Chinese fixated on winning war against US via "assassin's mace."

U.S.-China Commission ^ | 7/15/2002 | Richard D'Amato

[sam_paine]

		Statement by Chairman Richard D’Amato U.S. Capitol, July 15, 2002 Thank you for coming this morning. I will make brief remarks, as will Vice Chairman Michael Ledeen, then answer your questions. This is the Commission’s first annual report to the Congress. Congress directed us to look at the wide scope of the U.S.-China bilateral economic and trade relationship, with a focus on its national security implications. We spent the last year holding hearings, engaging in original research and conducting meetings to serve as the eyes and ears of Congress. We have tried to augment Senators’ and members’ understanding of this complicated, big and growing relationship between the US and China, its dangers, trends, opportunities, and particularly its unknowns. This is a bipartisan product, the results of a broad agreement among nearly all of the Commissioners, a highly varied group of people who put fresh eyes on this subject, and approved the Report by a vote of 11-1. I want to commend Vice Chairman Ledeen for his work and support in this effort, and thank all Commissioners, most of whom are in this room, for their hard work and creative diligence. This is an educational report and an action document. Each chapter highlights findings and makes recommendations which flow from those findings. The Executive summary gives the key 21 recommendations, but you will find many others at the end of each chapter. We have copies available of our entire hearing record, and a two volume set of our documentary annex -- original research and original translations of Chinese materials. We also have released an original survey research study done at the University of Maryland, which documents Chinese media treatment of the U.S. from various perspectives. We found that U.S. policy toward China has been and is fragmented, lacking consistency and depth. It has often been driven solely by commercial interests, or by specific human rights issues, or by a particular military crisis – rather than by a comprehensive examination of all the issues which impact this relationship. Furthermore, over the last 30 years it has been dominated by strong Executive branch personalities and compulsive secrecy. We lack a sustainable consensus on the fundamental national interests of the U.S. among our elected leadership, particularly between the President and Congress. We think the nation is poorly served by this shortcoming, and it needs to be corrected, particularly as China grows in economic and military power, and the U.S. plays a substantial role in propelling that rise in power. We are also very concerned over the serious differences in the perceptions held by each country of the other, lacking agreed-upon goals, core values and shared agendas. The potential for miscommunications and serious misunderstandings is apparent. It is compounded by a dismal failure, despite long American efforts, to establish bilateral institutions for confidence building, threat reduction, and crisis management. Let me call your attention to several unique aspects of our report: Chapter 1 on conflicting national perspectives opens the report because we think it sets the framework which needs understanding and attention by the Congress. We think that Chinese strategic thinking that we have documented in this chapter is cause for concern. The Chinese leadership appears to be fixated on so-called asymmetrical warfare, or silver bullets, surprise weaponry and tactics they call assassin’s mace. We worry that they may be mesmerized by a self-deception that they can prevail in military scenarios with the U.S. on the cheap through such surprise strategies. These perceptions problems are accompanied, in our view, by the steadfast refusal of the Chinese leadership to engage us constructively on the matter of building effective bilateral confidence building institutions and procedures. We are encouraging the Administration to make renewed attempts to build such institutions. We go to some lengths to make numerous recommendations designed to enhance U.S. better understanding and knowledge of China and Chinese materials in the U.S. We recommend rebuilding the Library of Congress China collection, new national education language and area studies grants programs similar to the NDEA programs of the past, new efforts at open source collection by the intelligence community and an upgrading of the FBIS, Federal Broadcast Information Service. We know too little about China’s intentions, what they are communicating to their own people, and to us, and we need a far better level of effort. In Chapters 2, 3, 6 and 7 we document the growing, and very unbalanced economic relationship. We have a huge $80+ billion trade deficit, large flows of investment, R&D, private and public technology to China, as well as substantial funding from U.S. capital markets. U.S. exports of goods to China remain stagnant, while China’s exports to the U.S. are exploding. Our primary exports to China are our manufacturing capacity, R&D, and investment capital, not goods – and we differ in important ways with Europe in this area. The Chinese are dependent in substantial ways on U.S. economic flows. The impacts of this flow of resources on our national industrial base and national security is poorly documented. It needs careful monitoring. Our report calls for increased scrutiny of corporate activities in China, and a new corporate reporting system as to what investment, R&D and technology is being sent to China. We are also concerned over China’s impact on other Asian economies, particularly the Japanese, but also ASEAN and Taiwan, and call for fuller consultations between the U.S. and our Asian friends and allies on the consequences of this phenomenon for our mutual relations. Also there is a unique presentation in the Capital markets area (Chapter 6); a renewed call for more effective consultations and consensus building between the President and Congress on Taiwan policy (Chap 8). We are recommending refashioning the American toolbox of incentives and disincentives to enhance American leverage and encourage the Chinese to comply with their commitments -- in proliferation practices, prison labor agreement enforcement, IPR enforcement, and most importantly, with their far-reaching obligations under the WTO. We have proposed new American assistance programs to help China come into compliance in the WTO and build a working rule of law system in China – the success or failure of this I believe is the most important benchmark of progress as this commission’s work proceeds. The final chapter includes a series of recommendations for future Commission work, and those recommendations have now been incorporated in next years legislative appropriations bill. As you will see, they focus on proliferation, the full range and impacts of economic transfers to China, use of U.S. capital markets, corporate reporting, WTO compliance, and Asian regional impacts. A number of our recommendations have already been communicated to Congress, and several of them have already been acted upon or are being seriously considered as we speak. In concluding, one might ask our position on the policy we call "constructive engagement." My view is that if constructive engagement is to have any meaning or content beyond a superficial catchphrase, and be a sound basis for the refashioning of U.S. policy on a more coherent basis, it will have to become a real two-way street, not the sound of one hand clapping. In sum, we are looking for Chinese willingness to take steps to develop relations not susceptible to constant surprise, where the common ground is expanded and understood, open and transparent, and where cooperation and a positive atmosphere is nurtured. As yet, we do not see these things happening. Vice Chairman Ledeen.
	Home | USCC Charter | Hearing Schedule | Transcripts | Commission Members

