Romance of 3 kingdoms

[Gadger 0]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-1393127,00.html

EU ready to end ban on arms sales to China

By Anthony Browne, Brussels Correspondent

A NEW transatlantic rift will open today when the European Union formally tells China that it is prepared to lift its 15-year-old arms embargo.

Washington said that the prospect that its Pacific forces could be threatened by advanced European weapons sold to China was unacceptable and that lifting the embargo would lead to restrictions on American co-operation with Europe on defence issues.

We can't countenance the notion of advanced European weapons technology finding its way into the People's Army and threatening our forces in the region, or Taiwan; a US government official told The Times. It is very close to the bone for us. It is not at all in the EU's interest to lift the arms embargo.

At an EU-China summit in The Hague, Jan Peter Balkenende, the Dutch Prime Minister, will tell Wen Jiabao, his Chinese counterpart, that Europe has agreed in principle to end the embargo once China improves its human rights record and the EU has agreed a new code of conduct for arms sales.

The embargo has become one of the most sensitive geo-political issues, with the United States worried that its European allies will be arming a country that it sees as a potential military rival. The US and EU each imposed an arms embargo after the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 but France and Germany have been pressing to end it to boost sales for their defence industries and to improve relations with Beijing.

China is spending billions of dollars upgrading its military capability and is rapidly becoming an economic superpower. Washington is concerned that East Asia remains militarily unstable, with China threatening Taiwan and North Korea threatening South Korea. The US is worried that Europe will sell China advanced technology, such as over-the- horizon-targeting systems that would enable the Chinese military to strike American ships hundreds of miles out in the Pacific.

Congress already is planning legislation that would ban the Pentagon from trading with any country that makes military sales to China.

It would look at ways to make defence trade across the Atlantic more difficult than it was already, a US spokesman said. Congress will make it more difficult to co-operate with our European friends and allies on defence issues.

China is demanding that Europe lifts the ban, insisting that human rights and arms sales should not be linked. To maintain such an embargo is discriminatory and an obstacle to the promotion of China-EU relations,a Foreign Ministry spokesman said.

Britain has agreed in principle to lift the embargo although there is still disagreement over the timing and the conditions.

==============================

Obviously this isn't very ethical (human rights anyone?) but the economical benefits are going to be huge, expect a massive boom in the Belgian, French and US economy.

[Sgt. Jones 0]

Why let a few ethics get in the way of a nice profit??

[Gadger 0]

Why let a few ethics get in the way of a nice profit??

Let's say this time next year China invade Taiwan (improbable but not impossible) using military equipment purchased from the US. Hundreds of thousands of lives are lost and displaced, will you still care about profit then?

[Colossus 2]

Why not ban all weapons trade?

We got enough weapons and bullets already.

Speaking of bullets, I think Norway should stop exporting AT bullets to the States. We were against the war but yet we exported this special types of bullets to them.

[Sgt. Jones 0]

Sorry, I was being sarcastic. I think entering into the weapons trade with China would be a big mistake for the EU. But they appear to be hellbent on getting into bed with the chinese so they'll have to figure that one out on their own.

[Ex-RoNiN 0]

America complaining about dodgy arms sales?

Irony is just lovely

[red oct 2]

EU won't drop ban on weapons soon

http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=12018

[der bastler 0]

Well, instead of starting another trade war with Europe... how about joining the landmine conference to make the world a better place? And those cluster bombs aren't nice, too, regarding the aftermath of a battle...

[Sgt. Jones 0]

EU won't drop ban on weapons soon

Glad to see that the EU has made this decision. Now let's see if they actually stick to it.

Quote[/b] ]America complaining about dodgy arms sales?

Just out of morbid curiousity, where might you be from? Hopefully all of your country's dealings have been totally above board.... glass houses and all that

[hardrock 1]

Quote[/b] ]America complaining about dodgy arms sales?

Just out of morbid curiousity, where might you be from? Hopefully all of your country's dealings have been totally above board.... glass houses and all that

I think that's not of importance. The point is that just the USA, who are supporting I don't know how many civil wars in Africa and other regions with their weapons, the USA, who have one of the biggest (the biggest?) weapon industries in the world, the USA, who don't care at all about who agrees to their weapon trades and who does not, exactly THEY are complaining about someone who's doing just the same.

