chinese journal of international law-2002-qiang-387-419.pdf

Selected Documents*

Compiled by CHEN Qiang & HU Qian~

I. State Responsibility: Statements by Xue HanqinII. Humanitarian Intervention: Statement by Gao FengIII. Self-determination: Statement by Xie BohuaIV. Anti-terrorism: China's Position PaperV. The Spy Plane Incident: Statements from the FMPRC Web SiteVI. Declaration on the Shanghai Cooperation OrganizationVII. Declaration on Boao Forum for Asia

I. State Responsibility: Statements by Xue Hanqin

A/C.6/55/SR.14 (Nov. 10, 2000) (Sixth Committee, Summary record of the14 meeting; Held at Headquarters, New York, on Monday, 23 October2000, at 10 a.m.), pp. 8-9.

38. Ms. Xue Hanqin (China) said that her delegation was gratified that aftersome 40 years the task of formulating a comprehensive set of legal rulesgoverning State responsibility was near completion. Some questions remained,however. The issue of countermeasures had long been one of the mostcontroversial aspects of the regime of State responsibility. Countermeasureswere a legitimate means available to a country injured by an internationallywrongful act to redress the injury and protect its interests. In view of past andpossible future abuses, however, the recognition of a country's right to takecountermeasures must be accompanied by appropriate restrictions on theiruse.

39. When commenting on draft articles 30, 47 and 48 on first reading, herdelegation had pointed out the need to clarify and improve on the provisionsthey contained. Some improvements had indeed been made. For example, theambiguous reference to "interim measures of protection" had been deletedand qualifying phrases had been added to the wording of article 23 (formerlyarticle 30), while other provisions clearly set out both the aims of and

Note by the Editors: This collection of materials is provided for information only.The readers are advised to consult the original documents themselves. Given spaceconstraint and other difficulties, we can only hope to be as helpful to the readers aspossible, without any ambition to make the selection comprehensive, and we willmake full use of the materials available on the internet, primarily the official sites.Peking University Law School.

by guest on May 9, 2014

http://chinesejil.oxfordjournals.org/D

ownloaded from

http://chinesejil.oxfordjournals.org/

388 Chinese JIL (2002)

limitations on the resort to countermeasures. There was, however, room forfurther improvement.

40. The desirability of the newly added draft article 54 on countermeasuresby States other than the injured State, together with the related draft article49, remained to be determined. The provisions they contained wouldobviously introduce elements akin to "collective sanctions" or "collectiveintervention" into the regime of State responsibility, broadening the categoryof countries with the right to resort to countermeasures and establish so-called"collective countermeasures". That would, however, run counter to the basicprinciple that countermeasures should and could be taken only by a countryinjured by an internationally wrongful act. More ominously, "collectivecountermeasures" could provide a further pretext for power politics ininternational relations. The reality was that only powerful States and blocswere in a position to take countermeasures, usually against weaker nations.

41. Moreover, "collective countermeasures" were inconsistent with theprinciple of proportionality enunciated in draft article 52, for they wouldbecome tougher when non-injured States joined in, with the undesirableconsequence that countermeasures might gready outweigh the extent of theinjury. Draft article 54 further complicated the already complex question ofcountermeasures, so the best solution would be to delete both draft articles 49and 54. The existence of draft article 56 did not provide enough of asafeguard.

42. Another controversial issue was that of State "crimes". Introducing theconcept into international law would encounter insurmountable obstacles inboth theory and practice. In an international community made up ofsovereign States, par in parent imperium non habet was a basic legal principle.Furthermore, Roman criminal law stated that societas delinquere non potest. At thesame time, rejecting the concept would in no way diminish the personal legalresponsibility of a person committing an internationally wrongful act. Thatwas why her delegation had shared the view that the provisions relating toState "crimes" in the draft on first reading should be amended. To someextent the suggestions had been heeded. Part Two of the new text replaced theconcept with that of "serious breaches of essential obligations to dieinternational community", and it differentiated between varying degrees ofgravity of a breach. Her delegation favoured that differentiation.

43. Two further points, however, should be clarified in relation to draftarticle 42. First, the phrase "international community as a whole" should bedefined in order to prevent any dispute. Secondly, given the importance of the



ownloaded from


Selected Documents 389

Security Council within the United Nations collective security system, diequestion of whether the imposition of an international obligation on Stateswould be automatic or would ensue only after a Security Council decisionmust be settled.

44. All nine articles dealing with dispute settlement procedures in the drafttext adopted on first reading, which had been excessively detailed in somerespects, had been deleted. Her delegation conceded the need to amend theprovisions, since Article 33 of the Charter of the United Nations gave partiesto a dispute a range of means of peaceful settlement, but not their wholesaledeletion. Some provisions were required. It was to be hoped that theCommission could reconsider the matter and submit a revised text as part of acomplete text of draft articles for second reading.

A/C.6/56/SR.11 (Nov. 9, 2001) (Sixth Committee; Summary record of the1 lth meeting; Held at Headquarters, New York, on 29 October 2001, at 10a.m.), pp. 9-11.

56. Ms. Xue Hanqin (China) commended the completion of the draftarticles after 46 years of arduous effort on the part of the Commission.Generally speaking, the draft articles adopted on second reading wereextremely rigorous in structure and rich in substance. The Commission hadalso attained a balanced text by carefully weighing different positionsregarding various controversial issues, thus paving the way for its acceptanceby all parties.

57. Chapter III of Part Two dealt with some of the most controversial issuesarising during the course of the Commission's work. Her delegation wasappreciative of the fact that the Commission had replaced the term"international crimes of States", first, by the term "serious breaches ofobligations to the international community as a whole" and subsequently to"serious breaches of obligations under peremptory norms of generalinternational law", where "serious breaches" were defined as "gross orsystematic" failure to fulfill such obligations. Given that article 53 of theVienna Convention on the Law of Treaties contained a widely accepteddefinition of "peremptory norm", the phrase "obligations under peremptorynorms of general international law" had a more definite meaning and waseasier to comprehend.

58. Her delegation remained concerned, however, that the concept of"serious breaches" could still give rise to controversy in practice, since it was



ownloaded from



not clear who should judge whether an internationally wrongful actconstituted a serious breach. If it was left to States, they might arrive atdifferent conclusions, which would have repercussions on the provisions ofdraft article 41, paragraphs 1 and 2, and would thus adversely affect thestability of the international legal order. Security Council resolutions alsoentered the equation. There was a need to clarify whether in cases involving athreat to international peace and security, for example, obligations under thedraft article could arise only after the Security Council resolution had beenadopted.

59. With regard to article 48, her delegation accepted that any State otherthan an injured State might express an appropriate form of concern if theobligation breached was owed to a group of States or the internationalcommunity as a whole, and might even demand that the responsible Stateshould cease the internationally wrongful act; it doubted, however, whether itwas appropriate to elevate such actions to the level of a State's legalresponsibility. Moreover, China was concerned at the uncertainty in respect ofthe contents of the obligation breached, whether owed to a group of States forthe protection of their collective interest or to the international community asa whole. Such an approach was likely to lead to controversy and abuse, for itwas difficult to arrive at agreed criteria for judgement in such matters.

60. According to draft article 45 and paragraph 3 of draft article 48, if theinjured State had waived its right, or was regarded as acquiescing in the loss ofits right, to invoke the responsibility of the responsible State, no third Statehad the right to invoke that State's responsibility in its own interest. However,that did not seem consistent with the nature of the obligation breached, whichaccording to article 48 had to be one "established for the protection of acollective interest of the group" or owed to the international community as awhole. In that light, it seemed that the injured State should not be entitled towaive its right unilaterally. Moreover, it was not clear whether a third Statecould invoke responsibility before the acquiescence of the injured State in theloss of its right was firmly established.