[sam_paine]

Great news. The "Bill" is coming due.

(in Breaking News as it was just reported on FNC...)

[headsonpikes]

How can they get that assassin's mace through airport security? It's gotta look a little lumpy.

I don't think the Chinese have thought this through thoroughly.

[ecomcon]

Bump

[FreedomPoster]

I like the summary. I am afraid that all of the FedGov's eyes are on the Muslims, and the China represents a greater medium-term threat. And may be allied with some of our enemies in the Muslim world, on the sly (Iraqi weapons transfers, etc.).

Bump!

[vannrox]

Oh, personally, I believe that their individual interests are not that different from ours.

[sheik yerbouty]

They will lose.

[staytrue]

We know too little about China’s intentions, what they are communicating to their own people, and to us, and we need a far better level of effort.

You convieniently left this quote out of the title.

[sam_paine]

In the same vein, bank robbers are similar to folks with interest earning checking accounts....they both just want to make a little money.

There is a serious difference between the interests of a communist military dictatorship, and an open (as measured by whistleblowers and leaks to a free press), if not democratic society that at least still tolerates private property.

I'm doing more and more business with Chinese semiconductor companies...business we used to do with Japan and Taiwan.

It is a noticeable difference for new business opptys when we are told upfront that nothing can be covered under a Non Disclosure Agreement because any trade secret or product becomes property of the "Chinese People" when it hits their shore. It's not even that bad in Taiwan.

[Carry_Okie]

I don't think the Chinese have thought this through thoroughly.

On the contrary. Their efforts are careful, consistent, patient, inexpensive, and effective. You should note the breadth and depth of their efforts in Latin America, from the Panama Canal through Chavez in Venezuela to the Bahamas. Their alliances with Mexico are longstanding while Mexican contact with Taiwan is nil. Their ability to supply and augment military transport to our Southeast is increasing rapidly. It is clear that they intend to use strife both internally and all across our southern perimeter to prevent us from responding to their agressions across the Pacific. You will note growing distaste in Mexico for US policy in the Middle East and their willingness to abet trans-shipment of Arab terrorists into this country.

[sam_paine]

Left what out of the title? Should I just paste the entire article in the "title" field, or just paste the part -you- want to discuss, or just paste the part that -I- want to discuss?

I suggest you start your own thread and focus it on what -you- want to discuss.

