The "One China" policy has been slowly but steadily collapsing under the weight of its own contradictions for more than a decade. And how could it not collapse? America's very arcane, very nuanced policy was created in 1979. The world then was so different from today's that it might as well have been 1879.
As Kosovo demonstrates (and as Lebanon and Somalia showed more brutally), the most dangerous threats come from the need to occupy areas containing hostile populations; these dangers are even greater when the areas concerned are cities. This is the kind of future warfare on which the U.S. Army should be concentrating its new weapons development, its tactical thinking, and its moral preparation.
The MTCR is based on a policy, not a treaty. It focuses on ballistic and cruise missiles capable of delivering a 500 kilogram payload to a range of 300 kilometers. Any rockets or unmanned air vehicles with this capability, including space launch vehicles (SLV's), which are "peaceful" versions of long-range missiles, are subject to a strong presumption of export denial.
Scholars looked at the surveillance plane crisis and talked about the implications and next steps for US-China relations.
Whatever risks may accompany a policy of containment, the risks of weakness are infinitely greater. China hands both inside and outside the administration will argue that this crisis needs to be put behind us so that the U.S.-China relationship can return to normal. It is past time for everyone to wake up to the fact that the Chinese behavior we have seen this past week is normal.
U.S.-South Korean relations will be put to the test this week as South Korean President Kim Dae-Jung visits Washington. Kim’s recent summit with Russian President Putin produced a joint statement effectively opposing U.S. plans to deploy national missile defenses, complicating President Bush’s first foray into East Asian security affairs.