61. Another issue relevant to draft article 48 was the concept of "thebeneficiaries of the obligation breached" in paragraph 2 (b), which appearedto confer on third States the right to invoke responsibility in the interest ofindividuals or other non-State entities, even if they were not nationals of theresponsible State or of the third State concerned. The right so conferred wastoo broad and was likely to lead to disputes among the States involved.



ownloaded from



62. The question of countermeasures had always been controversial. Herdelegation had consistendy argued that countermeasures were permissibleunder international law if taken by an injured State to compel cessation of theact and safeguard its interests. In order to prevent abuse of that right,however, appropriate restrictions must be placed on it. A proper balance hadbeen struck in chapter II of Part Three, with the deletion of the provision inthe original draft article 54 that enabled States other than the injured State totake countermeasures, and die introduction of a saving clause in the new draftarticle 54. However, the new article failed to define "lawful measures". If theyincluded countermeasures, the new provision would have the same effect asthe old one. His delegation maintained its objection to expanding the range ofStates entitled to take countermeasures and introducing collective elementssuch as "collective intervention" or "collective sanctions".

63. The new draft contained no provisions on dispute settlement. However,because State responsibility was such a sensitive and controversial topic, it wasvery important for the draft articles to feature the principle that States mustabide strictly by the obligation to setde their disputes by peaceful means, inaccordance with Article 2, paragraph 3, and Article 33 of the Charter of theUnited Nations. A mechanism for setding disputes arising from Stateresponsibility could be adopted along the lines of the provision contained inthe draft articles adopted on first reading. The General Assembly, in decidingon the conclusion of an international convention on State responsibility,should also decide whether such a mechanism should be included.

64. Her delegation had no objection to the recommendation in the reportthat the General Assembly should take note of the draft articles in a resolution,and annex the draft articles to the resolution.

II. Humanitarian Intervention: Statement by Gao Feng

A/54/PV.55 (General Assembly Official Records, 54th Session, 55th PlenaryMeeting, Wednesday, 17 November 1999, new York), pp. 19-20.

Mr. Gao Feng (China) (spoke in Chinese): The United Nations Decadeof International Law has registered many tangible achievements, as isfaithfully reflected in the Secretary-General's report. I would like to expressmy appreciation for this. The Chinese delegation has already made itscomments on these achievements in its statement to die Sixth Committee.Moreover, we believe it is necessary, against the backdrop of some of thisyear's major events in international relations, to reflect further on major issues



ownloaded from



that have an important bearing on the direction of the development ofinternational law.

The development of international law is at a crossroads. Since the end ofthe cold war, regional or subregional conflicts resulting from intra-State ethnicproblems have become new threats to the international peace and security,subjecting the international order, embodied in the United Nations and itsCharter, to unprecedented challenges. Humanitarian intervention under thepretext of protecting human rights is being used by some influential politiciansas an answer to such challenges.

We all know that examples of humanitarian intervention are not hard tofind—at least that has been the case over the past 150 years—but its legalityunder international law has always been doubtful and controversial. This isbecause in the past 150 years there has never been a case in which theintervening State has not abused humanitarian principles for the sake of itsown interests. The unlawfulness of this is clearly stated in the United NationsCharter. Post-cold-war examples in Africa and the Balkans have shown thathumanitarian intervention is still being used as an excuse for certain countriesto realize their own strategic interests. Such intervention is selective. It is anunlawful act carried out by one or two countries or a group of countries on thebasis of double standards. Its nature did not, does not and will not change. It isironic that even those who have carried out such interventions might also bereluctant to discuss or develop criteria for humanitarian intervention toacquire legality under international law because doing so would limit theirfreedom in making such interventions. Such humanitarian intervention willnot bring peace to the world, nor will it eliminate humanitarian disasters.Intervention can be useful for resolving crises only when it is decided by thecollective security regime, guided by the United Nations Charter.

It is true that the current collective security regime is not perfect, but theconsequences of abandoning such a regime would be very disastrous to worldpeace and security and would far outweigh the defects of the regime. Besides,we still have opportunities to correct or mitigate those defects through thereform of the United Nations.

Certain humanitarian disasters in the context of regional conflictsrequire prompt action by me United Nations, but such action has to be takenwithin the legal framework of the United Nations Charter. Protecting andrespecting human rights or people's right to self-determination do not renderthe State insignificant. Truly meaningful human rights protection can berealized only under the effective law and order of a State or the internationalcommunity. The unbridled freedom of an individual or a group of individualsoutside the law will lead to the oppression of one group of people by another.



ownloaded from



The incessant splitting of States since the end of the cold war has not madeStates disappear. On the contrary, it has increasingly demonstrated thepolitical and social significance of national culture and national spiritembodied in States, and the unity between human rights and State sovereigntyis also more obvious.

Facts have shown that unlawful armed encroachment on a nation'ssovereignty is by definition a serious violation of human rights, and of thatnation's right to self-determination. It is totally unconvincing and extremelydangerous to argue that in order to protect a nation's human rights, armedencroachment, in violation of international law, must be carried out againstthat nation's sovereignty, and that in order to protect the human rights of agroup of people of a nation, the human rights of another group of people ofthe same nation must be forcibly denied, including their right to survival. Theact of protecting human rights does not have the special status of being aboveinternational law. A legitimate goal should be achieved only throughlegitimate means. This is a basic principle that a society based on the rule oflaw follows as a matter of course.

The world legal order, with the United Nations Charter at its core, didnot come into being out of thin air. It is the crystallization of hundreds of yearsof human experience and wisdom. When carrying out commemorativeactivities for the United Nations Decade of International Law and thecentennial of the Hague International Peace Conference, we haveemphasized, without exception, the utmost importance of the world legalorder centred on the United Nations Charter. The changes in internationalrelations since the end of the cold war have posed certain new questions for us,but these new questions are far from being significant enough to require thedestruction of the principal pillars of this legal order. In the general trend ofglobalization, the international community will be increasinglyinstitutionalized and based on law. If we deviate from the principles of law,whether in pursuit of global or regional peace and security or for theprotection of human rights, we will find ourselves farther and farther from ourgoals and from international justice. Returning to a state of anarchy or to thelaw of the jungle offers absolutely no future.

III. Self-determination: Statement by Xie Bohua

Statement by Mr. Xie Bohua, Counsellor of the Permanent Mission of Chinaon the Right to National Self-determination (Item 118 ) at the ThirdCommittee of the 56th Session of the General Assembly on 31 October, 2001<http://un.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/20001.html>.



ownloaded from



Mr. Chairman:

Bringing an early end to the protracted bloody Israeli-Palestinianconflict, restoring all legitimate rights of the Palestinian people, includingtheir right to national self-determination and achieving a just andequitable settlement of the question of Palestine are the keys to a durablepeace in the Middle East. An early settlement of the Middle Eastquestion is not only in the interest of the full enjoyment of all humanrights by the people of the region, regional stability and development,but also benefits world peace, security and development. We are worriedby the continued armed invasion of Palestinian-controlled areas byIsraeli troops and the tense situation thus created. We call on Israel onceagain to immediately cease its military operations and withdraw its forcescompletely from the Palestinian-controlled areas so as to prevent anyfurther worsening of the situation.

Mr. Chairman:

The right to national self-determination is an important part of humanrights and represents a sacred right of all peoples, especially theoppressed nations, to fight against imperialism and colonial rule and forindependence and national liberation. According to relevant resolutionsof the UN General Assembly and the Vienna Declaration andProgramme of Action, the right to self-determination applies to peoplesunder foreign domination and occupation. It should not become apretext to support acts of violating and undermining territorial integrityand sovereignty. In recent years, some quarters have blatantly advocatedthe splitting of sovereign countries in the name of the right to nationalself-determination. Their activities of undermining state integrity andnational unity should be condemned and resolutely opposed by thewhole world.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

IV. Anti-terrorism: China's Position Paper

China's Position Paper against International Terrorism (02/10/01) (Releasedon September 25, 2001 on the web site of the Foreign Ministry,<http://un.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/18635.html>.



ownloaded from



I. Terrorism, which endangers innocent lives, causes losses of socialwealth and jeopardizes security of States, constitutes a serious challenge tohuman civilization and a serious threat to international peace and security.

