U.S. Relations With the People's Republic of China (2007)

U.S. Department of State

Daily Press Briefing

Sean McCormack, Spokesman
Washington, DC
January 22, 2007

1:05 p.m. EST

MR. MCCORMACK: Good afternoon, everybody. No opening statements, so we can get right to your questions. Who wants to start?

QUESTION: Have you heard anything from the Chinese about the test?

MR. MCCORMACK: We talked to them about it. Chris Hill, when he was in Beijing, talked to them about it. He talked to a representative of the Chinese ministry. The bottom line is we encourage them to be more forthcoming and transparent with respect to not only this test but also their space programs. It has been a continuing topic for us as well as others in the region to encourage the Chinese to become more transparent in terms of their military spending and their military programs. I think the -- Chris's interlocutor didn't really have anything new to say beyond what you've seen from the Chinese ministry statements talking about this was not meant as a threat against anybody and it's not meant to spark a race to militarize space. But the bottom line, George, is we would encourage greater transparency as to exactly the specifics of this test, the intent behind it, and then also more largely more transparency about their program.

QUESTION: Bob Joseph said last Friday that this was a wakeup call and that the U.S. is going to take steps to defend its assets in space. Can you elaborate on what that would entail?

MR. MCCORMACK: I wouldn't get into that, Kirit. I think that probably the folks that are more qualified to talk about that would be over at the Department of Defense. They have a significant role in managing those assets, getting them up into space, and then any questions about defending them as well I think would probably best be put to them.

QUESTION: The officials that Chris met with, I mean, they did acknowledge the test? Because previously the foreign ministry had been pretty --

MR. MCCORMACK: Yes, yeah, they did.

Yes, sir.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) said the Chinese were diplomatically unprepared to deal with the aftermath of this test. Do you get that impression at all?

MR. MCCORMACK: I can't -- I'm not really in a position to judge. That really gets into the internal workings of the Chinese Government and I really wouldn't be in a position to tell you who was informed when or, you know, how far in advance or what information they were giving -- what information they were given. They haven't been very forthcoming, I think is the assessment, a fair assessment to date. Whether or not they were informed beforehand, I can't tell you.

QUESTION: Would you say though that the Chinese have been able to answer the questions that Bob Joseph has put to them when he met with them last week?

MR. MCCORMACK: I can't say. I haven't talked to Bob so I don't know what questions he put to them.

QUESTION: Sean, what do you mean when you say greater transparency in, you know, their future military actions? I mean, is that just between our governments?

MR. MCCORMACK: No, we've talked quite a bit -- if -- quite a bit about this whole idea of transparency in their spending plans, their budget, their military programs, what their policy and doctrines are. This has been a topic that we have encouraged them to make progress on for some time. We have made some progress, I think basic progress, in terms of military exchanges. We -- actually, between the Department of Defense and the Chinese military there is a joint exercise. You'd have to talk to DOD. It's something like a search-and-rescue mission kind of exercise. So there have been some baby steps in that regard in terms of greater openness, but they have a ways to go, generally speaking, about the spending on their military programs, their policies and doctrines, getting a better understanding of what their policies and doctrines are as well as the programs that they have that are financed by their budget. So we want to have a better understanding of that. I think states in the region have also talked to them about that. It's just normal dialogue with them.

Specifically in terms of this, the same would apply. We would be -- we're looking for, again, a greater understanding of exactly what their intent was, what the specifics were surrounding this test, as well as any programs they may have to conduct future such tests or any details of the programs of which this was a part. And this is -- all of this is designed, really, to avoid any sort of misunderstandings not only with the United States, but other countries around the world.

It is -- for countries that have good relations, and I would say we have good relations with China, it is important that there be a set of rational expectations that are generated based on publicly available information and information that is exchanged via diplomatic channels, just so you -- again, so you don't -- so you avoid misunderstandings, misperceptions down the road. This is an area, however, where we would continue to urge the Chinese to work on, because more progress needs to be made.

Okay, yes.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

QUESTION: You could regard oil as their ace in the hole, given the world's dependence on oil. In other words, they can do what they want and they know that people will keep dealing with them because people need the oil.

MR. MCCORMACK: Well, again, that gets to the decisions of individual corporations and companies around the world. And they will have to make their own decisions based on their own investment risk assessments, their reputational risk assessments. They will -- businesses will have to make their own decisions. Of course we do from time to time talk to states who have perhaps some influence, some role, some stake in oil corporations about -- questioning, well, is now really the right time to be investing in the Iranian oil sector. We did that, for example, with the Chinese. You heard the Secretary talk about that a little bit.

But again, those are decisions for individual corporations to make. But there are very real factors that are on the table now in terms of investing in Iran, not because of anything in particular that we have done. But it really -- because of the Iranian regime's actions, which has in turn gotten a response from the international community.

So you know, again, when you're talking about and you're sitting there in the corporate offices thinking about making multi-billion dollar bets that return investments over a couple of decades, you have to consider these sorts of things. They're very real factors.

Yeah.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

(The briefing was concluded at 1:31 p.m.)