Read what this guy says.
Black people in New Orleans should be made to understand that the whole world is watching. Any racism people may have is being justified every time they turn on their televisions. If you thought turning around the situation in the black community was tough then, wait until the Democrats you know and love so well, have to explain to their white constituents why they'll need to provide additional tax money to help. And when the plea is balked at, don't blame racism. Don't blame Republicans. Don't blame black conservatives who have moved on. Blame yourselves.
As a native New Orleanian I am sick when I see what is happening to my poor city. But poverty did not impel these people to steal anything beyond water and food. Justifying the theft as a proper reaction to poverty and racism only encourages the "it's not my fault and I'm not responsible for anything that I do" attitude that will keep many poor blacks locked in a cycle of poverty.
Last week Jesse Jackson took the time to stroke a neo-communist strongman's ego in Venezuala, something that has nothing to do with the US Civil Rights struggle. This week, in face of story after story showing laughing, smiling blacks looting at will, he is nowhere to be seen.
Leadership means standing up when times are tough and decisions are unpopular. It's time for the black community's leadership (self-proclaimed, by the way, and claiming to stand for a mythical single black America) to demonstate leadership and condemn theft, robbery and murder in the strongest possible terms and not hide behind the same tired slogans.
Wednesday, August 31, 2005
Monday, August 29, 2005
Negotiation Point
Iraq's Sunnis reejct the constitution, eh?
The Sunni negotiators subsequently issued a joint statement rejecting the draft and asking the United Nations and Arab League to intervene.
By ignoring, in the end, the objections of the country's former Sunni elite, Iraq could face a further spike in the violent insurgency. That insurgency draws fighters from the now-disaffected Sunni minority that lost power with Saddam Hussein's ouster.
How about a trade? U.S. support for the Sunni position (i.e. a unitary state) for an end to the insurgency?
The Sunni negotiators subsequently issued a joint statement rejecting the draft and asking the United Nations and Arab League to intervene.
By ignoring, in the end, the objections of the country's former Sunni elite, Iraq could face a further spike in the violent insurgency. That insurgency draws fighters from the now-disaffected Sunni minority that lost power with Saddam Hussein's ouster.
How about a trade? U.S. support for the Sunni position (i.e. a unitary state) for an end to the insurgency?
Jesse and Ceasar, Cindy and Al
Ever wonder what old style civil rights leaders do in an increasingly less race conscious America? Well, Jeese went to Venezuela to show support for a neo-communist strongman and to argue for civility (hold your laughter).
"Jackson urged U.S. authorities to take action, and said the U.S. government must choose 'diplomacy over any threats of sabotage or isolation or assassination.'
'We must choose a civilized policy of rational conversation,' he said at a news conference."
While Sharpton joined Sheehan and pronounced her our nation's moral compass.
"I feel that it is our moral obligation to stand and to be courageous with these families, and particularly Cindy, that have become the conscience of this nation," said Sharpton, a former Democratic presidential candidate.
Would someone whose son died in the war and who still supports the war count as a moral conscience? Or is that a priviledge reserved for the anti-war bunch?
"Jackson urged U.S. authorities to take action, and said the U.S. government must choose 'diplomacy over any threats of sabotage or isolation or assassination.'
'We must choose a civilized policy of rational conversation,' he said at a news conference."
While Sharpton joined Sheehan and pronounced her our nation's moral compass.
"I feel that it is our moral obligation to stand and to be courageous with these families, and particularly Cindy, that have become the conscience of this nation," said Sharpton, a former Democratic presidential candidate.
Would someone whose son died in the war and who still supports the war count as a moral conscience? Or is that a priviledge reserved for the anti-war bunch?
Monday, August 22, 2005
Cops -- In Iraq
This is real: Cops, Iraqi Style. Halalalalalalaa- BOOOM! Goodbye high speed chases with drunken white trash, hello exploding Sunnis.
Shattered glass, body parts, a blood-splattered blue sedan: the grainy video pans over the scene as Iraqi officers comb the site of a drive-by assassination.
It's "Cops" Iraqi-style, minus the "Bad Boys" soundtrack but otherwise roughly modeled after the American TV show.
