U.S. and Hong Kong (2007)

U.S. Department of Defense
Office of the Assistant Secretary of Defense (Public Affairs)

News Transcript

Presenter: Commander, U.S. Pacfic Command, Adm. Timothy Keating

November 27, 2007

DoD News Briefing with Adm. Keating from the Pentagon Briefing Room, Arlington, Va.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

Q: Admiral, it's Lolita Baldor with AP. If I can just change subjects on you for a second. Twice in the last week or so, Navy ships were not allowed entry into Hong Kong. I'm wondering if you could tell us, A) whether there's been any new or latest attempt to contact the Chinese and find out why this happened; and also, what does this tell you in terms of any long-term either relationship with China and any future efforts to dock there? Do you think this is going to be an ongoing problem?

ADM. KEATING: Thanks, Lita. I hope it's not an ongoing problem, and it shouldn't be an ongoing problem. This is a kind of a mundane, run of the mill -- I've been to Hong Kong, I don't know, I'll say six times in my career. I've been at it a long time, but I've been to Hong Kong a number of times. It's one of the great liberty ports in the world. It's a terrific opportunity for sailors, Marines -- if there are some on board and to spend time with their families.

You all are aware the Kitty Hawk was close to making her port call. Families had flown down from Japan, hundreds of them, I'm told, and at the last minute the Chinese denied the Kitty Hawk battle group -- the carrier and several of its escorts -- denied them permission to come into Hong Kong.

This is perplexing. It's not helpful. It is not, in our view, conduct that is indicative of a country who understands its obligations of a responsible nation. There is little strategic benefits to it. There's a lot more downside than upside. So it's hard to characterize it in anything but a at least perplexing, if not troublesome, light.

I have had no conversation with any Chinese officials. We are in dialogue with OSD and State, and I've got a phone call in to our ambassador there. I've not yet been able to connect to Ambassador Randt.

So, perplexing, troublesome. No direct contact with the Chinese. Would certainly hope that this is not indicative of future repeated denials. We'd like to get into Hong Kong. We want to engage in even discourse. I'm hoping to go to China in January. As you know, Secretary Gates was just there a couple of weeks ago. He had a good visit. So this denial in the very late stages of port visit planning is -- came as a surprise and it's of some concern to us.

Q: To follow up, have there been attempts to contact the Chinese that they have rebuffed, or have they just been not successful, or no real overt effort yet? Can you sort of describe what types of efforts are being made and if the Chinese are simply refusing to explain?

ADM. KEATING: I could not characterize it that way, Lilly. I have -- I personally as commander of Pacific Command have not initiated any phone call to Chinese military counterparts, and wouldn't, necessarily. It is more a State Department function, which is why I say I'm working to talk to Ambassador Randt. And I would leave that -- the high-level -- I'm not suggesting we would demarche, but activities such as that are much more in the State Department and Pentagon's line than they are ours here at Pacific Command. I've not spoken to our ambassador. I've got -- we're playing phone tag right now.

I don't think that there is anything calamitous about this or there would have been more direct back-and-forth action between officials from our government and their government. And as you know, the Chinese reversed themselves after the Kitty Hawk reversed itself, its battle group. The Chinese said: Oh, yeah, you know, the sun was in our eyes or something; you can come in. Well, it was too late by then.

So, no conversation between me and Chinese military officials, and there may be some at a little bit lower levels out of State or the Pentagon. I am unaware of any such effort.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

Q: Yeah. Admiral, Bill Gertz with the Washington Times. I'd like to follow up on the Kitty Hawk incident and how this will affect the mil-to-mil relationship. It seems -- I'm sure that some will characterize what happened as a mistake, but it seems pretty clear that it was an unfriendly action, and that raises the question about whether you will curtail or curb the military-to-military contacts with China, even though Hong Kong is technically not part of that.

I was also told that the Chinese have cut back on some of the military exchanges as a result of the president's recent meeting with the Dalai Lama. Are you planning to expect some kind of apology from the Chinese, and do you think that you will be curtailing the military exchange program as a result?

ADM. KEATING: Thanks, Bill. I doubt we'll receive an apology from the Chinese. I'm not expecting one. Wouldn't mind it, not to me but to the families of the sailors who committed a couple of bucks to get down to Hong Kong for Thanksgiving with the sailors off the Kitty Hawk. That is a distressing part of this.

As I mentioned a minute ago, I think we have a trip that we're planning, like 12 through 15 January. It'll be our -- my second visit to China in less than a year as the commander of Pacific Command. As you know, perhaps Fox Fallon, my predecessor, went a couple of times while he was there. So that means the door is open. The phone lines are open. We have not curtailed on our side any mil-to-mil engagement. We are pushing for increased exchange of personnel.

