Posted on Tuesday, January 11, 2011 - 09:05 am:

At a summit meeting in April 2006 between President George W. Bush and Chinese President Hu Jintao, Mr. Bush directly appealed to the Chinese leader to send China's strategic-missile commander to visit the United States as a first step in strategic dialogue. Mr. Hu agreed, but so far, the commander has not visited.

Mr. Hu will visit Washington beginning Jan. 19, and the issue of military exchanges and security dialogue is expected to be raised in meetings with President Obama.

Mr. Tkacik, the former State Department official, said the Pentagon hopes China will explain its secret nuclear strategy and forces in security talks. But the United States reduced the likelihood that China would join such talks by holding a one-sided dialogue, such as giving China's military recent briefings on U.S. nuclear strategy — the same as those given to U.S. allies.

China's refusal to engage and share information on its military "all boils down to the fact that we've been way too indulgent with the Chinese," Mr. Tkacik said.

"For the past 20 years, we've given the Chinese information briefings and tours of our military facilities without demanding any reciprocity. And as a result, we haven't gotten any reciprocity," Mr. Tkacik said.

Past military talks between China and the United States involved Chinese officers reading talking points and protesting U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, according to defense officials who have participated in the talks.

The exchanges were undermined by China's dispatch of large numbers of intelligence collectors to gather war-fighting information at U.S. military facilities. As a result, Congress in 1999 outlawed exchanges that could bolster Beijing's nuclear and power-projection capabilities.

.
.
.

Edward Timperlake, a former Pentagon technology security official, said nontraditional military exchanges with China must be handled with caution.

"Military-to-military exchanges at the senior-officer level are one thing," Mr. Timperlake said. "But at the tactical level, especially when they involve U.S. military training and tactics, [the exchanges] constantly have been all one way in China's favor.

"A lot of U.S. combat lessons learned are being paid for in blood by our troops. What good does it do to share that information with a rising adversary who is rapidly modernizing? It makes absolutely no sense," he said.