 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
 |
 |
Department of State Office of the Spokesman
Date: 07/29/2001
Beijing, China - July 28, 2001
SECRETARY POWELL: Well, good afternoon, ladies and
gentlemen. I just had a productive series of meetings here in Beijing, and I was
accompanied throughout the day by our new
ambassador to the People's Republic of China, Ambassador Sandy Randt, who is
here with us and who
presented his credentials this afternoon to
President Jiang.
I had meetings with President Jiang, Premier Zhu,
Vice Premier Qian, and Foreign Minister Tang. I told them I was here as sort of
an advance party for
President Bush, who will be here later this year,
and conveyed the message that President Bush wants to build constructive,
forward-looking relations
with the People's Republic of China. And he is very
much looking forward to his visit in the fall, both to the APEC meeting in
Shanghai and then to be
received by President Jiang here in Beijing.
I had to take note of the fact that I was deeply
impressed with the transformation that has taken place in China over the last 20
years, and since my last
visit some 17-plus years ago. I reiterated, to all
of my interlocutors, America's support for the changes that China's accession to
the World Trade
Organization inevitably will bring. I told Chinese
leaders that the United States is prepared to work with China as it continues to
move forward and
adopt world standards, in this area of trade and in
other areas as well. I congratulated President Jiang on Beijing's successful bid
to host the 2008
Olympics. The United States looks forward to seeing
the changes, in the next seven years, that this historic event is bound to
stimulate.
China and the United States have a strong, common
interest in seeing a stable Asia, and a world where economies can thrive and
security needs can be
met. In our discussions, I also emphasized my
government's interest in continuing to have dialogue in important areas, such as
human rights,
nonproliferation, and other global issues, and we
will be pursuing that dialogue actively. I am pleased that our two countries
will be resuming our
dialogue on human rights in the coming months.
Secretary of the Treasury Paul O'Neill and his
Chinese counterpart will convene the 14th Joint Economic Commission Meeting in
Beijing in September,
and the Joint Committee on Commerce and Trade, led
by Secretary Don Evans, will meet later this year. Additionally, we have agreed
that the Military
Maritime Consultative Agreement Committee (MMCA)
will hold a special meeting during the month of August, at a time -- at a place
yet to be
decided, and a date not quite nailed down. And we
will also be holding expert talks on nonproliferation matters. So in the course
of the day, we have
come to quite a few agreements on how we can move
forward with our dialogue, on a full range of issues that the two nations are
interested in: from
trade, proliferation, to human rights, to commerce,
and to the MMCA activities.
President Bush believes -- and I believe, of course
-- that a constructive relationship between the United States and China is in
the interest of the
American and Chinese peoples, in the interest of
our allies and friends in Asia, and in the world's interest. And I look forward
to working with my
Chinese colleagues to broaden and deepen the areas
of our cooperation. Thank you very much, and I'd be pleased to take some
questions.
QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, George Gedda of AP. Could
you talk about your discussions on the issue of missile transfers and weapons
technology
transfers? Are the gaps narrower now than when you
started?
SECRETARY POWELL: The conversation went to the
November 2000 agreement and some of the concerns we had with respect to that
agreement:
grandfathering contracts that had been signed
earlier but delivered after. We still have to work on resolving that problem.
Some other issues -- with
respect to specific transfers -- we pointed out to
them, and the need for expert consultation on their export control policies that
we think ought to be in
place. And so I think we moved the ball forward.
There are still some outstanding issues to be resolved, and some places where we
don't have full
agreement, and all of this will be taken into
account as we look at licensing some of the satellite sales that are on the
table before us. But I think we had
a good exchange of views, and we found a way to
move forward with the experts committee getting together.
QUESTION: I'm a journalist from Beijing Youth Daily.
My question is: What kind of things impressed you most during your one day's
visit to Beijing,
and do you think one day's visit to Beijing is
enough for you to learn about this nation -- a nation which is considered to be
the so-called potential
competitor of the United States? Thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: No, one day is certainly not
enough, and I spent most of the day just going back and forth on the east-west
main road, from
one government office to the other, looking out the
window of a car. And so I wouldn't presume to suggest that I saw a lot of the
country, or learned
through personal observation a lot of what's going
on in China. But, even just that experience, of going up and down that road
several times today, and
looking out the window, and seeing all the
construction that has taken place since I went up and down that street in 1973
-- and went up and down that
street again in 1983 -- to see what that represents
in the way of transformation in China, what that represents in the way of an
economy that is moving
forward and starting to join the international
economic system in generating a level of wealth that permits that kind of
development to take place and
eventually spread out across the whole society; to
see what that represents in the way of gifted, skilled political leadership that
would move the country
in that direction, and to see what that also
represents in terms of the energy of the Chinese people to move forward.
