NAPSNet Daily Report 16 October, 2000

Recommended Citation

"NAPSNet Daily Report 16 October, 2000", NAPSNet Daily Report, October 16, 2000, https://nautilus.org/napsnet/napsnet-daily-report/napsnet-daily-report-16-october-2000/

 
CONTENTS

I. United States

1. PRC-Japan Talks
2. Cross-Straits Relations
3. PRC Defense White Paper
4. US View of PRC White Paper
II. Republic of Korea 1. Inter-Korean Project in the DMZ
2. ROK-US Missile Talks
3. Japanese Red Army Hijackers in DPRK

I. United States

1. PRC-Japan Talks

Agence France Presse (“ZHU WOOS JAPANESE, BUT WARNS OVER TAIWAN,” Tokyo, 10/16/00), the Associated Press (Eric Prideaux, “CHINESE PREMIER CHARMS ‘TOWN HALL,'” Tokyo, 10/14/00), and Reuters (“CHINA’S ZHU TERMS JAPAN VISIT A SUCCESS,” Tokyo, 10/16/00) reported that PRC Premier Zhu Rongji’s six-day visit to Japan and meeting with Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori were generally applauded as a success. Zhu said he made it clear during his trip that that “Our aim is not to seek an apology but to use history as a mirror to build friendship in the future.” Zhu said the PRC remained on its guard against revisionist Japanese who have played down events such as the 1937-38 Nanjing Massacre by Japanese soldiers. However, he said, “We distinguish some militarists from ordinary people. The Japanese people, like the Chinese people, were victims of Japanese militarism. There has indeed been no formal apology in writing for the war of aggression. But, at the same time, we highly appreciated a formal statement made in 1995 by the then premier (Tomiichi) Murayama, which expressed an apology towards the rest of Asia.” However, Kazuhiko Koshikawa, deputy press secretary to Japanese Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori, said that Japan considers the matter closed. Koshikawa said, “It’s very clearly stated in documents.” That was one of the only discordant notes struck during Zhu’s visit. Takashi Nobehara, director of the Asian Studies Center at the Japan Research Institute, said, “By appearing on a popular TV program, Zhu has succeeded in projecting a better image of China and himself to a wider audience in Japan. He has won the hearts and minds of the Japanese people, particularly those who are not familiar with China.” Yasuhiko Yoshida, professor of international relations at Saitama University, said, “China is well aware that it needs Japanese public opinion on its side to obtain economic aid from Japan. The best way to improve that public opinion is not to bring up the issue of wartime history so as not to anger the Japanese people.”

Agence France Presse (“ZHU WOOS JAPANESE, BUT WARNS OVER TAIWAN,” Tokyo, 10/16/00) reported that PRC Premier Zhu Rongji said on Monday that his summit talks with Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshiro Mori on October 13 had been “frank, cordial and constructive.” However, Zhu warned Japan of repercussions if it allowed former Taiwan president Lee Teng-hui to go ahead with his plan to visit this year. Jiang said, “As a matter of course, I raised the Taiwan question when I met with Prime Minister Mori and leaders of political parties. I must insist that China maintains the principle of one China. Mr. Lee is absolutely not an ordinary person. And if he makes such a visit, the two sides (Japan and China) are fully aware of its consequences.”

2. Cross-Straits Relations

The Washington Post (John Pomfret, “CHINA TURNS ON CHARM TO TAIWAN,” Taipei, 10/15/00) reported that within the past few months, more than a third of the 221 members of Taiwan’s legislature have traveled to PRC at the government’s invitation. The PRC has stopped trying to force Taiwanese businessmen who had supported Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian’s campaign to distance themselves from him. Chou Hsi-wen, a member of the People First Party, traveled to Beijing in August for the first time in years as part of a delegation that met with some of the PRC’s top officials. Chou said, “They have improved their economy a lot, and their politics as well. They are more open- minded and flexible. They are getting richer; they are getting stronger.” Parris Chang, a Democratic Progressive legislator, said, “They are trying to manipulate political forces here, using divide-and-conquer tactics. I don’t think Chen Shui-bian is happy with the way China is trying to deal with him. It’s making Chen stiffen his attitude.” Chen said in an interview that he is disturbed by the PRC’s new policy and worried that Taiwanese politicians might be taken in. He said, “We lack a sense of crisis and the ability to distinguish between friend and foe. This is of concern to me.” One PRC official said, “As long as we continue this kind of soft pressure, Taiwan will realize that it must come closer to us.” The report went on the say that the new tactics illustrate a desire by the PRC leadership for some success on Taiwan. According to a senior PRC official involved in Taiwan affairs, there is a debate among PRC experts about whether Chen has the political muscle or the will to be “Taiwan’s Nixon.” Chou’s belief is that Chen should open unification negotiations with the PRC as soon as possible. He called on Chen to accept a vague agreement made in 1992 between the PRC and Taiwanese negotiators that there is one China, although each side stuck to its own interpretation. Chou said, “The Chinese Communists are isolating Chen Shui-bian and his government. The problem is that this side is not moving to talk. But you have to negotiate with them; you have to bargain with them. Meanwhile, time is passing…. And they are getting stronger.”

