Thursday, February 26, 2009

Commentary: Resumption of defense dialogue sends positive signal for Sino-U.S. ties

by Yang Qingchuan

WASHINGTON, Feb. 25 (Chinese media) -- The resumption of a

defense dialogue between China and the United States is widely believed to send

positive signals for furthering ties between the two nations and the two

militaries, thereby creating favorable conditions for future development.

The upcoming working meeting of the defense

ministries of China and the U.S., scheduled for Feb. 27-28, will be the first

between the two countries since October.

As both countries have long agreed, there is a shared

responsibility for China, the world's largest developing country, and the United

States, the largest developed country, to maintain peace and development in the

world.

In an era that demands more cooperation to safeguard

regional and global peace and stability, China and the United States agree that

enhanced exchanges in defense affairs will benefit the growth of ties between

the two countries and their militaries.

They agree in addition that cooperation also will

help maintain peace and stability in the Asia Pacific region and the world.

China always attaches great importance to the

development of military ties with the United States.

China issued a white paper on national defense in

January, stating clearly that developing ties with the U.S. military conforms to

the common interests of both sides.

China expects to work with the U.S. to foster

favorable conditions for both sides to improve and develop military ties, the

paper said.

China has also noticed a growing interest in the U.S.

to enhance military exchanges during and after the U.S. presidential election.

Barack Obama, in September 2008 during his successful

presidential campaign, wrote in China Brief, a periodical of the American

Chamber of Commerce in China, that the two militaries "should increase not only

the quantity of their contacts but also the quality of their engagements."

Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman last week hailed the

resumption of China-U.S. defense consultations.

"We take this as a positive signal that the Chinese

are prepared to engage and begin working to resume a regular

military-to-military exchange," he said.

"We place a high priority on the U.S.-China

mil-to-mil relationship," Whitman said.

Top U.S. military officials, including Admiral

Timothy Keating, commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, said they were looking

forward to more exchanges with the People's Liberation Army of China this year.

Carol Shea-Porter, a member of the U.S. House

military committee, recently pointed out that it is important for the U.S.

military to continue dialogue with China.

With the continuous development of overall China-U.S.

relations, bilateral military-to-military ties have also generally expanded in

recent years.

Last year, the two sides officially established a

telephone link between China's Ministry of National Defense and the U.S. Defense

Department.

The two militaries most recently reportedly

coordinated with each other in the international fight against piracy in the

Gulf of Aden.

However, the development of relations between the two

militaries has not been on an even path.

For the record, some people in the United States have

not always stuck to the one-China policy while some others are still hawking the

false theory of the "China Threat."

It is evident that such actions are not helpful to

maintaining healthy and steady development of the China-U.S. defense

relationship.

Lessons from the development of military ties show

that the political foundations of the relationship will only be solidified if

China and the U.S. pay due regard to each other's core interests.

To create favorable conditions for further

development of bilateral military ties, the new U.S. administration needs to be

mindful of the critical interests and concerns of China, stick to the three

China-U.S. joint communiqués and take action to remove the current obstacles in

the relationship.

No comments: