現在最下不了台的就是那群泛藍政客及統媒了.他們剛剛才賣力演出一齣[一邊一國後美國不滿台灣政府]騙劇,美國居然來了這個[不反對台獨論]!

垂頭喪氣下,統媒忙著壓抑這條新聞,泛藍政客只好尷尬地說,美國對兩岸事務一向維持模稜兩可的態度，阿米塔吉談話的代表性還須審慎評量，不宜因為一個人的談話就貿然加以論斷!

不錯,凡事是不宜因為一個人的談話就貿然加以論斷的.愛台灣的人絕不會因某某的一句話而樂昏了頭.從民進黨,台聯,及外交部對這事的發言,都可看出泛綠陣營審慎的態度和正確的處理方式.該問的是:為什麼統媒及泛藍政客在[一邊一國]報導時,必須撒謊,拚命尋找扭曲,甚至於造假,國務院發言人的所謂[言外之意]?譬如講話中忘了稱陳水扁為[總統],就大作文章;有人引述了一小段上海公報用語,就讓統派記者自淫了好幾天!還有那位厚皮小妹大的[蔡英文報告],記憶猶新吧....

統媒及泛藍政客們,你們如此喜愛[貿然加以論斷],阿米塔吉談話後,你們還敢厚著臉皮,呼籲各界不要[貿然加以論斷]?你們有羞恥心嗎?

>>正在北京訪問的美國副國務卿阿米塔吉，昨天會晤中國官員後召開記者會，首度鬆口表示，美國不支持台獨，但不表示反對台獨，可以說是語帶玄機。阿米塔吉也首開美國官員先例，第一次在中國公開以總統來稱呼陳水扁。<<

因為他如果表明支持的態度,
那麼不管我新投資的加工廠品質好或壞,
他都必定會給我訂單.
但是他也不反對,
因為只要我投資工廠的品質以及價格,
和外面比較起來有競爭力,
他還是會給我做的.

KSC兄：

統派媒體的牛皮越吹越大

越來越難善後

等著看他們吹破

>>泛藍政客只好尷尬地說,美國對兩岸事務一向維持模稜兩可的態度，阿米塔吉談話的代表>>性還須審慎評量，不宜因為一個人的談話就貿然加以論斷!

不是要吐嘈你...
你自己先說《台灣早就獨立, 不管誰支持不支持都一樣》
又在文章尾端寫到《台灣內部永遠都無法整合意見, 所以永遠也獨立不了》
到底誰才是自打嘴巴的《一群笨蛋!》呢?

聽不懂我用台灣格語講好了
台灣實質是在獨立狀態下的, 但是並沒有該有的名份, 目前看來也是很難得到名份, 這是統獨兩派都知道的事實, 既然如此, 那又為何有人喊獨呢? 大家都知道根本是在喊爽的, 所以我說:
【喊獨立只是一年四季搞選舉的政客的分化台灣內部爭取票源的手段罷了, 分化後的結果是什麼? 用腦筋想想吧! 台灣內部永遠都無法整合意見, 所以永遠也獨立不了, 這就是政客真正的目的。】
後面指的是的名份也被接受的獨立, 獨立的第一階段就是要全民共識, 你們這群笨蛋讓政客耍得團團轉,分化成如此大的阻力, 如何達成共識?
你們到底想不想獨立? 一群自以為是的笨蛋!

怎麼那麼多笨蛋....唉!....受不了。

或許有人想知道Armitage先生怎麼說:

本人對於貴報將昨日美國副國務卿阿米塔吉之談話扭曲，以下列標題來報導感到強烈不滿!!!!!!!!
************************************************
阿米塔吉：美堅持一中政策 不支持台獨 (中時電子報)
************************************************

請問各媒體包括電視新聞，中央社，聯合報，自由時報，台灣日報 ...等，在引述阿米塔吉回答美聯社記者提問之回答時，均依實際談話做報導及標題陳述，而在比對各相關新聞媒體後，中國時報之報導居然是與中共新華社之報導內容最為接近。

本人在此強烈抗議貴報扭曲事實之報導，也將email及post以下各報導之內容給友朋，讓大家來檢驗中國時報。我必須說，我很唾棄中國時報本篇之報導手法!!!


************************************************
中國時報 　 兩岸大陸 　 910827
阿米塔吉：美堅持一中政策 不支持台獨

　王綽中／北京二十六日電、周野／台北報導　昨天抵達北京訪問的美國副國務卿阿米塔吉今天向中共官員保證，美國將繼續堅持「一個中國」政策，並且不會支持台灣獨立。北京外交人士也透露，阿米塔吉此行主要是向中方傳達美國不會支持台獨的堅定立場，以為「一邊一國論」所引起的緊張關係降溫。

　今天早上，阿米塔吉展開了一連串拜會中共高層官員的行程。據美國大使館消息指出，今天阿米塔吉先後會晤了中共國家副主席胡錦濤、主管對外事務的副總理錢其琛、外交部長唐家璇，同時與主管對美事務的外交部副部長李肇星舉行工作會談。