3. PRC Defense White Paper

Xinhua News Agency (“SUMMARY OF CHINA DEFENSE WHITE PAPER,” Beijing, 10/16/00) reported that the PRC’s Information Office of the State Council published a white paper on the PRC’s policies on its national defense and international security issues on Monday. The white paper, titled “China’s National Defense in 2000,” aims to “express the Chinese people’s sincere aspirations for peace and to help the rest of the world better understand China’s national defense policy and its efforts for the modernization of its national defense” at the turn of the century. The paper said the world “is undergoing profound changes which require the discard of the Cold War mentality and the development of a new security concept and a new international political, economic and security order responsive to the needs of our times.” It stressed that the PRC pursues a national defense policy that is defensive in nature and the main aspects of defense policy are consolidating national defense, resisting aggression, curbing armed subversion, and defending state sovereignty, unity, territorial integrity and security. Regarding the issue of nuclear weapons, the white paper reiterated the PRC position that its small number of nuclear weapons is entirely for self-defense and that the PRC undertakes not to be the first to use nuclear weapons, and not to use or threaten to use nuclear weapons against non-nuclear-weapon states. It added that the PRC maintains a small but effective nuclear counterattacking force in order to deter possible nuclear attacks by other countries. On the issue of Taiwan, the white paper said that the PRC government has consistently adhered to the one-China principle and will never give in or compromise on the fundamental issues concerning state sovereignty and territorial integrity. It reiterated, “If a grave turn of events occurs leading to the separation of Taiwan from China in any name, or if Taiwan is invaded and occupied by foreign countries, or if the Taiwan authorities refuse, sine die, the peaceful settlement of cross-Straits reunification through negotiations, then the Chinese government will have no choice but to adopt all drastic measures possible, including the use of force, to safeguard China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and achieve the great cause of reunification.”

4. US View of PRC White Paper

Reuters (“U.S. SAYS THREATS AGAINST TAIWAN COUNTERPRODUCTIVE,” Washington, 10/16/00) reported that responding to the PRC’s release of its white paper on defense policy, the US said Monday that it was counterproductive for the PRC to emphasize the use of force in its campaign to gain control of Taiwan. An anonymous official in the US State Department said, “We reject the use of force or the threat of the use of force to resolve the Taiwan question. As we have told the Chinese at senior levels, comments that focus on possible use of force (against Taiwan) are counterproductive to the peaceful resolution of differences.” The US official, repeating long-standing US positions on Taiwan, said that the US would continue its “one China” policy and urge both sides to refrain from actions or statements that increase tension or complicate dialogue. The official added, “We urge them to take steps that foster dialogue, reduce tensions, and promote mutual understanding. We welcome greater transparency with respect to China’s military development, doctrine, spending and policies and will be reviewing the document in detail to see how this new addition of the white paper on defense contributes to that goal.”

II. Republic of Korea

1. Inter-Korean Project in the DMZ

The Korea Herald (“UNC RELEGATES DMZ NEGOTIATION POWER TO SEOUL, INFORMS P’YANG,” Seoul, 10/16/00) reported that the ROK Defense Ministry said on October 15 that the UN Command (UNC) has delivered a letter to the DPRK relegating its negotiating power to the ROK military concerning safety measures for inter-Korean projects in the Demilitarized Zone (DMZ). The ministry said the letter, sent to the DPRK side on October 14 through Panmunjom, stated that the ROK Defense Ministry “has the authority to negotiate the security arrangements required for mine clearing and construction in the DMZ on behalf of the UNC.”

2. ROK-US Missile Talks

The Korea Herald (“SEOUL, WASHINGTON TO RESUME TALKS ON MISSILE RANGE, SOFA,” Seoul, 10/16/00) reported that ROK officials said on October 15 that the ROK and the US will resume two sets of formal talks to extend the ROK’s missile range and revise the Status of Forces Agreement this week. On Monday, officials from the two countries will hold a meeting in Washington to discuss the extension of the range of Korean missiles. Chances are that the ROK and the US will likely be able to strike a deal on the ROK’s bid to boost its missile range to counter DPRK missile threats.

3. Japanese Red Army Hijackers in DPRK

Chosun Ilbo (Shin Jung-wha, “NK MAY RETURN HIJACKERS TO TOKYO,” Seoul, 10/16/00) reported that on March 30, 1970, nine Japanese Red Army students who hijacked Japanese Airlines (JAL) passenger aircraft Yodo in the sky arrived in the DPRK via Seoul. The DPRK, treating them as political refugees, granted them various favors. Housed in Pyongyang, the hijackers also enjoyed financial support. Five of them were listed as missing in Japan, having been instructed by the Japanese Foreign Ministry to return their passports on grounds, among others, that they contacted apparent DPRK agents. Their expulsion from the DPRK is being discussed in connection with the forthcoming US removal of the DPRK from the list of terrorism-supporting countries. Thirty-two family members of the Japanese hijackers still live in Pyongyang.

The NAPSNet Daily Report aims to serve as a forum for dialogue and exchange among peace and security specialists. Conventions for readers and a list of acronyms and abbreviations are available to all recipients. For descriptions of the world wide web sites used to gather information for this report, or for more information on web sites with related information, see the collection of other NAPSNet resources.
We invite you to reply to today’s report, and we welcome commentary or papers for distribution to the network.

Produced by the Nautilus Institute for Security and Sustainable Development in partnership with:
International Policy Studies Institute Seoul, Republic of Korea
The Center for Global Communications, Tokyo, Japan
Center for American Studies,
Fudan University, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China
Monash Asia Institute,
Monash University, Clayton, Australia

Timothy L. Savage: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States

Gee Gee Wong: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States

Robert Brown: napsnet@nautilus.org
Berkeley, California, United States

Kim Hee-sun: khs688@hotmail.com
Seoul, Republic of Korea

Hiroyasu Akutsu: akutsu@glocomnet.or.jp
Tokyo, Japan

Peter Razvin: icipu@glas.apc.org
Moscow, Russian Federation

Yunxia Cao: yule111@sina.com
Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

Dingli Shen: dlshen@fudan.ac.cn
Shanghai, People’s Republic of China

John McKay: John.McKay@adm.monash.edu.au
Clayton, Australia

Leanne Payton: lbpat1@smtp.monash.edu.au
Clayton, Australia

 


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.