II. The Chinese Government opposes and condemns all forms ofterrorism and is against using terrorism as a means of achieving politicalobjectives.

III. The fight against terrorism calls for protracted and concerted effortsof the international community. It is imperative to strengthen internationalcooperation at all levels and establish an international anti-terrorismmechanism under the auspices of the United Nations in accordance with theCharter of the United Nations, relevant Security Council resolutions, allconventions against international terrorism as well as documents adopted bythe UN General Assembly in this regard.

IV. China supports all efforts aimed at strengthening anti-terrorismconventions within the framework of the United Nations, including the earlycompletion of the International Convention for the Suppression of Acts ofNuclear Terrorism and the Comprehensive Convention on InternationalTerrorism. China encourages all States to become parties to the existinginternational anti-terrorism conventions as soon as possible and to effectivelyimplement such conventions.

V. In their cooperation to fight international terrorism, all States shouldfaithfully fulfill their responsibilities and obligations, including:

- condemning all acts, methods and practices of terrorism in all its formsand manifestations as criminal and unjustifiable;

- taking necessary measures, in accordance with their national laws andinternational obligations, to cut off any financial, material and militarysupport to terrorists;

- desisting from engaging in activities of organizing, abetting, assisting,financing or participating in terrorist acts in the territories of othercountries, or acquiescing in or encouraging activities within dieir ownborders that facilitate acts of terrorism in other countries, or sheltering,harboring or conniving at international terrorists, or supporting ortolerating for whatever reason or in whatever form and by whatevermeans, perpetrators of terrorist acts;

- taking appropriate measures to ensure that their territories are notused as terrorist training camps or to prepare or organize acts of terroristactivities against other countries or their nationals;



ownloaded from



- arresting, prosecuting and extraditing perpetrators of terrorist acts inconformity with their domestic laws and provisions of relevantinternational treaties;

- making efforts to conduct international cooperation through bilateral,regional and multilateral agreements and arrangements, particularly bypromoting all forms of information exchange helpful to the fight againstterrorism, providing legal assistance in terms of investigation, evidence-collection, arrest and prosecution procedures involving acts of terrorism,and extraditing or handing over by other means criminals to relevantauthorities of countries concerned, in accordance with domestic laws aswell as obligations provided for in international treaties. Developedcountries should provide to other Member States upon request necessaryanti-terrorism technologies, financial assistance and training and helpthe latter to strengthen their anti-terrorism capacity building.

VI. The United Nations and its Security Council should play a leadingrole in the fight against terrorism. It is recommended that the SecurityCouncil should establish an anti-terrorism mechanism to explore andformulate and conduct concrete programs for the fight against terrorism.

VII. It is recommended that UN Secretariat strengthen its capacity ofinformation-collection and analysis in the field of counter-terrorism and reportto the Security Council periodically.

VIII. The fight against terrorism should be conducted in accordancewith the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations andother established norms of international law. There should be acomprehensive approach, involving political, diplomatic, economic and othermeans, to address both the problem of terrorism and its underlying causes, inan effort to eliminate the root causes of terrorism.

V. The Spy Plane Incident: statements from the FMPRC Web Site

1. China's Solemn Position on the US Military Reconnaissance PlaneRamming into and destroying a Chinese Military Plane (3/4/2001)<http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9607.html>.

On the evening of 2nd April, Assistant Minister of Foreign Affairs Mr.Zhou Wenzhong summoned the US Ambassador Prueher again and madeclear to the US side China's solemn position on the US militaryreconnaissance plane ramming into and destroying a Chinese military plane.

Mr. Zhou Wenzhong pointed out that the US side should take fullresponsibility for this serious incident that took place on the morning of April



ownloaded from



1 st. The act of the US side constitutes a violation of the UN Convention onthe Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), which provides, among others, that thesovereign rights and jurisdiction of a coastal State over its Exclusive EconomicZone, particularly its right to maintain peace, security and good order in thewaters of the Zone, shall all be respected and that a country shall conform tothe UNCLOS and other rules of international law when exercising its freedomof the high seas. The US has also undermined the consensus that China andthe US reached last May on preventing dangerous maritime military activities.After causing the incident, the US plane forced its way into the Chineseterritorial airspace and landed at a Chinese airfield without permission fromthe Chinese side. It has thus further breached international law and therelevant provisions of the Chinese laws. All this has constituted anencroachment upon China's sovereignty and territorial airspace. The Chineseside strongly urges the US Government to take seriously the Chineserepresentations and protests, give the Chinese Government and people aconvincing account of the provocative act by the US military plane inviolation of international law, and take effective measures to prevent therecurrence of similar incidents.

Mr. Zhou Wenzhong expressed strong displeasure at the accusativeremarks made by the US side in recent days against the Chinese side. Hepointed out that the facts have clearly shown that it was the US plane thatrammed into and destroyed the Chinese plane. It was the US plane thatabruptly veered at a wide angle and approached the Chinese plane in its flight.This was the direct cause of the crash of the Chinese plane. The US side has,in disregard of the repeated opposition of the Chinese side, frequentlydispatched its planes to China's coastal areas for reconnaissance purposes,which was the root cause of the above-mentioned serious incident. The USside has no right whatsoever to make any requests to the Chinese side or toshirk its responsibilities. Instead, it should face up to the facts squarely, take upthe responsibilities and apologize to the Chinese side.

Mr. Zhou Wenzhong stressed that according to the 1944 Convention onInternational Civil Aviation and the Law of the People's Republic of China onthe Territorial Sea and the Contiguous Zone, the US plane shall not fly overChinese territorial airspace without prior consent of the Chinese side. Thereare signs indicating that the communications system of the US plane stillworked properly after the incident. But the US side neither sought the Chinesepermission for its over-flight of the Chinese territorial airspace nor informedthe Chinese side of its intention to do so during the entire process fromentering the Chinese territorial airspace to landing at the airfield. In doing so,the US has violated international law and encroached upon China's



ownloaded from



sovereignty and territorial airspace. According to both international law andChina's domestic laws, the Chinese side has the right to investigate incidentinvolving the aircraft that forced its way into the Chinese territorial airspacewithout permission and landed at a Chinese airfield, let alone that the USplane is not an ordinary civil aircraft.

Mr. Zhou Wenzhong strongly urged the US side to take seriously thesolemn representations and the legitimate requests of the Chinese side andgive, as soon as possible, the Chinese Government and people a convincingaccount about the US plane ramming into and destroying a Chinese planeand encroaching upon China's sovereignty and territorial airspace.

2. Spokesman Zhu Bangzao Gives Full Account of the Collision betweenUS and Chinese Military planes (04/4/2001)<http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9576.html>.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhu Bangzao Tuesday night gave a fullaccount of the recent mid-air collision between US and Chinese militaryplanes, and stated China's stance on the incident.

Zhu said that on the morning of April 1, a US EP-3 electronicsurveillance plane flew southeast of China's Hainan Island. At 8:36 Beijingtime, the US surveillance plane approached the airspace over China'sterritorial waters off the city of Sanya to conduct reconnaissance. The ChineseNavy sent two F-8 fighters to follow and monitor the US plane. At 9:07, theChinese planes made a normal flight in an area 104 kilometers from thebaseline of China's territorial waters. The course of the Chinese planes was at110 degrees, and the US plane was flying parallel with the right side of theChinese planes in the same direction.

The US plane suddenly veered at a wide angle towards the Chineseplanes, which were closer to baseline of the Chinese side. The US plane's noseand left wing rammed the tail of one of the Chinese planes, causing it to losecontrol and plunge into the sea. The pilot Wang Wei made parachuted fromhis stricken plane, while the other Chinese plane returned safely and landed at9:23. The US plane entered Chinese airspace without approval, and landed atLingshui Airport in Hainan at 9:33. The Chinese side made properarrangements for the 24 crew members aboard, in the spirit ofhumanitarianism.

After the incident, relevant Chinese departments immediately sentsearch-and-rescue planes and ships to look for pilot Wang Wei. PresidentJiang Zemin is deeply concerned about Wang's safety and has instructed timeand again to search for and rescue him at any cost. Up till 14:00 hours April 3,



ownloaded from



a total 37 planes and 29 boats had been sent to collision area. The search andrescue mission is still going on.