Shattered glass, body parts, a blood-splattered blue sedan: the grainy video pans over the scene as Iraqi officers comb the site of a drive-by assassination.
It's "Cops" Iraqi-style, minus the "Bad Boys" soundtrack but otherwise roughly modeled after the American TV show.
Wednesday, August 10, 2005
America, the Uncomfortable
This is just plain dumb.
In a nutshell:
Congress passed a law in 1997 barring those convicted of capital crimes from being buried in a national cemetery. The law was designed to block the possibility of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, a veteran, being buried at Arlington.
But some now wonder whether the restriction should cover a broader range of criminals.
...Towers said his office received calls this week from veterans uncomfortable with the idea of a convicted murderer being laid to rest at Arlington, with some saying they would not like to be near such a person in death.
In death. Death.
Get over yourself.
In a nutshell:
Congress passed a law in 1997 barring those convicted of capital crimes from being buried in a national cemetery. The law was designed to block the possibility of Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, a veteran, being buried at Arlington.
But some now wonder whether the restriction should cover a broader range of criminals.
...Towers said his office received calls this week from veterans uncomfortable with the idea of a convicted murderer being laid to rest at Arlington, with some saying they would not like to be near such a person in death.
In death. Death.
Get over yourself.
Monday, August 08, 2005
Liberal American Leaders
If these are the type of comments that liberal Americans leaders think will be the formula for electoral success in the future, then they may as well quit politics.
"They all [Republicans -- ed] need to be locked up because they are all criminals and they are all thieves," said Judge Greg Mathis, the star of the syndicated television program "The Judge Mathis Show."
'They shot and missed when they enslaved, segregated and oppressed our people. They shot and missed when they stole the past two presidential elections. They shot and missed when they denied our right to vote,' Mathis said. "
And then there's Pelosi, a liberal's liberal, arguing that blacks were probably disenfranchised to some degree during the last two elections.
Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California appeared at the march and noted that minorities may not have had full voting rights in the last two presidential elections.
"Some changes have to be made so we don't have a repeat of 2000 and 2004 where there was intimidation and discrepancies at the polls," Pelosi told Cybercast News Service during the voting rights march.
Well, duh. If Bush won two elections, the only possible explanation is that he won it by disenfranchising blacks, and probably some women too. It's simply not possible that Bush won fair and square. Not when I hate him so much. Right, Mrs. Pelosi? Judge Mathis?
"In the state of Ohio, where they had fewer voting booths and long lines in minority neighborhoods and no lines and many voting booths in white neighborhoods, that the balance is not what it should have been," she added.
But, wait, there's more.
U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) echoed the accusation of many at the march that Bush was an illegitimate president.
"The last two elections were stolen. They were stolen and so we will not rest until we reclaim our democracy and this is what today is all about," Lee told the crowd gathered.
Not to be outdone, Rep. Maxine Waters had her say, too.
"We are here to take on President Bush, [Vice President] Dick Cheney. We are here to take on [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay. We are here to take on the new appointee to the Supreme Court, John Roberts," Waters said from the podium to cheers from the crowd."
So did Charles Rangel "who declared that the president's "record against human rights, civil rights, economic rights, is absolutely terrible."
And finally (you knew he was coming) the very Reverend Jackson, before whom no Republican walks guiltless, says "the same old enemies of civil rights and voting rights will always keep up their ugly activities. Race baiters and discriminators may go underground, but they never move out of town."
Funny. Race baiters. From Jesse "white people don't like you" Jackson.
Is this the Democratic Party under Dean? Is this the group that hopes to retake the White House? C'mon. With falsehoods, half-truths and a condescending anger towards the current administration, these politicos only make themselves look silly and in thrawl to left wing kooks. After all, isn't their collective indictment against Bush, et al. merely an accusatory finger in the face of the majority of Americans who voted for Bush?
How can the left be simultaneously for America, but against everything that the majority voted to support? They alienate their potential voters with every speech from these liberal hotheads.
"They all [Republicans -- ed] need to be locked up because they are all criminals and they are all thieves," said Judge Greg Mathis, the star of the syndicated television program "The Judge Mathis Show."