So a lot has happened since my earlier visits, and
in the 20-odd years since relations took a different turn between the United
States and China. And
much more will happen in the future, with accession
to the World Trade Organization. And I believe much more needs to be done,
because as you
suggest, it is not just what you see in a main
street in Beijing, but what you see in the furthest reaches of the nation. And
until all people are touched by a
level of success and given hope and food on their
table and education for their children and a roof over their heads and a
satisfactory life, then political
leaders must continue to work to develop an economy
that will do that, and to open a society that will give people a pass to achieve
their dreams and
achieve their ambitions, hindered not by government
but by their own willingness to dream big and to work hard.
QUESTION: Robin Wright, Los Angeles Times: On human
rights, did you bring up the case of Zheng Zhensheng, the former U.S.-based
scholar and
father of an American citizen, or any other
specific cases today? And secondly, despite the resolution of the EP-3 and the
three scholars with U.S. ties,
do you believe that you can actually close a
fundamental gap between the United States and China on issues such as Taiwan,
missile defense --
especially in light of the language about China as
a strategic competitor?
SECRETARY POWELL: I didn't raise specific cases,
because I think it's more important not to focus all the time on individual
cases. We've seen
some progress -- and I might say success -- in
three cases within the past few days. I was more interested in raising the whole
issue of human rights and
the rule of law and treating people properly. And
that was done in every single meeting. And we had a candid exchange of views:
that there are two
different perspectives to this, two nations come at
this problem from different historical perspectives and different traditions,
and I made the case and
the strong point that there is, nevertheless, a
universality with respect to human rights that I think all nations should aspire
to.
And so, I think that I laid the predicate that as
individual cases come along, they should be measured against the rule of law and
commonly accepted
standards of jurisprudence. And I don't think that
that message was missed by my interlocutors.
With respect to the EP-3, I think that is behind us.
There is an outstanding accounting matter that has to be dealt with -- and will
be dealt with in due
course. Narrowing the gap on Taiwan and missile
defense: with respect to Taiwan, we have a clear policy that has been U.S.
government policy for a
number of administrations, and our policy is "One
China," and within that policy we also have an obligation to provide weapons to
Taiwan that will be
defensive in nature and conventional in nature, so
that they will feel secure, and thereby in that security have the confidence to
engage with the People's
Republic and hopefully, with that confidence, they
can restart dialogue and discussions on cross-strait issues.
On missile defense, I tried to make a comprehensive
case of the President's strategy of moving forward with missile defense as part
of a restructured
strategic architecture: why that made sense, and
why we shouldn't hang on to old concepts and old treaties if they're not
relevant to the present. They
listened carefully, and I'm sure we'll have many
more conversations on this subject, because they have a different view of it.
But that's why friends talk
to each other and consult with one another.
QUESTION: I'm Jaime Flor Cruz with CNN. Many things
have changed between the U.S. and China, and China and Taiwan, and you work for
a
new administration in Washington. Do you see a need
now to negotiate a new communiqu? that perhaps can redefine the relationship
with China, or
supercede the existing three communiqu?s?
SECRETARY POWELL: No, I don't see a need, and no one
has suggested such a need -- either on the Chinese side or any of my colleagues
in the
State Department or in the new Administration. So
the Taiwan Relations Act, and the three related communiqu?s still remain the
basis of our policy.
QUESTION: New York Times: The Administration has
made some progress with the Russians this week on missile defense, and a little
bit of progress
has been made with the Senate Democrats. Did you
tell the Chinese today that the Administration's plans on missile defense would
leave their limited
nuclear deterrents in tact?
SECRETARY POWELL: I told them that our plans with
respect to missile defense are for a limited missile defense that will be
clearly -- when you see
it come into being, when you see the kind of
systems that our development put in place - would not threaten, not intended to
threat(en), and I also don't
think they would see it actually threatening the
strategic deterrents of either Russia or China.
QUESTION: Good evening, Mr. Powell. I'm from China
Central Television, and Mr. Bush and many U.S. Government officials said that
the
Sino-U.S. relationship was very important. The
officials of other Asian countries also agree that the stability of this
relationship will contribute to the
peace and stability of the Asia-Pacific region, and
even of the world. So could I know what specific steps does the US Government
plan to take to
improve the Sino-U.S. relationship? My second
question is about Taiwan. Both you and Mr. President Bush said that the United
States pursues
one-China policy, and it is well known that the
United States has already made concrete promises in the three Sino-U.S. joint
communiqu?s. However,
actually, I know the United States has never given
up selling weapons to Taiwan. This obviously violated the spirit of the Three
Communiqu?s. So
would you please tell us what on earth is the U.S.
policy on Taiwan? That's all. Thank you.
SECRETARY POWELL: That's all? I think I've described
what our policy is. Our policy is "one China." And within the context of that
policy, for
many, many years, since its very beginning, we have
examined arms sales to Taiwan. We've examined those arms sales in terms of their
defensive
needs, but we also examine what they say they need
to make sure that it does not upset the balance in the region, and that it is
always of a conventional
nature, and it is always of a defensive nature. I
don't believe that in any way arms sales policy has destabilized the region and
certainly is not inconsistent
with our one-China policy and the three
communiqu?s.
