms to Taiwan or enter into military alliance of any form 
     with Taiwan.''--``White Paper issued by China's State 
     Council, as reported in Chicago Tribune, February 22, 2000.
       ``Beat them till they hurt, beat them till they obey, beat 
     them until they're scared! Beat them until the Taiwan 
     separatists admit total defeat''--An article carried on the 
     state-run Yangcheng Evening News' web site said this to 
     describe China's option of striking Taiwan with missiles and 
     warplanes, ``China Goes to War with Words Against Taiwan,'' 
     AP, July 26, 1999.
       ``We must make it crystal clear. No matter who comes to 
     power in Taiwan, Taiwan will never be allowed to be 
     independent. This is our bottom line. This is also the will 
     of the 1.25 billion Chinese people.''
       Dismissing widely held views by foreign military analysts 
     that China lacks enough aircraft, missiles and ships to 
     attack Taiwan, Zhu said, ``By such calculations, Hitler would 
     long ago have conquered the whole world. The Chinese people 
     will use all their blood and even sacrifice their lives to 
     defend the unity of our motherland and the dignity of the 
     Chinese nation.'' Zhu accused U.S. political leadership of 
     delaying China's unification with Taiwan, declaring, ``They 
     always have taken China as their imaginary or potential enemy 
     and have always wanted to use Taiwan, which in their view is 
     an unsinkable aircraft carrier, to oppose China.''--Remarks 
     from Chinese Premier Zhu Rongji, ``Chinese Premier Warns U.S. 
     Over Taiwan, PNTR Vote,'' National Journal's Congress Daily, 
     March 15, 2000.
       ``A handful of American politicians, who are holding a Cold 
     War mentality, have pushed the House to pass the act in an 
     attempt to provide a legal basis for the buildup and 
     expansion of military contacts and exchanges between the 
     United States and Taiwan.''
       The Taiwan Security Enhancement Act is ``a complete 
     violation of the three Sino-U.S. joint communiques, a serious 
     encroachment on China's sovereignty, a gross interference in 
     China's internal affairs, and an attempt to make `two 
     Chinas'.''--Remarks by Chinese Ambassador to the United 
     States Li Zhaoxing, ChinaOnline, February 3, 2000.
       ``Although a handful of U.S. legislators claim that the 
     Taiwan Security Enhancement Act was aimed at `protecting' 
     Taiwan's `security,' their real motive is to split China, and 
     prevent China from becoming stronger . . . some U.S. 
     lawmakers have ignored International Law and tried to make 
     legislation on the `security' of another country's

[[Page S10133]]

