BEIJING -- It could hardly have come at a worse time for Beijing. When Maj. Gen. Zhu Chenghu of the People's Liberation Army warned last week that U.S. military "interference" in a conflict over Taiwan could lead to a Chinese nuclear attack on the U.S., he reinforced every worst fear of a "China threat." What's worse, indeed almost comical, is that he made the comment to me and a handful of other foreign correspondents who had been invited here by Beijing in an effort to improve China's international image.
Recent warnings about Beijing's military buildup suddenly took on a very real significance, and the cloud cast by the general's threat is likely to intensify pressure on the Bush administration to take a tougher line with China over everything from Cnooc's bid for Unocal to revaluation of the yuan.
Despite these potentially devastating consequences, it was clear to those of us who witnessed last Thursday's warning that it was no accidental outburst. I'd been asking about possible Chinese tactics in the event of a conventional war over Taiwan, when the general responded to my question by raising the stakes dramatically:
"According to the balance of power between the United States and China we have no capability to fight a conventional war against the United States," the PLA hard-liner told me. "If the Americans interfere into the conflict, if the Americans draw their missiles and position-guided ammunition into the target zone on China's territory, I think we will have to respond with nuclear weapons."
Almost too stunned to respond, I offered Gen. Zhu a chance to back down -- or at least qualify the circumstances under which China would unleash its nuclear missiles against "hundreds of, or two hundreds" of American cities. Presumably, I suggested, he was only talking about the unlikely scenario of a U.S. attack on mainland Chinese soil. No, the general replied, a nuclear response would be justified even if it was just a conventional attack on a Chinese aircraft or warship -- something very likely if Washington honored its commitment to help defend Taiwan against an invasion by Beijing.
A fellow correspondent offered Gen. Zhu another escape route, reminding him that China had a longstanding policy of no first use of nuclear weapons. But the general brushed that aside as well, saying the policy could be changed and was only really intended to apply to conflicts with nonnuclear states in any case. Afterward he made only half-hearted efforts to dissuade us from publishing what he insisted was purely his personal view and said he thought there was unlikely to be a war.
In Washington, the first ramifications of Gen. Zhu's comments are already being felt. The State Department denounced the general's remarks as "highly irresponsible," and at least one congressman has called for a review of diplomatic ties with China. A Pentagon report on the growing pace of China's military buildup, due to be released within the next few days, is likely to intensify calls for tougher action.
But to PLA hard-liners, all this is of secondary importance. After all, if the likes of Gen. Zhu are prepared to contemplate the "destruction of all [Chinese] cities east of Xian" in order to capture democratic Taiwan -- which Beijing insists is part of China -- they are unlikely to lose any sleep if outrage over his remarks derails Cnooc's bid for Unocal.
A self-professed "warmonger," the general has often previously warned of a nuclear war over Taiwan -- most recently at a panel discussion earlier this year with Admiral Dennis Blair, the former commander-in-chief of the U.S. Pacific Command, and former U.S. Assistant Secretary of Defense Chas. Freeman.
That doesn't mean his comments reflect Chinese military strategy. Beijing doesn't have enough nuclear warheads to target hundreds of American cities, and more senior figures in the PLA presumably realize that attacking even one would mean the end of Communist rule as well as most of China. Nor is Gen. Zhu an influential policy maker -- as dean of international fellows at China's National Defense University his main job is running exchange programs for visiting senior foreign military officers.
But the general's career hasn't suffered from his outspokenness. He was promoted two ranks in 2004 and continues to meet foreign visitors despite his habit of making controversial remarks. Even if Gen. Zhu's views don't represent official policy, China's top brass evidently see advantages in allowing such sentiments to be disseminated to an international audience.
Nor is he the only Chinese general to have warned of nuclear war if the U.S. comes to Taiwan's defense. Senior Col. Luo Yuan, of the Academy of Military Science, has voiced similar sentiments. So too has Gen. Xiong Guangkai, now the PLA's deputy chief of general staff, who was famously quoted as warning Mr. Freeman in 1995 that Americans "care more about Los Angeles than you do about Taipei."
The likely goal of these repeated threats is to sow the idea in Washington that China might actually be crazy enough to initiate a nuclear exchange, even though it would amount to political and military suicide. "It's a strategy of perception management," said Larry Wortzel, a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation who has known Gen. Zhu for more than a decade. "One objective is to put enough doubt in the minds of the American public that they will think it's not worth going to war over Taiwan."
As demonstrated by the backlash following Gen. Zhu's remarks, that is a counterproductive strategy which only makes the China threat look even more alarming. Some in Beijing evidently realize that China has a PR problem -- otherwise we wouldn't have been invited on last week's trip. But they don't have the clout to take on the PLA -- indeed even President Hu Jintao has tread cautiously since taking up the chairmanship of the Chinese Communist Party's Central Military Commission last year. And, judging from my experience last week, the PLA seem to be the ones calling the shots over Taiwan -- whatever the cost to China's international image.
Mr. Gittings is The Asian Wall Street Journal's deputy editorial-page editor.