I don't say that other countries have clean hands in these belongs, but other countries don't complain about America's trades (which also has a very bad side, concerning the civil wars . . .)

Well, instead of starting another trade war with Europe... how about joining the landmine conference to make the world a better place? And those cluster bombs aren't nice, too, regarding the aftermath of a battle...

just got to repeat that

[Sgt. Jones 0]

Quote[/b] ]I think that's not of importance. The point is that just the USA, who are supporting I don't know how many civil wars in Africa and other regions with their weapons, the USA, who have one of the biggest (the biggest?) weapon industries in the world, the USA, who don't care at all about who agrees to their weapon trades and who does not, exactly THEY are complaining about someone who's doing just the same.

Actually, it is of great importance. Unless, of course, you are just jumping on the popular euro trend of bashing the US. So we have possibly the biggest weapons trade in the world and support many civil wars.... that's why they are all running around with various russian rifles... because the US has been supplying them with arms....

Quote[/b] ]I don't say that other countries have clean hands in these belongs, but other countries don't complain about America's trades (which also has a very bad side, concerning the civil wars . . .)

Really, I hadn't noticed the other countries had stopped complaining. Actually, they seem to complain as loudly as possible about just about everything the US does.

[D34N 0]

Quote[/b] ]Let's say this time next year China invade Taiwan (improbable but not impossible) using military equipment purchased from the US. Hundreds of thousands of lives are lost and displaced, will you still care about profit then?

That wont happen:

1. The US Already Backs Taiwan, with AMRAAM's and so on.

2. US Giving Weapons to China would be like the US giving weps to USSR During the Cold war. To quote SNL's George HW. Bush(Dana Carvey): "Not ganna happen"

[red oct 2]

i think the concern is, when the the U.S. and other governments were dealing weapons and what not to these dictators in Africian trouble regions, they could go on and on w/ the destroying and killing and it wouldn't harm U.S. European interests or their economies. now of course im not saying this is okay. just the opposite. however China isn't some little African nation. China is a massive country w/ a large population and are rappidly growing economic influence in the world. and has some of the worst human rights violations in the world. which is why the arms sanctions were put on them in the first place. so what i don't get is, if people didn't like it at all when one nation (the U.S.) was the dominate in the worlds economy and military, than why would you wana go and settle for another one nation only w/ worse human rights violations being the single dominate superpower?

[crashdome 1]

Actually, it is of great importance. Unless, of course, you are just jumping on the popular euro trend of bashing the US. So we have possibly the biggest weapons trade in the world and support many civil wars.... that's why they are all running around with various russian rifles... because the US has been supplying them with arms....

We have the largest arms trade in the world.

http://fas.org/asmp/

One look at the amount of arms given away under the Excess Defense Article alone is astonishing.

http://www.fas.org/asmp/profiles/655-2003/65503DoD_EDA.pdf

Those were all given away.... FOR FREE.

We do care about who gets the weapons. We don't want it coming back to bite us in the ass... literally. All-in-all we have no right to complain about what someone else sells to China. It's their weapons and they can do what they wish. If it happened to come from us in the first place... well, then we shouldn't have developed and sold so many to em.

I live in the US and I have the right to bash any policies/decisions I see as unfit in this country. We encourage defense contracting and other private enterprise in the region of Defense, but then we stomp on someone else who tries to do it just because we don't like one of their customers ? That is hypocritical.

[crashdome 1]

i think the concern is, when the the U.S. and other governments were dealing weapons and what not to these dictators in Africian trouble regions, they could go on and on w/ the destroying and killing and it wouldn't harm U.S. European interests or their economies. now of course im not saying this is okay. just the opposite. however China isn't some little African nation. China is a massive country w/ a large population and are rappidly growing economic influence in the world. and has some of the worst human rights violations in the world. which is why the arms sanctions were put on them in the first place. so what i don't get is, if people didn't like it at all when one nation (the U.S.) was the dominate in the worlds economy and military, than why would you wana go and settle for another one nation  only w/ worse human rights violations being the single dominate superpower?

I guarantee it isn't for human rights violations. I am sure it is more the fear of losing profits when they begin to copy and manufacture the weapons themselves.

