|
|
|
|
|
GOLDSEA |
ASIAMS.NET |
ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES
ANTAGONIZING CHINA OVER NMD
(New 6/20/01.)
lobal peace and prosperity depends to a remarkable degree on robust exchanges between the world's richest nation and the world's most populous. Considering that fact, the leaders in Washinton D.C. and Beijing have been either tragically star-crossed or remarkably cavalier about provoking confrontation.
In 1996 Beijing fired a pair of ballistic missiles across the Taiwan Strait under the pretext of "military exercises", prompting the U.S. to send a carrier battle group in response. In 1999 the U.S. bombed the Chinese embassy in Kosovo and ascribed it to an intelligence error.
In mid 2000 the two nations seemed about to put the bad blood behind them when President Clinton struck a deal for U.S. approval of China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO). Then George Bush vowed to commit untold billions to building a space-based national missile defense (NMD) system to detect and destroy ballistic missiles that might threaten the U.S. A clear effort at upsetting the global balance of power, charged Beijing, vowing to commit whatever resources necessary to counter NMD. Its predictably harsh and intransigent stance toward a crippled U.S. spy plane forced to land on Hainan Island produced another standoff which, for several tense days, seemed capable of triggering a shooting war.
What American wouldn't want a shield from foreign ballistic missiles? But the NMD is hardly a sure thing. It's premised on technology that won't exist for a decade or more. It will end up costing well over $100 billion dollars. Meanwhile its mere existence on drawing boards sours relations with China, Russia and other nations. At present all it guarantees is another arms race. The only way it makes strategic sense is as a means to bankrupt a nascent geopolitical rival by forcing it into an arms race it can't afford. Look at what the nuclear arms race did to Russia.
Does the U.S. stand to gain or lose by using the NMD to threaten and alienate China?
This interactive article is closed to new input.
Discussions posted during the past year remain available for browsing.
CONTACT US
|
ADVERTISING INFO
© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.
|
|
|
|
WHAT YOU SAY
[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]
Foreign policy is a double-standard. Tawain, if it was a province of the USA, the USA would first boycott it, then, used its media to say it had terrorist or communist there, then after a less effort to get UN agreement would invade Tawain, and make it apart of it. Yet, it want let China do this. Worse, it try's to get diplomatic ties with Tawain, to the point during Reagan's Administration, talked of siding with Tawain if China tried to forcefully, retake it.
Double-standard. The British and the Falklan Islands, same thing.
Double standare, when Iraq invaded Kuwait. Kuwait was apart of Iraq, before the Western Powers, annexed it as they have done, to most non-western countries.
China just getting back Hong Kong from Britian..No kidding. Can you imagine, China giving back Ireland to England after 50 years.
I am so happy that Vietnam is one country. I will be overjoyed when Corea/Korea becomes one Nation.
The Western Powers never hesitated to make Germany whole again. NOw, did they???
Divide and conquer, the Mantra of the Western Philosophy.
Zimbabwe...The president is wrong to kick out White Farmers who own 95 per cent of the land, and the people own none. The British Government wants the head of Zimbabwe's president Mugabee to role-literally.
Japanese Government. Why is the US government still with troops on their soil?? Why want it let Japan re-build militarily?
Why did June 6, 1944, the Invasion of Normandy have to happen; why not drop the Atomic Bomb on Berlin? Then Munich?
The West don't work like that my friend. Instead it was easier to drop it on Japan. For obvious reasons.
The British finally let India have some freedom and Independence.
Blackpanther Maurice.Smith@ssa.gov
Saturday, April 19, 2003 at 10:54:32 (PDT)
[199.173.225.21]
Is china unstable enough to enter such a war? We need to learn from our past and realize a conflict is created from two sources. Americans' may be subject to an attack from foreign enemies but they will never lose there government or country. Asia is filled with buisness associates to America and we provide millions of customers. Instead of thoughts of war perhaps we should assist China in it's development. If only Americans could have its upperclass share wealth, Global economics could be primed to the point where America would be strong enough to forget about foreign attacks on its' civilians.
Gareth Bailey
Sunday, December 01, 2002 at 00:21:45 (PST)
[68.0.205.126]
With China's Chairman Jiang Zemin visiting Bush's Presidential ranch in Texas is a very significant meaning to Chinese-USA relations.
For one thing, China is no longer seen as an immediate threat as it was prior to Sept. 11 The shift is now to global terrorism and Islamic fanaticism being threats to the world peace.
If China can somehow aid in containing or bringing down the threat in North Korea, there will be much to be gained by China and the Chinese image worldwide.
Chinese-American
Sunday, October 27, 2002 at 22:02:05 (PST)
[64.130.235.33]
I frankly am amazed at the posion that the Indian people are putting out these days against Pakistan I wonder why India is so insecure, crying over every bullet Pakistan buys, I wonder why Pakistan does not utter a word when India goes out and shops for,2 billions worth of Jaguars and Military goodies...do we know something they dont?, I dont know to a neutral observer it seems like India is a cry baby and Pakistan the elderly statesman watching from afar...smiling at the little baby thinking "{when will it grow up?)" hahaha. Bringitotgether seems like a true RSS man..in his khaki shorts and that small feeble saphron flag and the cute whistle they blow. Seems like they trying to act like a tough guy finding security in numbers on the Hindu dominant streets of India but when you ever see them one on one they look and they are just little feeble bodies.