It should be pointed out that it was proper and in accordance withinternational law for Chinese military fighters to follow and monitor the USmilitary surveillance plane within airspace over China's exclusive economicwaters.

By veering and ramming the Chinese jet at a wide angle in violation ofthe flight rules, the US surveillance caused the crash of the Chinese jet. Thesurveillance flight conducted by the US aircraft overran the scope of "freeover-flight" according to international law. The move also violated the UnitedNations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which stipulates that any flight inairspace above another nation's exclusive economic zone should respect therights of the country concerned. Thus, the US plane's actions posed a seriousthreat to the national security of China. Meanwhile, such an action was alsoagainst the consensus reached by the two countries in May last year onavoiding risky military actions in sea areas. According to the consensus, whenmilitary airborne vehicles encounter each other in international airspace, bothsides should properly observe the current international law and practices, andtake into consideration the flight safety of the other side so as to avoiddangerous approaches and possible collisions. It should also be pointed outthat after the incident the US surveillance plane intrude China's airspace andlanded at a Chinese airport without permission from the Chinese side, a movethat further violated the regulations set forth by international and Chinese law,thus constituting a gross encroachment upon China's sovereignty andterritorial airspace.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry lodged a solemn representation andprotest to the US government on April 1 concerning the US plane's act ofclashing into the Chinese warplane and infringing upon China's sovereigntyand airspace. The Foreign Ministry has pointed out that the US should bearfull responsibility for the incident, and demanded that the US governmentmake an explanation to the Chinese government and people on the USplane's actions. China also demanded that the US take effective measures toprevent such an incident from recurring. The Chinese Foreign Ministrylodged a solemn representation once again on April 2.

In response to statements from the U.S. side in recent days, Zhu stressedthe following points:

First, the US military surveillance plane violated the principle of "freeover-flight," because the incident incurred by the US plane happened inairspace near China's coastal areas and China's exclusive economic waters.According to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea and



ownloaded from



general international law, all countries enjoy the freedom of over-flight in theexclusive economic waters of a nation. However, the Convention and generalinternational law stipulate at the same time that the rights of the coastalcountry should be considered. The US surveillance plane's reconnaissanceacts were targeted at China in the airspace over China's coastal area and itsflight was far beyond the scope of "over-flight", and thus abused the principleof over-flight freedom. The US plane's action also posed a serious threat toChina's security interests, hence it was right for the Chinese military planes tomonitor the US spy plane for the sake of China's state security. The US plane,in violation of flight rules, caused the crash, so the US side should bear fullresponsibility for the incident.

Second, it was illegal for the US military surveillance plane to enterChina's territorial space and to land at a Chinese airport without China'sapproval. The US plane's action has constituted an infringement uponChina's sovereignty and territorial space. According to international law andrelevant Chinese laws, China enjoys sovereignty over its territorial space.According to the 12th article of the Law on China's Territorial Waters andTheir Contiguous Areas, foreign aircraft may enter the airspace over China'sterritorial waters only in accordance with agreements or regulations signedbetween the government of the People's Republic of China (PRC) and thegovernments of foreign countries. Otherwise, such entry should be approvedor accepted by the government of the PRC or its authorized organizations.The 3rd article of the Convention on International Civil Aviation adopted in1944 clearly states that the military aircraft of a country may not fly overanother country's territory or land on its territory without permission. The USmilitary surveillance plane did not issue any request or notice to the Chineseside to enter Chinese airspace or land on Chinese territory during the wholeprocess. (Facts show that after the collision the US plane had the time andtechnical ability to issue such a request or notice, however the US plane failedto do so.) By entering China's airspace and landing at a Chinese airportwithout informing the Chinese side, the US plane has violated the relevantregulations of international conventions and Chinese laws, and its actionsconstituted serious infringements upon China's sovereignty and airspace.

Third, it is a fact that the US surveillance plane rammed the Chinesewarplane. After the collision, the front part of the nose of the US jet droppedofF, and the airscrew of its second left engine was deformed, evidence that theUS plane veered into, approached and collided abruptly with the Chineseplane, which can not be denied. The US side should face up to the facts, bearfull responsibility, apologize to China, and not seek any excuse to shirk itsresponsibility.



ownloaded from



Fourth, either according to international law or Chinese domestic laws,China has the right to investigate the plane which caused all this trouble, andthe incident as a whole, as China is the victim, the country where the incidentoccurred and the country where the culprit aircraft landed. Taking intoconsideration the suddenness and complexity of the incident, China needssufficient time to make the investigation. Even under such circumstances, theChinese Foreign Ministry still called in the US ambassador to China, andlodged a representation with him at 9:30 pm on the evening of the day theincident took place.

It also needs to be pointed out that the US plane is not a civilian aircraft,but a military spy plane that illegally entered Chinese territory, violated bothinternational and Chinese domestic laws, and posed a serious threat toChinese sovereignty and airspace. The US spy plane entered China illegally,differing from the aircraft that enters China in accordance with the law, cannot enjoy immunity. The Chinese side reserves the right to lodge furtherrepresentations in line with the investigation results.

Fifth, the most urgent matter for the US side is not to table all manner ofrequests, but to make a thorough review on the incident, apologize to theChinese side and respond to China's concerns and demands. The Chinesegovernment and people have the right to know the answers to the followingquestions:

Why does the US side frequently send its military surveillance planeson spy flights over sea areas close to China?

Why did the US warplane make an abrupt turn and ram theChinese jet in violation of operation rules?

Why did the US plane intrude into China's airspace and land at aChinese airport without approval from the Chinese side?

The US is fully responsible for making a clear explanation of the abovequestions to the Chinese people.

At present, the Chinese side is conducting an investigation into theincident. Although the process is not yet complete, China lost no time inallowing US diplomats in China to meet the US plane crew members inquestion, after taking into consideration humanitarian concerns and therelevant agreements between China and the US. This demonstrates China'ssincerity and humanitarian spirit in handling the issue. China will dealproperly with the US crew and plane in accordance with the law and theresults of the investigation.

Zhu once again demanded that the US side seriously consider China'ssolemn representations and rational requests, and sincerely cooperate with



ownloaded from



China in the investigation. He also urged the US side to make a promptexplanation to the Chinese government and people about the US plane'sramming of the Chinese jet and its infringement upon China's sovereignty andairspace, apologize to the Chinese side and bear all the responsibilities arisingfrom the incident.

3. Vice-Premier Qian Qichen: The US side should apologize to theChinese People (7/4/2001) <http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9650.html>

On April 6, Mr. Yangjiechi, Chinese Ambassador to the US forwardeda letter from Premier Qian Qichen to the US Deputy Secretary of State.

In his letter, Qian pointed out: the position of the Chinese Governmenton this incident is very clear. The US side should take up its responsibilities,provide convincing explanations to the Chinese people and start consultationswith the Chinese side on how to prevent recurrence of similar incidents. Chinahates to see the bilateral relations damaged by this incident. It has thereforekept a cool head and exercised great restraint in handling this matter.Regrettably , the US statement on this incident so far is unacceptable to theChinese side, and the Chinese people have found it most dissatisfying. Qianpointed out that it is essential for the US side to face up the facts squarely andadopt a positive and practical approach, apologize to the Chinese people.Then the two sides may move on to discuss matters concerning the USmilitary plane and other remaining problems.

On April 4, US Secretary of State Powell sent a letter to Vice PremierQian. Powell expressed in his letter that we very much regret the pain thisaccident has caused. President Bush is very concerned about your missingpilot. His thoughts and prayers are with the pilot's family members and lovedones, as are mine and all Americans. He also mentioned in the letter that hewant to work with Qian toward a productive and successful relationship andto putting this unfortunate accident behind them.

4. Ambassador Prueher Handed a Letter to Minister Tang Saying "VerySorry"(l 1/4/2001) <http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9703.html>.