　阿米塔吉在結束會見行程後，今天晚上八點三十分在美國駐北京大使館舉行記者會。對於今天與中共高層官員的會談，阿米塔吉表示滿意，並且認為此次中美官員會談具有「建設性」。

　在談到「台灣問題」時，阿米塔吉向中共官員表示，美國不會支持台灣獨立，將繼續堅持「一個中國」政策。有關「一邊一國論」所引起的波瀾，阿米塔吉認為，雖然中美雙方在台灣問題上有不同的意見，但兩國在處理此問題上已有很多經驗，此次問題「不會很嚴重」。

　有關美國最為關注的反恐問題，阿米塔吉對於中共昨天公布實施的「導彈及相關物項和技術出口管制條例」表示歡迎；中共方面也對美方同意將新疆東突分離分子放在國際反恐勢力上表示滿意。

　今年十月，中共國家主席江澤民將訪問美國，這也是阿米塔吉此行與中共方面磋商的重點。在會面後的記者會上，阿米塔吉只強調美國正在積極進行準備，並不願意透露細節；中共則告知，中共外交部將在九月初派出第一批先遣人員赴美，為江澤民十月的美國之行鋪路。

　在今天的會見中，中美兩國官員還討論了印巴、朝鮮等地區問題；美國官員也就人權和經貿問題與中共官員進行磋商，阿米塔吉同時也就當前美方最為關注的伊拉克問題提出討論。

　阿米塔吉此次的亞洲之行，已經先後會晤了斯里蘭卡、印度、巴基斯坦等國的領導人。在明天結束北京行程後，將轉往日本訪問。

　中共國家副主席胡錦濤廿六日下午在人民大會堂會見美國務院常務副國務卿阿米塔吉時表示，台獨勢力的分裂活動是台灣地區和平穩定的最大威脅，他希望美國能為台海地區的和平穩定發揮建設性的作用。

　據「新華社」報導，胡錦濤對阿米塔吉來參加中美副外長級磋商表示歡迎。他並希望美國能做好江澤民訪美準備工作，確保訪問成功。

　在談到臺灣問題時，胡錦濤闡述中共對臺灣問題的一貫方針和原則立場。他強調，「台獨」勢力的分裂活動是台海地區和平穩定的最大威脅，是亞太地區和平穩定的破壞因素。中國政府堅持「和平統一、一國兩制」的基本方針和江澤民解決臺灣問題的八項主張，致力於實現兩岸的和平統一。但我們絕不允許搞「台獨」，絕不容忍「台獨」勢力對中國主權和領土完整的損害。希望美方切實恪守一個中國政策和中美三個聯合公報的原則，為台海地區的和平穩定和中國的和平統一發揮建設性的作用。

　阿米塔吉則表示，美國內對美中關係雖有不同看法，但大多數人贊成發展美中關係。美方願意在反恐等各個領域加強同中方的合作，同時以建設性的態度處理彼此間的分歧。阿米塔吉並重申，美國政府堅持一個中國政策，不支援「臺灣獨立」，這一立場沒有改變。

新華社
唐家璇外長會見美國常務副國務卿阿米蒂奇
(2002.08.26 23:11:39)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

　　新華網北京８月２６日電 外交部長唐家璇今天會見了美國國務院常務副國務卿阿米蒂奇。

　　唐家璇說，近來中美關係取得進展，發展勢頭是好的。江澤民主席將於今秋訪美，與布希總統舉行第三次會晤。這對中美進一步發展建設性合作關係意義重大。中方願與美方一道，抓緊做好有關準備工作，確保訪問取得積極成果，推動兩國關係不斷取得新的進展。

　　唐家璇指出，慎重處理臺灣問題對中美關係穩定發展十分重要。“臺獨”意味著災難。希望美方認清“臺獨”分子的真面目，停止售臺先進武器和提升美臺關係，不再向“臺獨”勢力發出錯誤信號，為臺海地區的穩定與中美關係的健康發展做實事。

　　阿米蒂奇表示，近來美中雙方在雙邊領域和國際及地區問題上的磋商與合作富有成果。美方願與中方共同努力，加強兩國關係。美方高度重視江澤民主席即將對美國的訪問，願與中方共同做好各項準備工作，使這次訪問和兩國元首的會晤取得成功。

　　關於臺灣問題，阿米蒂奇重申，美國奉行一個中國的政策，遵守中美三個聯合公報的原則，不支援“臺獨”。

　　唐家璇表示，中方讚賞美方決定將有關“東突”組織列入恐怖主義組織名單，希望雙方在雙向、互利的基礎上加強反恐合作。中國政府一貫反對大規模殺傷性武器的擴散。中方剛剛頒布有關導彈及其相關物項和技術出口管制的條例及清單，這再次表明中國政府對防擴散的態度是認真的。希望中美雙方在平等和信任的基礎上，加強防擴散領域的合作。

　　阿米蒂奇表示，美方讚賞中方在反恐問題上的立場，對美中兩國在該領域的合作感到滿意。在反恐方面，美方願與中方相互支援，加強合作。中方頒布有關條例和清單是積極的步驟。雙方表示將加強溝通，努力推動防擴散領域的合作取得進展。

