Published by: World Tibet Network News, Monday, February 26, 1996

By: David Dyar

Washington, Feb. 21 (VOA)

Intro: Political commentator pat Buchanan's victory in the New Hampshire republican presidential primary election has brought new attention to his foreign policy views. V-O-A's david dyar reviews some recent comments mr. Buchanan made about china.

Text: since the beginning of the campaign for the republican party's presidential nomination mr. Buchanan has attracted attention with his views about domestic issues.

Reports of his comments about foreign issues mostly have centered on criticism of free trade policies and the need to preserve american jobs. He also has urged tough measures to curb illegal immigration and to slash foreign aid.

This week, when he spoke on the american broadcasting company's program "this week with david brinkly" mr. Buchanan elaborated somewhat on u-s / china relations. In an exchange with commentator sam donaldson, candidate buchanan criticized president clinton's policies toward china.

Buchanan: I think our policy toward china is craven appeasement. Craven appeasement. They've got a 40 billion dollar surplus at our expense. Donaldson: american business wants to go over there, Mr. Buchanan. Buchanan: American business is not going to run the Buchanan administration. It's run too many administrations. It is too much in control of the congress.

Mr. Buchanan was asked about campaign advertisements discussing nuclear weapons. The political advertising suggested that under certain circumstances mr. Buchanan would favor supplying small nuclear arms to taiwan, south korea, japan or australia. Mr. Buchanan said the ads distorted his position. He said he would not renege on the nuclear non proliferation treaty.

// Buchanan act //

I would not transfer american nuclear weapons to any nation. But I think we'd better think about the possibility, with pyongyang building nuclear weapons. China has them, threatening taiwan. You'd better think about the possibility that these nations are going to go nuclear on their own. It is a major issue. It ought to be discussed.

// End act //

In another exchange with mr. Donaldson, mr. Buchanan was more specific about how he might react to the possibility of a conflict between china and taiwan.

// Donaldson-buchanan cut 2 //

Donaldson: should the united states -- if you were president -- actually preserve taiwan's independence by force of arms, if necessary?

Buchanan: excellent question. If the united states indicated we're abandoning taiwan completely, my guess is taiwan would try to rush to some kind of small nuclear deterrent. I believe we should quietly tell china this, sam: "listen, you are not going to destroy the independence of these people. You're not going to violate all our agreements. You said the future of china would be worked out peacefully. If you try to invade or destroy that island, you've got a horrendous crisis with the united states." I would not do it publicly. I would send someone -- like jim schlesinger over to china to talk right across the table form them, and to talk realistically.

// End cut //

Mr. Buchanan said a raid on taiwan by china was unlikely but when pressed for his likely response to such an attack he called for a display of armed might and severe trade restrictions.

// Buchanan act //

I would leave my options open. I'll tell you what I would do. I would start an airlift of modern aircraft. And I would sell the taiwanese whatever they needed in terms of anti-submarine naval forces. I would move the 7th fleet right in that particular area. And then I would tell the chinese, again -- "we have told you, don't do this." I think china would wake up and listen because the first thing it would suffer is an economic contraction, because I would shut off trade with china.

// End cut //

Mr. Buchanan previously has called for a 20 per cent tarrif on chinese exports to the united states. During the interview sunday he repeated his position that he would not renew china's most favored nation trading status and indicated he might impose a higher tariff than the 20 per cent he earlier advocated.