'They shot and missed when they enslaved, segregated and oppressed our people. They shot and missed when they stole the past two presidential elections. They shot and missed when they denied our right to vote,' Mathis said. "
And then there's Pelosi, a liberal's liberal, arguing that blacks were probably disenfranchised to some degree during the last two elections.
Democratic House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi of California appeared at the march and noted that minorities may not have had full voting rights in the last two presidential elections.
"Some changes have to be made so we don't have a repeat of 2000 and 2004 where there was intimidation and discrepancies at the polls," Pelosi told Cybercast News Service during the voting rights march.
Well, duh. If Bush won two elections, the only possible explanation is that he won it by disenfranchising blacks, and probably some women too. It's simply not possible that Bush won fair and square. Not when I hate him so much. Right, Mrs. Pelosi? Judge Mathis?
"In the state of Ohio, where they had fewer voting booths and long lines in minority neighborhoods and no lines and many voting booths in white neighborhoods, that the balance is not what it should have been," she added.
But, wait, there's more.
U.S. Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.) echoed the accusation of many at the march that Bush was an illegitimate president.
"The last two elections were stolen. They were stolen and so we will not rest until we reclaim our democracy and this is what today is all about," Lee told the crowd gathered.
Not to be outdone, Rep. Maxine Waters had her say, too.
"We are here to take on President Bush, [Vice President] Dick Cheney. We are here to take on [House Majority Leader] Tom DeLay. We are here to take on the new appointee to the Supreme Court, John Roberts," Waters said from the podium to cheers from the crowd."
So did Charles Rangel "who declared that the president's "record against human rights, civil rights, economic rights, is absolutely terrible."
And finally (you knew he was coming) the very Reverend Jackson, before whom no Republican walks guiltless, says "the same old enemies of civil rights and voting rights will always keep up their ugly activities. Race baiters and discriminators may go underground, but they never move out of town."
Funny. Race baiters. From Jesse "white people don't like you" Jackson.
Is this the Democratic Party under Dean? Is this the group that hopes to retake the White House? C'mon. With falsehoods, half-truths and a condescending anger towards the current administration, these politicos only make themselves look silly and in thrawl to left wing kooks. After all, isn't their collective indictment against Bush, et al. merely an accusatory finger in the face of the majority of Americans who voted for Bush?
How can the left be simultaneously for America, but against everything that the majority voted to support? They alienate their potential voters with every speech from these liberal hotheads.
Thursday, August 04, 2005
Toilet Required
No toilet, no seat, says minister
Village council candidates in India should be allowed to stand for election only if they have a toilet at home, the rural development minister says.
Village council candidates in India should be allowed to stand for election only if they have a toilet at home, the rural development minister says.
Thursday, July 28, 2005
Good News
From the Washington Post today.
An organization of top American Muslim religious scholars plans to issue a formal ruling today condemning terrorism and forbidding Muslims to cooperate with anyone involved in a terrorist act, according to officials of two leading Islamic organizations.
Safi, who heads the society's Leadership Development Center, said yesterday that "the statement prohibits Muslims from giving any support to terrorist groups who have carried out attacks against unarmed civilians. Groups like al Qaeda have misused and abused Islam to fit their own radical and criminal agenda, and I feel the statement is an important step to repudiating such groups."
Although the fatwa is important, Safi added, "there is a need to become more proactive in addressing the issue of terrorism by American Muslims."
Good news, indeed.
Tuesday, July 26, 2005
Muslim leader says U.S. behind Sept. 11
Were we also behind the singing and dancing in the streets of some Arab neighborhoods when the towers fell? Was that also part of our Grand Plan?
"We believe they are willing to sometimes sacrifice their own people for the objective to control the whole world," Abu Hamza, president of the Islamic Information and Services Network, told the Melbourne Herald Sun.
Read it here.
"We believe they are willing to sometimes sacrifice their own people for the objective to control the whole world," Abu Hamza, president of the Islamic Information and Services Network, told the Melbourne Herald Sun.
Read it here.