　　２６日上午，外交部副部長李肇星與阿米蒂奇舉行了中美副外長級政治磋商，雙方就江主席訪美準備工作、反恐、防擴散、經貿、南亞、中亞、朝鮮半島、中東及其他共同關心的問題廣泛、深入地交換了意見。

　　中國人民解放軍副總參謀長熊光楷同日也會見了阿米蒂奇一行。

今天自由時報就有提到，國民黨的用很尖酸嘲諷的方式說，美國之所以要這樣說，是怕台灣真的跟支那統一了。如果那樣，那美國的武器要賣給誰。

統派就是這樣無所不用其極的，以非常cynicism的論調質疑美國的動機，製造台灣人民對美國的不信任感。甚至讓台灣人民有被利用的感覺。好像台灣很好欺負，列強（除了一貫真心誠意對台灣熱愛的支那以外）都想來分一杯羹。

統派總是把大部分外國的友好善意都解讀為惡意，但是卻在條列支那各種威嚇發言中，咬文嚼字，硬說在這些威嚇中其實隱藏了很多善意，「就看扁政府能不能體會了」。

簡直是神經錯亂，莫名其妙。與其說是統派，不如說是舔支。

舉這個例子就很明白：有一個叫台灣的女孩被一個叫支那的流氓持刀意圖強姦，旁邊有一個叫美國的路人前來相助，拿出一把槍，阻止了流氓的邪惡陰謀。然後，給了女孩一支防狼噴霧，叫她以後小心點。

這時，就有一個叫做妓者的人跑出來，對女孩說：千萬不要相信那個路人，妳看，他給妳這支噴霧還要兩百元，就算他是送妳的好了，其實他是想等到妳把這支噴完了，賺妳繼續填充藥劑的錢。不，他還有更邪惡的陰謀。妳看，不覺得他的眼神不對嗎？天底下哪有人會為了保護一個不認識的人而冒險？其實他根本就是打算等趕走那位支那先生後，自己再把妳給姦了。

中央社記者張銘坤台北二十七日電）台灣團結聯盟政策會主任李先仁今天表示，美國副國務卿阿米塔吉昨天在北京的談話等於是清楚告訴中共，台灣獨立與否要由台灣二千三百萬人來決定，這是對陳水扁總統﹁一邊一國﹂談話的善意回應，台聯感到欣慰。

中央社記者黃明興台北二十七日電）美國副國務卿阿米塔吉在北京表示美國對台灣獨立既不支持也不反對，中華民國外交部發言人張小月今天在記者會上表示，阿米塔吉強調民主原則，也就是兩岸問題要用對話、諮商與和平方式解決，外交部相信，阿米塔吉的談話有助於
整個亞太地區的和平與安定。

聯合新聞網下午馬上在首頁頭條補上一則大大的
“美不反對台獨？國務院澄清”
字超大
真怕讀者看不到
另外一則字超大的頭條則是
“陳主席面對三萬名群眾抗議”

以下是今天(8/27)各個報紙對於美國副國務卿阿米塔吉於北京回答美聯社記者提問之報導。請注意，是今天之早報。至於中時在網站上加入即時焦點之新聞如下，而今天中時晚報之報導亦如下所附，這些證據有幾個重點:

1. 中國時報之早報的報導，是將之放在兩岸新聞(與中央日報相同)，並在內容動了手腳，對於不反對台獨隻字不提。代表中時對於此新聞希望做小並誤導，很賤!!!

2. 今天早上網站上就放入:台灣獨立? 阿米塔吉:美國不支持也不反對(美聯社)之報導來掩人耳目，然而劉屏此篇報導相同內容，在中時晚報之紙版發行時，又改成: 美不反對台獨？國務院：阿米塔吉沒這麼說。中時報系顯然是將大家當白痴，大搞網路及實體世界之兩面報導手法興風作浪!!!

中時實在太可惡了，所以以下文件我就將連結及內容均列出，免得中時又開始上開始大改原始文件!!! 我決定將此欄之討論列印廣為流傳，並email讓大家知道。

Just lets do it!!!

*********************************************
中時電子報(網站即時焦點之版本)

美不反對台獨？
國務院：阿米塔吉沒這麼說
呂秀蓮：美國不支持台獨 是指不參與加工
親民黨團籲扁：統獨擺一邊 勿誤判情勢
台聯：阿米塔吉善意回應一邊一國
(http://news.chinatimes.com/Chinatimes/Moment/newfocus-index/0,3687,910827005+91082705+0+120059,00.html)

(劉屏/華府報導)
台灣獨立? 阿米塔吉:美國不支持也不反對(美聯社)

美國副國務卿阿米塔吉說在北京說「美國不支持台灣獨立，也不反對台灣獨立」？美國國務院熟悉東亞事務的官員表示，阿米塔吉不是那麼說的。官員建議各方讀讀阿米塔吉的談話內容，即可瞭解真相。