With respect to stability in the relationship
between China and the United States, we are doing many things. My presence here
today is an example of
trying to let the world see that we are not
enemies, and we are not looking for an enemy. We are looking for ways to
cooperate. We are looking for
ways to move forward in a positive manner.
President Bush's visit this fall, both in Shanghai for the APEC meetings and in
Beijing, also illustrate that
we're reaching out and building on the areas of
common interest, and where we have disagreements, not shrinking from those
disagreements, not saying
they don't exist, but facing them and talking about
them and trying to solve them. And just because we have a disagreement in one
area doesn't mean
we have to ignore all the other positive areas in
which we can move forward.
So we want to approach China with a broad agenda,
from trade through human rights through proliferation through arms sales through
missile defense
through relations with other countries in the
region, reminding them that America is an Asian-Pacific nation as well, not only
by our presence in the
Pacific, but by the large Asian population that
lives in the United States. We want to talk about the rule of law. We want to
talk about how the rule of
law is important to economic development. So we
have so many things that are in common, and we have areas of disagreement. Let's
talk about all of
them for the purpose of keeping a positive
relationship moving forward. The region and the world and both nations need the
United States and China to
cooperate and move forward.
QUESTION: Terry Schultz, Fox News: Mr. Secretary,
this morning you had an interesting little exchange with the Foreign Minister,
when he said you
didn't really need to discuss the things you'd gone
over in Hanoi, and you said, "Oh, I think we'll continue on." How resistant was
he to going back over
some of the things in Hanoi? For example, did it
seem that because they released these two detainees he wanted to push human
rights discussion further
down the agenda? And, could you tell us a little
more about the resumption of dialogue? Did you get any answers to some of the
questions you were
asking, or were they pushed forward now that you've
set up talks for further in the future?
SECRETARY POWELL: He did say that at the outset of
the meeting while you were there, but as soon as you all left, we went back to
the agenda.
And he had several agenda items he wanted to talk
about, and he identified my agenda items for me. And he said, "I'm sure you'll
want to talk about
proliferation and human rights." And I did. So we
went back over in considerable detail the proliferation issue, and my answer to
George reflected that
earlier. We also talked in considerable detail
about human rights. The dialogue will begin with immediate conversations between
Assistant Secretary of
State Lorne Craner, who has responsibility for this
area (and) who is traveling with me and participated in all the meetings today.
My Assistant
Secretary for Democracy and Human Rights was here,
and he is part of this, and I introduced him to the leader in every single
meeting. And he will
begin discussions right away leading up to more
formal discussions later in the year. And no holds barred in these discussions.
We plan to talk about all
of the human rights issues that are of concern to
us, and we expect them to do the same. I'm sure they will see things in American
society that they think
bear discussion, and let's have that kind of
discussion back and forth in the spirit of candor and mutual respect.
QUESTION: As we know, after the collision of the
U.S. spy plane and Chinese jet fighter, the Sino-American military relationship
has been broken
off. How do you think there is a possibility to
resume these kinds of exchanges?
SECRETARY POWELL: The MMCA? Oh, military exchanges in general.
QUESTION: Yeah, yeah.
SECRETARY POWELL: Secretary Rumsfeld has got that
under review now, and he is examining all of the various ideas and requests with
respect to
military exchanges, and I think you will see a
resumption of them. I can't specifically tell you which ones and at what time
frame, because that is the
responsibility of Secretary Rumsfeld. For example,
I know that we've got some ship visits in Hong Kong right now, if I'm not
mistaken. So things will
pick up again, and I think we've got the EP-3
incident pretty much behind us. I'm not saying that the exchanges will be
exactly as they were in the past,
because it is a new administration, and Secretary
Rumsfeld will have to take a hard look at all of them to see that both sides are
mutually benefiting from
such exchanges.
QUESTION: Would you just clarify on a couple of the
issues you've touched on already? On missile defense, any thought or discussion
about actually
negotiating with China on missile levels or on
missile defense systems or anything? Similar to what you do in Russia? And also
wondering whether you
had touched on the issue of the build-up in Chinese
missiles in the Fujian coast, and whether or not something might be worked out
with that?
SECRETARY POWELL: No, we didn't talk about formal
discussions with respect to either offensive systems or defensive systems. We
don't have
any bilateral treaties with the Chinese as we do
with the Russians, so there wasn't a need to move in that direction, nor did
they suggest it. With respect
to the build-up of missiles: yes, that was touched
on. It was touched on in the context of -- as we look at what Taiwan's defensive
needs are. To some
extent that is a reflection of what is facing
Taiwan -- to the extent that build-ups take place. That starts to shift the
balance and requires us to take a
hard look when examining arms sales. So yes, it did
come up in that context.
QUESTION: Any response?
SECRETARY POWELL: The response was that there was not such a missile build-up.
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)
This
material is produced independently for NTI by the James Martin
Center for Nonproliferation Studies at the Monterey Institute of
International Studies and does not necessarily reflect the
opinions of and has not been independently verified by NTI or
its directors, officers, employees, agents. Copyright © 2007 by
MIIS.