Monday, July 18, 2005
Presidential Election Protests
Radical Lefties are shocked, shocked and outraged. Why, how dare the FBI track them during the Presidential election. After all, what American in his right mind would find it justifiable to allow people to threaten violence and disruptions against a political party? Don't we still have the First Amendment? Can't I threaten to shut down a city, scare the hell out of delegates, burn a Presidential contender in effigy, agitate for violent protests and all in the name of Peace and Justice? Isn't that my right?
Turns out, no (and for the better, by the way).
article here
Turns out, no (and for the better, by the way).
article here
Sunday, July 17, 2005
Blair's Words
On Islamic extremism...
"What was Sept. 11 the reprisal for? Why even after the first Madrid bomb and the election of a new Spanish government were they planning another atrocity when caught? Why if it is the cause of Muslims that concerns them do they kill so many with such callous indifference?"
"Their cause is not founded on an injustice," he said. "It is founded on a belief, one whose fanaticism is such it can't be moderated. It can't be remedied. It has to be stood up to."
Here
"What was Sept. 11 the reprisal for? Why even after the first Madrid bomb and the election of a new Spanish government were they planning another atrocity when caught? Why if it is the cause of Muslims that concerns them do they kill so many with such callous indifference?"
"Their cause is not founded on an injustice," he said. "It is founded on a belief, one whose fanaticism is such it can't be moderated. It can't be remedied. It has to be stood up to."
Here
Friday, July 15, 2005
Chinese Saber Rattling
An article in todays NY Times, Chinese General Threatens Use of A-Bombs if U.S. Intrudes, mentions the comment from a Major General from the so-called People's Army. He openly advocates the PRC's nuclear first-strike capability against the US in a Sino-US struggle over Taiwan. He wants to change the PRC's official policy against using nukes first. Keep in mind that it is generally believed that the PRC has nuclear-tipped ICBM's that could reach Western coastal cities of the US.
I would note that the Party leadership and their cronies in the military (or is it the other way around?) are good at beating their swords against their shields, especially in the face of mounting domestic unrest and international pressure. "When in doubt, threaten Taiwan" seems to be the mantra of the PRC for more than fifty years now. So we must take this rationally while also realizing that China is a nuclear power with a sizeable pool of citizens to draw into a traditional military draft if they so choose.
It's all games with the Communist Party, but we should up the ante and nip this talk in the bud. There will be no quarter for talk--veiled or not--of annihilating our cities as we defend their brethren across the Taiwan Strait. And we are quite vocal in an all-options military policy when it comes to threats to our security. The general seemed to offer up all the cities east of Xian (the first Imperial capital of China), which is basically all of China's cities! Interesting.
MEMO TO BEIJING: We're not willing to offer up any of our cities nor the democratic and free city of Taipei!
I would note that the Party leadership and their cronies in the military (or is it the other way around?) are good at beating their swords against their shields, especially in the face of mounting domestic unrest and international pressure. "When in doubt, threaten Taiwan" seems to be the mantra of the PRC for more than fifty years now. So we must take this rationally while also realizing that China is a nuclear power with a sizeable pool of citizens to draw into a traditional military draft if they so choose.
It's all games with the Communist Party, but we should up the ante and nip this talk in the bud. There will be no quarter for talk--veiled or not--of annihilating our cities as we defend their brethren across the Taiwan Strait. And we are quite vocal in an all-options military policy when it comes to threats to our security. The general seemed to offer up all the cities east of Xian (the first Imperial capital of China), which is basically all of China's cities! Interesting.
MEMO TO BEIJING: We're not willing to offer up any of our cities nor the democratic and free city of Taipei!
Thursday, July 14, 2005
A Message from the New World Order
China and Russia, those happy bastions of freedom and democracy, non-interference and human rights, have issued a joint communique today that implicitly sticks a big middle finger in the direction of their overbearing western neighbour (no, not Japan).
In it, they maintain
Differences and disputes must be solved through peaceful means rather than through unilateralism or coercion. There should be no use or threatened use of force, says the joint statement.
In it, they maintain
Differences and disputes must be solved through peaceful means rather than through unilateralism or coercion. There should be no use or threatened use of force, says the joint statement.
Only on the basis of universally recognized tenents and norms of international law, and under an impartial and rational world order, can problems facing mankind be solved, says the document.
All countries should strictly observe the principles of mutual respect for each other's sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other's internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence, it says.