[red oct 2]

i think it has more to do w/ U.S. interests in Tiawan than worrying about the Chinese copying designs. if the U.S. government was so concerned about that, it wouldnt be selling so many weapons to begin w/. i wouldn't doubt the only reason why the U.S. government might not like the idea of the E.U. selling weapons to china is merely profit loss, but im not speaking on behalf of our government. as i said there are economical interests in both China and Tiawan. what happens to our economy if China decides to take these new weapons and use them on Tiawan? what if a attack on Tiawan provokes Japan into rearming its military? there are a few islands that are under Japanese control that China claims belongs to them so there could just as easiely be a situation similar between tiawan and china. what would happen if China and Japan went to war again?

[denoir 0]

It's a very thin line to walk, but I think they are doing ok so far. Keeping up good trade relations = carrot, not giving them weapons = whip. When dealing with other nations, it's important to always keep a dialogue open, reagrdless of your differences.

The other apporach of principled stubbornness (Å• la America-Iran) only leads to a dead-lock and further hostilities.

Furthermore China is a very important trade partner for the EU. It's the second biggest after the US. And the EU is China's largest trading partner. We're involved in a lot of international projects together etc Not selling them weapons is unlikely to hurt relations, but it gives a possibility of influencing them in a non-invasive way.

As for weapons sales in general, Europe should take a good long look to who it's selling weapons right now. The list is long and not very distinguished. And America should be careful for what it wishes as it is the largest buyer of European weapons.

Personally, I'd like to see a complete weapons ban (for say a period of 30 years at a time) to countries that start illegal wars (i.e without international approval). It's far more morally questionable for instance to sell missiles to America who will actively use it to kill people in Iraq (and generally goes to war on a regular basis), than selling it to China - who hasn't hurt a fly outside its borders for decades.

Of course, that won't happen. Countries that spend weapons are the best buyers as they come back for more.

[red oct 2]

okay, but what would the E.U. do if China does decide to go through w/ a invasion into Tiawan? they have threatened to do so after all. and what happens when Japan starts asking for weapons?

[Apollo 0]

1) Russia ,the EU ,The US ,they are all involved in weapons sales (Russia being the master in it though ,but noone seems to mind that much ) and neither of those country's have a particularry clean sheat on dodgy arm sales.

the US is fast to blame the Eu if it sells material to a country it seems as a thret to it's millitary supremacy ,when someone sells arms to some African minor engaged in civil war it doesn't matter much though.

We european's feel though that when the US starts to complain about weapons sales to the EU that it's kinda like .... Hipocracy?

2)What will some european material make of difference? China can become the superpower of it's wishes and frankly there is no country in the world there that can stop them ,they can use us ,but in the end they don't need us ,it's only a matter of time until China is the most powerfull player in the world ,better have good relations with this country ,i would rather have them as a friend than an enemy.

Besides the more we isolate China the worse it is in the longterm ,taking China in the WTo was a very good step ,economic interdependancy has shown to be the peacemaker of the late 20th century ,the more China and the West cummulativly enriches itself on trade with eachother ,the more theyll be depended on eachother for their wealth and that war will become impossible.

3)China doesn't seem so expansionist to me ,more like isolationist as it was for a few millenia already ,they strive though for a unified China.

That they want Nationalist China (AKA the guomingdang ,the KMT or now known as indipendant taiwan) to become now part again of China is more than logical ,in the end China is really only still into a civil war state between Communists and nationalists for over 60 years.The historic alliance of the USA with "democratic China" is historicly kinda rediculous to ,for the simple reason that the KMT under the leadership of Chiang Kai Sheck was more a facist totalitarian regime than a democracy ,only in name democratic ,far from the original Guomingdangg ideals innitially established bu Sun Fats Yen ,The USA however never supported the Communists simply because they were communists. (and especially not during the cold war)

Taiwan is an rediculous inheritance of Failed US policy in China combined with an cold war aftermath ,in esscense the result of betting on the wrong horse in WWII in a region filled by totalitarian regime's grown from a really good but o so American vision in that time that they should make China free from all colonial powers and foremost a democratic nation in the East.