     territory, and this has fully exposed the arrogance of the 
     U.S. hegemonists.''--Editorial in the People's Daily, as 
     reported by ChinaOnline, February 3, 2000.
       ``The move [Taiwan's effort to join the United Nations] 
     constitutes a flagrant violation of the purposes and 
     principles of the U.N. Charter, a distortion of the nature of 
     the U.N. and a gross interference in China's internal 
     affairs.''--Remark by Zhu Bangzao, Spokesman for the Chinese 
     Foreign Ministry, ``China Objects to Taiwan Leader's U.S. 
     Visa,'' New York Times, August 5, 2000.
       ``If we were to take military action, it should be sooner 
     rather than later.''--Jiang Zemin, ``Act soon if force is 
     needed, says Jiang,'' South China Morning Post, March 28, 
     2000.
       ``At the special Politburo meeting called on the evening of 
     the election, what the senior cadres were debating was not 
     whether some degree of force would be used against Taiwan, 
     but when.''--``Military pressure builds over Taiwan,'' South 
     China Morning Post, March 29, 2000.
       ``The [recently-acquired] Sovremenny destroyer is equipped 
     with eight SS-N-22 missiles, which can carry nuclear 
     missiles.''--Beijing Jiefangjun Bao, March 22, 2000 (Emphasis 
     added).
       ``The new Chinese-made super Kilo-class diesel attack 
     submarine was quietly put into service recently with the 
     South China Sea Fleet for the mission of combat readiness 
     against Taiwan.''--``Chinese-made Kilo-class attack submarine 
     goes into service, starts undertaking combat readiness 
     task,'' Hong Kong Sing Tao Jih Pao, April 4, 2000.
       ``A-Category Group Armies in Nanjing and Guangzhou War 
     Theaters Have Been Equipped With Naval Vessels To Enhance 
     Sea-Crossing and Landing Operations Capability''--Hong Kong 
     Ming Pao, April 10, 2000.
       ``In order to deal with the military crisis that might 
     occur in the Taiwan Strait, the Central Military Commission 
     has decided to set up a Fujian Joint Operational 
     Headquarters. On 11 February the headquarters for the first 
     time directed the ``routine military exercise'' of using 
     submarines to block the Taiwan Strait.''--Hong Kong Sing Tao 
     Jih Pao, February 17, 2000.
       ``The Taiwan authorities actually have only two roads to 
     take: The first is to identify with the one China principle, 
     peaceful reunification, and one country, two systems; the 
     second is to force Beijing to resolve the Taiwan issue by 
     military means. There is no third road, nor is it possible 
     for the confrontation to go on for a long time.''--Zhang 
     Wannian, Vice Chairman of the Central Military Commission, 
     July 6, 2000.
       ``In the process of settling the Taiwan issue, we will do 
     whatever we can to bring about peaceful reunification. But, 
     in the event that any serious incidents to split Taiwan from 
     China under any pretext occur, that a foreign country invades 
     Taiwan, or that the Taiwan authorities refuse for an 
     indefinite time to settle the issue of cross-strait peaceful 
     reunification through talks, then we will be forced to take 
     all possible drastic measures to accomplish the great cause 
     of the motherland's reunification.''--General Zhang Wannian, 
     the PLA's highest-ranking officer, a vice chairman of the 
     Central Military Commission, and a Politburo member, ``The 
     One China Principle and the Taiwan Issue,'' February 21, 2000 
     (English version published by Xinhua).
       ``A possible interference by the United States has already 
     been taken into account in our military preparations; in 
     fact, we have taken into account all possibilities in our 
     preparations. If the United States really interferes in the 
     matter, the question is how far the United States can go in 
     its interference. The Taiwan side should also get a clear 
     idea of this issue. Making a big country like China as its 
     opponent, the United States will surely lose more than it 
     gains. The United States suffered losses in every war it 
     fought in Asia in the past, and I believe it will surely 
     learn from all its bitter lessons. Even if the Untied States 
     or U.S.-led U.N. troops are involved in the matter, in no way 
     will the United States afford a loss in the war; putting all 
     other things aside, a slight increase in its casualties will 
     lead to domestic pressure that will prove too much for it to 
     bear. What is more, we also have other strategies to use in 
     such a war, for example, a China-Russia alliance is also a 
     move that can touch the United States on its sore spot. 
     Therefore, we are not afraid of the involvement of the United 
     States or any other foreign forces, for we are assured that 
     we can win the war in the end.''--Unnamed PLA general, 
     ``Discussing Taiwan Strait Crisis with a General,'' Ta Kung 
     Pao, May 15, 2000.


                          ANTI-U.S. STATEMENTS

       In reference to the relationship between Russia and China: 
     ``The partnership is an effort to oppose hegemony and 
     supremacy, and one single country dominating the world.''--
     Remark by Zhao Huasheng, Director of the Russian Studies 
     Department at the Shanghai Institute for International 
     Studies, ``Putin Visits China in Hope of Strengthening a 
     Strategic Axis,'' New York Times, July 17, 2000.
       ``U.S. a Threat to World Peace.''--``China Demonizes,'' 
     title of editorial from PRC state-owned China Daily, as 
     reported by Washington Post, July 17, 2000.
       ``On June 22, 1999, the People's Daily fed a general anti-
     American campaign related to the accidental bombing of the 
     Chinese Embassy in Belgrade with a long, hysterical piece 
     accusing the United States of `acting like Nazi Germany' by 
     leading the NATO campaign to stop the ethnic cleansing of 
     Kosovo.''--``China Demonizes,'' Washington Post, July 17, 
     2000 (article excerpt).
       In reference to the relationship between Russia and China: 
     ``The partnership is an effort to oppose hegemony and 
     supremacy, and one single country dominating the world.''--
     Remark by Zhao Huasheng, Director of the Russian Studies 
     Department at the Shanghai Institute for International 
     Studies, ``Putin Visits China in Hope of Strengthening a 
     Strategic Axis,'' New York Times, July 17, 2000.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Enzi). The Chair recognizes the Senator 
from Wyoming.
  Mr. THOMAS. I yield 5 minutes to the Senator from Minnesota.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota.
  Mr. WELLSTONE. Mr. President, I thank my colleague from Wyoming.

                          ____________________