Why Is EU Putting US/China/Taiwan In Precarious Positions

[Annie]

How do you say France & Germany?

http://www.suntimes.com/output/osullivan/cst-edt-osul29.html

China-Taiwan balancing act jeopardized by EU

March 29, 2005

BY JOHN O'SULLIVAN

Imagine the following "European rockets sink U.S. aircraft carrier in Taiwan Straits." Such a headline is unlikely, of course. If such an event were ever to happen, it would mean a massive crisis had erupted both in Asia and across the Atlantic. Very likely, it would indicate the end of the Atlantic alliance -- and perhaps a new cold war between the United States and a new Euro-Chinese axis.

But such a headline is far from impossible if two current political trends continue uninterrupted.

[...]

And if the Taiwanese were rash enough to ignore this warning -- thus putting their real existing democratic independence at risk for a purely formal status -- he would extract in return for U.S. inaction a Chinese promise that a post-conflict Taiwan would enjoy the same kind of "special" status that Hong Kong has enjoyed since 1997.

It is not certain a Chinese attack across the straits would succeed even against a Taiwan unprotected by the United States. Taiwan is formidably armed, and as D-Day should warn us, amphibious operations are always very risky. That is why the Chinese are desperate to acquire the most modern weapons from whomever will sell them.

That is where the European Union comes in. At a time when the Bush administration is doing all it can to restrain Taiwan, the EU is proposing to aggravate this extraordinarily serious crisis by lifting its arms embargo on Beijing imposed after the massacre in Tiananmen Square. This decision is being firmly pushed by France and Germany, strongly supported by the nascent EU diplomatic staff headed by Javier Solana, and resisted by the Brits and the East Europeans.

Exactly why are the French, Germans and the Euro-diplomats pushing this controversial proposal so strongly? After all, it has some very obvious drawbacks. It risks a major trans-Atlantic rift at a time when U.S.-European relations were manifestly improving as a result of the recent Bush visit. It gives aid and comfort to a despotic Chinese regime with territorial ambitions. And it threatens to destabilize a part of the world -- northeast Asia -- where a number of important strategic threats already fester, for instance, North Korean nukes.

Quite simply, France under President Jacques Chirac and Germany under Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder want to forge a strategic partnership with China against the American "hyperpower" to bring about a "multi-polar world." The EU diplomatic machinery under Solana is going along with all that because its overriding impulse is to forge a common foreign policy distinct from U.S. foreign policy. And what could be more distinct than a policy of arming a major state that is threatening to invade a U.S. ally? It must give Solana a positive frisson of Euro-excitement -- reminding him perhaps of the days when he led anti-American demonstrations to keep Spain out of NATO.

It will seem much less exciting if, somewhere down the road, Bush's balancing act fails, the Chinese invade, America comes to the help of Taiwan, and an American aircraft carrier is attacked with French or German weapons sold by the EU. That dangerous situation will be even more dangerous if, by then, the EU has forged its strategic partnership with the Beijing dictatorship. We would then be in a new cold war....

 

[dilloduck]

How do you say France & Germany?

http://www.suntimes.com/output/osullivan/cst-edt-osul29.html

My guess would be that the EU countries need the bucks.

 

[Annie]

I think this more likely:

Quite simply, France under President Jacques Chirac and Germany under Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder want to forge a strategic partnership with China against the American "hyperpower" to bring about a "multi-polar world." The EU diplomatic machinery under Solana is going along with all that because its overriding impulse is to forge a common foreign policy distinct from U.S. foreign policy. And what could be more distinct than a policy of arming a major state that is threatening to invade a U.S. ally?

 

[Said1]

I think this more likely:

Originally Posted by suntimes article
Quite simply, France under President Jacques Chirac and Germany under Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder want to forge a strategic partnership with China against the American "hyperpower" to bring about a "multi-polar world." The EU diplomatic machinery under Solana is going along with all that because its overriding impulse is to forge a common foreign policy distinct from U.S. foreign policy. And what could be more distinct than a policy of arming a major state that is threatening to invade a U.S. ally?

Given their history of exterting power and promoting their own self-interests through international institutions (which appears to be coming to an end), it's time for plan B: arm and supply weapons. Talk about repeating old patterns.

 

[freeandfun1]

They are trying to stir shit so we have to clean it up and then once again be declared the bad guys. Folks need to wake up and realize that the EU is out to destroy the US. They aren't trying to do it militarily, but economically.

 

[Said1]

They are trying to stir shit so we have to clean it up and then once again be declared the bad guys. Folks need to wake up and realize that the EU is out to destroy the US. They aren't trying to do it militarily, but economically.

Bingo. Unfortuantely, Canada seems to be following the proverbial "Yellow Brick Road".