Unless, of course, you are Taiwan. Or Tibet. Or part of the Korean peninsula. Or a Japanese island grouping near lots of oil. But everyone else is probably ok. Unless we get mad at you. Or you get in our way. Or we find you to be an inconvenience to our plans for peaceful reunification of a never-existant homeland. Or you criticize our government.
Tuesday, July 12, 2005
More China News
From today's Washington Post:
In China, the divide between rich and poor is greater than before the peasant-led revolution that brought the Communist Party to power in 1949. Last month, China's government announced that the income gap had widened in the first three months of the year, with the richest 10 percent of the population controlling 45 percent of the country's wealth and the poorest 10th holding little more than 1 percent, according to the official New China News Agency.
In Beijing, concern mounts that the rural poor are falling so far behind as to challenge the legitimacy of the party. Demonstrations have become near-daily occurrences as farmers protest loss of land to development and excessive taxation. In response, the central government has rolled back taxes on peasants.
China's response to this internal problem will be the driver for its relationship with the US. The more torn the Communist leadership becomes over the pros and cons of its integration into a capitalist global economic order, the more likely it is that they will engage in erratic and potentially self-destructive behaviour.
Think about the various groups in China (military, economic, peasants, coastal elite, party supporters) acting in opposition to one another, largely so that each can secure a future for its own interests. This infighting may see an economic elite offering concessions to US businesses, attempting to calm ruffled feathers. The military, meanwhile, would continue to increase its spending exponentially in the belief that a war is on the horizon. Peasants would demand a change in the political and economic order, something that liberals would interpret as a move away from Communist orthodoxy, while the military and party would see as a clear signal for a re-invigorated Maoist nation.
Continue to add tension, maybe a provocative claim from a Taiwanese leader, for example, and China explode with the passions of 1 billion souls. The US is an easy scapegoat in this scenario. After all, who brought these problems into China in the first place? Who brought factories and marketing, and exporting, and social alienation and and and...
You read it here first.
Thursday, July 07, 2005
Tuesday, July 05, 2005
Radical Muslim News
Attackers attempt to take Ayodha, a central flash-point of inter-religious conflict in India between Hindus and Muslims.
Militants [thought to be Pakistan-based Muslims -Ed] blew up a security wall with a car bomb and stormed a Hindu shrine at the heart of India's biggest religious controversy Tuesday, triggering a gunbattle in which security forces killed five attackers.
Meanwhile teachers in southern Thailand will soon be allowed to carry guns to keep from being sent on unanticipated (and undesired) early retirement by Muslim radicals.
More than 700 people, including at least 24 teachers, have been killed since January 2004 in unrest which the government blames on Islamic militants. Teachers are often targeted as they are seen as symbols of Thailand's Buddhist authorities.
In Iraq, acid attacks are increasing against immodest women.
A month ago I was walking from my college to my house when I was abducted in the street by three men. They dropped acid in my face and on my legs. They cut all my hair off while hitting me in the face many times telling me it’s the price for not obeying God’s wish in using the veil," Hania Abdul-Jabbar, a 23-year-old university student, recounted.
"Today I cannot see out of one eye because the acid made me lose my vision. I am afraid to leave my house. Now I am permanently disfigured with a monster face," she added with tears rolling down her swollen and scarred cheeks.
Also in Iraq, insurgents are killing barbers for shaving beards or removing facial hair from their customers.
These stories were pulled from only two Google news searches this morning. Here we have attacks by Muslims against other Muslims for not being religious enough, against Hindus and Buddhists for not being Muslims, and generally against anything that does not have a Wahhabist seal of approval.
Does anyone else see these incidents as a religious fad that will eventually bring most Muslims into disrepute, no matter how loudly they complain about misrepresentation in the media? How about some forceful opposition to these radical acts by responsible Islamic leaders? I
Militants [thought to be Pakistan-based Muslims -Ed] blew up a security wall with a car bomb and stormed a Hindu shrine at the heart of India's biggest religious controversy Tuesday, triggering a gunbattle in which security forces killed five attackers.
Meanwhile teachers in southern Thailand will soon be allowed to carry guns to keep from being sent on unanticipated (and undesired) early retirement by Muslim radicals.
