Premier Wen: "It will be South Korea that suffers the most."

[below_freezing]

ÎÂ×ÜÔÚÈÕ±¾·¢¾¯¸æ£ºÈô¿ªÕ½,º«¹ú×îÊÜÉË£¡ - ½¾üÂÛ̳ - ÌúѪÉçÇø

6月1日,中国国务院总理温家宝在东京接受日本NHK电视台专访。新华社记者 庞兴雷摄

中国国务院总理温家宝周二在离开日本前往蒙古之前接受日本广播协会电视台的独家访问。关于天安舰问题，温家宝表示中国不会袒护任何一方，他呼吁各国保持冷静。

温家宝在结束对日本的访问之前，接受了日本NHK电视台的独家访问。对韩国天安舰事件，温家宝表示各国应当保持冷静、回避军事冲突。

温家宝：“我们呼吁各方冷静克制，不要使事态升级，更不要发生冲突。因为发生冲突，受害最深的是韩国人民，中国也难于幸免。”


温家宝说，在天安舰问题上中国不会袒护任何一方。日本媒体解读称，此番发言说明中国在同朝鲜保持一定距离。

温家宝：“我们不会袒护任何一方，要从根本上使任何处理的方式都有利于半岛的和平和稳定”。

中国有一句成语：城门失火，殃及池鱼。这样的感受只有相邻的国家才会有。他透露，自己同韩国总统李明博先后进行了约4个小时的深谈，谈话一直在友好、坦诚和相互理解的气氛下进行。


不过，就韩国把天安舰问题提交安理会处理后中国会怎么做，温家宝则没有做出明确回答。

温家宝还表示，作为六方会谈主席国，中国将努力争取六国协商早日重开。


The bolded means:

温家宝：“我们呼吁各方冷静克制，不要使事态升级，更不要发生冲突。因为发生冲突，受害最深的是韩国人民，中国也难于幸免。”


Premier Wen: We encourage all sides to calm down and restrain themselves, and do not allow the matter to escalate or cause conflict. If there is any conflict, it is South Korea that will suffer the most, China may also be dragged in.

 

[aimarraul]

seoul is too close to the border,no matter how modern S.K military is,seoul will return to the 70' once they start the war.either china or u.s wants to see the second korean war ,nothing will happen.Lee Myung Bak should save some tears for the next election

 

[tinguzzz]

please translate

 

[below_freezing]

i translated at the end. the rest of the article can be translated at translate.google.com but its just saying about how he's in japan for some important thing and just mentioned how south korea will suffer if anything happens.

 

[username]

i translated at the end. the rest of the article can be translated at translate.google.com but its just saying about how he's in japan for some important thing and just mentioned how south korea will suffer if anything happens.

does your Premier mean that China will support NK in case if war breaks out b/w NK and South Korea ?

Let me also know whether China thinks it was an unprovoked agression by NK or not.

If so why should China support an agressor ? I don't understand...

 

[username]

seoul is too close to the border,no matter how modern S.K military is,seoul will return to the 70' once they start the war.either china or u.s wants to see the second korean war ,nothing will happen.Lee Myung Bak should save some tears for the next election

I read in newspapers that NK was the agressor... Does China think so ?

If it thinks so, then is it correct to support NK ?

 

[below_freezing]

You are thinking far beyond what he means. Our premier means what he said and no more or less.

Furthermore we have already stated that we will not support whoever is proven, as defined by our government, to have sunk the South Korean ship.

 

[Martian2]

Nathan Gardels: Geopolitical Pre-Quakes: China on North Korea, the US on Israeli nukes

"Times Syndicate/Tribune Media
Posted: June 1, 2010 03:20 PM

Geopolitical Pre-Quakes: China on North Korea, the US on Israeli nukes

As in geology, in geopolitics pre-quakes often portend larger tremors.

Last week in South Korea, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao -- who, like the rest of the Politburo, is not known for loose lips -- said that China would "protect no one" in resolving the crisis that has resulted from the sinking of a South Korean naval vessel by North Korea. China has zero interest in encouraging instability on the Korean Peninsula, but Wen was clearly signaling to North Korea's leaders that when push is leading to shove China can only be pushed so far. Despite long-standing ties, China's other interests have overtaken its ability to overlook North Korea's erratic trouble-making brinkmanship.

Similarly, last week at the Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference in New York, the US signed onto a resolution calling on Israel to open its nuclear facilities for inspection and for a regional conference in 2012 on a Middle East nuclear free zone. As with China and North Korea, the Obama administration was signaling to its long-standing Israeli ally that America's other interests must trump Israel's when their strategic goals conflict -- and they increasingly do, as witnessed by the split over expanded settlements around Jerusalem and no doubt now over the Gaza flotilla. If the US wants to limit the spread of nuclear weapons and disarm Iran's nuclear ambitions, it can no longer overlook Israel's nuclear arsenal and the exception it claims for existing in a bad neighborhood.

