[net.politics] China is more of an ally than New Zealand?

nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (04/16/85)

Apparently the US has given a guarantee that any US Naval vessel
that calls in a Chinese port will not be carrying nuclear weapons, at
the request of the Chinese government.  New Zealand has asked for a
similar guarantee, and has been met with the threat of an economic
embargo.  A nice way to treat a valuable ally.
-- 
James C. Armstrong, Jnr.		ihnp4!abnji!nyssa

In the sight of the Great Video, and of Varos, who gave his name to
our planet, we pray that you accept the lives of these humble deviants,
in recompense for their sins.  We also pray that you look benignly upon
us, and down upon your people as servants.

wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (04/17/85)

Wrong, Kiwi breath.  The U S Navy gave the same reply
to China that it gave to New Zealand.  The Chinese
government just decided to accept the reply and
gp ahead with the visit.  They are, perhaps,
assuming that since the are a communist nation,
that the US would not send nuclear devices into
their waters anyway.  The Navy has not changed
it's policy concerning nuclear devices.  They
will not say one way or the other what is on
board their ships.  Nor, will they say where
such devices are stored on shore.  A rather
sound approach to keeping secrets in my opinion.

T. C. Wheeler

nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (04/18/85)

>Wrong, Kiwi breath.  The U S Navy gave the same reply
>to China that it gave to New Zealand.  The Chinese
>government just decided to accept the reply and
>gp ahead with the visit.  They are, perhaps,
>assuming that since the are a communist nation,
>that the US would not send nuclear devices into
>their waters anyway.  The Navy has not changed
>it's policy concerning nuclear devices.  They
>will not say one way or the other what is on
>board their ships.  Nor, will they say where
>such devices are stored on shore.  A rather
>sound approach to keeping secrets in my opinion.
>
>T. C. Wheeler

If I may correct you, I should like to point out that my breath
is not odored with Kiwi, rather ginger.  Also, I quote from the Guardian:

_Naval deal with Washington likely to anger New Zealand_

CHINA WINS US PLEDGE TO BAN VISITS BY NUCLEAR SHIPS

From Mary-Louise O'Callaghan in Peking

   The US is giving to China the non-nuclear guarantee on all ships 
visiting Chinese ports that it has refused to give to New Zealand, according
to the General Secretary of the Communist Party, Mr. Hu Yaobang.

Mr. Hu said that China supported New Zealand's non-nuclear stance and
disclosed that China had asked and received assurances from the US that
any US ships visiting Chinese ports would be conventional warships.

News of this agreement is likely to come as some surprise to New Zealand
which is suffering considerable political backlash after Washington refused
to disclose whether ships visiting New Zealand would be carrying nuclear
weapons.

The New Zealand Labour Government banned visits by nuclear ships from the
country's ports following its election last year.

He said he would not be raising the issue during his visit to New Zealand 
this month, but that China supported New Zealand's non-nuclear stand.

"The position taken by New Zealand with regards to this question is the
internal affair of New Zealand.  But it has always been our consistent
position to oppose the superpowers' nuclear arms race," he said.

China had insisted on the non-nuclear guarantee from the US before they 
agreed to host a goodwill visit from the US Navy this year.

The official organ of the Chinese Communist Party, the People's Daily, 
came out in support of the New Zealand banning last year with a 
commentary that said China supported New Zealand's stand against the
superpowers.

*** end quote *** (The rest of the article talked about the Hong Kong
accord between Britain and China)
-- 
James C. Armstrong, Jnr.		ihnp4!abnji!nyssa

In the sight of the Great Video, and of Varos, who gave his name to
our planet, we pray that you accept the lives of these humble deviants,
in recompense for their sins.  We also pray that you look benignly upon
us, and down upon your people as servants.

jj@alice.UUCP (04/18/85)

WRONGO, Ginger Breath! (or so you called yourself)<frankly, I dislike such labels.>

Mainland China did indeed say what you quoted.  THEY announced it,
we didn't.  The State Department immediately said "Hey!   We didn't
say that!"

(Or so says the Star Ledger, Guardian indeed.)