國務院官員說，阿米塔吉有關美國立場的談話，完全符合美國一貫的政策，即是美國遵循「一個中國」政策，不支持台灣獨立。

根據稍早通訊社發自北京的報導，稱阿米塔吉表示美國既不支持、也不反對台灣獨立。亦有通訊社稱阿米塔吉「對美國的台灣政策做出重要澄清」。有資格就台海事務發言的國務院資深官員說，「他不是這麼說的。（Thats not what he said.）」。

根據美國官員提供的記者會問答全文，記者會上有人問道「如果海峽兩岸決定台灣獨立，美國仍然不支持台獨嗎？」阿米塔吉答覆說，「如果兩岸人民達成可接受的解決方案，美國顯然無從干涉」。因此，阿米塔吉的說法是：如果是兩岸同意台灣獨立，在這種情形之下，美國自然無由反對。換句話說，他說的「不反對」，是指「如果兩情相悅，則干卿底事？」

以下是記者會有關台海議題的問答內容。問題部分略有精簡，回答部分則係全文：

問：您剛提到（美國）行政當局不支持台灣獨立。你能否解釋，何以（美國）行政當局要對台海的最終解決採取立場？如果海峽兩岸人民決定台灣可以獨立，華盛頓仍然不支持台灣獨立嗎？

答：遣辭用字很重要。說「我們不支持」是一回事，這和說「我們反對」是不一樣的。如果兩岸人民達成可接受的解決方案，美國顯然無從干涉（obviously wouldnt inject），所以我們用「我們不支持」一詞。不過這個問題要由兩邊人民來解決。

國務院資深官員說，阿米塔吉的談話是美國的一貫立場，可能是少數台灣媒體一時不察，所以出現不同解讀。

*******************************************
中時晚報 (紙面出版版本)
美不反對台獨？國務院：阿米塔吉沒這麼說
劉屏/華府報導
(http://news.chinatimes.com/Chinatimes/newslist/newslist-content/0,3546,130502+132002082700755,00.html)
美國副國務卿阿米塔吉說在北京說「美國不支持台灣獨立，也不反對台灣獨立」？美國國務院熟悉東亞事務的官員表示，阿米塔吉不是那麼說的。官員建議各方讀讀阿米塔吉的談話內容，即可瞭解真相。

國務院官員說，阿米塔吉有關美國立場的談話，完全符合美國一貫的政策，即是美國遵循「一個中國」政策，不支持台灣獨立。

根據稍早通訊社發自北京的報導，稱阿米塔吉表示美國既不支持、也不反對台灣獨立。亦有通訊社稱阿米塔吉「對美國的台灣政策做出重要澄清」。有資格就台海事務發言的國務院資深官員說，「他不是這麼說的。（Thatsnot what he said.）」。

根據美國官員提供的記者會問答全文，記者會上有人問道「如果海峽兩岸決定台灣獨立，美國仍然不支持台獨嗎？」阿米塔吉答覆說，「如果兩岸人民達成可接受的解決方案，美國顯然無從干涉」。因此，阿米塔吉的說法是：如果是兩岸同意台灣獨立，在這種情形之下，美國自然無由反對。換句話說，他說的「不反對」，是指「如果兩情相悅，則干卿底事？」

以下是記者會有關台海議題的問答內容。問題部分略有精簡，回答部分則係全文：

問：您剛提到（美國）行政當局不支持台灣獨立。你能否解釋，何以（美國）行政當局要對台海的最終解決採取立場？如果海峽兩岸人民決定台灣可以獨立，華盛頓仍然不支持台灣獨立嗎？

答：遣辭用字很重要。說「我們不支持」是一回事，這和說「我們反對」是不一樣的。如果兩岸人民達成可接受的解決方案，美國顯然無從干涉（obviously wouldnt inject），所以我們用「我們不支持」一詞。不過這個問題要由兩邊人民來解決。

國務院資深官員說，阿米塔吉的談話是美國的一貫立場，可能是少數台灣媒體一時不察，所以出現不同解讀。

*****************************************************
中國時報 第11版 兩岸三地 　
阿米塔吉：美堅持一中政策 不支持台獨
(http://news.chinatimes.com/Chinatimes/newslist/newslist-content/0,3546,110505+112002082700069,00.html)

中央日報 第5版 兩岸三地 　
美副卿：華府對統獨無既定立場
(http://www.cdn.com.tw/daily/2002/08/27/text/910827g4.htm)

聯合報 頭版
美副國務卿：美不支持、不反對台獨(http://udnnews.com/NEWS/FOCUSNEWS/FOCUS/965556.shtml)

台灣日報 頭版
美副國務卿：不支持台獨不表示反對台獨美官員首次在北京表態阿米塔吉指美對統獨並無立場美媒體解讀為尊重台灣民意選擇(http://tw.news.yahoo.com/2002/08/27/polity/twdaily/3488235.html)