More than 700 people, including at least 24 teachers, have been killed since January 2004 in unrest which the government blames on Islamic militants. Teachers are often targeted as they are seen as symbols of Thailand's Buddhist authorities.
In Iraq, acid attacks are increasing against immodest women.
A month ago I was walking from my college to my house when I was abducted in the street by three men. They dropped acid in my face and on my legs. They cut all my hair off while hitting me in the face many times telling me it’s the price for not obeying God’s wish in using the veil," Hania Abdul-Jabbar, a 23-year-old university student, recounted.
"Today I cannot see out of one eye because the acid made me lose my vision. I am afraid to leave my house. Now I am permanently disfigured with a monster face," she added with tears rolling down her swollen and scarred cheeks.
Also in Iraq, insurgents are killing barbers for shaving beards or removing facial hair from their customers.
These stories were pulled from only two Google news searches this morning. Here we have attacks by Muslims against other Muslims for not being religious enough, against Hindus and Buddhists for not being Muslims, and generally against anything that does not have a Wahhabist seal of approval.
Does anyone else see these incidents as a religious fad that will eventually bring most Muslims into disrepute, no matter how loudly they complain about misrepresentation in the media? How about some forceful opposition to these radical acts by responsible Islamic leaders? I
Syrian Firefight
Militants engaged in shoot-out with Syrian security forces.
Sana reported that security officers had been on the trail of the men for several days, and that some of the men who fought the security services were believed to have been former bodyguards of Saddam Hussein.
Minor note to the overall Islamic Insurgeny, but interesting nonetheless.
Sana reported that security officers had been on the trail of the men for several days, and that some of the men who fought the security services were believed to have been former bodyguards of Saddam Hussein.
Minor note to the overall Islamic Insurgeny, but interesting nonetheless.
Monday, July 04, 2005
Thursday, June 30, 2005
The Sleeping Dragon
I am always cautious of predictions, particularly when they come to the Middle Kingdom. Such an ancient place has a resilient tendency to amaze.
However, I am not so reticent to make predictions about the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Their days have been and are numbered. Theirs is a discredited and forgotten ideology that is in many ways being daily chipped away by Western liberalism (little "l"). What concerns me, as it has since 1989, is what happens when the CCP starts to crumble. We have seen a slow, painful decline of the party with a simultaneous rise in world affairs.
There will be a power grab, a desperate act to divert attention from the true plight of the people (all of the people, not just the elite and the wealthy in the halls of power). This is evident from 6 June 1989 (Tianenmen Square) onward. When threatened the party leadership responds unflinchingly with violence. They have never had any problem massacring their own people in the name of Communism (always the problem with Communist ideologies). Mao did it. Deng did it. Hu will likely do it too.
I'm reminded of the stories in 1996, while I was living in the Middle Kingdom, of the massacre of Buddhist monks in Western China and of the Uighurs in Xinjiang province. Today one only has to do a simple internet search to find the many reports out of China, on a nearly daily basis, of some type of social unrest that is spreading like the bird flu throughout the countryside.
Don't get me wrong. I think the CCP leadership is bumbling and naive. They discount the power of their own people to counter the selfishness and vulgar disregard the Party has for "the people".
And the countryside is where the CCP has to worry most. While peasants flood into the cities of China's prosperous coasts, they are putting pressure on the CCP to provide opportunities (and minor freedoms) given to citizens of the cities. Normally Beijing throws them a bone of say democratic control over their locality or of an old party-owned factory. It's all a game though, a waiting game, an end game by which the party leadership is coldly calculating how to get out on top.
The CCP has been lobbing missiles and "accidentally" entering the Taiwan Straits (outside the territorial waters of the the PRC) for years now. The frequency and brashness of these incursions has been increasing though. Now with the Washington Times report (entry below) that the CCP's gotten the attention of the Pentagon comes cause for new concern. Add this to the very real machinations on the world stage with CNOOC's bid this week for Unocal oil and we've got serious problems at hand. Add into this already volatile mix the tinder-box that is North Korea and the abyss that is Russia and we should have a serious concern about future Sino-US relations. Combine all of these tell-tale signs and we see the classic set-up of a regime that is about to make a move.
