REMARKS BY THE SPOKESPERSON

CHINA FOREIGN MINISTRY

September 5, 2002

Excerpts

. . .

Q: The US President Bush will make a speech at the UN General Assembly on 12 September to explain the Iraqi policy of the US.  Does China welcome this? . . .

A: At present, the Iraqi issue has the tendency of escalation and the Chinese side is deeply concerned and worried about it.  We believe that the core of the issue is the comprehensive and effective implementation of the relevant UNSC resolutions.  On the one hand, Iraq should restore cooperation with the UN to allow the UN weapons inspectors back to Iraq.  On the other hand, the concern of Iraq regarding its sovereignty, territorial integrity and legitimate security should be earnestly respected.  All parties should make efforts to push for the progress of the Iraqi issue.  China has for several times said that we are not in favor of use or threat of force, and holds that the Iraqi issue should be solved in a political way within the framework of the relevant UNSC resolutions.

. . .

Q: US President will explain why the US wants to topple the Saddam administration in his speech at the UN General Assembly.   Does the Chinese side view it as a positive step?

A: Since the speech has not been made yet, it is not convenient for me to comment without relevant knowledge.

Q: President Bush said that he would have consultation with China on the Iraqi issue.  What is your comment?  Did the US side contact the Chinese side on this issue?

A: I can confirm your information.  The US side has contacted China.  The China-US relations are faced with a good opportunity for development.  President Jiang is going to visit the US, and this will be the third meeting between the two heads of state within one year.  It should be said that the two sides have maintained close consultation and exchanges of views on many major issues.

Q: Did you say that the US side has contacted China? When? What did China say to the US?

A: The US side has contacted China and the two sides are now under discussion.

. . .