既然阿米塔吉在北京有關美國對台獨問題立場的談話是完全符合美國一貫的政策的。那麼讓我們看看國務院的發言人所提出的記者會紀錄，阿米塔吉回答說：措詞是重要的，說「我們不支持」是一回事，這跟說「我們反對」有所不同。如果兩岸的人民達成可以接受的解決方案，美國顯然不會介入。因此，我們說的是「我們不支持」它，但這是要由當事雙方的人民解決的問題。

說「我們不支持」是一回事，這跟說「我們反對」有所不同。可以認知為「說我們不支持台灣獨立，並不是說我們反對台灣獨立」嗎？如果可以如此解讀的話，那麼美國的一貫政策，就是美國在「一個中國」政策之下，我們不支持台灣獨立，我們並不反對台灣獨立。

而所謂的「一貫的政策」，就是以前是，現在也是，可見的未來也是。因此，以前大談美國反對台灣獨立的人，他們都是騙徒。

真是騙肖e, 美國國務院在記者會後, 就把問答全文放在網站上,
一向如此. 還裝成一副真的與官員很熟的假樣子. (昨天全文就上網了!)

http://usinfo.org/wf/020826/epf103.htm

*EPF103 08/26/2002
Transcript: Armitage Says U.S. Does Not Support Taiwan Independence
(Armitage also discusses South Asia, nonproliferation, terrorism) (4420)

The United States does not support independence for Taiwan, says Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage.

In an August 26 news conference in Beijing, Armitage told reporters that while Taiwan is one of the questions where Washington and Beijing have a difference of opinion, the U.S. approach to relations with Taiwan is based on our One-China Policy, the Three Communiqu廥, and the Taiwan Relations Act.

Armitage added that U.S. policies and actions are predicated on the Beijing regimes continuation of the policy of peaceful resolution of the question.

The United States expects that the policy of peaceful resolution regarding Taiwan will continue to be the policy of the Peoples Republic of China, he said.

Armitage told reporters that cooperation between the United States and China in the field of counter-terrorism is good. He noted that the United States and China will be participating in a meeting on terrorist financing and are about to have a discussion about container handling security and container security.

Regarding North Korea, Armitage said both the United States and China share an interest in continued stability on the peninsula of Korea.

Armitage noted that Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing had briefed his delegation on Chinas promulgation of missile-related export control regulations and Chinas plans to strictly enforce these new rules and regulations.

Armitage said the United States welcomed the news, and added that the regulations are modeled on the Missile Technology Control Regime (MTCR) guidelines.

Turning to South Asia, Armitage said he thanked his Chinese counterparts for the strenuous efforts of President Jiang Zemin, along with Russian President Vladimir Putin, in Almaty earlier this year to lower the tensions between India and Pakistan.

I dont think theres any difference of opinion on the absolute need to contain the tensions and try to bring about a better situation, Armitage said. We know the historical relationships between China and Pakistan.

We did note that the present relationship between India and China is better than it has been in the past and we certainly expect that to continue, Armitage said. For our part, we are going to continue to consult closely with the Chinese as we move forward and continue our involvement surrounding the tensions in that region.

Following is a transcript of Armitages August 26 news conference in Beijing:

(begin transcript)

Transcript of
Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage
Press Conference - Conclusion of China Visit

Beijing, China
August 26, 2002

ARMITAGE: I just completed a very full day of positive discussion with Chinese leaders. My primary focus was on making preparations for the meeting between Presidents Bush and Jiang in Crawford scheduled for October 25. My meetings included calls on Vice President Hu Jintao, Vice Premier Qian Qichen, Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan, my host Vice Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing, Deputy Chief of the General Staff General Xiong Guangkai.

In these talks, we discussed a wide range of bilateral and regional issues. With Vice Minister Li, we reviewed our cooperation and recent exchanges on counter-terrorism, human rights and religious freedom, nonproliferation, and regional and economic issues. Vice Minister Li briefed us on Chinas promulgation of missile-related export control regulations and Chinas plans to strictly enforce these new rules and regulations. We welcomed the news. On human rights and religious freedom, we discussed ways in which we in the U.S. hope to convert these irritants to a more positive force in U.S.-China relations. Vice Minister Li and I spent a significant amount of time discussing South Asia, including my just-concluded visit to Sri Lanka, India, and Pakistan. These talks were aimed at continuing to lower the tensions and promote peace and stability in that very important region.

As you can imagine, my calls on Foreign Minister Tang, Vice Premier Qian, and Vice President Hu were especially important for underscoring the broad areas in which our two great nations cooperate on a daily basis. I am encouraged by all my Chinese hosts strong commitment to standing with us in the international fight against terrorism. In each call, we talked of opportunities and shared hopes for stronger relations in the future. Of course, we also exchanged views on areas in which we did not see eye to eye. On every issue, these exchanges were constructive as well as candid.

QUESTION: Is there any linkage between your visit and the ongoing Iraqi Foreign Minister visit to China? Did you have an exchange of views with the Chinese officials that you met on the Iraq issue? Thank you.

ARMITAGE: There was nothing but coincidence in the Iraqi Foreign Ministers and my visit here. I was informed by our Chinese friends here this morning that the Iraqi foreign minister was in town.

