The United States and China in Power Transition - Strategic Studies ...
The United States and China in Power Transition - Strategic Studies ...
The United States and China in Power Transition - Strategic Studies ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
美国因素及其影响” (“<strong>The</strong> U.S. Factor <strong>in</strong> the South <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Sea Disputes”),<br />
当代亚太 (Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific <strong>Studies</strong>),<br />
No. 1, 2010; Liu Zhongm<strong>in</strong> (刘中民), “海权问题与中美关系述论”<br />
(“An Analysis of the U.S.-<strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Relationship <strong>and</strong> Its Impact on<br />
the South <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Sea Issues”), 东北亚论坛 (Northeast Asia Forum),<br />
Vol. 15, No. 5, September 2006; Liu Zhongm<strong>in</strong> (刘中民), “海权问题<br />
与冷战后的中美关系:矛盾的认知与艰难的选择” (“South <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong><br />
Sea Issues <strong>and</strong> Post-Cold War U.S.-<strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Relations: Conflict<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Underst<strong>and</strong><strong>in</strong>g <strong>and</strong> Difficult Choices”), 外交评论 (Foreign Affairs<br />
Review), Issue 85, December 2005; Qiu Danyang (邱丹阳), “中菲<br />
南沙争端中的美国因素” (“<strong>The</strong> U.S. Factor <strong>in</strong> S<strong>in</strong>o-Pilip<strong>in</strong>o South<br />
<strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Sea Dispute”), 当代亚太 (Journal of Contemporary Asia-Pacific<br />
<strong>Studies</strong>), No. 5, 2002.<br />
125. Hu Sup<strong>in</strong>g (胡素萍), “冷战以来美国对南海政策的演变,<br />
1950-2004” (“<strong>The</strong> Evolution of U.S. Policy on the South <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Sea,<br />
1950-2004”), 新东方 (<strong>The</strong> New Orient), No. 5, 2010. Hu mentions<br />
<strong>in</strong> her article that Ch<strong>in</strong>ese Foreign M<strong>in</strong>istry had issued more than<br />
400 protests aga<strong>in</strong>st the <strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> between September 1956<br />
<strong>and</strong> 1970. But Hu provides no source or reference for this number<br />
(a common problem with most Ch<strong>in</strong>ese publications).<br />
126. Warren Christopher, quoted <strong>in</strong> A. James Gregor, “Qualified<br />
Engagement: U.S. <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Policy <strong>and</strong> Security Concerns,” Naval<br />
War College Review, Spr<strong>in</strong>g 1999. Gregor states <strong>in</strong> his article<br />
that “U.S. Secretary of State Warren Christopher rem<strong>in</strong>ded the<br />
Ch<strong>in</strong>ese foreign m<strong>in</strong>ister that the <strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> had treaty obligations<br />
with the Philipp<strong>in</strong>es.” <strong>The</strong> reference of this remark is from<br />
Indoch<strong>in</strong>a Digest, April 21, 1995.<br />
127. An <strong>in</strong>fluential piece on the U.S. neutrality on the South<br />
<strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Sea disputes is by Scott Snyder, “<strong>The</strong> South <strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Sea Dispute:<br />
Prospects for Preventive Diplomacy,” Special Report to the<br />
<strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> Peace Institute, Wash<strong>in</strong>gton, DC: <strong>United</strong> <strong>States</strong> Peace<br />
Institute, 1996.<br />
128. Richard Cron<strong>in</strong>, “Maritime Territorial Disputes <strong>and</strong> Sovereignty<br />
Issues <strong>in</strong> Asia,” A Testimony before the Senate Subcommittee<br />
on East Asian <strong>and</strong> Pacific Affairs, July 13, 2009; Peter A.<br />
Dutton, “<strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong>’s Views of Sovereignty <strong>and</strong> Methods of Access<br />
Control,” Testimony before the U.S.-<strong>Ch<strong>in</strong>a</strong> Economic <strong>and</strong> Security<br />
Review Commission, February 27, 2008; Dan Blumenthal,<br />
226