Mr. Joseph Prueher, US Ambassador to China and the representativeplenipotentiary of the US Government for handling the incident of a USmilitary reconnaissance plane ramming into and destroying a Chinese militaryaircraft, handed a letter to Chinese Foreign Minister Tangjiaxuan at 5:30 pmon 11 April at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People's Republic ofChina, to say "very sorry" for the incident. It is stated in the US letter that



ownloaded from



"both President Bush and Secretary of State Powell have expressed theirsincere regret over your missing pilot and aircraft. Please convey to theChinese people and to the family of pilot Wang Wei that we are very sorry fortheir loss." The US side goes on to say that it is "very sorry the entering ofChina's airspace and the landing did not have verbal clearance."

The US side has also expressed its appreciation of "China's efforts to seeto the well being" of its crew.

According to the officials of the Foreign Ministry handling the incident,the case has not been closed. The two sides will hold talks soon to discuss thecause of the incident and ways for the US side to stop dispatching itsreconnaissance aircraft to the vicinity of the Chinese coast and prevent therecurrence of such incidents, and other related issues.

5. Tangjiaxuan Receives a Letter From the US Government Saying"Very Sorry" to the Chinese People (11/4/2001)<http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9700.html>.

On the afternoon of April 11 th, while receiving a letter that USAmbassador Joseph Prueher, the representative plenipotentiary of the USGovernment for handling the incident of a US military reconnaissance planeramming into and destroying a Chinese military aircraft, handed over toMinister Tang on behalf of the US Government this afternoon, China'sForeign Minister Tang Jiaxuan pointed out that the US side must take fullresponsibility for the incident, provide convincing explanations to the Chinesepeople, stop its reconnaissance activities above the Chinese coast and takemeasures to stop the recurrence of such incidents.

Ambassador Prueher said in the letter that both President Bush andSecretary of State Powell have expressed their sincere regret over China'smissing pilot and aircraft. He said on behalf of the US Government that theywere very sorry to the Chinese people and the family of pilot Wang Wei andthat they were very sorry for the US plane entering China's airspace andlanding without a verbal clearance. The US side also expressed itsappreciation of China's efforts to see to the well-being of the American crew.

Minister Tang pointed out that it is a serious incident that the USmilitary reconnaissance plane rammed into and destroyed a Chinese militaryplane on the morning of 1 April off the coast of China's Hainan Province,leading to the missing of the Chinese pilot, and entered China's airspace andlanded at the Chinese airfield without permission. The said US plane intrudedinto China's territorial airspace and encroached upon China's sovereignty inviolation of international law and the provisions of relevant laws of China as



ownloaded from



well as the consensus that China and the US reached last May on avoidingdangerous maritime military activities. Its act has thus constituted a threat toChina's national security. The US side must take full responsibility for theincident. It is entirely reasonable and legitimate for the Chinese side to ask foran apology to the Chinese people from the US side.

Minister Tang emphasized that ever since the US militaryreconnaissance plane rammed into and destroyed a Chinese military plane,the Chinese side has all along handled this incident with calmness andrestraint and in accordance with international law and the provisions ofrelevant laws of China. The competent departments in China have, out ofhumanitarian considerations, treated the 24 crew members of the USreconnaissance plane well and arranged for their meetings with US diplomaticand consular officers. He said he noted that the US side expressed in the letterits appreciation to the Chinese side for all this. He told Ambassador Prueherthat the Chinese side understands the American people and the families of thecrew are eagerly looking forward to an early return of the crew and a reunionwith them. As the US Government has already said "very sorry" to theChinese people, the Chinese Government has, out of humanitarianconsiderations, decided to allow the crew members to leave China aftercompleting the necessary procedures.

He also pointed out that this is not the conclusion of the case involvingthe US military plane ramming into a Chinese aircraft, causing the missing ofthe Chinese pilot, entering the Chinese airspace and landing at a Chineseairfield without permission. The two sides will continue with the negotiationson the matter and other related issues. The Chinese Government and peopledemand that the US side provide convincing explanations to the Chinesepeople on this incident, stop sending aircraft to the vicinity of the Chinesecoast for reconnaissance activities and take effective measures to avert therecurrence of similar incidents. The US side must understand fully theseriousness of the incident, take seriously the solemn position of the Chineseside and properly handle this incident. It must not make an erroneousjudgement and further damage the bilateral relations.

Minister Tang finally stressed that China's sovereign independence,territorial integrity and national dignity brook no infringement. It is China'sconsistent position that state-to-state relations, including China-US relations,must be based on such basic norms governing international relations asmutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggressionand non-interference in each other's internal affairs. The Chinese sideattaches importance to China-US relations. To develop friendly relations andcooperation between China and the US serves the interests of both countries



ownloaded from



and the world at large. It is hoped that the US will strictly abide by the threeChina-US Joint Communiques and the basic norms governing internationalrelations and will refrain from doing anything more to impair the bilateralrelations. The US should take a constructive attitude and work with theChinese side to bring the bilateral relations onto the track of normaldevelopment.

6. Spokesperson on the Letter from the US Government Saying "VerySorry" to the Chinese People (11/4/2001)<http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9702.html>.

I. After the incident, the Chinese side has been insisting that the US sideshould make an apology. But the US side has so far only said that it is verysorry for the incident. Yet, the Chinese side has decided to allow the US crewmembers to leave China. Does mat mean that the Chinese side has madeconcessions to the US side over this matter? Or has the US side made anycommitments to the Chinese side?

A: US Ambassador Joseph Prueher, the representative plenipotentiary ofthe US Government for handling the incident, formally handed a letter onbehalf of the US Government to Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jiaxuan tosay "very sorry" for the incident. In the letter, the US Government has said"very sorry" to the Chinese people and the family of pilot Wang Wei for themissing pilot and aircraft. The US side has also said "very sorry" to theChinese side for its plane entering China's airspace and landing at a Chineseairfield without acquiring a verbal clearance. Under diese circumstances andout of humanitarian considerations, the Chinese Government has decided toallow the US crew members to leave China after completing the necessaryprocedures. However, it must be pointed out that this case has not concludedyet. The two sides will continue their negotiations on this incident and otherrelated issues.

II. The Chinese side has made it clear that the decision to allow the UScrew members to return to their country does not imply the conclusion of theincident resulting in the missing of the Chinese pilot. What does that meanexactly by saying that "it has not concluded"? Does the Chinese side stilldemand an apology from the US side? Or does it has any more demands?

A: The US military reconnaissance plane rammed into and destroyed aChinese military plane off the coast of China's Hainan Province, resulting inthe missing of a Chinese pilot, intruded into China's airspace and landed at aChinese airfield witiiout permission. This is a serious incident. The



ownloaded from



responsibility for this incident entirely lies with the US side. According tointernational law and the provisions of the relevant laws of China, the Chineseside has every right to conduct a comprehensive investigation of this incident.Once the US crew members leave China with the Chinese permission , thetwo sides will continue their negotiations on this incident and other relatedissues.

III. The Chinese side says that after completing necessary inquiries withthe US crew members, the Chinese Government will allow them to leaveChina. Has the Chinese side completed the inquiries? What is the result of theinquiries? Under what circumstances will the US crew members leave China?How will the Chinese side determine the nature of their involvement in theincident? Will China prosecute them?

A: Our investigation has not completed yet. The Chinese side willreserve the right to make further representations with the US side and handlethe incident on the basis of results of the investigation.

IV. President Bush asked the Chinese side to release the US crew andreturn its plane as soon as possible. How will China do to the US plane? WillChina return the plane to the US side? If so, when will China do that? Whatfurther conditions will the Chinese side raise for the return of the plane?

A: According to international law and the provisions of the relevant lawsof China, the Chinese side has every right to conduct a comprehensiveinvestigation of such an incident in which a foreign military reconnaissanceplane that rammed into and destroyed a Chinese plane, illegally intruded intoChina's airspace and landed at a Chinese airfield. The Chinese side willdecide on how to do with the plane on the basis of the results of theinvestigation.

