U.S. Missile Defense
Compromises Global Security
by Tang Jiaxuan*, March 30, 2001
BEIJING- Every state has the right to security
and each government has the obligation to protect its nationals.
But how to exercise this right and acquire security in its real
sense is a question worth serious deliberation.
As globalization progresses, countries are becoming
increasingly interdependent. This is as true in the security area
as it is economically.
Security is mutual and indivisible. No country
can exist in isolation, nor can it resolve all the security issues
it faces single-handedly. True security is based on global security
and on the extensivecooperation of the international community.
A military edge cannot guarantee security. Unilateralism
will only lead to greater insecurity.
The proliferation of weapons of mass destruction
and missiles is a complex problem that can be tackled only through
global cooperation. Setting up a national missile defense system
would not contribute to solving this problem, but only further
aggravate it.
Since the end of the Cold War, the international
community has made considerable progress in nonproliferation.
It is therefore neither wise nor advisable to build a so-called
missile defense system, whose effect is questionable, at the expense
of the international arms control and nonproliferation system
after so many years' efforts, including those of the United States.
Some people describe the Anti-Ballistic Missile
Treaty as part of the "Cold War mentality" and hold
that it should be discarded. This view is neither fair nor just.
Like all the other arms control treaties, the ABM treaty reflects
the interdependent relationship among contracting parties in security
matters. This relationship did not disappear with the end of the
Cold War, but rather is becoming even stronger in the era of globalization.
The ABM treaty is effective. It is not outdated.
Just as the ABM Treaty cannot be viewed in isolation,
neither can a U.S. missile defense program. Offense and defense
are always indivisible. Enhanced defensive capabilities, to a
large degree, mean improved offensive capabilities as well.
This is particularly true for the United States,
the only superpower. The United States possesses the biggest nuclear
arsenal and the most sophisticated conventional weapons in the
world, and it pursues a deterrence policy based on first use of
nuclear weapons. A missile defense will severely impede the nuclear
disarmament process and render any U.S. initiative on the reduction
of offensive nuclear weapons meaningless.
People cannot but ask what on earth is the real
intention behind U.S. insistence on developing a missile defense
system in defiance of the international community. Is it really
to defend against the missile threat from the few so-called "problem
states," or for greater military advantage over other big
countries?
Recently there has been relaxation of tensions
in the Asia-Pacific region. All parties should cherish this hard-won
state of affairs and create conditions for continued relaxation.
Theater missile defense would only add complex and confrontational
factors to the detriment of regional stability.
Some in the United States clamorously advocate
incorporating Taiwan into the U.S. theater missile defense system
or providing anti-missile weapons or technologies to Taiwan. This
is a most dangerous tendency. If the United States chose to do
so, it would put Taiwan under the American umbrella of military
protection and restore, de facto, the U.S.-Taiwan military alliance.
It would surely inflate the arrogance of the forces for Taiwan's
independence, jeopardize stability in the Taiwan Straits, endanger
the peaceful reunification of China and lead to serious regression
in China-U.S. relations.
China has no intention of threatening U.S. security,
nor does it seek such capabilities. China has always exercised
great restraint in the development of nuclear arms. China has
always pursued a policy of no first use, and keeps a small but
effective nuclear force only for the purpose of containing other
countries' possible nuclear attacks. This policy will remain unchanged.
China and the United States shoulder common responsibility
for maintaining world peace and security. A cooperative and constructive
relationship between China and the United States will have a crucial
impact on world stability.
China and the United States have long engaged
in fruitful cooperation over nonproliferation. China is ready
to continue on this path. But we also look forward to serious
and pragmatic dialogue with the Bush administration on missile
defense and related issues.
*Tang Jiaxuan is the Foreign Minister of China.
He contributed this comment to the Los Angeles Times Syndicate,
Friday, March 30, 2001
|