Back to Important Issues
 

Back to TSEA

   Taiwan Security Enhancement Act (TSEA)

Senate Helms Urges Us to bring Taiwan under Regional Defense Umbrella  "The leaders in Beijing must be made to know, in no uncertain terms, that they will never be able to use advanced nuclear technology to intimidate the US into having any sort of "constructive engagement", said jesse Helms (R-NC), the chairman of the US senate Foreign Relations Committee, in Friday's Asian Wall Street Journal.  (see below)

Helms said mainland China's espionage is the most devastating intelligence failure in American history.  Thanks to the Cox report's revelations, Americans now know that mainland China, has moved almost overnight from a country that had nuclear capability of the 1950's to one that possesses most modern and advance technology in the nuclear arsenal.

Helms wrote that mainland China is not interested in a "strategic partnership" with the US.  To the contrary, Beijing views America as an adversary, perhaps an outright enemy.

Their true nature was demonstrated by the spate of anti-American, government sponsored riots all across mainland China following NATO's accidental bombing on May of the mainland Chinese embassy in Belgrade.

No country truly interested in a "strategic partnership" with American would mislead its people into believing that the bombing was deliberate, or refuse to broadcast American apologies, Helms said.

Beijing's leaders now view the reunification of Taiwan as their No. 1 priority.  That is why the US Senate must approve the bipartisan Taiwan Security Enhancement Act, Helms added.

Helms stressed that the US government must bring Taiwan under a regional missile defense umbrella that will protect the Taiwanese, as well as all US allies in the Asia pacific region, from a ballistics missile attack by mainland China.

This is vital because during the past year Beijing has begun moving hundreds of medium range ballistic missiles along mainland Chinese coast near the Taiwan Strait, in a clear effort to intimidate Taipei, Helms said.

As a result, the US must move quickly to build a national missile defense to protect the American people from a ballistic missile attack.  Beijing cannot blackmail the US nuclear weapons if its missiles cannot hit the US, he said.


 'Engagement' With China Doesn't Work. Now What?
 July 8, 1999

By Jesse Helms (R., N.C.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Thanks to the Cox report's revelations, Americans now know that Communist China has moved almost overnight from a 1950s nuclear capability to the most modern, advanced technology in the American nuclear arsenal. It is the most devastating intelligence failure in American history.  But while the details of the report have been widely discussed, one question remains
unanswered: What are we going to do about it?

China's apologists in Washington have quickly circled their wagons in an attempt to limit the impact of the Cox report's damning disclosures on the Clinton administration's "engagement" policy toward Beijing. Incredibly, some in the administration have even had the gall to attempt to use this scandal of their own making to press for ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty. If anyone believes that flimsy arms control agreement will restrain China's now-exposed nuclear ambitions, there's a bridge in Hong Kong, I want to sell him.

The administration can no longer spin its way out of a fundamental reassessment of its China policy. The time has come for President Clinton to confront some uncomfortable facts about how China views the U.S., and about how the U.S. must respond to protect its vital interests in Asia.

China is not interested in a "strategic partnership" with the U.S., as demonstrated by the spate of anti-American, government-sponsored riots all across China following NATO's accidental bombing in May of the Chinese embassy in Belgrade. To the contrary, the Chinese regime views America as an adversary, perhaps an outright enemy. No country truly interested in a "strategic partnership" with America would mislead its people into believing that the bombing was deliberate, or refuse to broadcast American apologies and then incite mobs to attack U.S. diplomatic posts with rocks and Molotov cocktails.

Beijing's paramount goal is to displace U.S. influence in the Asia Pacific region. China's aim is to undermine U.S. relations with its Asian allies (who they hope will increasingly turn to China as the region's security guarantor), and prevent America from defending its vital interests in Asia particularly our ability, and willingness, to defend Taiwan against forced reunification with the mainland.

China is determined to modernize its military forces, especially its nuclear capabilities, speedily in order to challenge U.S. military dominance in the Pacific. The Chinese know that today their military is vastly inferior to ours, but as their military might increases, we can be sure that the Chinese regime will act more assertively.

China's nuclear espionage has brought us significantly closer to the day when Beijing will be in a position to use nuclear blackmail against the U.S. China has already shown its willingness to issue such threats. Just after China fired missiles off Taiwan's coast in 1995, a Chinese general publicly boasted that the U.S. would never come to Taiwan's defense because "Americans care more about Los Angeles than Taipei."

Of course, China does not want open war with America. As the Chinese Sun Tzu wrote some 2,500 years ago in "The Art of War": "Supreme excellence in war consists in breaking the enemy's resistance without fighting." China hopes to develop the military capacity to prevent America from defending its interests in Asia, with what Sun Tzu called a "sheathed sword" in
this case, a nuclear sword.

Those who argue for U.S. "engagement" with China delude themselves if they daydream that America can engage China from a position of weakness. Ronald Reagan's dictum of peace through strength applies as much in the Far East as it did in the East Bloc. We can convince the Chinese leadership to behave only if their avenues to adventurism and confrontation are closed.
To start, we must take the following steps:

First, shore up our own defenses, and those of our allies, in the region. The most urgent priority is Taiwan. With Hong Kong back in the fold and Macau soon to be reabsorbed into the mainland, Beijing's leaders now view the reunification of Taiwan as their No. 1 priority.

That is why the U.S. Senate must approve the bipartisan Taiwan Security Enhancement Act. The act will authorize more U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and increase cooperation between the U.S. and Taiwanese militaries. This will deter Chinese threats against the island. And given China's recent seizures of islands that lie within Philippine maritime boundaries, it is also imperative
that we rebuild our defense relationship with the Philippines, now that the Philippine Senate has ratified the Visiting Forces Agreement.

Second, we must bring Taiwan under a regional missile-defense umbrella that will protect the Taiwanese, and all U.S. allies in the region, from ballistic missile attack by China (or for that matter by North Korea). This is vital because during the past year China has begun moving hundreds of medium-range ballistic missiles along the coast near the Taiwan Strait, in a clear
effort to intimidate Taipei.

Third and foremost, the U.S. must move quickly to build a national missile defense to protect the American people from ballistic-missile attack. China can't blackmail us with nuclear weapons if its missiles can't hit the U.S. We must, once and for all, place that antiquated Cold War relic known as the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty into the dustbin of history, and then build and deploy a system to defend us from the threat of Chinese ballistic missile attack.

Thanks to this administration's ineptitude, China now possesses the most advanced American nuclear weapons technology. The leaders in Beijing must be made to know, in no uncertain terms, that they will never be able to use that technology to intimidate the U.S. Then, and only then, can we have any sort of constructive "engagement" with them.
 
 

 
Any questions? Please email: home@fapa.org