V. The searching and rescuing efforts by the Chinese side for the missingChinese pilot are still under way and the whereabouts of the pilot are stillunknown. As such, why does the Chinese side allow the US crew members toleave China? How does the Chinese side think it appropriate to solve theremaining problems concerning the crashed aircraft and the missing pilot?

A: US Ambassador Joseph Prueher today handed a letter on behalf ofthe US Government to say "very sorry" to the Chinese side. As the USGovernment has already said "very sorry" for the incident in the letter, theChinese Government has, out of humanitarian considerations, decided toallow its crew members to leave China. The Chinese pilot, Wang Wei, is stillmissing. The Chinese leadership, Government and people are extremely



ownloaded from



worried and deeply concerned about his life. We are doing everything possibleto search for him.

VI. The Chinese side has demanded that the US side stop sendingmilitary aircraft to the vicinity of the Chinese coast for reconnaissanceactivities and take effective measures to prevent the recurrence of suchincidents. But the US side has failed to respond to this. Will the Chinese sideinsist on this? If the US side continues with reconnaissance flights off China'scoast, what measures will the Chinese side take?

A: The reconnaissance activities against China by the US aircraft offChina's coast pose a threat to China's security interests. We demand that theUS side take seriously the solemn representations made by the Chinese side,stop sending aircraft to the vicinity of China's coast for reconnaissanceactivities and take effective measures to prevent the recurrence of suchincidents.

VII. The Chinese side has made it clear that the Chinese and US sideswill continue their negotiations on the incident and other related issues. Iwould like to ask at what levels China and the US will conduct suchconsultations? What will the two sides discuss in such talks? Will the two sidecarry out a joint investigation into this incident? Will the two sides continue toimplement the relevant consensus reached between them on how to avoiddangerous maritime military actions? Will the two sides consider introducing anew mechanism to prevent the recurrence of such incidents?

A: China and the US have conducted several rounds of diplomaticconsultations on the incident in which the US reconnaissance plane rammedinto and destroyed a Chinese plane. This case has not concluded yet. The twosides will continue with the negotiations on this incident and other relatedissues in the coming days. We believe that it is more important to strictly abideby the relevant principles of international law and implement the existingconsensus than to introduce a new mechanism. This is the only effective wayto avoid the recurrence of such incidents.

VIII. What adverse impact does China think the incident has on China-US relations? How does China expect China-US relations to develop in thefuture?

A: The Chinese side has always attached importance to China-USrelations. To develop friendly relations and cooperation between China andthe US is in the interests of both countries and vital to peace and prosperity inthe Asia-Pacific region and the world at large. However, it must be based



ownloaded from



upon the three China-US Joint Communiques and such basic normsgoverning international relations as mutual respect for sovereignty andterritorial integrity, mutual non-aggression and non-interference in eachother's internal affairs. It is our hope that the US side will not do anythingmore to impair the bilateral relations. The US should properly handle thisincident and work with the Chinese side to bring the bilateral relations ontothe track of normal development.

7. China and the US Held Negotiations on the Incident that a USReconnaissance Plane Rammed into and Destroyed a Chinese Plane andRelated Issues (18/4/2001) <http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9892.html>

On the afternoon of April 18, according to relevant understanding of thetwo sides, China and the US held negotiations on the incident that a USreconnaissance plane rammed into and destroyed a Chinese plane and relatedissues in Beijing. During the negotiations, the two sides elaborated theirrespective stances on the issue. Lu Shumin, head of the Chinese delegationand director of the Department of North American and Oceanian Affairs ofthe Foreign Ministry, reiterated China's principled stand on the incident,noting that the Chinese side has had enough evidence to prove that it is theU.S. side that should hold the full responsibility for the incident and the so-called evidence and remarks made public by the U.S. side over the past fewdays are sheer groundless. He emphasized that The U.S. side should bear thefull responsibility for the incident, make clear and responsible explanations tothe Chinese people, stop reconnaissance flights in the space adjacent toChinese coastal areas and take effective measures to prevent the recurrence ofsuch incident.

It is learned that the two sides will continue their negotiations on April19.

8. Sino-US negotiation on the Air-collision Incident (20/04/2001)<http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/9946.html>

In accordance with relevant understandings between the two sides,China and the United States held talks on April 18 and April 19 in Beijing onthe April 1 incident in which a US reconnaissance plane rammed into anddestroyed a Chinese fighter jet, and other related issues.

During the talks, Mr. Lu Shumin, head of the Chinese delegation andDirector-General of the Department of North American and Oceanian Affairsof the Foreign Ministry, pointed out that on April 1 the U.S. reconnaissance



ownloaded from



plane bumped into and destroyed a Chinese military aircraft, causing thedeath of the Chinese pilot Wang Wei, in airspace near China's island provinceof Hainan. Later the US plane intruded into China's territorial airspace andlanded at a Chinese military airport without permission. This was a seriousincident in violation of international law and Chinese sovereignty. The basiccause of the incident is that the United States, disregarding solemnrepresentations by the Chinese side on many occasions, has for many yearsfrequently conducted reconnaissance flights in the airspace close to Chinesecoastal areas. The US should bear full responsibility for the incident. TheChinese side demands that the United States make explanations to theChinese Government and people, stop reconnaissance flights in the airspaceclose to Chinese coastal areas and take effective measures to prevent therecurrence of similar incidents.

Mr. Lu pointed out that after the incident the Chinese side, taking intoconsideration the general interests of the China-US relations, has handled theincident in a calm and restrained manner in line with relevant provisions ofinternational law and Chinese law. Out of humanitarian considerations, theChinese side made proper arrangements for the 24 crew members of the USplane and allowed officials from US embassy and consulates in China to meetwith them for many times. However, the US side adopted a completelydifferent attitude towards the incident. Especially after the Chinese sideallowed US crew to leave China, some ranking US officials, disregarding factsand confounding right and wrong, made a lot of highly irresponsible remarkson the incident, in an attempt to shift the responsibility onto the Chinese side.Some of them even threatened to link the incident with other issues involvingChina-US relations. This is firmly opposed to and by no means acceptable bythe Chinese side. The words and deeds of the US side offer no help at all tofind an appropriate resolution of the incident and will only further damageChina-US relations.

Mr. Lu said that the Chinese people love peace, but China's sovereignty,territorial integrity and national dignity brook no infringement. China hasalways held that state-to-state relations should be based on the basic norms ofinternational relations, including mutual respect for each other's sovereigntyand territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression and non-interference in eachother's internal affairs. China values China-US relations and it has alwayscommitted itself to developing healthy and stable relations between the twocountries. History shows that the development of friendly relations andcooperation between China and the US is in the interests of the peoples of thetwo countries and is of vital significance to maintaining peace, stability andprosperity in the Asia-Pacific region and the world as a whole. Since the



ownloaded from



establishment of diplomatic ties between China and the United States, greatprogress has been made in a wide range of fields in terms of bilateral relations.Such a situation has not come by easily and it needs efforts from both sides tomaintain it.

The Chinese side hopes that a proper solution to the incident can befound. It does not want to see Sino-US relations been further effected becausethe incident is allowed to drag on without a solution. But it is the US side whoholds the key as to whether this can be achieved. The US side must fullyunderstand the seriousness of this incident, take the solemn stand and demandof the Chinese side seriously, demonstrate sincerity, adopt a practical andconstructive approach and respond positively to the request of the Chineseside, in the interest of finding a proper solution to the incident.

Mr. Peter F. Verga, head of the US delegation and DeputyUndersecretary of Defense, said the United States does not regard China as anenemy and it is also the desire of the U.S. side to develop constructiverelations with China. The US side hopes that a solution to the collisionincident can be found as soon as possible. Mr. Verga claimed that the U.S.side is not responsible for the collision. He defended the US for sendingreconnaissance planes to the airspace over the waters close to China's coast onthe excuse that the U.S. planes enjoy the freedom of overflight.