[genefromjersey]

" Constructive Engagement " is shorthand for " Ai-ee ! Stupid American Running Dog Capitalists and Their Lackeys Dig Their Own Economic Graves ! "

[thatsnotnice]

The Chinese view the U.S. as a hegemon in decline and have told everyone that will listen that they will fill the void as the U.S. vacates an area or press us when we stagnate in an area. They have been doing so. It’s no secret.

[sam_paine]

Their alliances with Mexico are longstanding while Mexican contact with Taiwan is nil.

Are you suggesting a Taiwan-China conflict where Mexico and the "Reconquistas" would be allied with China and we would be fighting for the "1848 borders."

Seems far fetched, but stranger things happen.

[Map Kernow]

We think that Chinese strategic thinking that we have documented in this chapter is cause for concern. The Chinese leadership appears to be fixated on so-called asymmetrical warfare, or silver bullets, surprise weaponry and tactics they call assassin’s mace. We worry that they may be mesmerized by a self-deception that they can prevail in military scenarios with the U.S. on the cheap through such surprise strategies.

Think "Pearl Harbor." The Japanese thought that that surprise attack would take out essentially all our capability to counter their thrust south into the Philippines, Malaya, and Indonesia, and force us to negotiate a peace that would concede Japan hegemony over Asia and the Western Pacific. Their "magic bullet" strategy didn't ultimately work, but it did work long enough to cost us considerable lives and treasure. Let's not let it happen again, no matter how much profit Wal-Mart and other US companies make by business dealings with China.

[spetznaz]

I personally believe that the threat of assymetrical warfare posed by the Chinese is a threat that should be taken quite seriously. And this is for a number of reasons.

First of all assymetrical warfare (AW from now on) has been proven to be a viable mode of war when you need to negate or threaten superior military assets. It worked perfectly in Afghanistan during the 1980s when the CIA helped Usama bin Laden and his fellow mujahadeens (then they were called 'Freedom fighters') fend off Soviet attacks. There they used stinger (and in smaller measures redeye) handhel SAMs to neutralize Soviet helicopter gunships and fighter-bombers. In Vietnam too the Soviets gave 'aid' to the Vietcong by providing sophisticated (for then) SAM systems that wrought havoc on our WildWeasels and other US fighters.

Yet compared to what China is developing today that type of AW was very rudimentary!

There are reports that China has been 'acquring' sophisticated Western and Russian military tech (when i say acquired i mean through direct purchase, indirect purchase, and theft). The following are several examples.

First thing first they have SunBurn missiles! The sunburn is a supersonic missile developed by Russia for one purpose and one purpose only .....destroying American aircraft carriers! They are quite fast, extremely maneuvrable, and able to use a 'ripple effect' where a line of missiles attack at different flight paths, different angles and different speeds, all in a bid to beat the anti-missile defenses of the carrier. China has them.

China also has the J-10 fighter jet, which it developed thanks to the US and Israel! How? The US and Israel were working ona fighter concept called the Lavi which got cancelled in 1987, but somehow some Israeli general decided it was prudent (perhaps financially) to send the prototype details to China. Thus the J-10 was developed.

China also has the J-11 ....which in Russia is known as the Sukhoi-27 Flanker. This is a very advanced jet fighter, ranked better or equal to any western jet (apart from the upcomign F-22 Raptor and possibly the Eurofighter). This Russian jet's specifics were bought by China, and they can now make it indigenously as the J-11. Luckily most Chinese pilots do not seem to be very good pilots and thus have been crashing this very capable jet quite often (LOL) but should they learn how to use it as the Russians do let me just say any American pilot in a F-18 Hornet/SuperHornet will find himself in dire straits!

Plus they got have some Israeli made Python-3 air to air missiles, which are quite advanced (the Python-4 is the best in the world) as well as the Russian R-73 (which by the way is ranked as second best in the ASRAAM category inthe world). Nothing we have can match these missiles that can even be fired laterally from the fighter jet. Some say the also have the R-77 (an extremely advanced AMRAAM) but i personally do not believe the Russians would have sold them such a missile.

China has also been trying to acquire the Shvkal 2 Hypercavitating Rocket torpedo, which travels underwater in an 'envelop' of gases at speeds 4-5 times faster than anything we have. Some say china may have obtained either one of the prototypes of the former Shvkal-1, or working plans of the Shvkal-2.