Politics, unlike tectonic plate shifts, are more predictable and, at least in human-scale time, move slowly. But cracks are clearly widening into crevices in the old geopolitical order."

 

[username]

You are thinking far beyond what he means. Our premier means what he said and no more or less.

Furthermore we have already stated that we will not support whoever is proven, as defined by our government, to have sunk the South Korean ship.

I am not able to understand, because of the following sentence in the first post of this thread...

China may also be dragged in.

So I was asking you whether your Premier means that he will also go for war alongside with N.K.

I am still confused...

 

[deepak75]

You are thinking far beyond what he means. Our premier means what he said and no more or less.

Furthermore we have already stated that we will not support whoever is proven, as defined by our government, to have sunk the South Korean ship.

Strange. They why warn South Korea and also mention that China may get involved if there is a conflict. Certainly South Korea will not sink its own boat? Would Premier Wen be thinking so while making the statement / threat?

 

[Martian2]

These points are based on my common sense and understanding of the history of northeast Asia.

1) China will probably support limited punishment of North Korea. North Korea has to pay some sort of a price.

2) China will not permit South Korea and/or the United States to militarily destroy North Korea. Korean War II, anyone? North Korea is a buffer state and it will stay that way.

3) Economic punishment of North Korea will be limited to ensure that hordes of North Korean refugees do not stream into China.

4) If South Korea chooses to wage a full-scale war against North Korea, North Korea will unleash thousands of artillery guns and "it will be South Korea that suffers the most." South Korea will eventually defeat the North Korean military.

However, South Korea does not get to keep North Korea. As a buffer state (see point #2 above), a defeated North Korea will still revert to some form of North Korean rule. Alternatively, China may decide to temporarily rule/stabilize a defeated North Korea.

Conclusion: No matter how you look at it, whether Seoul is burning from North Korean artillery fire or not, South Korea does not get to keep one inch of North Korean soil. Korean reunification is only possible with the agreement of North Korea and China. Unless all three parties sign on the dotted line, South Korea does not have the option of changing the status quo in northeast Asia.

 

[deepak75]

These points are based on my common sense and understanding of the history of northeast Asia.

1) China will probably support limited punishment of North Korea. North Korea has to pay some sort of a price.

2) China will not permit South Korea and/or the United States to militarily destroy North Korea. Korean War II, anyone? North Korea is a buffer state and it will stay that way.

3) Economic punishment of North Korea will be limited to ensure that hordes of North Korean refugees do not stream into China.

4) If South Korea chooses to wage a full-scale war against North Korea, North Korea will unleash thousands of artillery guns and "it will be South Korea that suffers the most." South Korea will eventually defeat the North Korean military.

However, South Korea does not get to keep North Korea. As a buffer state (see point #2 above), a defeated North Korea will still revert to some form of North Korean rule. Alternatively, China may decide to temporarily rule/stabilize a defeated North Korea.

Conclusion: No matter how you look at it, whether Seoul is burning from North Korean artillery fire or not, South Korea does not get to keep one inch of North Korean soil. Korean reunification is only possible with the agreement of North Korea and China. Unless all three parties sign on the dotted line, South Korea does not have the option of changing the status quo in northeast Asia.

Is China a party to the Korean agreement / disagreement on unification / resultant scenario from the War? Was there such an accord ever signed between North Korea and China that N.K will remain to be the buffer state of China and will take punishments as China advises limited to the economic punishment only the tune that the poor refugees do not move in to China?

 

[Martian2]

Is China a party to the Korean agreement / disagreement on unification / resultant scenario from the War? Was there such an accord ever signed between North Korea and China that N.K will remain to be the buffer state of China and will take punishments as China advises limited to the economic punishment only the tune that the poor refugees do not move in to China?

According to Wikipedia, China sent 926,000 troops to push back the U.S./U.N. army on the Korean peninsula. You bet that kind of military power makes China a party to the divided Korean peninsula. Unlike 1950-1953, China is unimaginably more powerful today. The North Korean situation does not change unless China says so. The reason is simple mind-boggling military power. As I stated earlier, Korean War II, anyone?