Yes there was a time that the USA was really an admirable country ,always ready to help smaler powers in their struggle against Tyrany ,a bullwark of freedom and democracy ,not that it was always really possible or that they really had an idea about the complexity's involved with their goals in forming some nations to democracy's. (whereas they seem to have failed to correctly estimate these complexity's in Iraq now to)

But i have to say ,it all went seriously wrong in America with the Cold war ,IMO the cold war left a permanent idiological trauma onto the USA ,beginning with the awfull Mcarthy era ,basicly a time when the USA lost most of it's freedom fighting innosence to become a far right superpower.

I guess i should be gratefull that the US liberated my country in WWII ,often Americans will remind Europeans of this liberation ("we saved ur ass") ,but IMO that was a whole other USA than there exists today.

IMO it's just misplaced of the USA to still support Taiwan in these modern times ,knowing the whole episode of the 2 China's ,and the lost relavance of that conflict with the ended WWII and Cold war.

The more we work toghether with Communist China and build up our relations and mutual trade the more China will evolve at it's own pace towards democracy ,given China's history that whole evolvement is a hughe step for the Chinese society ,this is an advanced and thousands of years old society that was and probably still is largely uncompatible with democracy in itself ,such was the class system in imperial china itself for thousands of Years (that class system was so radical different to western one ias such that fillosofer's and scientist in china were always regarded as the lowest of all classes) ,for thousands of years china has been a country ruled by a strong centralised goverment ,anything else led to civil war ,China became communist because it's social and political structure fitted quite well in such a framework ,you can't impose democracy on china ,it will need a long evolution before it can reach anthing resembling that.

Taiwan might officially be called a democracy for over 50 years ,in the end it's still not really a democracy but already has had a long and slow evolution towards that way.The handover of hong knog from the UK to China has up to this date some effect's for politic's in china ,i think it's good for the Chinese evolution to have such thing's as small democratic microcosmosses in their country that graduatly pave the way for more of such evolutions in China.

[denoir 0]

okay, but what would the E.U. do if China does decide to go through w/ a invasion into Tiawan? they have threatened to do so after all. and what happens when Japan starts asking for weapons?

There's no chance in hell China would invade Taiwan. It's all just political posturing. Invading Taiwan would get them very little, and it would hurt them economically.

I think Apollo covered the rest. China is largely on its own and through some international encouragement going in the right direction. And as for foreign policy, China is far more isolationist than the other way around. We should instead be worrying about countries that actually start wars.

[Sgt. Jones 0]

I agree. A 30 year weapon sales ban of any EU military products to the US would be fine. If the EU thinks it's a better idea to trade weapons with China, then let them. After all it is much better for business if China only abuses their own population.....

Of course, trading high tech military technology with China definately has the potential to create a military super power that may have some interesting views on what it ought to do. But that's hardly a concern. The EU has evolved beyond the need to concern itself with military matters or even to maintain anything beyond a nominal defense force.

If things go to hell, they won't be interested in requesting, or accepting, any US military involvement. If the US is smart, they won't offer any assistance either.

[D34N 0]

Furthermore China is a very important trade partner for the EU.... And the EU is China's largest trading partner.

Yes by a mere $3.7Billion (EU 65.7B, Japan 64B US 62B).

okay, but what would the E.U. do if China does decide to go through w/ a invasion into Tiawan? they have threatened to do so after all. and what happens when Japan starts asking for weapons?

My guess is send in a 10 or 20 thousand troops to help the US/Taiwan, and then sit back and watch the worlds economy get a kick in the crotch.

I create a rough scenario of this as an OFP2 Storyline.

2)What will some european material make of difference? China can become the superpower of it's wishes and frankly there is no country in the world there that can stop them ,they can use us ,but in the end they don't need us ,it's only a matter of time until China is the most powerfull player in the world ,better have good relations with this country ,i would rather have them as a friend than an enemy.

Well any country with more than 60 nukes can stop China fro becoming a superpower.. at the worlds expense. Anyways, China can become a superpower if it wants to but it will still a large 3rd world nation outside the cities.

Yes there was a time that the USA was really an admirable country ,always ready to help smaler powers in their struggle against Tyrany ,a bullwark of freedom and democracy ,not that it was always really possible or that they really had an idea about the complexity's involved with their goals in forming some nations to democracy's.

