The Asian edition of the Wall Street Journal of the U.S. recently carried a not-signed commentary in an effort to defend the U.S. Defense Department's "Annual Report to the Congress on the Military Power of the People's Republic of China 2006" and to inflate the fallacy of "China threat".

　　The article alleged that China's military was in wanting of transparency. The last paragraph of the article concluded that China said its military motive was for peace. However, people would perhaps be more prone to take China at its words if China's efforts in building up its military might for national defense would embrace less surreptitiousness of Su Zi's Art of War but more transparency.

　　It is absurd indeed for this new argument to imply that Chinese military's dedication to the study of the Sun Zi's Art of War contributes to the arrival at the conclusion that China's military was lack of transparency.

　　The logic of the article desecrated Sun Zi's Art of War by alleging that the purpose of studying it is to churn out "intrigues". The thought of Sun Zi is known to all and its highest realm is to "break the enemy's resistance without fighting it". Although over 2000 years have elapsed, the ideas of "without fighting it" and "being cautious to resort to fight" are still of immediate significance, and thereby merit thinking deeply about and insight learning.

　　China is following the road of peaceful development and the task of China's armed forces is to stand up to aggression and defend the security of the country. It is downright mudslinging to say that the Chinese army's study of Sun Zi's Art of War is to add more "secrecy" to the military affairs. And to stamp the open and transparent Chinese military with a non-transparent chop is beyond any doubt a practice that harbors absolute ulterior motives and therefore is misleading to the public opinion.

　　By Qian Shui

　　(June 15, PLA Daily)