Tag: China

Project Syndicate Adores China (and seems to Despise Israel) – Read Project Syndicate with Great Care, it is NOT Our Friend

I am writing with regard to the article published by Project Syndicate, and republished in the Taipei Times on May 1, 2018 on p. 8 entitled China Should Follow WTO Rules written by Martin Feldstein.

While not bashing Israel, Project Syndicate seems to make great efforts to glorify Communist China and the new Emperor Xi. This is another Project Syndicate “hail China” article. Is it any surprise? What is wrong with these people? George Soros continues to seek a revolution with totalitarian flavor in the world (a “World with Chinese Characteristics” – he would really love that, it seems). Truthfully, this article and Martin Feldstein, disgusted me from the very first line: “I am a great admirer of China and its ability to adjust its economic policies to maintain rapid growth, but now that it has risen to the top of the global economy…” WHAT ABOUT ITS TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIP AND CRUSHING OPPRESSION OF ITS PEOPLE? Not one word. Not one.

Professor Feldstein recounts how he traveled to China in 1982, and how poor it was, and governed by a communist regime. Even then he makes no reference to the nature of the regime – and that is the point – very little has changed since 1982 aside from having beguiled the world into sending trillions of dollars into building up the world’s biggest threat to freedom. I think as an economist, Martin looks at the Chinese economic experiment and marvels at it, sort of like a biologist might examine anthrax or the plague and marvel at the complexity and efficiency at killing. At least the biologist recognizes the threat to humanity. Here, well….only marveling. This kind of appeasement of China is one of the most dangerous aspects of this platform, filling heads around the world with glowing praise for China, a silent killer adept at its own propaganda and blackmail.

Where does Project Syndicate find these pro-China hacks with stellar resumes? You would think that as a member of the Reagan and Bush administrations, Feldstein might have developed a healthy perspective on China’s menace to the world. Perhaps he was brainwashed and turned sappy when he served in the Obama administration and then the Council on Foreign Relations.

Here is an example of another Harvard economist overwhelmed with admiration by the ease with which a totalitarian government can manipulate its economy to become whatever it wishes on the backs of over a billion peasants. Amazing what killing 80 million of its own people, and oppressing billions, strictly controlling every aspect of society and foreign competition at will, and stealing every single item of technology within its sticky, greedy hands, and elevating industrial espionage to a national duty can do for your economy.

Remarkably, Feldstein focuses only on China’s compliance with WTO requirements to admit China into the world as an international leader, and nothing else. He already puts their economy at the top. However, not one time, not one word, not a whisper is devoted to China’s horrendous treatment of its people, the complete absence of any freedom, rights, justice, free will, license, democracy, free enterprise, its aggression towards the South China Sea, its neighbors and in particular its obsession with destroying Taiwan’s democracy, a threat to China’s malignant one-party dictatorship. How is it possible that Feldstein, a member of three Presidential administrations, a supposedly world class economist cannot even recognize China’s hegemonic intentions (e.g. his glowing view of One Belt One Road, ignoring its threat to the world) and complete domination of its people, or that its economic “success” is done with blood on the Emperor’s hands?

This is why we are in danger. People like this, like Feldstein, with long resumes, appointments at the best universities (Harvard in his case), a large platform and absolutely no brains whatsoever in their empty Project Syndicate heads (empty aside from some economic guidelines, formulae and statistics, devoid of morality apparently). In my opinion, Mr. Feldstein is a brilliant economist and a complete idiot (something I feel he has in common with Joseph Stiglitz).

 

 

 

Taiwan is Not Switzerland

In an article published in the Taipei Times (“Politicians warn against entering China-US spat” March 20, 2018, p. 3) members of the Foundation on Asia-Pacific Peace Studies appear to argue that Taiwan must navigate a neutral path between China and the United States to avoid further danger.

What? Uh, no matter how much these meek pundits wish to believe that Taiwan is Switzerland, it is not, and never will be in any universe I can think of (and by the way, Switzerland, while outwardly appearing to remain neutral during the Nazi regime, could not (or would not) resist in every respect, because it was defenseless except for the mountains making invasion difficult, and because financially Switzerland was able to benefit from the Nazi regime, while enacting harsh refugee laws against Jews fleeing the Nazis, essentially yielding to Hitler’s genocidal plans).

The arguments set out in the Foundation’s meeting are fallacious. First, the ideas that Taiwan should “create another path to interact with the two powers to ensure its security” or “Taiwan should not choose sides in the conflict between the US and China, but should instead interact positively with both countries” are insane. The only way to ensure its security is to ally with someone who provides security. Lets see — uh, one giant neighbor who wants nothing but to destroy your leadership, swallow you whole and kill all of your freedoms, and kill any who oppose it – or, a nation of laws and freedom sworn to oppose totalitarian regimes hell bent on world domination and who has promised by its own law to protect you from such aggression. Uh…truthfully I don’t see much of a choice. At all. Unless suicide is the target. (By the way the strategy of “we don’t want to piss off China” is not a viable strategy because it is in fact a noose that tightens each time China want to squeeze. Weakness is not a strategy, it is suicide with a ruthless and brutal regime as the Chinese Communist Party, now led by the Emperor Xi).