Then there is the J-12 fighter project that is due for completion a decade from now. The J-12 is a stealth program that utilizes Russian stealth tech (from the Russian stealth prototypes Mig-Mapo 1.42 and the other Russian stealth S-37 Berkerut ...not to be confused with the Su-37 'terminator' which is not stealth). The J-12 is said to be in the same league with the F-22 Raptor and is meant to match it in performance and abilities (although the J-12 will have more gorund attack capabilities).

China has also invested in both the Czech 'Tamara' anti-stealth radar (a relatively rudimentary passive radar suite that can detect stealth aircraft) as well as much more advanced Russian anit-stealth detection devices.

Anyway the purpose of AW for China is not to make them win any wars with the US! Nope, that would never happen because the US is just too strong for China to stop directly. What AW is for is to cause sufficient casualties on the American side to cause the American population back home to reconsider the fight and call back the soldiers. After all China is banking that Americans back here will not let there people die in the protection of Taiwan. Imagine what the populace would do if two aircraft carriers were sunk with all hands on board. There would be many calling for the immediate destruction of China, even using nukes .....but many more would start questioning what American soldiers are doing defending Taiwan and a Vietnam situation would develop where they are calling for immediate withdrawal.

That is why AW by the Chinese should be looked at carefully.

[headsonpikes]

I guess I just keep assuming that when push comes to shove, we'll unleash Hell on them.

I know no-one interested in a Chinese-run world; so long as the U.S. maintains strategic supremacy, and elects a President with a pair, China is just another Asian despotism.

Despotism has never travelled well.

[Carry_Okie]

Look at the long progress of history where nations have come and gone? What is "far fetched" about it?

[LibWhacker]

It appears to me that America's hyper-power status -- while comforting to us -- is totally unacceptable to any number of major countries and loose alliances around the world (China, Russia, all of the muslim countries, and even some of our so-called friends in Europe). For our own safety we should be prudent about this and regard them collectively as perfectly capable and treacherous enough to do ANYTHING they think is necessary to do to prevent us from holding onto that distinction much longer.

Each knows he cannot defeat us alone and yet appears fully committed to defanging us somehow, someway, sometime -- but soon. That implies they'll necessarily come around to a secret mega-alliance. And it may already be forming. The EU has has come right out and stated as much: they are determined to dethrone us as the leading economic power in the world. China is working like crazy to build up its military. Russia is unhappy with us. And the unity of muslim opinion amongst countries that normally have little use for one another is another indicator.

I just hope it's only the background static in my tinfoil hat that's causing me to interpret much of the rest of the world's convergence of opinion about us and their increasing hatred for us as a sure prelude to a coordinated surprise attack by the whole lot of them. But I fear it isn't. And that's the real assassin's mace we should be worrying about, imo -- not a blow from one country like a China, but a simultaneous blow from many.

So it makes no sense to me for us to be disposing of our "surplus" nukes at this time. Indeed, this is the worst possible time to do such a thing . . . Just my opinion.

[Red Jones]

thanks for that run-down.

Many have underestimated the americans in the past.

[Map Kernow]

Their efforts are careful, consistent, patient, inexpensive, and effective. You should note the breadth and depth of their efforts in Latin America, from the Panama Canal through Chavez in Venezuela to the Bahamas. Their alliances with Mexico are longstanding while Mexican contact with Taiwan is nil. Their ability to supply and augment military transport to our Southeast is increasing rapidly. It is clear that they intend to use strife both internally and all across our southern perimeter to prevent us from responding to their agressions across the Pacific. You will note growing distaste in Mexico for US policy in the Middle East and their willingness to abet trans-shipment of Arab terrorists into this country.

At least since World War I (remember the "Zimmermann telegram"?), the enemies of the United States have tried to gain Mexico's cooperation in a joint strategy against the United States. The incentive offered has always been the "restoration" of lands in the American Southwest that many, if not most, Mexicans still consider legitimately part of Mexico. The Chinese are very much aware of this, especially the continuing historical enmity between the US and Mexico over the 1846-48 war. Let's not kid ourselves: our border with Mexico is now, and will increasingly be in the future, a source of threats to our national security, aided and abetted by deep rooted Mexican popular hostility towards the US, and China has exploited and will increasingly exploit our vulnerability on our southern border. Depend on it.

[Vigilanteman]

Excellent point. I . . . and my family make it a point to loudly shun anything "Made in China". For some items, it is vitrually impossible, even if you are willing to pay more.

