Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Sully- who wrote (692245)	7/15/2005 9:33:31 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769670

Both Parties Propose to Punish China Trade By Paul Blustein Washington Post Staff Writer Friday, July 15, 2005; A04 washingtonpost.com Powerful members of Congress yesterday announced plans to introduce bills aimed at punishing China for some of its trade practices, making it likely that passage of such legislation will be necessary to secure approval of the controversial Central American Free Trade Agreement. Rep. Bill Thomas (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, threw his weight behind legislation that would allow U.S. companies to seek duties on goods found to be subsidized by the Chinese government. Thomas acknowledged that he had resisted previous versions of the bill, but was coming around in part because a few lawmakers -- notably fellow Republican Phil English (Pa.) -- were insisting on it as the price of their support for CAFTA. "This is exactly the kind of progress that we need to be taking on the biggest trade issue the U.S. is facing," English said at a news conference with Thomas. Thomas said the bill would be more "responsible" than earlier drafts. Thomas's endorsement demonstrated the desire of Congress to take action against China's trade policies, and the difficulty the Bush administration and its Republican allies are having trying to get CAFTA through the House. Although the trade pact was passed by the Senate, 54 to 45, late last month, it faces a far tougher battle in the lower chamber. On the surface, the China and CAFTA issues aren't closely related. The growing U.S. trade deficit with China and the recent bid by a Chinese firm for a U.S. oil company has fed congressional anxiety about Beijing's increasing economic muscle and outrage over practices such as keeping its currency fixed against the U.S. dollar. CAFTA, which would significantly lower trade barriers between the United States and six Latin American countries, has drawn fire for failing to protect worker rights adequately and for threatening U.S. special interests such as the sugar industry. But House Republican leaders have been forced to confront the prospect that CAFTA might fail to secure enough votes in the House, which would be a devastating setback to President Bush's trade agenda. Lawmakers may think they have enough political "cover" to vote for CAFTA if they have also voted to punish Chinese trade practices -- or so many political analysts believe. Thomas essentially confirmed that was his strategy. Asked if he expected a vote on the China bill before CAFTA comes to the floor in late July, he said "it is probably a good idea to do it before . . . so we let people express themselves" on the China trade issue first. He said he expected no difficulty getting House Republican leaders to accept his schedule. "I think I can persuade them," Thomas said, smiling. Democrats, who are almost unanimously opposed to CAFTA, portrayed Thomas's statement as a sign of desperation. "The Republican leadership cannot get the votes to pass CAFTA on its own merits," said Rep. Charles B. Rangel (N.Y.), ranking Democrat on the Ways and Means Committee. Rangel and other Democrats introduced their own anti-China bill yesterday. Linking such legislation to CAFTA "diminishes the importance of both trade matters and underscores the weakness of the Bush administration's current policy toward trade with China and the major flaws in CAFTA," said Rep. Sander M. Levin (D-Mich.). The bill endorsed by Thomas and English, which they said was still being prepared yesterday, would authorize the Commerce Department to impose duties on government-subsidized imports from "non-market economies" such as China. Currently, imports from such countries are subject only to anti-dumping penalties, though under rules that make it easier to conclude that dumping has taken place. English said the bill would retain the "heart and soul" of his previous drafts. Thomas said that the bill had been changed enough to make it acceptable to him. "Compromise is at the heart of American politics," he said. "You listen to the concern and you try to accommodate it as best you're able." He added that he did not expect the administration to raise serious objections. Neena Moorjani, a spokeswoman for the U.S. trade representative, said, "We have some concerns about the bill, but we're studying it." The bill would also require the administration to monitor more comprehensively how China complies with its trade obligations on the piracy of goods, and other matters. In addition, the Treasury Department would be required to submit a report to Congress defining currency manipulation. Thus far, the Treasury has declined to describe China's currency policy as manipulation. Democrats contended that their bill was tougher. It would amend trade laws "to allow U.S. action against currency manipulation and would define it as a trade violation," Levin said, adding that it also covered problems concerning China that the Republican bill did not address. A press officer at the Chinese embassy did not return a phone message seeking comment. © 2005 The Washington Post Company

To: Sully- who wrote (692245)	7/15/2005 9:34:25 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Respond to of 769670

Chinese General Threatens Use of A-Bombs if U.S. Intrudes July 15, 2005 By JOSEPH KAHN nytimes.com BEIJING, Friday, July 15 - China should use nuclear weapons against the United States if the American military intervenes in any conflict over Taiwan, a senior Chinese military official said Thursday. "If the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition on to the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons," the official, Maj. Gen. Zhu Chenghu, said at an official briefing. General Zhu, considered a hawk, stressed that his comments reflected his personal views and not official policy. Beijing has long insisted that it will not initiate the use of nuclear weapons in any conflict. But in extensive comments to a visiting delegation of correspondents based in Hong Kong, General Zhu said he believed that the Chinese government was under internal pressure to change its "no first use" policy and to make clear that it would employ the most powerful weapons at its disposal to defend its claim over Taiwan. "War logic" dictates that a weaker power needs to use maximum efforts to defeat a stronger rival, he said, speaking in fluent English. "We have no capability to fight a conventional war against the United States," General Zhu said. "We can't win this kind of war." Whether or not the comments signal a shift in Chinese policy, they come at a sensitive time in relations between China and the United States. The Pentagon is preparing the release of a long-delayed report on the Chinese military that some experts say will warn that China could emerge as a strategic rival to the United States. National security concerns have also been a major issue in the $18.5 billion bid by Cnooc Ltd., a major Chinese oil and gas company, to purchase the Unocal Corporation, the American energy concern. China has had atomic bombs since 1964 and currently has a small arsenal of land- and sea-based nuclear-tipped missiles that can reach the United States, according to most Western intelligence estimates. Some Pentagon officials have argued that China has been expanding the size and sophistication of its nuclear bombs and delivery systems, while others argue that Beijing has done little more than maintain a minimal but credible deterrent against a nuclear attack. Beijing has said repeatedly that it would use military force to prevent Taiwan from becoming a formally independent country. President Bush has made clear that the United States would defend Taiwan. Many military analysts have assumed that any battle over Taiwan would be localized, with both China and the United States taking care to ensure that it would not expand into a general war between the two powers. But the comments by General Zhu suggest that at least some elements of the military are prepared to widen the conflict, perhaps to persuade the United States that it could no more successfully fight a limited war against China than it could against the former Soviet Union. "If the Americans are determined to interfere, then we will be determined to respond," he said. "We Chinese will prepare ourselves for the destruction of all the cities east of Xian. Of course the Americans will have to be prepared that hundreds of cities will be destroyed by the Chinese." General Zhu's threat is not the first of its kind from a senior Chinese military official. In 1995, Xiong Guangkai, who is now the deputy chief of the general staff of the People's Liberation Army, told Chas W. Freeman, a former Pentagon official, that China would consider using nuclear weapons in a Taiwan conflict. Mr. Freeman quoted Mr. Xiong as saying that Americans should worry more about Los Angeles than Taipei. Foreign Ministry officials did not immediately respond to requests for comment about General Zhu's remarks. General Zhu said he had recently expressed his views to former American officials, including Mr. Freeman and Adm. Dennis C. Blair, the former commander in chief of the United States Pacific Command. David Lague of The International Herald Tribune contributed reporting for this article. * Copyright 2005 The New York Times Company