VZCZCXRO8282
RR RUEHCN RUEHGH RUEHVC
DE RUEHBJ #0886/01 0930004
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 030004Z APR 09
FM AMEMBASSY BEIJING
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC 3247
INFO RUEHOO/CHINA POSTS COLLECTIVE
RHMFIUU/CDR USPACOM HONOLULU HI

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BEIJING 000886 
 
DEPARTMENT FOR INR/R/MR, EAP/CM, EAP/PA, EAP/PD, C 
HQ PACOM FOR PUBLIC DIPLOMACY ADVISOR (J007) 
SIPDIS 
 
E.O. 12958:  N/A 
TAGS: OPRC KMDR CH
 
SUBJECT: MEDIA REACTION: G-20, U.S. Military 
 
-------------------- 
  Editorial Quotes 
-------------------- 
¶1. G-20 
 "The focus of the G20 should not only be on how to handle the 
financial crisis" 
a. Shanghai based News Agency under Shanghai Media Group (SMG) 
publication China Business News (Diyi Caijing) (04/02): While we are 
paying so much attention to the solutions to the financial crisis at 
the G-20, there are also other issues worthy of concern.  First, 
whether the G-20 mechanism is workable.  Pan Rui, general secretary 
of the Shanghai-based organization U.S. Studies points out the 
development outlook of G-20 is not clear yet.  "It is hard to 
coordinate different demands from around the world because there are 
too many members and each faction has their own interests. 
Moreover, since America's leadership capacity has been questioned, 
who will be the leader remains an issue for G-20.  Some think that 
the U.S. and China can be the joint leaders of the G-20.  But 
currently this assumption is not realistic" he says. A former 
Ambassador to EU says that it is hard to tell whether nor not the 
G-20 mechanism can be maintained.  Europe and Japan still prefer the 
G-8 or G-7 because their interests are diluted by a G-20.  Second, 
meetings among China, the U.S., and Russia should be anticipated. 
The major tone of Obama's policies towards Europe, Russia, and China 
will be uncovered after the multilateral contacts between the U.S. 
and other major countries at the G-20, including the pattern of 
future U.S.-China economic talks and whether or not U.S.-Russia 
relations be "recommenced".   Third, China's role has attracted 
attention.  International society has different anticipations and 
demands for China.  The London summit gives China a place to express 
its own ideas.  Chinese experts think that "China should take a low 
key" and as a developing country China should "be practical and 
gradually (develop itself)". To raise unrealistic hopes for China's 
role in order to urge China to implement its responsibilities - 
which are beyond its capacity - is not an efficient solution to the 
current financial crisis and will damage China's interests. 
b. "Obama-Hu meeting gives power to conquer the financial crisis" 
 
The official Communist Party international news publication Global 
Times (Huanqiu Shibao)(04/02): President Obama will visit China in 
the second half of this year.  The [leadership] level of the 
U.S.-China strategic dialogues will increase.  But neither the U.S. 
nor the Chinese officials ever used the expression "G-2".  A Chinese 
official warned that China should not be deceived by such an 
exaggerated expression.  Zhu Feng, deputy director of International 
Strategy Research Center of Peking University, says that "G-2" is 
just a concept, not an operable project.  Both U.S. and Europe are 
very clear about this.  Using the word "G-2" is only to show the 
importance of U.S.-China cooperation and induce China to carry more 
international responsibilities.  "G-2" reflects a concern that if 
China doesn't enhance cooperation with U.S., a geo-conflict may 
occur.  It's not necessary for China to be too enthusiastic about 
the "G-2" and China's national interests do not need a "G-2" 
mechanism. China, a large country but not a powerful country, cannot 
afford too many international responsibilities.  Zhu Feng also says 
that the over-pessimistic analysis about G-20 (there is no room for 
failure at G-20) is a one-side analysis.  The most significant 
meanings of G-20 are to provide a collective, multilateral, 
institutional, and coordinated mechanism to the world when 
responding to the financial crisis.  As long as the G-20 exists, 
there will be more determinations and solutions to jointly conquer 
the crisis. However, the resolution to the crisis relies on every 
country, not just the G-20 mechanism. Every country should be 
parallel to G-20, not affiliated to it. 
 
c. "Whose wallet will the G-20 fatten?" 
 
The official Xinhua News Agency international news publication 
International Herald Leader (Guoji Xianqu Daobao)(04/02): There are 
two focuses for the G-20: asking each country to further stimulate 
currency liquidity and to conduct more economic stimulus packages. 
Under the current two outstanding demands that U.S. wants to keep 
its global dominance and developing countries want to expand their 
power to influence or make decisions in the world, the G-20 submit 
will become a fight with certain limitations. Of course, one summit 
cannot solve the current global financial crisis.  But it should not 
be a coordinating meeting for some countries to get investment. 
This kind of market rescue requires clear reasons and a review of 
its effectiveness. The topic of long-term reform should also be 
listed on the agenda of international cooperation through this 
summit. 
 
¶2. U.S. Military 
 
"Why does the U.S. military contradict itself?" 
 
The China Radio International sponsored newspaper World News Journal 
(Shijie Xinwenbao)(04/02): Recently there are facts which show the 
U.S. State Department and U.S. Department of Defense are not on the 
 
BEIJING 00000886  002 OF 002 
 
 
same page. For example, regarding the incident in the China South 
Sea and U.S. attitudes toward North Korea's missile launch the 
comments from these two departments are inconsistent.  This is not 
the first time that these two departments expressed opposite views. 
Taking the U.S.-Taiwan policy as an example, the U.S. State 
Department always plays "nice person" by saying sweet words to China 
while the U.S. military often plays "angry person", advocating 
"China's military threat" in every possible way.  Analysts indicate 
that Obama needs to deal with both the economic problems and the 
U.S. troops scattered around the world in the first year of his 
presidential term.  The military issues are not easier than the 
economic problems.  Therefore, it may take time for Obama and Gates 
to go through breaking-in. 
 
PICCUTA