[PhilDragoo]

Munro and Bernstein, The Coming Conflict with China, 1997, suggest China has four strategic objectives:

1) U.S. out of Asia;
2) Japan neutralized;
3) SoKo absorbed;
4) Taiwan absorbed.

Unrestricted Warfare, by Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui (Beijing: PLA Literature and Arts Publishing House, February 1999) suggests asymmetric means to accomplish these ends.

As noted, China uses sock puppet North Korea, and its proliferation clients as deniable agents, trained Al Qaeda/Taliban, works with Mexico, Venezuela, Panama and others to thwart our aims--even as Henry the K said we ought not thwart theirs.

China is the biggest customer of Russia's Arms 'R' Us, buying a third and fourth Sovremenny destroyer with Moskits, eight Kilos, Su-30's, while loading up on IRBMs (350 headed for 600) opposite Taiwan.

Meanwhile economic unrest and instability from unemployment riots to major bank insolvency loom. Jiang has cooked the books, exaggerating growth while understating weapons expenditures.

China will exploit our preoccupation with Iraq or some future terrorist attack to bully Taiwan.

They rely heavily on a perceived softness, viz Xiong Guangkai offering to charbroil L.A.--then being Clinton's guest in the White House January 24-26, 2000, to "reestablish military-to-military connections".

Surely they parleyed their arms status to a quantum-leap generational improvement by the Loral-Hughes 1995 200-page fax, and the work of burros like Wen Ho Lee (pobrecito "victim" of "profiling").

We are the great hegemon, and the EP-3C incident should have cleared away any doubt.

Cuba's Russian sigint base at Lourdes was closed this year, and China takes its place, recently spoofing New York air traffic control into thinking it was U.S. military.

Jiang is being glorified and may seek a dramatic gain to cement his defying statute and remaining in power.

Certainly we live in interesting times.

[Libertarianize the GOP]

.

[DoctorMichael]

{sam_paine} In reference to the article and report: About Freakin' time!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

........I believe that their individual interests are not that different from ours.

{vannrox} You're kidding, right?

If not, then.............Between these little grinning, thuggish, greedy, cheating, totalitarian, sociopathic liars and those within this country that somehow in their own twisted, ignorant, flatulent, misguided way that can't see the difference between the two systems of government, here's hoping this country wakes up before its too late.

[Sawdring]

Bump to you folks!

[Ronin]

That's the truth. From where I sit in Japan, everything that China has done in the last 20 years seems geared to pushing the U.S. completely out of the Pacific and extending their influence throughout South-East Asia.

China's vision of its proper sphere of influence is everything from the Indian Ocean to Hawaii -- specifically including Australia and New Zealand.

China's long-term game plan for Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand and the other nations of the region is based on gathering economic dominance. Nations that historically distrust China (Viet Nam, Japan, Taiwan etc.,) are also being wooed, but at the same time, serious work is being done to isolate and counter them militarily.

[Republic If You Can Keep It]

Many thanks again to Clinton for giving them our sensitive missile technology.........after all, we're "strategic partners", remember?

[Askel5]

Thanks Sawdring. Much appreciated.

I like the "executive branch" dig but if you listen to them talking in The Message They're Sending is the Same Thing or listen to Byrd discuss the Virus that Infects the Senate, it's a little much to be arguing that our policy is somehow "fragmented".

That's about as ludicrous as pointing to some "partisanship" where abortion's concerned when -- in actuality -- abortion is a GOP policy for which the Democrats are charged with securing the Will (and Express Consent) of the People.

I still think China's gonna clean our clock. The cool thing being that it'll put the fear of God back in the Russians -- a revolution from below all the way to the top -- and she'll swing to the West for the Last Battle.

[sam_paine]

China's long-term game plan for Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand .....

So won't there be several countries (numerically at least) which will want us to prop them up against China? Is that why we are seeing "cooperation" in Phillipines/Indonesia???

Seems like it'll be to the little guys' advantage to play the US against China to keep their little governments afloat....

[Sawdring]

I think the US would crush China in a head to head conflict. But if they can keep the US navy at bay they might be able to make Taiwan stand down.

[honway]

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/710245/posts

Revelations that the Taliban was working on a telecom surveillance equipment with the help of the Chinese after 9-11

Cyber warfare could possibly qualify as "assassin's mace." Arming a surrogate to attack while China maintains deniability seems consistent with the committee's findings.