Ok.

IMO it's just misplaced of the USA to still support Taiwan in these modern times ,knowing the whole episode of the 2 China's ,and the lost relavance of that conflict with the ended WWII and Cold war.

China=Not a Democracy. Taiwan='Shining Becon of Freedom in Asia'

Anyways you said the US is misplaced in supporting Taiwan (A democracy) Yet it meets the descriptions of a country America would support when it was "Admirable" Quote:]Yes there was a time that the USA was really an admirable country ,always ready to help smaler powers in their struggle against Tyrany ,a bullwark of freedom and democracy

The more we work toghether with Communist China and build up our relations and mutual trade the more China will evolve at it's own pace towards democracy

I'd like to say that I think that China is Communist only in name.. and that its really a Totalitarian Regime with open markets. China will not be a democracy until it stops covering up it failures/problems in a Russian/USSR type way.

But thats just my 2.16Yen (2 Cents)

[Colossus 2]

China will evolve at it's own pace towards democracy

I guess that they will come to that in the future but it will take time.

Right now they only have economical free zones.

Well any country with more than 60 nukes can stop China fro becoming a superpower.. at the worlds expense.

Nukeing don't solve anything, just make things worse

[Apollo 0]

Quote[/b] ]Furthermore China is a very important trade partner for the EU.... And the EU is China's largest trading partner.

Yes by a mere $3.7Billion (EU 65.7B, Japan 64B US 62B).

That may be now ,but China is a booming economy ,bound to become a hughe economical player in the future ,this trade will surely boom to.

Quote[/b] ]2)What will some european material make of difference? China can become the superpower of it's wishes and frankly there is no country in the world there that can stop them ,they can use us ,but in the end they don't need us ,it's only a matter of time until China is the most powerfull player in the world ,better have good relations with this country ,i would rather have them as a friend than an enemy.

Well any country with more than 60 nukes can stop China fro becoming a superpower.. at the worlds expense. Anyways, China can become a superpower if it wants to but it will still a large 3rd world nation outside the cities.

That's a dull argument ,It's not very plausible that anyone will send 60 nuke's on China when they are evolving peacefully ,thus as long as China evolve's at it is doing it will become the largest superpower in the world ,and any technoligy we don't sll to them they will eventually develop themselfs.

Quote[/b] ]IMO it's just misplaced of the USA to still support Taiwan in these modern times ,knowing the whole episode of the 2 China's ,and the lost relavance of that conflict with the ended WWII and Cold war.

China=Not a Democracy. Taiwan='Shining Becon of Freedom in Asia'

Anyways you said the US is misplaced in supporting Taiwan (A democracy) Yet it meets the descriptions of a country America would support when it was "Admirable" Quote:]Yes there was a time that the USA was really an admirable country ,always ready to help smaler powers in their struggle against Tyrany ,a bullwark of freedom and democracy

You don't seem to understand ,Taiwan as a national state doesn't really exist ,the official name of that country is to this date The ROC ,Republic of China.Only a minority in Taiwan really want's to establish a Taiwanese nationalist state and taiwanese nationality.

Furthermore ,taiwan may be somewhat of a democracy now ,it only evolved to that status only like 10 years go ,prior to that taiwan was ruled 40 years under martial law and another 20 years under a KMT 1 party rule.As such the incentive for America to suppor Taiwan from the 50's onward was that it was a Non-Communist foothold in Asia in the cold war period ,at that time ROC's politics were more facist like than democratic.

This policy was mainly an inheritance of WWII ,at that time the KMT was the dominant power of the Chinese mainland and when the USA came into war with Japan it was strategicly important for the US to support the KMT ,afterall victory of japan over the KMT and thus Japan annexing parts of China and puppeting the rest woul have freed up a hughe lot of troops from that fron ready to be used against the USA in the pacific and UK in India ,since they were now allied anyway they favoured the KMT above the communist when the civil war started ,although American political analysts knew all to well that the KMT could never control China anymore as frankly the Chinese poppulation hated it.

Even then ,American political analysts understood that Communist China was a different kind of communism not very simmilar to USSR communism ,and that given the thought that the KMT had been an totolitarian regime ,just like any other goverment China just had in the last 7000 years ,that Communist China was only regarded communist because it had certain policy's that were more than logical given the social reallity in China.