In short, what we need is a bold foreign policy about China and not just a Bush family mantra of killing the party with capitalism (read: buying the Party off with economic concessions while the people suffer). We need a foreign policy that addresses the real threats of a potential war to protect Taiwan and the many unstable players (North Korea, Russia, et al) that could play into that nightmarish equation. The Bush Administration could start by outright blocking the CNOOC offer for national security reasons.
In a new strategic policy shift, I'm not talking about an Iraq-style regime change: that would be suicidal. But we can return to efforts to encourage democracy and undermine the CCP's efforts to stave it off. We can start by reversing the Bush Sr. deceivingly-benign policy of ignoring their human rights abuses. (They make Abu Graib look like a picnic in Central Park.) Turn up the heat and watch the CCP leadership sweat. Make efforts to force transparency and accountability for their actions. When the CCP says they have religious freedom, hold them accountable. When they say they have freedom of speech, make them prove it.
One subversive strategy might be pulled from the pages of the Cold War playbook, the Reagan chapter: ally ourselves with the Vatican to foment change through the illegal and underground Church in China that has a very vibrant and secret presence there. Continue by strengthening old alliances with the Dalai Lama and the Free Tibet movement (alliances Nixon broke off when he "normalized" relations with the PRC). Forge new alliances with the Western Muslim sects that have long been oppressed by Beijing and with new groups such as the brutalized Falun Gong (a very large, vocal, and powerful force in China today).
My point is there are many ways to go about avoiding what we are currently doing, which is plainly nothing. We can do something, and we should. I truly believe in the ability of the Chinese people to stand up for themselves and to make the right choice towards the democracy they were promised, at the end of imperial rule, and never received. But they are not likely to get such a democracy or avert war if we sit idly by. We either get our hands dirty now, or we see them bloodied later.
However, I am not so reticent to make predictions about the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Their days have been and are numbered. Theirs is a discredited and forgotten ideology that is in many ways being daily chipped away by Western liberalism (little "l"). What concerns me, as it has since 1989, is what happens when the CCP starts to crumble. We have seen a slow, painful decline of the party with a simultaneous rise in world affairs.
There will be a power grab, a desperate act to divert attention from the true plight of the people (all of the people, not just the elite and the wealthy in the halls of power). This is evident from 6 June 1989 (Tianenmen Square) onward. When threatened the party leadership responds unflinchingly with violence. They have never had any problem massacring their own people in the name of Communism (always the problem with Communist ideologies). Mao did it. Deng did it. Hu will likely do it too.
I'm reminded of the stories in 1996, while I was living in the Middle Kingdom, of the massacre of Buddhist monks in Western China and of the Uighurs in Xinjiang province. Today one only has to do a simple internet search to find the many reports out of China, on a nearly daily basis, of some type of social unrest that is spreading like the bird flu throughout the countryside.
Don't get me wrong. I think the CCP leadership is bumbling and naive. They discount the power of their own people to counter the selfishness and vulgar disregard the Party has for "the people".
And the countryside is where the CCP has to worry most. While peasants flood into the cities of China's prosperous coasts, they are putting pressure on the CCP to provide opportunities (and minor freedoms) given to citizens of the cities. Normally Beijing throws them a bone of say democratic control over their locality or of an old party-owned factory. It's all a game though, a waiting game, an end game by which the party leadership is coldly calculating how to get out on top.
The CCP has been lobbing missiles and "accidentally" entering the Taiwan Straits (outside the territorial waters of the the PRC) for years now. The frequency and brashness of these incursions has been increasing though. Now with the Washington Times report (entry below) that the CCP's gotten the attention of the Pentagon comes cause for new concern. Add this to the very real machinations on the world stage with CNOOC's bid this week for Unocal oil and we've got serious problems at hand. Add into this already volatile mix the tinder-box that is North Korea and the abyss that is Russia and we should have a serious concern about future Sino-US relations. Combine all of these tell-tale signs and we see the classic set-up of a regime that is about to make a move.
