The United States and China in Power Transition - Strategic Studies ...

usiness is also a reflection of the U.S. gun culture,
helping the weak side to self defense, economic support
for the defense industry, and many others. It is
also a business, as Secretary of Defense Gates put it,
which has been going on for over 30 years; and the
executive office is not in a position to terminate it.
Fourth, Gate’s remarks brought out a point that the
Chinese still do not seem to understand about how the
U.S. Government functions. The provision of weapons
to Taiwan is codified in the TRA. It is a legal requirement
for the President. As long as Taiwan requests
arms, the President will follow the law to entertain its
needs. Moreover, the President is also required by the
U.S. Arms Export Control Act to notify the Congress
of the decision to sell arms to Taiwan (or to any other
nation). No matter how low key the President elects
to make the notification, the authorization becomes a
public record in the Federal Registry and the media
are there to bring it to the public’s attention. China
should take these factors into account before preparing
its unconditioned and outrageous reaction to the
next U.S. move on this issue.
Finally, if China wants to get the United States to
stop selling arms to Taiwan, it can do one of the following
two things: to get Taiwan to give up its need
for arms or to get the U.S. Congress to repeal the arms
provision in the TRA, or to abolish the TRA altogether.
Chinese should see that the 1982 U.S.-China Joint
Communiqué, which suggested that the United States
would reduce the arms sales and eventually put an
end to them (see the full quote in the previous section
about Taiwan), is an empty-worded U.S. presidential
statement with China. It is not endorsed by the Congress,
hence has no legally-binding power. The executive
office does not have the power to put an end to
186