Mr. Lu refuted such arguments, pointing out that the incident happenedin the airspace over China's exclusive economic zone (EEZ). According to theUnited Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, overflight over the EEZ ofanother nation should not violate the general rules of the international lawsuch as the inviolable nature of national sovereignty and territorial integrity.Due respect should be given to the national sovereignty and territorialintegrity of the nation concerned and the national security, peace and order ofthe said nation should not be jeopardized. The activities of the U.S. side in theairspace over the waters close to China's coast have seriously harmed China'snational security and national defense interests and gone far beyond the limitof the freedom of overflight provided for in the UN Convention on the Law ofthe Sea. These activities are abusing the freedom of overflight. The U.S.planes are not conducting ordinary flights in the airspace over the waters offChina's coast, but are carrying out reconnaissance activities to collectintelligence about the Chinese side. Such military activities of the UnitedStates during peacetime threaten China's national security, peace and order,constitute a provocation against China's national sovereignty; and violate thebasic norms of the international law on mutual respect for sovereignty andterritorial integrity among nations.



ownloaded from



The Chinese side produced a lot of evidence during the negotiations,proving fully that it was the U.S. plane that rammed into and destroyed dieChinese aircraft and that it was the U.S. plane that caused die incident. Mr.Lu stressed that the U.S. side should bear full responsibility for the incident.The facts are clear and brook no denial. The Chinese Government and peopledemand that the US side stop sending airplanes on reconnaissance missions inthe airspace over the waters close to China's coast and hope the US side willseriously treat China's solemn position and correct its erroneous behavior.

It is learned that the two sides have agreed to keep in contact onhandling the incident and other related issues.

VI. Declaration by the Heads of State of the Members of theShanghai Cooperation Organization (A/57/88-S/2002/672,Annex (June 17, 2002))

Today we, the heads of State of the People's Republic of China, theRepublic of Kazakhstan, the Kyrgyz Republic, the Russian Federation, theRepublic of Tajikistan and the Republic of Uzbekistan, solemnly signed theCharter — the basic constituent document of the Shanghai CooperationOrganization (SCO). This event marks the creation of the legal foundation fora new international association, the establishment of which we proclaimed inJune 2001 in Shanghai.

We believe that the establishment of SCO is in keeping with the actualsituation in the region and in the world, and also corresponds to thefundamental interests of the peoples of the six countries.

I

SCO is the successor of the "Shanghai Five" and was established on thebasis of two agreements, which were innovative for the Asian continent, onconfidence-building measures in the military sphere and on arms reductions.

SCO was established in order to strengthen mutual trust, friendship andgood-neighbourliness between die member States, consolidate multilateralcooperation in the maintenance and strengthening of peace, security andstability in the region, jointly counteract new challenges and threats,encourage effective and mutually advantageous cooperation in variousspheres, and promote economic growth and the social and culturaldevelopment of the member States.

SCO is based on the principles of mutual respect for sovereignty,independence, territorial integrity and inviolability of borders, non-



ownloaded from



interference in internal affairs, non-use of force or threat of its use, and equalrights of all member States.

II

The rapid fulfilment of the procedures for the ratification of the SCOCharter and the Agreement on the regional counter-terrorist structure of SCOwill contribute to the early launching of all the mechanisms designed to ensurethe effective functioning of SCO.

The national coordinators of SCO are instructed, without waiting forthe completion of all the domestic procedures for the entry into force of theSCO Charter, to proceed to prepare the range of contractual and normativetexts regulating the procedure for the work of the SCO organs and otheraspects of its activity.

Within the framework of SCO, active steps will be taken to implementthe Shanghai Convention on Combating Terrorism, Separatism andExtremism, and to adopt appropriate texts on multilateral cooperation incurbing illicit narcotics and arms trafficking and other types of criminalactivity of a transnational character, and also illegal migration.

The establishment of a mechanism for the mutual exchange ofinformation and for seeking joint positions on foreign policy issues of mutualinterest, including issues arising within international organizations and forumssuch as the United Nations, is of current significance.

We note with satisfaction that along with the solution of organizationalissues, the process of the development and institutionalization of cooperationamong member States on specific topics in various fields is under way. Wegreatly value the outcome of the first meeting of heads of Government of theSCO countries on 14 September 2001 in Almaty and the meetings ofMinisters for Foreign Affairs on 7 January 2002 in Beijing and 26 April 2002in Moscow, and we support the development of contacts between defence,foreign policy and border departments, directors of law-enforcement bodiesand special services within the framework of the "Bishkek Group", ministriesof culture, emergency services and orfier governmental structures. We agreedto continue the gradual expansion of areas of cooperation between the SCOmember States.

We believe that the development of economic partnership is aparticularly important goal in the work of SCO. To this end, the negotiatingprocess will be intensified on issues of the establishment of favourableconditions for trade and investment and the formulation of a long-termprogramme of multilateral trade and economic cooperation in accordancewith the Memorandum between the Governments of the SCO member States



ownloaded from



of 14 September 2001. In the near future, it will be necessary to determinepriority projects for practical cooperation in such spheres as building transportlinks and energy projects, water use, obtaining and transporting energyresources, and also other spheres of mutual interest.

Ill

The SCO member States are developing their relations within theframework of the evolving multipolar system of international relations andbelieve that the world order in the twenty-first century must be based onmechanisms for the collective solution of crucial problems, the supremacy oflaw and the gradual democratization of international relations.

The SCO member States will make efforts for the prevention andpeaceful settlement of international conflicts associated with inter-ethnic, inter-faith, territorial, political and other differences, in strict accordance with theCharter of the United Nations and the norms of international law.

The SCO member States intend to increase cooperation with each otherand with other countries in the search for answers to the challenges of theprocess of globalization, neutralization of its negative aspects and possiblerisks, and preservation of the variety of forms of economic, social and culturaldevelopment. Globalization and the national interests of States are notmutually exclusive, but mutually enhancing structural elements of thedeveloping world order. The international community needs to work outsecurity concepts of a new type, based on the principles of mutual trust,mutual advantage, equality and cooperation, contributing to a radicalweakening of the factors undermining security, and the eradication of sourcesof new threats.

The SCO member States are resolved to intensify cooperation incombating terrorism, separatism and extremism, organized crime, illicittrafficking of narcotics and psychotropic substances, and also weapons. Theyregard these phenomena as transnational threats, which can be effectivelytackled only through the organization of collective efforts by the internationalcommunity.

The SCO member States firmly reject all acts, methods and practices ofterrorism. The struggle against terrorism must be waged on the basis of thenorms and principles of international law, must not single out any religion orindividual countries or ethnic groups, and must be devoid of bias and doublestandards.

The SCO member States believe that it is necessary to create a globalsystem to deal with new threats and challenges, with a central coordinatingrole for the United Nations and its Security Council, which would include



ownloaded from



appropriate multilateral mechanisms for cooperation covering early warningand prevention of emerging threats and a decisive and adequate response tosuch threats. For actions in this area, it is crucially important to formulateprinciples within the framework of the United Nations and also a clear,universally binding international legal basis for counter-terrorist activitieswhich would not allow for dual interpretation and would not serve as a coverfor interference in the affairs of other States and infringement of theirsovereignty.

The Shanghai Convention on Combating Terrorism, Separatism andExtremism of 15 June 2001, and also the Agreement between the Statesmembers of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization on the regional counter-terrorist structure, of 7 June 2002, represent an important contribution tothese efforts and create clear legal parameters for the development at theregional level of practical cooperation in combating terrorism, separatism andextremism.

The SCO member States are convinced that an important part of globalcounter-terrorist efforts should be to deprive terrorism of its social foundation,including the eradication of poverty, unemployment, illiteracy, anddiscrimination on racial, ethnic and religious grounds.

The SCO member States support each other's efforts to eliminate themanifestations of terrorism, separatism and extremism, and also the stepstaken by the international community to close off the channels of financing ofterrorist activity, and will intensify their own efforts to prevent the preparationand financing of acts of terrorism in their own territories and deny refuge toterrorists.

The SCO member States confirm their intention to do everythingpossible to help strengthen the role of the United Nations in internationalaffairs and further enhance the effectiveness and authority of the SecurityCouncil, which has primary responsibility for the maintenance of internationalpeace and security.