Korean War - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"The United Nations, particularly the United States, came to the aid of the South Koreans in repelling the invasion. After early defeats by the North Korean military, when a rapid UN counter-offensive repelled the North Koreans past the 38th Parallel and almost to the Yalu River, the People's Republic of China (PRC) came to the aid of Communist North.[23] With Communist China's entry into the conflict, the fighting took on a more dangerous tone. The rapid Chinese counter-offensive repelled the United Nations forces past the 38th Parallel. The Soviet Union materially aided North Korea and China. The threat of a nuclear world war eventually ceased with an armistice that restored the border between the Koreas near to the 38th Parallel and created the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ), a 2.5-mile (4.0 km) wide buffer zone between the two Koreas."

http://history.howstuffworks.com/korean-war/korean-war.htm/printable

North Korea invaded South Korea on June 25, 1950.

 

[Speeder 2]

Attack against South Korean ship looks like false flag operation


While international investigators have accused North Korea of sinking a South Korean patrol corvette in March, China has taken a more cautious position.

Investigative journalist and RT contributor Wayne Madsen says it is because Beijing suspects there was greater deception at work.

“The Cheonan [navy corvette] was sunk by this torpedo that was later to be discovered to have been of German manufacture. Germany said it sells no military weapons to North Korea. This thing is starting to look like a classic false flag operation,” Wayne Madsen says.

“Kim Jong-Il who very rarely travels – and when he does, he only travels by train – went to Beijing. My sources in Beijing say that he went to Beijing, that Chinese authorities said that North Korea did this, he denied it. They were satisfied with his response,” Madsen adds. “Now the Chinese are very suspicious of the US’ intentions in richening things up in the Korean peninsula.”


?Attack against South Korean ship looks like false flag operation? - RT Top Stories


Now the question is if Germany can not sell and hasn't sold any of its sub and sub-related waepons to NK, to whom then have Germans sold their weapons ?

The list is a very short one : EU states , the UK, and Israel.



Like like any murder case, one has to find the motive and the murder weapon to have the case.

NK had and has ZERO motive to sink it. And NK has no means to sink it either.

If NK indeed didn't do it? Who did it then?

Considering US's massive millitary complex is in dear need of wars to dig themselves out of financial troubles , we have here a motive, a strong motive; Given Pantagon and CIA's worldwide track record, no one is surprised here if it is indeed the case.

But the USN doesn't operate German torpedos...

Who then is the ONLY one that connects the all dots together ?




Germany Sells Another Submarine To Israel


BRUSSELS – German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, will, according to informed sources in Berlin, finalise the details of the sale of another Dolphin class submarine to Israel on January 18th when Mrs. Merkel will visit Israel. The sources said that the negotiations are now at an advanced stage.


Israel has already taken delivery of three German submarines, which where ordered in 2005 and were expected to be handed over to the Israelis in 2010. Despite German demands, Israel has not paid for previous deliveries and Germany is now insisting on payment. The submarines have been built at a cost of 1.3 billion Euros with Germany covering one-third of the bill.

The Dolphin Class submarines are quiet diesel-electric attack submarines that evolved from Germany’s U209 class. They can fire torpedoes as well as cruise missiles carrying nuclear warheads from their four 650mm torpedo tubs, which will enable the Israelis to respond in case of a nuclear attack.

The other six 533mm tubes can launch torpedoes or anti ship missiles. The sources said further, that Israel has conducted deployment tests on a nuclear-capable version of its medium-range Popeye Turbo cruise missile design to ensure they can be fired from the 650mm torpedo tube in the Dolphin Class submarines. Furthermore, the Israelis have tested in 2002 the Popeye Turbo cruise missile in a location off Seri Lanka.

The submarines incorporate an Air Independent Propulsion (AIP) system in order to allow them to spend more time submerged. The Dolphin subs are designed for a crew of 35, and have a maximum speed of 20 knots and a maximum range of 4,500km. Israel has now a total of six Dolphin Class submarines.


Read more: Germany Sells Another Submarine To Israel | The Economic Voice

 

[SomeGuy]

does your Premier mean that China will support NK in case if war breaks out b/w NK and South Korea ?

Let me also know whether China thinks it was an unprovoked agression by NK or not.

If so why should China support an agressor ? I don't understand...

I read in newspapers that NK was the agressor... Does China think so ?

If it thinks so, then is it correct to support NK ?

I am not able to understand, because of the following sentence in the first post of this thread...



So I was asking you whether your Premier means that he will also go for war alongside with N.K.

I am still confused...

Strange. They why warn South Korea and also mention that China may get involved if there is a conflict. Certainly South Korea will not sink its own boat? Would Premier Wen be thinking so while making the statement / threat?

I think what the premier means is that because S.Korea is a more modern developed country with a large economy compared to the backwards, undeveloped, poor north - in a conflict, this would mean the south has more to lose.