Political trust needed to further military ties
- Source: Global Times
- [08:30 January 07 2011]
- Comments
The US should reflect on its strategy. Blindly blaming China is harmful to both sides.
Take US arms sales to Taiwan. The US made a commitment to China on this issue in the August 17 Communiqué of 1982, but it has breached its promise.
China's decision to stall military communication is a sign of dissatisfaction, but our main consideration is to stabilize overall Sino-US relations.
Yang: As China's military power grows, US security misgivings are on the rise, it's natural. However, military confrontations and conflicts are in no sense inevitable.
China and the US should respect and tolerate each other, accord each other a reasonable development space and recognize each other's rights including the right to develop militarily. Military relations may be more vulnerable, but cooperation is growing too.
We hope the competition will be healthy competition.
GT: In November Robert Gates said that he hoped Sino-US military exchanges could be upgraded to a strategic dialogue level. Do you think it is possible to establish a strategic military dialogue mechanism?
Luo: As a scholar, I noted the expressions used by the US officers. Ongoing military communication with a dialogue mechanism would undoubtedly help improve and develop relations between China and the US.
Sino-US military exchanges should be based on principles of mutual respect, mutual trust, reciprocity and equality. Both sides should try not to offend the core interests of the other, and eschew new friction.
To end the ups and downs in Sino-US military communications, the two should conduct an dialogue on equal footing, respect each other's interests and security concerns, carry out constructive cooperation, realize mutual transparency and gradually develop mutual trust and goodwill.
Yang: The Sino-US economic and strategic dialogue has notched up great achievements.
On the military side, upgrading communication to the strategic level demands the two sides offer reasonable definitions of each other's position. They should treat each other as partners, competitors but not rivals.
The two should perfect a crisis-control mechanism to solve disputes, and try to broaden cooperation in both traditional and non-traditional areas.