In short, what we need is a bold foreign policy about China and not just a Bush family mantra of killing the party with capitalism (read: buying the Party off with economic concessions while the people suffer). We need a foreign policy that addresses the real threats of a potential war to protect Taiwan and the many unstable players (North Korea, Russia, et al) that could play into that nightmarish equation. The Bush Administration could start by outright blocking the CNOOC offer for national security reasons.
In a new strategic policy shift, I'm not talking about an Iraq-style regime change: that would be suicidal. But we can return to efforts to encourage democracy and undermine the CCP's efforts to stave it off. We can start by reversing the Bush Sr. deceivingly-benign policy of ignoring their human rights abuses. (They make Abu Graib look like a picnic in Central Park.) Turn up the heat and watch the CCP leadership sweat. Make efforts to force transparency and accountability for their actions. When the CCP says they have religious freedom, hold them accountable. When they say they have freedom of speech, make them prove it.
One subversive strategy might be pulled from the pages of the Cold War playbook, the Reagan chapter: ally ourselves with the Vatican to foment change through the illegal and underground Church in China that has a very vibrant and secret presence there. Continue by strengthening old alliances with the Dalai Lama and the Free Tibet movement (alliances Nixon broke off when he "normalized" relations with the PRC). Forge new alliances with the Western Muslim sects that have long been oppressed by Beijing and with new groups such as the brutalized Falun Gong (a very large, vocal, and powerful force in China today).
My point is there are many ways to go about avoiding what we are currently doing, which is plainly nothing. We can do something, and we should. I truly believe in the ability of the Chinese people to stand up for themselves and to make the right choice towards the democracy they were promised, at the end of imperial rule, and never received. But they are not likely to get such a democracy or avert war if we sit idly by. We either get our hands dirty now, or we see them bloodied later.
Monday, June 27, 2005
Chinese Plans
According to a defector, China is merely biding its time until the day it is strong enough to attack Taiwan (and by extension the US), an event probably precipitated by large-scale social unrest that can be defused by the war. The same defector reiterates how much the US is China's primary enemy (specifically the Chinese Communist Party), and how obsessed they are with eventually "striking back".
Worry. Talk like this makes Iraq's problems look silly in comparison. The only nation in the world that I am aware of that is spending money as fast as we are to improve our armed forces is China -- and they have approximately 700M more souls to throw into the line of fire than we do.
"The United States is considered by the Chinese Communist Party as the largest enemy, the major strategic rival," Mr. Chen told The Washington Times in a telephone interview from Australia, where he is in hiding after breaking with Beijing in May.
All Chinese government officials are ordered to gather information about the United States, "no matter how trivial," he said. "The United States occupies a unique place in China's diplomacy," Mr. Chen said.
...On China's military buildup, Mr. Chen said Beijing is following the strategy of former leader Deng Xiaoping, who urged China to "bide our time, build our capabilities" -- military as well as economic and political. "What that means is that when the day is mature, the Chinese government will strike back," he said. Mr. Chen said the danger of a war over Taiwan is growing.
"That is possible as Chinese society is getting more unstable," he said. "Once any serious civil disobedience occurs, the government may call for a war across the Taiwan Strait to gather [political] strength from people."
Worry. Talk like this makes Iraq's problems look silly in comparison. The only nation in the world that I am aware of that is spending money as fast as we are to improve our armed forces is China -- and they have approximately 700M more souls to throw into the line of fire than we do.
"The United States is considered by the Chinese Communist Party as the largest enemy, the major strategic rival," Mr. Chen told The Washington Times in a telephone interview from Australia, where he is in hiding after breaking with Beijing in May.
All Chinese government officials are ordered to gather information about the United States, "no matter how trivial," he said. "The United States occupies a unique place in China's diplomacy," Mr. Chen said.
...On China's military buildup, Mr. Chen said Beijing is following the strategy of former leader Deng Xiaoping, who urged China to "bide our time, build our capabilities" -- military as well as economic and political. "What that means is that when the day is mature, the Chinese government will strike back," he said. Mr. Chen said the danger of a war over Taiwan is growing.
"That is possible as Chinese society is getting more unstable," he said. "Once any serious civil disobedience occurs, the government may call for a war across the Taiwan Strait to gather [political] strength from people."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