The SCO member States believe that the observance of theinternational nuclear non-proliferation regime is one of the most importantelements of ensuring peace and security both in Asia, and at the global level.The early accession of all countries to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation ofNuclear Weapons, and also the signing and ratification of the ComprehensiveNuclear-Test-Ban Treaty by States which have not yet done so, will helpstrengthen strategic stability at various levels.

The SCO member States support the establishment of nuclear-weapon-free zones, including the initiative of the Republic of Uzbekistan to establish anuclear-weapon-free zone in Central Asia.



ownloaded from



The SCO member States stress their respect for and support of the non-nuclear status of Mongolia.

The SCO member States welcome the conclusion of a new treatybetween the Russian Federation and the United States of America concerningfurther major reductions in strategic offensive weapons, and regard this as apositive contribution to the reduction of nuclear weapons.

The SCO member States call for an early start to the multilateralnegotiations on the preparation of a comprehensive agreement on the non-emplacement of weapons in outer space, and the non-use of force or threat ofits use in relation to space targets.

The SCO member States, committing themselves to act in accordancewith the principles of the Charter of the United Nations, confirm theuniversality, indivisibility, interdependence and interrelatedness of all humanrights and also dieir obligations to observe human rights and fundamentalfreedoms, consider peace and development to be the basic guarantee of thepromotion and protection of human rights, and oppose the application ofdouble standards in human rights issues and interference in the internal affairsof other States under the pretext of protecting them.

IV

The SCO member States have the inalienable right to choose freely theforms and methods of ensuring their security, including the development ofcooperation with other States. They will follow this policy in such a way as notto cause negative consequences for regional stability and security.

The SCO member States consider that the security of Central Asia isinseparably linked with the prospects of the peace process in Afghanistan. Inthis connection, they will intensify cooperation with each other in promotingthe post-war political and economic recovery of this country.

The SCO member States welcome the establishment of a new, stableAfghanistan, free from terror, war, drugs and poverty, and declare theirrespect for the cultures and traditions of all peoples inhabiting that country.They are prepared to promote the process of the establishment of a broadlyrepresentative government in the interests of the entire Afghan people.

The SCO member States wish to see the Asian and Pacific region as azone of peace, stability and joint prosperity, and are prepared to cooperateconstructively with all States and regional associations in establishing acooperative system of security throughout the region, within the framework ofthe Charter of the United Nations and international law, taking into accountto an equal degree the interests and approaches of all participants. Thestrengthening of the mechanisms of multilateral cooperation which have



ownloaded from



already proved their worth, such as the Association of South-East AsianNations (ASEAN) Regional Forum and others, will contribute to theestablishment of such a system.

The SCO member States believe that the Government of the People'sRepublic of China is the sole legitimate Government representing all ofChina, and that Taiwan is an inseparable part of the territory of China.

The SCO member States support the efforts of the two Korean States todevelop and expand dialogue and cooperation in the spirit of the agreementsof the inter-Korean summit meeting in June 2000 and believe that it is usefulto develop dialogue and constructive cooperation between the DemocraticPeople's Republic of Korea, the United States of America and other countriesof the West in order to achieve lasting peace and stability on the Koreanpeninsula.

The SCO member States call upon India and Pakistan to resumepolitical dialogue in order to banish tension and develop cooperation betweenthe two countries.

The SCO member States express deep concern about the protractedcrisis in the Middle East, which is having an adverse effect on regional andinternational security and stability. The SCO member States call upon Israeland Palestine to proceed immediately to implement the relevant resolutions ofthe Security Council, respond positively to the peace-keeping efforts of theinternational community, and resume the search for peaceful ways of resolvingthe dispute.

The SCO member States are prepared to continue political anddiplomatic efforts together with the international community in order toensure the full implementation of all the relevant resolutions of the UnitedNations Security Council on the Iraq question.

The SCO member States commend the initiative of the Republic ofKazakhstan to convene the Conference on cooperation and confidence-building measures in Asia and believe that this forum, along with the existingstructures and mechanisms in Asia, will play an important role in raising thelevel of mutual trust and the development of multilateral cooperation amongthe Asian countries.

V

We confirm that SCO is not a bloc or a closed alliance, is not directedagainst individual countries or groups of States, and is open to broadcooperation with other States and international associations in accordancewith the purposes and principles of the Charter of the United Nations and the



ownloaded from



norms of international law, on the basis of mutual interests and commonalityof approaches to resolving regional and worldwide problems.

[Signatories]St. Petersburg, 7 June 2002

VII. Declaration on Boao Forum for Asia (Feb. 26, 2001; thisNGO's website is at: http://www.boaoforum.org/)

At the beginning of the new millennium, we gather here in Boao, HainanProvince, in the People's Republic of China to review the economic and socialchallenges facing Asia. We recognize the importance of developing Asianperspectives on emerging issues and challenges facing Asia. We furtherrecognize the need for sustained efforts to promote greater interdependenceand economic integration of the region. To this end:

• Noting Asia's great diversity in economic and social conditions,differences in the stages of development and in the variety of culturesand traditions,

• Noting that despite its great diversity, Asia is united in its overarchinggoal of seeking equitable and sustainable development for its peoplesand is determined to move forward,

• Noting that an outward oriented strategy to exploit the full potentialof its vast natural and human resources through the use of newtechnologies represents an optimal path to the elimination of poverty,enhanced prosperity and the quality of life.

• Firmly convinced that through dialogue, coordination andcooperation amongst the countries of Asia, new Asian perspectiveswill emerge to cement and deepen economic ties, enhance trade andinvestment within the region and the world at large.

We do herby solemnly declare:

1. That the Boao Forum for Asia be established under the laws ofthe People's Republic of China and permanently located in Boao,Hainan Province, China.

2. The forum will be guided by the Vision, Mission and Strategiesenunciated below.



ownloaded from



Vision Statement

• Strive to become the premier Forum, promoting the developmentgoals of Asian countries through greater regional economicintegration.

Mission Statement

Towards realization of the Vision, the Forum will endeavor to:

• Provide a platform for high-level interactions between representativesof Governments, business leaders and academic scholars to furtherand deepen trade and investment ties, promote partnerships andevolve different perspectives on emerging global economic challenges.

• Gain deeper understanding of the diversity of the region throughwider discussion of culture and the arts, and foster a deeper sense ofsocial responsibility amongst private enterprises within Asia.

• Develop an enabling environment and strengthen synergies for thepromotion and growth of business enterprises with the goal ofattaining sustainable economic progress in the region.

• Nurture and promote the concept of intra-regional institutionalnetworking and region-wide strategic links with the objective ofenhancing trade and investment opportunities arising fromglobalization, both within the region and in the rest of the world.

• Provide intellectual leadership for developing human resources andfurther research on issues of importance, both internal to the regionand its relationships with the rest of the world.

Strategies

The Forum will pursue its Mission mrough the adoption and implementationof appropriate strategies, which will include:

1. Convene conferences, seminars and workshops on a regular basis,to discuss important issues in the areas of trade, investment andenvironmental protection, etc.

2. Complement other regional and international initiatives to intensifyand strengthen partnerships between governments and businessenterprises in matters of trade and investment.



ownloaded from



3. Monitor global and regional economic trends that impact oneconomies of the region.

4. Collate and disseminate information especially on emerging issuesaffecting trade and finance and highlight new opportunities forregional cooperation.

5. Pursue both in-house and collaborative research activities that willcontribute to the overall goals of the Forum.

6. Facilitate contacts between enterprises in the region through thedevelopment of networking arrangements.

7. To become a center for research and graduate training to equipAsian business communities with better management andtechnological capabilities

We further agree that appropriate mechanisms be established to fulfill theideals and objectives of the Boao Forum for Asia.

We are fully convinced that the Boao Forum for Asia will lead to a moreprosperous and stable Asia living in harmony with itself and with the rest ofthe world.

Adopted on Feb 26th 2001 at Boao, Hainan, the People's Republic ofChina.



ownloaded from