[FormerLurker]

But they're our friends. Nothing to see here, just move along..

[Ronin]

China's plan seems to be to buy them out rather slowly. At least as far as I can see. Let's face it, the ethnic Chinese control most of the economic clout in all these nations anyhow.

[PhilDragoo]

Friday, September 29, 2000

Chinese view mission-critical computer code

Report: FAA's air traffic control systems open to 'malicious attack'

by Charles Smith

According to a newly released General Accounting Office report on computer security, the Federal Aviation Administration has allowed Chinese nationals without security clearances to inspect "mission-critical" computer source code.

"We found instances in which background searches were not performed -- including on 36 mainland Chinese nationals who reviewed the computersource code of eight mission- critical systems as part of FAA's effort to ensure Year 2000 readiness," states the August GAO report.

"By again not following its own policies, FAA increased the exposure of its systems to intrusion and malicious attack," the report notes.

"FAA's own system penetration testing and vulnerability assessments demonstrate significant areas of weakness. Because of the sensitivity of this information, we do not publicly disclose details on these weaknesses."

The FAA security weakness, according to one defense adviser, could spell disaster in the near future. According to William Triplett, co-author of "Year of the Rat" and "Red Dragon Rising," the possible Chinese army penetration of critical U.S. air traffic control systems is part of an ongoing information war being waged against America.

"This has enormous implications for communist Chinese cyber warfare against the United States," stated Triplett, who has studied Chinese army information warfare. "In the event of a conflict, they could hold hostage the very lives of hundreds of thousands of American men, women and children."

According to Triplett's 1999 book "Red Dragon Rising," Chinese army information warfare is an "unheralded national security threat to the United States."

"The American economic, political and social system is essentially unprotected against a Chinese information warfare attack. As the PLA notes, 'America's economic system is extremely vulnerable to information attacks.' Senior PLA officers have begun to talk among themselves about a pre-emptive strike using information warfare," noted Triplett.

Concern over the GAO report is also growing on Capitol Hill. There are reports that the House National Security Committee discussed the GAO report in closed session on Wednesday. According to one congressional staffer,the FAA air traffic control system has previously been penetrated by theChinese military.

"The Chinese signals intelligence base in Cuba has already messed with FAA air traffic control around New York during a test last year," stated the source. "This whole situation is very troubling. The key is that these Chinese nationals were given access to 'mission-critical' parts of the FAA system. They know exactly where and how to bring it all down. If the Chinese army does take control of the U.S. air traffic control system, then planes will fall from the sky."

There is open evidence that American air traffic control is vulnerable to a Chinese cyber attack. The GAO has repeatedly documented security problems inside the FAA.

The August 2000 GAO report states that the FAA has "a history of computer security weaknesses in a number of areas, including its physical management at facilities that house air traffic control (ATC) systems, security for both operational and future systems, management structure for implementing security policies, and personnel systems.

"While FAA reports that it has performed background checks on the majority of its federal employees, the same cannot be said for its many thousands of contract employees," states the report.

"In January 2000, FAA estimated that it had over 28,000 existing contracts and purchase orders under which approximately 38,000 contract employees were engaged. However, according to the agency's database on contract personnel, background searches have been performed for only 16,000 contract employees since 1996, which -- even with the unlikely assumption that all of these people are still employed -- is less than half of the current contract employee population."

"Over the past three years, we have made over 20 recommendations to FAA to address these weaknesses in the areas of physical security of facilities, systems security, security management, and personnel security," noted the GAO report.

"While the agency is making progress in each of these areas, much work remains to be done to assess risks and to adequately protect critical ATC facilities, information and resources. Until this work is completed, FAA will remain noncompliant with its own security policies and the systems on which the flying public depends will continue to have vulnerabilities that are not being expeditiously identified and corrected."

In 1999, the General Accounting Office tested the physical security of the Federal Aviation Administration. GAO inspectors were able to penetrate secure areas including the offices of the secretary of State and critical air traffic computer rooms inside FAA facilities. The GAO auditors warned of the growing security problems during congressional testimony.

"We found significant weaknesses that compromise the integrity of FAA's air traffic control operations," stated the GAO auditor. "This review resulted in a number of findings too sensitive to discuss in today's open hearing; accordingly, my statement will refer only to findings and recommendations contained in the unclassified version of our limited official use report.We can tell you openly, though, that we found evidence of air traffic control systems that had been penetrated, and critical ATC data had been compromised."