I mentioned Chief Roy earlier. He has had discussions with the Chinese military officials about senior enlisted academies and exchanges at the kind of senior noncom level.

We are looking to find ways to incorporate the Chinese in fairly fundamental military exercises, search and rescue exercises, humanitarian assistance and disaster relief exercises. We have invited them to several of these.

Their response has not been what we would like. But it is an open dialogue we have with these guys, and we're hopeful that in the months ahead, based on visits following on Secretary Gates -- and, you know, Chairman Mullen was just there. This is going to be a long process, in our view. We are cautiously optimistic that we'll be able to work our way around some of these aggravations, if you will. We hope none of the aggravations are from us. We think they're all from them.

As the Olympics loom larger and the summer of 2008 comes upon us, we are hopeful that the behavior of the Chinese will be more like that of other responsible countries. And we would be happy to engage with them in discussions that might clear up any confusion on their part as to what we mean by that.

Q: Admiral, it's Jennifer Griffin with Fox News. I wondered if you could tell us how unusual is it for minesweepers to be -- that request a port of call from an advancing storm or protection from an advancing storm to be denied access to a port. Can you put that into terms that laymen would understand about how unusual that might be?

ADM. KEATING: It's very unusual, one, to kind of get caught, but that's the way weather at sea can be. I've found myself -- on aircraft carriers, anyway -- in water, wind, sea conditions that even on a big aircraft carrier will get your attention.

Those two minesweepers were engaged in an operation, not against China but out in international water, and a storm blew up and they needed to get into a place of refuge. And, you know, Hong Kong's nearby and that's a great place to go. So for the Chinese to have denied those two ships, in particular, small though they may be, that is a different kettle of fish for us and is, in ways, more disturbing, more perplexing than the denial for the Kitty Hawk's port visit request.

As it turns out, both the Patriot and Guardian remained unaffected. They suffered no damage. But this is a kind of an unwritten law among seamen that if someone is in need, regardless of genus, phylum or species, you let them come in; you give them safe harbor. Jimmy Buffett has songs about it, for crying out loud.

So this is an area that causes us a little more concern. And I think Gary Roughead had a couple words for you earlier. That is behavior that we do not consider consonant with a nation who advocates a peaceful rise and harmonious relations.

So it causes us -- it gives us concern.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]

Q: Admiral, it's Guy Raz from NPR. Looking ahead to your visit to China in January, I think you said the 8th to the 12th, can you give us a sense of what's on the agenda, what you're going to be talking with the Chinese about, what you're hoping to emphasize and what you're hoping to get out of those meetings?

ADM. KEATING: Guy, it's a week later -- a couple days later than that. And it's a request. I haven't yet been given permission to come. We'll see how that goes.

Yeah, I would be anxious to engage in discussions with appropriately senior folks on a couple of topics. One, obviously, Hong Kong port visit. Two, the development of weapons and their exercises in which we have seen them use these weapons. On my first visit to China, they professed to have no hegemonic intentions and, in their words, they only want to be able to protect those things that are theirs. Fair enough. The sum of the weapons we see them developing indicate to us a little more aggressive strategic goal, perhaps, than would be easily understood on our part if it is only to protect those things that are theirs.

Now, I can an make another case that because of their reliance on external sources for energy, in particular, they -- the Chinese -- want to guarantee the safe passage through international water, an understandable goal, and so they want to develop a navy that can go a little bit further than their first island chain.

So we'll engage with discussions about weapons development, training, blue-water navy capabilities, some air-to-air systems that we see them developing. So it's not going to be anything earth- shattering or startling. We'll go -- we'll continue -- our goal is to continue to develop this dialogue. The way we look at it, Guy, is if there are areas for misunderstanding between our countries -- and I think there are right now -- if we can reduce the -- that gap, the delta in those areas, reduce the potential for misunderstanding, then as that delta diminishes, as the gap closes, you have less room for confusion which could lead to confrontation, could lead to crisis.

Now, that's kind of a bumper sticker approach to it, but by working on this end to increase the dialogue on the day-to-day execution of military operations, and understanding their strategy, and developing the communications capabilities that we don't have right this second -- and this isn't just hotline, it's who do we call -- we reduce potential for confusion, which dramatically reduces the likelihood of conflict, in our perspective. And that's our goal. Peace and stability in the region. To get there, we reduce the chance for misunderstanding.

[ ...Intervening Text... ]