I think the second part of your question was, did the Chinese and I exchange views on Iraq? Yes, we did.

QUESTION: My question is about whether you have talked with the Chinese leaders about the Taiwan issue. Do you think Chen Shuibians one side and one country opinion will have some bad influence on President Jiang Zemins visit to the U.S. Thank you.

ARMITAGE: Well, of course we discussed the issue of Taiwan. In my opening statement I referred to issues on which we agreed and issues on which we didnt agree. Of course its well known that we dont entirely agree on the issue of Taiwan. The statements of President Chen Shuibian on August 3rd were a subject of our discussions. The U.S. view has been put forward by spokesmen from the State Department and the White House. That is that the U.S. does not support Taiwan independence and I dont think that those statements of August 3rd will in any way interfere with the third summit between President Bush and President Jiang Zemin.

QUESTION: Could you please tell us the substance of your talks with the Vice President, Hu Jintao?

ARMITAGE: In general I can. We exchanged pleasantries and mutual respects between the Vice President and our Vice President, Dick Cheney. Vice President Cheney has accepted a return visit under the invitation of Vice President Hu Jintao for some time in the future. I was able to convey his best respects and good wishes. We did talk about the Taiwan question. We talked at length about areas in which we not only can cooperate but areas in which we need to cooperate, such as the World Summit on Sustainable Development which is going to take place in Johannesburg. We also talked about South Asia and the absolute need for China and the U.S. to continue our efforts to try to contain the difficulties and lower the tensions.

QUESTION: On the subject of proliferation, now that China has published these export controls and the list of dual-use technologies subject to restriction, will the U.S. now go ahead with its part of the November 2000 agreement and begin issuing permits for U.S. satellites to be launched in China? Or, is there now going to be a period in which the U.S. watches how these regulations are implemented and enforced before doing that?

ARMITAGE: Well, part of the November 2000 agreement also, from the U.S. point of view, required certain punishment for people who had engaged in these sanctioned activities. What we did agree to do is to have our experts get together as soon as humanly possible on our side, this would be Assistant Secretary John Wolf, to not only fully understand the regulations and enforcement mechanism but to talk about a way forward. We view this as a positive step and a positive development, and I hope that the talks that will be coming in the very near future will lead to the undoing of some of those licenses which have been held up.

QUESTION: Have you seen the list of the technologies and the products that are covered under these regulations? If so, do they meet your requirements or are there important technologies that arent even on the list?

ARMITAGE: During my meeting this morning with Vice Foreign Minister Li he gave me the export regulations. Unfortunately for me, they were in Chinese. So the answer to your question is, Ive seen them but I didnt understand them. I suspect that our folks are poring over them right now. Someone who is much more expert on the ins and outs will be able to give you a much more considered answer.

QUESTION: Sorry, but is that the list or is that just the regulations and the list of the products will be coming?

ARMITAGE: I heard that that is the case but as I say I didnt tear through it. It was quite thick and I had ongoing discussions.

QUESTION: You just mentioned that you discussed the issue of South Asia with the Chinese leadership. How did the Chinese respond and what was your view of this?

ARMITAGE: Well, in the first instance I thanked the Chinese side for the strenuous efforts of President Jiang Zemin at Almaty a couple of months ago to try to lower the temperatures, along with the efforts of President Putin. Of course, the United States has been involved throughout. I dont think theres any difference of opinion on the absolute need to contain the tensions and try to bring about a better situation. We know the historical relationships between China and Pakistan. We did note that the present relationship between India and China is better than it has been in the past and we certainly expect that to continue. For our part, we are going to continue to consult closely with the Chinese as we move forward and continue our involvement surrounding the tensions in South Asia.

QUESTION: There have been many times since Mr. Bush was elected when the mood in Washington seemed rather anti-Chinese. A lot of questions have been raised about China. Even many in the administration are very suspicious about the Chinese. The way you describe your visit, its like youre best friends. Can you talk a bit about this?

ARMITAGE: Well, I would note that whether youre in Beijing or whether youre in Washington, there are voices who are not as favorable to the relationship. Its not a phenomenon thats limited to Washington. I note that President Bush has three times now, or will soon with Crawford, have met with the leadership of China. Secretary Powell has had significant interactions with his foreign minister counterpart; Vice President Cheney with Vice President Hu Jintao. I think the senior leadership of the United States is quite intent on developing a good, solid relationship with the Peoples Republic of China. This is not to deny that there are voices occasionally that question this relationship in Washington and beyond in our country. Just as its not to deny that there are voices here in Beijing that question the worthwhile nature of the relationship with the United States.

I dont think that your characterization of us as having had a conversation as if were the best of friends...(inaudible). Some of us have been dealing with the Chinese leadership for 20-odd years, so there is a certain basis of understanding. Even when we disagree, I think theres enough, as we say here in Beijing, mutual trust and confidence, to know that we can disagree without being disagreeable.

QUESTION: Did the U.S. side have any input into the drafting of the export controls which have been issued here? Was anything presented by the U.S. side that the U.S. would like to see happen?