"I am not familiar with this particular case at the FAA," stated Ross Munro, director of Asian Studies at the Center for Security Studies, a Washington based think tank.

"However, I am at least very concerned," noted Munro. "There are all too many instances where this administration has held exchanges with the People's Republic of China and the Americans are far more eager to ingratiate themselves with the Chinese than worry about U.S. national security interests."

Munro's concern that air traffic security has a lower priority than diplomatic overtures to China may be correct. Declassified documents from the FAA reveal that Chinese army officials were being given unprecedented access to both sensitive air control facilities and to American military bases at the same time FAA security had been compromised.

The Chinese military visits to U.S. air traffic control facilities took place under a civil airline modernization program for China. The documents, forced from the FAA by the Freedom of Information Act, are official Air Force, Commerce Department and FAA reports on Chinese military contacts between 1993 and 1999.

The documented meetings show that the Clinton administration attempted to conceal the military background of the Chinese representatives. For example, in 1993, a Chinese military delegation visited America under the FAA civil exchange program. According to the FAA, which sponsored the visit, the entire delegation was civilian. One FAA official, however, noted that many members of the Chinese delegation actually held rank in the People's Liberation Army.

In fact, the FAA official who attended the meeting wrote "military" next to the names of seven members of the 1993 "China Air Traffic Control" delegation in an apparent effort to track the Chinese army officers.

The 1993 FAA delegation list includes a "Mr. Kui Fulin," who toured FAA headquarters in Washington, D.C., Andrews AFB in Maryland and Boeing Aircraft Corporation in Washington state. According to the unknown FAA official, Kui was actually "Gen." Kui Fulin, Chinese army deputy chief of the General Staff. Kui is also known as the man who planned the brutal 1989 army attack on unarmed student demonstrations in Tiananmen Square.

The 1993 FAA list also states that "Mr. Li Yongtai" was the commissionerof the Air Traffic Control Commission of China. According to the handwritten notes taken by the FAA, Li was actually "Lt. Gen." Li of the Chinese air force.

According to the FAA documents, the Chinese army access to the FAA continued through 1999 under the civilian air program. In May 1999, documents show that Chinese air force and navy officers toured Edwards Air Force Base for the FAA civil program. Edwards AFB is a test center for Air Force and NASA research aircraft, including the space shuttle.

According to a May 1999 U.S. Air Force report, the Chinese were given details on "special airspace" areas inside America that are used for military training, research and national security zones. The Chinese military officers were also briefed on the latest in advanced "mobile radars," command and control systems, global positioning system navigation and surveillance radars.

During the tour, Chinese military officers were also given training on U.S. Air Force combat missions, including "bombing and strafing" and "combat readiness." The U.S. Air Force documents show Chinese air force officers were given a "simulated" F-16 training mission under the FAA civil program.

The training included a "two ship formation of F-16s from Luke AFB,Ariz.," on a "bombing" and over-flight mission in a training area, code-named "Baghdad," northwest of Prescott, Ariz. The simulated exercise also included "in-flight refueling" with a tanker aircraft under control of a U.S. Air Force airborne radar plane.

China's sigint installation on Cuba spoofed New York air traffic control this year into thinking it was U.S. military.

[Blood of Tyrants]

Have you taken a look at the idiots manning the airport "security"?

[sam_paine]

Buy them out, as in the tinpot despots, but not the people....I hope!! Surely everyone knows what they are doing to Hong Kong...unemployment...moving operations to China's coast....draining the miracle.

Exactly what they will do to Taiwan and any other Island down there.

[Steel and Fire and Stone]

The primary purpose of having a defense is deterrence. If deterrence fails, regardless of whether we ultimately prevail, we will have lost. We will have lost millions of American lives (including you, or someone you care about). We will have lost our security. We will have sacrificed rights that will make the traditional concept of "freedom" forever different.

The issue is not whether the U.S. can "win" a war against China, or more specifically, a Chinese led Axis, but whether we can convincingly deter such a war. The evidence is not good. The Chinese believe they can succeed in a war against the U.S., and that they could sustain the casualties such a war would entail.

