1. Excerpts from Bush New York Times interview on missile defense, nuclear cuts, China and Russia - January 13, 2001 Q. What worries you more when you think about China, a strong China that begins deploying more weapons, becomes more aggressive in the area, or a weak China that is internally having great difficulty? A. That's an interesting question. I would hope that there would be a strong market- oriented country that does not feel the need to spend a lot of its G.N.P. on offensive weaponry. . . . China is not going to be weak. It is still going to have a military presence. . . . Q. Internally weak? A. Internally weak is going to mean that there is uncertainty and instability in the government. . . . The cultural revolution, for example, to me, is the kind of thing that the world would like to avoid because of the uncertainty of what China would look like after a cultural revolution. It was an unbelievable period of time in that country. It was a period of time where - it was just an unleashing. It was chaotic. It was anarchistic in many ways. To me, particularly as China develops as the military power, a chaotic China would be something that should cause great concern to people in the region and to us. . . . I would like to see predictability when it comes to people with whom we are dealing. That is not to say that I am not going to push for freedoms. And I agree with the president to trade with China. As a matter of fact, I agreed with him to the point that during the campaign I supported his initiative. I'm trying to figure out if your question is a trick question. Q. No, it was pretty straightforward. A. We're just going to have a lot of work. . . . Redefining the role of the United States from enablers to keep the peace to enablers to keep the peace from peacekeepers is going to be an assignment. And national missile defense is going to be an assignment of the secretary of state. I am very aware of that. Q. Would you go ahead even if it looked like the Chinese would build up their nuclear forces [to overwhelm the missile defense system]? A. They are building up their nuclear forces. . . . Q. But right now, they are nowhere near what Russia, for example, has deployed. . . . A. Correct. But nevertheless . . . Russia's nuclear force load is decreasing. They [China] are increasing. And we've just got to explain why we are doing what we are doing. National missile defense is - let me start over. . . . The Chinese know and the Russians know that there will be no system developed in the immediate future or foreseeable future, is a better word, that can conceivably intercept a multiple launch regime. . . . You know that. They know that. . . . I'm kind of rambling on here. But I thought it was very interesting when at some point [Russian President Vladimir V.] Putin said, "You start talking about interception on the launch and theater-based protections." I found that to be an interesting statement. When I ever visit, I look forward to exploring that discussion with him, because it's precisely what I told [Russian Foreign Minister Igor S.] Ivanov in my meeting with him prior to the election. And they've raised great objections about missile defense, but I explained to them that I understand that the technology and the will, for that matter, of some in Congress will really mean that initially we will be deploying systems that will prevent the accidental launch of the ones and twos, with the ability for some nation like Iran to eventually say to us, "And we've got one aimed at Israel. And what are you going to do about it? . . . "One thing I did talk about in the campaign that hasn't gotten much focus is our willingness to reduce our own nuclear capacity, to reduce the offensive nature of our inventory and enhance the defensive posture of America. Q. Did that issue come up in your Pentagon discussions? A. No, it didn't, interestingly enough. Q. How low do you think you could bring the American arsenal? A. That's what we are going to find out. I'm going to make our case to parties involved. . . . I have said that one of our top priorities with Russia is to work with them on the spread of technologies, as well as nuclear safety. . . . I also have said it's going to be up to Russia to decide whether or not it is a place for - it's a welcoming place for our capital. They have to make the decisions on matters of real law and sound accounting principles. They have to assure capital that it is a safe haven. That you can get a reasonable rate of return. That's up to Russia. Lawrence "Butch" Turk Stop Star Wars campaigner Greenpeace USA 5901 Shattuck Av. Oakland, CA 94609 hm/ofc tel: 510-654-7568 cell tel: 202-251-8104 [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
