| Submit your comments on this article |
| International-UN-NGOs |
| US, China eye cooperation on Iraq, Iran Afghanistan |
| 2005-12-10 |
| WASHINGTON: The United States and China are eyeing possible cooperation on such diverse issues as Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea, the State Department said after talks among senior officials. Deputy Secretary of State Robert Zoellick, who led the US side, said they discussed "how China could work with the United States and others on challenges such as Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran and North Korea." They dwelt on "overlapping interests" in fighting terrorism, preventing the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, building energy security, and reducing the risks of pandemic disease. Zoellick said the two-day discussions were "constructive" in helping to enhance bilateral cooperation "for a more secure and prosperous world that respects human rights and the rule of law." Vice Foreign Minister Dai Bingguo led China’s delegation at the meeting, following up on the inaugural strategic talks launched in August in Beijing. The dialogue arose from a suggestion by Chinese President Hu Jintao to President George W Bush a year ago amid US suspicion over China’s rising military might and economic clout, and fierce competition among the two powers for depleting natural resources. China, Russia and, for a while, India have been cool to US moves to refer Iran to the UN Security Council for possible sanctions for its nuclear programme. "But I think it was notable that the goals were similar and that China wants to be seen as acting responsibly with regard to the important issue of nuclear proliferation," the official said. Zoellick also said that recent discussions on how the two sides could cooperate in Africa, and "on the dangerous mix of terrorism and weapons of mass destruction," would be expanded to cover other regions — Latin America and South and Central Asia. Bush visited Hu last month and held wide-ranging discussions, after which the two leaders took pains to emphasize the importance of US-China relations, pledging to work through what the Chinese President described as "inevitable" tensions. US concerns include the lack of transparency in China’s military budget and its weapons acquisitions, currency inflexibility, copyright piracy and alleged neo-mercantilist approach to obtaining energy supplies. Some groups have accused China of not doing enough to prod North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons. The latest round of six-party talks among China, the United States, Russia, Japan and the two Koreas aimed at ending Pyongyang’s nuclear ambitions ended in a stalemate three weeks ago. North Korea has threatened to boycott the talks after the United States imposed financial sanctions on it for counterfeiting. |
| Posted by:Pappy |
| #9 Sounds good to me, too, NGuard. Also, that China holds U.S. debt means that in extremis the U.S. could refuse to pay upon demand, which makes China's financial risk actually greater than ours... The cost in lost goodwill with the rest of the world would be ugly, but not so much as the actual financial cost to China, I imagine. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2005-12-10 20:23 |
| #8 Fine rant NG, especially the part about exporting revolution game. :> |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-12-10 14:36 |
| #7 yup - that's my diagnosis too, Nguard. |
| Posted by: too true 2005-12-10 13:04 |
| #6 economies have become vitally dependent on each other, so military war becomes prohibitively (one hopes) expensive Sorry, but someone has to make this point-- The same idea was mooted about 1910-13 (Dreadnought, Massey). It also should be pointed out that the current bunch of thugs running china's economy are kind of fuzzy on the whole concept of fiduciary responsibility. These clowns will go to war in a heart beat if they think their rule is seriously threatened, regardless of the consequences. (see Tienamen Sq., 1989) The only reason they haven't invaded Tiwan yet is that doing so would probably weaken their grip on power more than leaving it be--for now. As for co-operation, we can expect only enough to keep the US from looking at Beijing as a potential target for a democratic revolution. Not a shred more. China, and by extention other Tyranies and would be tyranies (France, Much of europe) ruled by small, semi-closed elites are in a mild panic now that the US has gotten into the exporting revolution and destabilization game. Or at least that is my opinion as to why parts of the world are so torqued about Iraq and the war on terror. They see that the fit at least part of the target description. Sorry about the rant, but hey... |
| Posted by: N guard 2005-12-10 12:43 |
| #5 The wiley Chinee are just making rational choices on investment. Consider Hugo's recent investment in Argentine debt for a different take. |
| Posted by: Shipman 2005-12-10 11:51 |
| #4 Cold War MAD gets new meaning: Mutually Assured Dependency. Chinese and American economies have become vitally dependent on each other, so military war becomes prohibitively (one hopes) expensive. |
| Posted by: Glenmore 2005-12-10 10:36 |
| #3 I just hope that when America gets to a point where we "owe" China, that we aren't forced into any "imperial entanglements" so to speak. (As Obi Wan once said). There is so much that I need to catch up on here. |
| Posted by: Jan 2005-12-10 09:14 |
| #2 The fact that China is buying our debt can be looked at a number of different ways. Example, as a sign of deep distrust in the other coubtries ability to pay. |
| Posted by: Redneck Jim 2005-12-10 08:27 |
| #1 It worries me how China has been buying our debt. I hope this all shakes out in a favorable light. |
| Posted by: Jan 2005-12-10 01:03 |