ARMITAGE: We certainly have had discussions. John Wolf and Undersecretary Bolton have had discussions with their Chinese counterparts. Whether they actually turned over a list I cant say.

DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY KEYSER: I think its modeled on the MTCR (Missile Technology Control Regime) guidelines.

ARMITAGE: There it is. And the answer is that its modeled on the MTCR guidelines.

QUESTION: A second question, did China and the United States see eye to eye with regard to the countries that should not get this kind of technology or is there disagreement regarding to Iran or Pakistan?

ARMITAGE: First of all, the United States is in the midst of developing quite a good congenial, constructive relationship with Pakistan. We didnt, in my discussions, get into individual countries and eligibility for different technology.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up on the proliferation issue. In the months that the U.S. and China were going back and forth about the November 2000 agreement, after the November 2000 agreement, the subject of grandfathering existing contracts came up. Is that issue now behind both sides, and how has it been dealt with?

ARMITAGE: I did not discuss it today. Much more time was spent on the regional issues. From our point of view, grandfathering was not on. This is one of the things that Assistant Secretary Wolf is going to have to discuss when he arrives here in Beijing. Or, perhaps well meet in New York. Wherever we can do it, as quickly as possible, with the Chinese.

QUESTION: (Inaudible)

ARMITAGE: Between the United States and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization? With China? Oh, absolutely. The question had to do with counter-terrorism cooperation and whether there was anything to expect in the U.S.-China relationship regarding counter-terrorism. Were going to have, I believe its our second meeting on terrorist financing. Were about to have a discussion about container handling security and container security. The Chinese side noted with satisfaction the U.S. determination to put the ETIM (East Turkestan Islamic Movement) on the foreign terrorist list, something weve had discussions with China about over the past several months. So, I think we certainly noted with satisfaction the cooperation we had in Washington, where, with Chinas assistance, we put together U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373, which covered the matter of terrorist financing. All in all, I think the counter-terrorism cooperation is a pretty good picture for the U.S. and for China.

QUESTION: The road to the release of these regulations on missiles today has been slow and rather bumpy, with some charges along the way that China continued to export this sort of technology. Given that background, how would you assess the significance of what happened yesterday? Does it mean the U.S. is still extremely wary and cautious? Or, this is a new chapter, and things are much better?

ARMITAGE: I dont know how a guy who cant read Chinese could characterize just what was contained on the list. Being a non-technical person myself, I dont think I can characterize us as being wary of it, or cautious. Were businesslike in our approach to the problems of export controls and proliferation. I certainly see this as an effort on Chinas part to move forward, and I fervently hope that thats what our experts will determine. I suspect they will. But I dont care to characterize.

QUESTION: Could you brief us a little bit more about what kind of talks you had on Iraq? Especially, have you touched upon the possibility of a U.S. attack on Iraq?

ARMITAGE: I discussed the fact that Iraq left untended, we felt, was a threat to us and to Iraqs neighbors. I discussed some of our Presidents comments, to the effect that he has all options before him and hes made no decisions. I discussed, with our Chinese friends, the fact that we will consult with them as we move forward, and that no final decisions have been made now. Finally, we discussed sort of the theory of having U.N. Security Council Resolutions existent, and the specter of a nation basically thumbing their nose at the United Nations Security Council, and what this augured for the body.

QUESTION: You mentioned the ETIM, and discussed putting it on the terrorist list. Does this mean that the U.S. considers the ETIM to be a terrorist organization, and would support putting it on a list of terrorist organizations?

ARMITAGE: We did.

QUESTION: You already have?

ARMITAGE: Yes. Its done. It was done several days ago. We also discussed, I might add, not only the fact that we put the ETIM on the terrorist list, but the need, as China moved forward itself, in the very difficult counter-terrorism fight with the ETIM, that theres absolute necessity to respect minority rights, particularly the Uighurs, in this case.

QUESTION: I would like to follow up on the BBC question about ETIM. Maybe you could tell us what ETIM stands for. Chinese officials in Xinjiang have actually said that there is no room for a peaceful independence movement, any sort of independence movement, in Xinjiang for the Uighurs. So, if the U.S. government is classifying the non-peaceful independence movement as a terrorist organization, where does that leave any independence movement?

ARMITAGE: The ETIM is the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement. After careful study we judged that it was a terrorist group, that it committed acts of violence against unarmed civilians without any regard for who was hurt. Im not sure what the second part of your question was.

QUESTION: Basically, no peaceful resistance is allowed in Xinjiang, so from a human rights point of view, if no peaceful resistance is allowed, and we classified the unpeaceful resistance as terrorism, what is left for anyone who wants independence?

ARMITAGE: I think I tried to make clear that as we discussed with our Chinese hosts, the placement of ETIM on the terrorist list, we also discussed the need to respect minority rights, particularly the Uighurs, and recognize that this is difficult, but its absolutely necessary, as we move forward.

QUESTION: (Translated.) Ever since Chen Shuibian made the statement about one country on each side of the Straits, the United States has not really commented on that statement. Why is that?

