For many years, Sha Zukang was a fixture on the disarmament circuit representing China during CTBT negotiations and making the odd statement here or there to cause an international kerfuffle — like when implied that China’s no-first use pledge might not apply to Taiwan.
Now that he is UN Undersecretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs, he is fodder for satirical articles in The Onion like this one:
See, I’m not like those other public servants who are dedicated to saving succeeding generations from the scourge of war and promoting social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom. I’m dangerous. I play by my own set of detailed bureaucratic procedures. I’m a rebel. A rogue. And I make the ladies swoon from sub-Saharan Africa to the shantytowns of the Mekong River Delta.
So don’t call me Undersecretary-General for Economic and Social Affairs Sha Zukang. Call me Daddy.
Looking at the dynamics of decision making in the Kitty Hawk fiasco…. might the proper parties to ask whether the “No first use” policy applies to Taiwan be the commanders of the two most affected military regions?
There are more and more published views by Chinese officials that suggest that the policy is shaky, and certainly a matter for debate and occasional public dissension within China.
Are these differences in opinion a good sign —- of liberalization and pluralism in China? Or are they dangerous warning signs of major policy change?
I wonder if they call the “no first use” bunch eagle huggers?