[16] Friends Committee on National Legislation, March 31, 2005.
[17] This drew a strong denunciation from Taiwan President Chen Shuibian, who called the act “a law of aggression.”
[18]Chalmers Johnson, Blowback. The term “irredentism” is taken from the name of an Italian political party of 1878 that sought to reclaim adjacent regions occupied largely by Italians but under foreign control.
[19]In February 1992, China passed the “Law of the People’s Republic of China on the Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone,” laying down an exclusive claim to the entire Spratly archipelago, about 324,000 sq. miles of ocean, and authorized the Chinese navy to evict “trespassers” by force. [20]Chalmers Johnson, Blowback.
21 “China Builds a Smaller, Stronger Military Modernization Could Alter Regional Balance of Power, Raising Stakes for U.S.,” Edward Cody, Washington Post, April 12, 2005.
[23]Cody, ibid. In March 2006 China announced a 14 percent rise in defense spending, to $35 billion. South China Morning Post, Nov. 1, 2006.
[24]“Is Chinese Military Modernization a Threat to the United States?”, Ivan Eland, Cato Policy Analysis No. 465, January 23, 2003.
[25] Cato analysis, ibid.
[26] Chalmers Johnson, Blowback. In 1999, China, a nuclear power since 1964, had roughly 20 old, liquid-fueled, single-warhead intercontinental-range missiles, whereas the U.S. had about 7,150 strategic warheads deliverable against China via missiles, submarines, and bombers. In 2001, the Bush administration shifted much of its nuclear targeting from Russia to China.
[27] According to Steve Hadley, President George Bush’s national security adviser, the U.S. also considers Mongolia, Indonesia, Malaysia, and Singapore as other “key friends” in its overall security strategy in East Asia. “New Insights into U.S. East Asia Strategy,” Pacific Forum CSIS, Comparative Connections, July 2006.
[28]“Pentagon spells out strategy for global military aggression,” Bill Van Auken, wsws, 9 February 2006.
[29] Chalmers Johnson, citing New York Times, March 24, 1999.
[30] “The speedup of China’s military modernization has its own logic, which is completely reasonable,” wrote Yuan Peng, vice director of the Institute of American Studies of China’s Institutes of Contemporary International Relations. “It is a necessary step for a major power in a new phase of development, just like the U.S. did at the end of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century, when it invested heavily in its naval power.” wsws, ibid. *This is part of a paper discussed by the author at the conference of the International League of Peoples’ Struggles in East Asia and Oceania on Dec. 11, 2006. It will also be part of a forthcoming book on East Asia today.
Hegemony or Cooperation: Major Contradictions in East Asia Today*
First of four parts
The Korean Peninsula: U.S. Military Aggression and Pyongyang’s Response
Third of four parts
China vs Japan: FTAs, Oil and Taiwan
Last of four parts
Save as PDF
0 Comments