If L.A. or N.Y. disappears tomorrow in a nuclear holocaust from a terrorist nuke, or a biological epidemic sweeps through the West, it will be months or years before the U.S. identifies the culprit. The Chinese, meanwhile, will move decisively to capitalize on the resulting vacuum in U.S. power, while we try to grapple with disaster, a collapsing economy, political unrest, and a dozen military situations around the world.

The threat has never been more real. I hope Bush's crew has a better handle on this behind the scenes, than is evident in public.

[Aaron_A]

All the scandals and indiscretions of the past are water under the bridge, we need to start looking at ways to neuter the Chinese dragon before it gets outta control.

[thatsnotnice]

I guess I just keep assuming that when push comes to shove, we'll unleash Hell on them.

I know, I know... someone has a plan, I guess...

I understand the sentiment though...

[SevenDaysInMay]

The monkey distracts one's attention away from the organ grinder, the true brains of the operation.

This world war has started.

[maui_hawaii]

link

Sorry about the re-post. The title change mixed me up.

[Don Joe]

"thanks for that run-down.

"Many have underestimated the americans in the past."

Indeed.

We have one item that is far beyond anything found in the aforementioned list. I don't know it's name, or the full extent of its capabilities, but I do know what I've seen it do with my own eyes. It can fly silently, at near-hovering speeds. By near-hovering speeds, I am talking about 1mph or slower, and by silently, I mean it is absolutely silent. It's about the size of a stealth fighter, perhaps a bit smaller, and has a rounded heart-shaped form factor, with a small cabin on top, and a notch in the rear, with no vertical control surfaces. It can also accelerate at a good clip, again, in absolute silence.

We've had this thing for at least six years.

[maui_hawaii]

"We have a huge $80+ billion trade deficit, large flows of investment, R&D, private and public technology to China, as well as substantial funding from U.S. capital markets. U.S. exports of goods to China remain stagnant, while China’s exports to the U.S. are exploding. Our primary exports to China are our manufacturing capacity, R&D, and investment capital, not goods –"

[maui_hawaii]

nothing can be covered under a Non Disclosure Agreement because any trade secret or product becomes property of the "Chinese People" when it hits their shore.

EXACTLY. "If it is not Chinese, then how is it in China?"

[Sabertooth]

We have one item that is far beyond anything found in the aforementioned list. I don't know it's name, or the full extent of its capabilities, but I do know what I've seen it do with my own eyes. It can fly silently, at near-hovering speeds. By near-hovering speeds, I am talking about 1mph or slower, and by silently, I mean it is absolutely silent. It's about the size of a stealth fighter, perhaps a bit smaller, and has a rounded heart-shaped form factor, with a small cabin on top, and a notch in the rear, with no vertical control surfaces. It can also accelerate at a good clip, again, in absolute silence.

We've had this thing for at least six years.

More information, please.

[Yehuda]

Chuck the Finese!

[sheik yerbouty]

I think China's real move might actually be Russia. China has a huge population. Russia beyond the Urals is open and enormous. China has been chummy lately with Indonesia, which for its size is densely populated. They, at a future date, and in conjunction with the PRC, may make a move on Australia if the US and the UK are otherwise engaged.

[Don Joe]

You know pretty much what I know. I watched one of them for about ten minutes in Aug. 1996 as it wandered overhead, coming in from the West, high, getting lower as it got closer, meandering around the sky as it slowly moved East. Shortly after it passed (just North of overhead), it picked up speed, and disappeared to the East in about a half minute or so. It rocked slowly side to side like a boat, and was black, with no markings that I could see.

I had the opportunity a few years ago to ask a fairly high-ranking Naval non-commissioned boomer sub officer (one of the hightest in the country, I will not say "how high" to protect his anonymity). He was a friend-of-a-friend and we were at a restaurant. He had an immediate change in demeanor from "life of the party" type guy to very uncomfortable as he vociferously protested that he knew nothing about it. A very bad Sgt. Schultz act, but no one was laughing. (The friend asked him about it later, because he acted so strange when I asked, and she said the same thing happened again -- he got all weird and insisted he knew nothing about it.)

[brat]

BTTT Thanks maui! They're already destroying us economically and I suspect it won't be long before all business is nationalized and the US cut out entirely. We've allowed Big Business to drain our nation of its lifeblood. Its probably too late. We can't fight a sustained war because alot of our weaponry parts are made overseas. Greed has done us in.