Yaqoot yaqoot@hotmail.com
Saturday, October 26, 2002 at 07:31:56 (PDT)
[195.73.17.49]
People keep talking India VS pakistan can both countries acually compare themselves to even the poorest first world country?.
I am a Pakistani and I feel amazed at how proudly Indians claim they ALMOST had Pakistan!! people lets not forget such statements need backing up with solid ground action, if I can jog your memory your esteemed former primeminister (Nehru) stood on a podium, shaking his stick saying " I will beat the Chinese with this stick" not very long ago!, the end result was that China swept you under the rug! and India was throw back by 20 years!, now you sit in your drawing rooms and start making these tall claims again, the fact my friends is that Pakistan is no Palestine! and India is no first world power, yes, numerical superiority exists but then even in 1965 we were no million man army! you were....the result ( despite claims in this forum that Pakistan lost? ) was a draw, going to war requires a psyche and I am afraid India does not have that yet. It is by a far stretch a defesive army trying to merely defend her borders, not designed for offensive action to take over vast tracts of territory, even though your leaders like to claim it is, Pakistan on the other hand needs to do enough to keep you out..we are not going to get into a tit for tat defence spending race with you. So just concentrate on making your country better dont make claims you cant back up please, just like Pakistan :)
Yaqoot yaqoot@hotmail.com
Saturday, October 26, 2002 at 07:25:13 (PDT)
[195.73.17.49]
i sense a lot of inter-asian hostility in this topic. Come on guys try and stay with the topic and quit bickering like little children.
^-^
Friday, August 16, 2002 at 07:07:20 (PDT)
Why don't you begin to live up to your word Turk...first I would like to see you take on little Israel...then for kicks try India. You talk a lotta mess...but you can't back it up with any facts.
bringittogether
Monday, June 24, 2002 at 15:14:06 (PDT)
"we are going to kill you"
"we will drown your people"
Oh yeah you are the pantheon of level headed thinking. You will do nothing little man except write annoying posts, with little inspiration and even less wit.
Turk
Saturday, June 22, 2002 at 04:33:09 (PDT)
AC...so you're saying that if every Hindu died in India...the Muslims wouldn't cheer and have a party...this works both ways buddy...we (not all)...hate each other equally...but the thing is...that why in Hindu majority India why did we let 120 million Muslims stay? why are there like no Hindus in Pakistan?...why didn't we just blast Pakistan when we had the chance?...probably because we felt is was the wrong to do...to annhilate Pak...this is war...WAR...we will DO whatever is necessary to win...you have to...it's life or death...
your conclusion of the USA is correct. It is the only stupid ass country to ever drop the bomb on anyone. Unluckily the Japanese...I can't conceive how there isn't resentment about that...or is there?
You all talk alot of s*** about India like it's bad...it's alot more tolerant than you can imagine and always has been.
bringittogether
Friday, June 21, 2002 at 13:56:18 (PDT)
bringittogether,
Well you're not Israel, because they just took over all Palestian Authority terroritory. And they're using the fence to build the biggest concentration camp in history.
As for Pakistan and India. As long as bleeping USA needs bleeping Pakistan to continue our bleeping "war on terror." The USA will have a slight bias to keeping good will with Pakistan.
Do you think the Hindu majority would care if the Muslim went on a hunger strike for independence. I think the Hindu would cheer them on and hope they die of starvation first.
USA is the biggest two face liar when it comes to atomic weapons. We are the only one who have used it against an enemy during a war.
AC Dropout
Thursday, June 20, 2002 at 13:56:05 (PDT)
Lets face it - India is weak willed.
It could have destroyed pakistan yonks ago. It vould have stopped pakistan from ever forming.
Bharat should have remained one whole unit rather than be split into three.
I blame Nehru. He messed everything up!
Now pakistan will be the immortal enemy of India. Either pakistan is taken over or india is broken up and then controlled again by islamicists.
But I foresee the future of Bharat being whole again, if only someone will take some action!
yayati
Thursday, June 20, 2002 at 13:17:08 (PDT)
Too bad for the Moslems...frankly my dear...I don't give a damn. 150 serperatist movements...no s*** sherlock...India's a vast and multi-ethnic country. The BJP will stay...and I don't care. You have your own country and your own Islamic world. Go there...and stay there. We don't need you in India. You talk about the BJP as it was the only govt that India ever had...this terrorism has been going on forever...it was about time someone like the BJP came along and put Pakistan down. Please, Pakistan never entered anything with the Soviet Union...you read up on your own history you moron. Don't go to a madrassa, read a actual book. And what nations are you talking about?...China? You idiot. Here I ask you for the 5th time for a solution that you think is right...instead of solutions you continue to antagonize...that's Muslim for you...I know an extremist when I see one...you are all extremists and probably are all Pakistanis...we are going to kill you. Mark that down...extreme as it may be. Look at this...like 5 guys against one Hindu...you weak and pathetic losers. I wonder what a war would be like...we would drown you people.
bringittogether
Thursday, June 20, 2002 at 11:45:21 (PDT)
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|