It must be said that you can't negativly review the Communist Chinese goverment entirely ,under rule of the KMT China was as much the underdeveloped country it was under Imperial rule ,that the Comunsts in China managed to let the nation evolve that much since the 50's to the way more modern state it is now is an incredible feat ,furthermore China has been evolving the last decade's towards a more free market structure to.While i won't say that the Communists never made errors (just take the cultural revolution as ex.) in overall i would note that up to this point it has been a force of gradual modernization both economicly and politicly.Th conclusion would be here that there really never existed much of a "communist China" ,more or less that the current goverment in Beijing has more been "realistic China".

China will graduatly reform at it's pace as it did the last 50 years.

In addition ,China has a policy towards Taiwan of "one nation ,two system's" ,it doesn't want to destroy Taiwanese deomcracy and would even allow it to keep it's own millitary ,in essence all China want's is that Taiwan become's officially part of and steps of the seperatism. In addition it must be said that a part of the Taiwanese poppulation is pro this unification ,however that as long as the politician's in Taiwan are supported by the USA that they don't feel the need to go into this path.For Taiwan in the short term it would have egative economical consequences if they joined China ,but it would have good economical consequence's in the long run.

The conclusion on the matter of USA involvement in Taiwan is that it doesn't do this because of an ideologcal support to freedom of democratic nations ,but because the USA has an interrest to support Pro USA country's in Asia to keep a certain power base out there ,deffinatly from a historical point of view it is as such.This withought understanding the complexity's of Asian politic's.

Vietnam was effectivly an error on on a simmilar level ,The USA supported a nation (south vietnam) that was not based on any nationalistic distinction (there only existed 1 vietnam) ,that was only democratic in name (South vietnam was an autoritatian regime ,ruled by changing dictator's) ,and that virtually had no support among the Vietnamese poppulation ,in essence it supported a regime that couldn't exist withought the US and was more or less an artificial counterwheight against communist influence in Indochina ,there existed the historical error of the USA in Vietnam ,by supporting a regime that didn't have tlocal support it effectivly became an occupying country fighting against unification of vietnam rather than a allied partner fighting for the freedom of a viable liveable democratic Vietnamese counterpart.

In the end ,China will strive for a unified China by all means nessecary ,but it will first explore all other option's before it goes to war.Ever since Imperial China had been trounced multiple times by foreign colonial powers and lost a lot of land to them ,it had the policy to reunify all Chinese lands from the hands of the "foreign devil's".This is an movement that exists for over 100 years and is an important factor in Chinese society.

Chinese society however never glorifies war and only see's it as a last step.Anyone fammiliar with the teaching's of Sun-Tzu will understand that the strive there is to be victorious by all means except fighting ,that is the essence of these teaching's and they are deeply inbedded in the Chinese society.

Beyon Historical Chinese lands China is an isolationist country however ,and the though that china would go on unreasonable conquest is fairly incompatibel with chinese culture.

The fault of the USA however is that they fail to recognize that and effectivly see China as a danger ,just as it did in the Vietnam war where they thought that the collaps of South vietnam would lead to a domina effect where the whole of Indochine would become parrt of the Chinese influence sphere.

The thought is that the more we support china to modernise ,the faster it will become semi-democratic and the faster that the Republic of China will loose it's reason for existance.

another thing to point out is that the more evolved China is the faster new evolvement's will come ,china's evolution in the last 60 years is cummulative.

[kerosene 0]

I thought France already exports military equipment to China

"China and France signed the agreement of assembling 50 Eurocopter AS 365N 'Dauphin II' multi-purposes helicopters at Harbin Aircraft Manufacturing Corporation (HAMC) in 1980, with the first helicopter rolled out in the following year."

Further orders in 97/98

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/aircraft/helicopter/z9.asp

Does it not count if the french sell them unarmed or something?

Chinese Blackhawk!

http://www.sinodefence.com/airforce/aircraft/helicopter/s70.asp

I think chinas emerging middle class will, in the future contribute to its becoming a more democratic state, a more educated, informed population is good, theres also (slighty)more tolerence of people not confirming in dress and tastes than there used to be.