| Speech at the NMD Briefing by Ambassador Sha zukang(14/03/2001) |
|
|
| 2004/04/16 |
|
Ladies and gentlemen,
I'm very pleased to have this opportunity to brief you on the missile defense issue. The U.S. NMD program has aroused extensive concerns among the international community.
It is no news that China is opposed to the U.S. NMD program. For two basic reasons: firstly, we don't believe that NMD is in the interest of international peace and security as a whole; secondly, it will compromise China's security.
What I want to emphasize here, is that China does not want to see a confrontation between China and the U.S. over the NMD issue nor an arms race between the two countries. We are against NMD, not because we intend to threaten the security of the U.S. with our nuclear weapons. We just hope that the existing mutual deterrence between the two countries can be preserved. As is known to all, China's nuclear arsenal is the smallest and least advanced among the five nuclear powers. Yet, China is the first to pursue the policy of no-first-use of nuclear weapons. Of course, China will not allow its legitimate means of self-defense to be weakened or even taken away by anyone in anyway. This is one of the most important aspects of China's national security.
Speaking from the international perspective, the U.S. NMD program will have a series of far-reaching negative consequences for the international security environment.
Firstly, the U.S. NMD program will jeopardize the global strategic balance and stability, and undermine the mutual trust and cooperation among major powers. Here, I would like to point out that "strategic balance" and "strategic parity" are two different concepts. The significance of the ABM treaty lies in the fact that, by prohibiting the deployment of nation-wide missile defense systems, it has maintained the strategic balance between the two nuclear superpowers, and by extension, has maintained the strategic balance among all the nuclear-weapon states. The U.S. development and possible deployment of NMD will disrupt the existing strategic equilibrium among major powers, and jeopardize the security interest of other countries. This will undoubtedly arouse suspicion and mistrust among major powers, hampering their coordination and cooperation in international security affairs.
Secondly, the U.S. NMD program will hamper the international arms control and disarmament process and even trigger a new round of arms race. As the only remaining superpower, the U.S. already possesses the largest and most advanced arsenal in the world, nuclear and conventional. In addition, the U.S. pursues a nuclear deterrence policy based on the first use of nuclear weapons. Under such circumstances, NMD will become a multiplier of the U.S. strategic offensive force. And the NMD program is, in essence, an U.S. program of unilateral nuclear expansion, which harbors the inherent danger of triggering an arms race at a higher level. To be specific, it may start off an arms race in outer space, and may also extend the arms race from offensive weapons to defensive weapons.
Thirdly, the U.S. NMD program will undermine the international non-proliferation regime and efforts. The U.S. claims that its development of missile defense systems is intended to counter the increasing threats posed by missile proliferation. I for one, and I don't think I'm alone, do not share the U.S. assessment of the missile threats. To say the least, the U.S. has over-exaggerated the missile threats from the so-called "countries of concern". In my view, the development of NMD is tantamount to "drinking poison to quench thirst". NMD is not a solution to the problem of missile proliferation. Instead, it will undercut the very foundation of the international non-proliferation regime, and even stimulate further proliferation of missiles.
Fourthly, the U.S. NMD program will increase the weight of the military factor in international relations in detriment to international peace and security. The international debate around the NMD issue is, in essence, about what kind of international order should be established, and a choice between unipolar and multipolar world. More and more people have come to realize that, the real motive behind the U.S. NMD program is to seek its own absolute security. Once NMD is deployed, no matter whether it is really effective or not, it would further strengthen the U.S. tendency towards unilateralism, and the tendency to use or threaten to use force. As a result, military factor will play a bigger role in international relations, and huge amount of financial resources and materials that would otherwise be devoted to economic development will be diverted to arms buildup. Under such circumstances, how can a country enjoy real security? How can the world remain stable?
Fifthly, NMD is not conducive to peace and security in the Asia-Pacific region. The implementation of NMD program by the U.S. will not only undermine global strategic balance and stability, but also disrupt efforts for security in the Asia-Pacific region. Moreover, the U.S. also intends to deploy TMD in the region. Research and development of TMD itself may not constitute a violation of the ABM treaty. But, the crucial question is how large is the scale and what are the nature and function of the TMD that the U.S. is preparing to deploy in Asia. If this TMD can be used as part of NMD and constitute the front deployment of NMD in the region, then its negative impact on regional security and stability will be no less than the NMD itself.
|
|