CASPAR WEINBERGER Says: War With China "Might Be Necessary" : LUSENET : TB2K spinoff uncensored : One Thread

This is from Newmax

[Fair Use: For Educational/Research Purposes Only]

China Threatens U.S. with Nuclear Attack

Sunday, March 5, 2000

If the United States goes to the aid of Taiwan in the event of a mainland Chinese attack on the island, Beijing will be prepared to launch nuclear missiles at America if the situation warrants it, a Chinese Communist Party document warns.

But the internal document, issued by the Chinese Communist Partys Central Military Commission, states that it is doubtful that such a nuclear conflict would erupt over Taiwan.

Still, recent bellicose statements by China's leadership have raised concerns among some defense experts in the U.S. Last week, former Reagan Defense Secretary Caspar Weinberger shocked a Capitol Hill conservative group by stating "It might not be wise for America to go to war with China, but it might be necessary."

Weinberger also chastised the Clinton administration for not responding to Beijing's hostile rhetoric, saying America needs to give China an "unequivocal, immediate, unambiguous, firm response."

The top secret Chinese document claims America has neither the will nor the ability to fight a long war. The document states: "Basically, we do not foresee a nuclear war between China and the U.S., for two basic facts will prevent it. First, it is against the U.S. interests to fight a nuclear war against China simply for [Taiwan president] Li Denghui and his followers.

"On this point the anti-China U.S. politicians will have to respect public opinion within the U.S. Our principle is [one of being] willing to sustain major losses of our armed forces to defend even just one square inch of land. If the U.S. forces lose thousands or hundreds of men under our powerful strikes, the anti-war sentiment within the their country will force the U.S. government to take the same path as they did in Vietnam.

"Unlike Iraq and Yugoslavia, China is not only a big country, but also possesses a nuclear arsenal that has long since been incorporated into state warfare system and played a real role in our national defence."

The document, distributed by the Central Military Commission  the communist partys arm of the Peoples Liberation Army (PLA)  to "All Regional Garrisons, All General Departments Affiliated to the Central Military Commission (CMC), All Arms and Services, All Corps Headquarters, All Provincial Garrisons, and All Prefecture Garrisons" as well as to certain unnamed U.S. officials, was obtained by Insight magazine and published in the current issue.

According to the authors, if Taiwan refuses to settle the reunification issue by peaceful means, and do so quickly, Beijing will have no alternative but to go to war  a war they insist they will win, even should the U.S. enter the fray in defense of the island.

The strategy outlined in the document envisions a quick, blitzkrieg-like strike at Taiwan, one that would overwhelm the Taiwanese before the U.S. could come to their aid.

"Although the quality of [Taiwans] equipment is not too bad, its quantity is limited," the authors explain. "It is obvious that after the first fatal strike, the Taiwan forces have no way to organise effective resistance. Under such circumstances, we will be able to control Taiwan before the U.S. intervention and then concentrate our forces to fight the U.S. Based on this scenario, it is impossible for the U.S. to force us to fight on two fronts when it tries to protect Taiwan...

"Taking into account of possible intervention by the U.S. and based on the development strategy of our country, it is better to fight now than future"  the earlier the better, the authors advise.

"The reason being that, if worse comes to worst, we will gain control of Taiwan before full deployment of the U.S. troops. In this case, the only thing the U.S. can do is fighting a war with the purpose of retaliation, which will be similar to the Gulf War against Iraq or the recent bombing of Yugoslavia as far as its operational objective is considered, namely, to first attack from the sky and the sea our coastal military targets, and then attack our vital civil facilities so as to force us to accept its terms like Iraq and Yugoslavia."

Such a strategic concept will not work against China, the document insists, claiming that China is, unlike Iraq and Yogoslavia, a "big country."

"So far the strategic superiority of the U.S. joint forces has not been tested in a war against a big country."

"It can be safely expected that once the U.S. launches an attack, the front line of the U.S. forces and their supporting bases will be exposed within the range of our effective strikes," the Chinese scenario for such a Sino-U.S. conflict states. "After the first strategic strike, the U.S. forces will be faced with weaponry and logistic problems, providing us with opportunities for major offensives and win large battles."

Despite the bellicose tone of the document, the authors say that Beijing prefers a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan issue, which it refers to as "a malicious tumor that hinders the development of our motherland."

But it reiterates the warning issued in the recent "white paper," which demands that Taiwan come to the negotiation table immediately or risk war if they continue to delay.

Taiwan, now in the final weeks of the islands presidential election on March 18, shows little inclination to bow to Beijings demands.

James Soong and Chen Shui-bian, the front-runners, have both turned down the white papers demands. "The white paper that China recently issued shows that they want to unify quickly. They say, 'If you don't reunify, we will attack,'" Soong said at a televised debate with his four rivals for the presidency.

"I emphasise especially: any kind of timetable would not meet the needs of Taiwan's people at this point," he said.

Chen was even more hard-nosed: "We refuse to accept talks with a time limit... Even more, we cannot accept negotiations under a 'talk or fight' military threat."

Observers described the recent white paper as an attempt to frighten voters away from voting for hard-liner Chen. Most polls have him second in a tight three-way race with about 20 to 24 percent support, just one or two percentage points behind Soong.


-- Zdude (, March 06, 2000


I wonder what the States would do if it didn't have some country to classify as "the enemy"? It used to be Russia. Now it's China. (With brief appearances by the likes of Iran and Iraq in between.) What would the States get up to if it didn't have to devote some portion of its time to concentrating on "the enemy"?

(I don't really expect anyone to answer this question. I was just musing!)

-- Richard Dymond (, March 06, 2000.

maybe the US has a particular "enemy" depending on circumstances which change

good old gasper, wonder what form of "war" he envisages

-- Sir Richard (, March 06, 2000.

Observers described the recent white paper as an attempt to frighten voters away from voting for hard-liner Chen. Most polls have him second in a tight three-way race with about 20 to 24 percent support, just one or two percentage points behind Soong.

Sounds like the US political tactics

-- (, March 06, 2000.

"All warfare is based on deception."

"Hence to fight and conquer in all your battles is not supreme excellence; supreme excellence consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." The Art of War by Sun Tzu

Sounds like they are already at it.

-- Ma Kettle (, March 06, 2000.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