ARMITAGE: We have indeed commented. The United States said, in response to that, both from the State Department spokespersons desk, as well as the White House, that the United States does not support Taiwan independence.

QUESTION: (Translated.) (Inaudible)...the difference of opinion between Bush and Jiang Zemin...(inaudible)...image of Chen Shuibian, whether these differences...(inaudible)...can be resolved...(inaudible)...by the next summit?

ARMITAGE: I think I understood the question to be, would the differences of opinion between Mr. Bush and President Jiang Zemin be resolved before the next summit?

QUESTION: (Inaudible)

ARMITAGE: I dont think I can comment on the image of President Chen Shuibian. I think I would note that Taiwan is one of the questions that, I think everyone knows, we have a difference of opinion with our Chinese friends on. Its a situation that has existed for a long time. I made it clear that our own approach to relations is based on our One-China Policy, the Three Communiqu廥, and the Taiwan Relations Act, and note that all of our activities are predicated on Chinas continuation of the policy of peaceful resolution of the question, when we certainly expect that to continue to be the policy of the Peoples Republic of China.

QUESTION: You just mentioned that the administration doesnt support Taiwan independence. Can you explain why the administration is taking a position on the final outcome in the Taiwan Strait? And, what could happen if, this would shock us all but, if the people on both sides of the Strait decided that Taiwan could go independent? Would Washington continue not to support Taiwan independence? Could you flesh out this policy a little more, so wed understand it more?

ARMITAGE: The wording is important. By saying we do not support, its one thing. Its different from saying we oppose it. If people on both sides of the Strait came to an agreeable solution, then the United States obviously wouldnt inject ourselves. Hence, we use the term we dont support it. But its something to be resolved by the people on both sides of the question.

QUESTION: Describe your remarks regarding Iraq. Could you tell us a bit about what you heard in response from the Chinese side?

ARMITAGE: No, I think thats for our Chinese friends to say.

QUESTION: Can I just ask, then, whether you were surprised by anything that you heard from that side?

ARMITAGE: No, I was not.

QUESTION: (Inaudible) What kind of pressure did China and America make on the ETIM issue?

ARMITAGE: On the ETIM issue? The cooperation is, we have put them on the foreign terrorist list. This will, we believe, have some effect on helping to dry up the funds that exist for this movement, therefore making it much more difficult for the movement to continue to engage in violence. We notice that when the United States put the LTTE of Sri Lanka on the foreign terrorists list, a short time later it became very much more difficult for them to act with the same impunity in Sri Lanka. Hence, theres been a movement, or at least the beginnings of a glimmer, of hope for peace in Sri Lanka. One would hope that the same type of result would be here.

QUESTION: (Inaudible)

ARMITAGE: LTTE, what? (Inaudible question) No, not by the United States.

QUESTION: By the government of Sri Lanka?

ARMITAGE: No, the government of Sri Lanka, which we support, can make any decision they want regarding -- theyve got the nearest equities. For our part, the United States part, the LTTE remains on the list.

QUESTION: Were you able to discuss Chinas position on North Korean asylum seekers? Im not sure if youre aware that today, seven North Koreans were arrested outside the Foreign Ministry?

ARMITAGE: We discussed the question of North Korea, the fact that both the United States and China share an interest in continued stability on the peninsula of Korea. I was unaware of that incident, the seven to which you refer. That did not come up in my talks today.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much.

(end transcript)

(Distributed by the Office of International Information Programs, U.S. Department of State. Web site: http://usinfo.state.gov)

Return to Public File Main Page

（B）
美國的政策如下：

﹝1﹞
維持及促進美國人民與臺灣之人民間廣泛、密切及友好的商務、文化及其他各種關係；並且維持及促進美國人民與中國大陸人民及其他西太平洋地區人民間的同種關係；

﹝2﹞
表明西太平洋地區的和平及安定符合美國的政治、安全及經濟利益，而且是國際關切的事務；

﹝3﹞
表明美國決定和「中華人民共和國」建立外交關係之舉，是基於臺灣的前途將以和平方式決定這一期望；

﹝4﹞
任何企圖以非和平方式來決定臺灣的前途之舉-- 包括使用經濟抵制及禁運手段在內，將被視為對西太平洋地區和平及安定的威脅，而為美國所嚴重關切；

﹝5﹞
提供防禦性武器給臺灣人民；

﹝6﹞
維持美國的能力，以抵抗任何訴諸武力、或使用其他方式高壓手段，而危及臺灣人民安全及社會經濟制度的行動。

（C）
本法律的任何條款不得違反美國對人權的關切，尤其是對於臺灣地區一千八百萬名居民人權的關切。玆此重申維護及促進所有臺灣人民的人權是美國的目標。

台灣人不可解讀,只有中時聯合有資格「解讀」,只有中時聯合才懂得英文,才懂得如何「解讀」!聽懂沒?只可惜了中時聯合的「一片苦心」;阿米塔吉毫無反悔之意,『不支持，並不表示反對」己經像野火一般,到處燃燒起來了,勢不可擋!