-- 
DO TEDDY BEARS HAVE OPINIONS?  ASK YOURS TODAY!
"I'm amazed that men like you can be so shallow, thick and slow"

(ihnp4/allegra)!alice!jj

wetcw@pyuxa.UUCP (T C Wheeler) (04/19/85)

The news article quoted from the Guardian will
also come as a surprise to the Pentagon, the New
York Times, and the Navy since all three have
reported just the opposite.  Who would you rather
believe is the watchword here.  I tend not to
put too much credence in a story out of Peking
by some news stringer, especialy since no other
news media has reported the same story.  I think
I will stick to the Navy version this time around.
T. C. Wheeler

nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (04/19/85)

>Mainland China did indeed say what you quoted.  THEY announced it,
>we didn't.  The State Department immediately said "Hey!   We didn't
>say that!"
>
>(Or so says the Star Ledger, Guardian indeed.)

Would the US government admit that they would give such a guarantee
to China and not New Zealand?  Pretty unpolitic of them, but equally
unpolitic of the US to blow a friendly mission to China because of
the lack of such a guarantee.  Answer: agree to the guarantee without
public mention.  (Why China announced it, I don't know.  Perhaps
to quell possible hostility to a US visit?)

I tend to trust the Guardian more than the Star Ledger.
-- 
James C Armstrong, Jnr.   ihnp4!abnji!nyssa

No, thank you.  Guns can seriously damage your health, you know!

jj@alice.UUCP (04/19/85)

OK, Mr/Ms Nyessa, you belive the news from China, a country
that just might see it's way clear to making the ANZUS alliance
that it's scared of a little weaker, but you don't believe your
own Department of State.  Now I HAVE to agree that the dept. of
State has an (um,ahem) bad  record, but I also have seen in prior news releases
in such places as Peking, a (shall we say) trace of self-interest
as well.  Given the situation, it's clear to me that there would
be no reason for PRC to NOT announce things the way they did,
and for the US to respond truthfully.


I find your prejudice against ANYTHING the US government does
so silly as to be almost pathetic.  As to your comments
re Guardian/Star Ledger,  like it or not, they both have the
same information.
-- 
DO TEDDY BEARS HAVE OPINIONS?  ASK YOURS TODAY!
"I'm amazed that men like you can be so shallow, thick and slow"

(ihnp4/allegra)!alice!jj

nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (04/23/85)

Further information on this topic:  The next day's issue of the
Guardian pointed out the fact that the US Navy ships to visit
Peking will be coming from Japan (with whom we have a treaty
stating that we will not bring nuclear weapons into their territory),
so they will not be armed with nuclear weapons.  The Chinese
representative construed that to mean that the US ships will
not be visiting China with nuclear weapons on board:  No formal
declaration of such by the US Gov't.  Assuming we still honour 
the treaty with Japan, and assuming we would not load nuclear
weapons onto the ship at sea before the visit to China, then the
statement by the Chinese is valid.

Of course the Star Ledger has access to the same information, who
is their Peking correspondant, again?
-- 
James C Armstrong, Jnr.   ihnp4!abnji!nyssa

Chap with wings there, five rounds rapid!

mangoe@umcp-cs.UUCP (Charley Wingate) (04/25/85)

In article <574@abnji.UUCP> nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) writes:

>If I may correct you, I should like to point out that my breath
>is not odored with Kiwi, rather ginger.  Also, I quote from the Guardian:
>
>_Naval deal with Washington likely to anger New Zealand_
>
>CHINA WINS US PLEDGE TO BAN VISITS BY NUCLEAR SHIPS
>
>From Mary-Louise O'Callaghan in Peking
>
>   The US is giving to China the non-nuclear guarantee on all ships 
>visiting Chinese ports that it has refused to give to New Zealand, according
>to the General Secretary of the Communist Party, Mr. Hu Yaobang.
>
>Mr. Hu said that China supported New Zealand's non-nuclear stance and
>disclosed that China had asked and received assurances from the US that
>any US ships visiting Chinese ports would be conventional warships.

Hail, O Ginger Breath.  One can see from the article that the Chinese claim
is false, and this was confirmed in the _Wash. Post_.  The U.S. agreed to
send conventionally POWERED ships.  Nothing was said about armament.

Charley Wingate  umcp-cs!mangoe

"For the mouse is a creature of great personal valour."    --   C. Swift