Let me reiterate – there is no scenario where getting closer to China protects Taiwan – none. Think Icarus.

Second, the statement that “The US until this year approached its relationship with China as a constructive partnership” is completely wrong – even if someone in the State Department used those exact diplomatic words, Communist China has, since 1949, been considered one of the primary enemies of America’s democratic roots and world peace (notwithstanding President Obama’s meekness and general wussiness, and softness, especially around Hu and Xi). If those pundits at the Foundation meeting don’t know that, everything they said is useless. “[A] strategic competitor,” is a polite way of saying “mortal enemy”. Duh.

Thirdly, this statement, especially by a Democratic Progressive Party member is inane: “Exports to China account for about 40 percent of Taiwan’s total — four times the volume of Taiwanese exports to the US — so it is necessary for Taiwan to interact with China, Hsu said.” Uh…I believe the policy of the current Tsai administration is Go South, which means, less China, more anywhere else. That is the way to deal with the dependence former President Ma spent 8 years constructing to prevent Taiwan from ever becoming independent. The job of the administration is to diminish reliance on China, not grovel. What’s with the grovelling?

“[The ruling party] cannot deny responsibility and the [deadlock] has to be resolved.” Does this sound as stupid to you as it sounds to me? Does Hsu not understand that Taiwan cannot resolve the deadlock as long as the DPP is in power unless it is willing to surrender its platform and principles because China will not accept the DPP and prefers the China-centric KMT party? This administration’s duty and mandate is to help Taiwan survive China’s aggression and hegemony.

“The US is also experiencing military confusion” – what? Confuse this gentlemen (you get my drift). If these “pundits” (I use the term quite loosely) want to make a strategic military decision based on a collision at sea, go ahead, it just proves their nonsense. The US still maintains the strongest military on Earth.

“In response to China’s growing power and the US’ diminishing influence, Washington has two options to counter China: launching a trade war against China or playing the Taiwan card with the newly legislated Taiwan Travel Act, which encourages visits between Taiwan and the US at all levels, Su said.” This is the dumbest statement of all. The US Congress has always supported Taiwan, not to diss China but to support a democratic ally in need of defense and support against a sworn US enemy. If these idiots believe the US Congress passed the act to goad China, they are more clueless than I thought. The act was unanimously passed by the US Congress to support and protect Taiwan. Geez. What’s wrong with these people?

““While many East Asian countries have adopted hedging strategies and maintained a relationship with the US and China simultaneously, only Taiwan takes a one-sided approach [to build rapport solely with the US],” Su said.” Uh….could it be because China has not threatened for 70 years to invade and kill any of the other East Asian countries? Again, duh. Why do these people even have a platform to speak?

Basically it appears to me there is one truth. The closer Taiwan gets to the United States (something the US has in recent Administrations had some difficulty with), the less likely China will be adventurous. The situation has been backwards for years. Instead of the US hesitating to get involved with Taiwan’s relationship with China (there is no relationship, only revulsion by more than 86% of Taiwanese), China should be wary of getting involved in Taiwan’s superb relationship with the United States. That is the way Taiwan stays protected. Taiwan should be looking for ways to reinforce that relationship, not distance itself or run away. An opportunity has been presented. China will whine and moan. So what? Taiwan should grab the chance and run with it.

The Vatican is Miscalculating if the Pope Believes He Can Resist Beijing’s Control Over the Entire Church, Given the Terms Being Discussed

Rome is miscalculating if the Pope believes he can resist Beijing’s taking control over most of or the entire Church, given the terms being discussed.

It’s not easy to get a clear handle on the ideals of Pope Francis, based on his roots in Argentina. If not sympathy or affinity for socialism, communism, fascism, perhaps at the very least an understanding or tolerance. Does this explain the Pontiff’s willingness to engage Chairman Xi and Communist China? The Church has resisted for quite some time. Latin America is a hundred year history of failed regime after regime, often with the people’s interests and rights subjugated and their future mortgaged for power. Communist China is no different. There may therefore be some affinity .

An avowed atheist regime, one wonders how the Pontiff can accept the Communist Party’s notion of Catholicism in China (an extension of the Communist Party, according to Party dogma, which elevates the Party above all, including and especially above God (and in this case the Trinity)).

The Vatican has tiptoed around Beijing for decades to avoid losing the Church in China, but the Pontiff seems ready to accept the Communist Party having a hand in running the Church inside China. The trouble with this is that the Pope obviously has not read up on the Party’s idea of cooperation with any religion, Tibetan Buddhism being the prime example. In that case, the Party actually kidnapped the number two figure in the religion (the 6-year old Panchen Lama, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, in 1995), and replaced him with a fake Chinese Communist Party Panchen Lama (much like the treatment the Vatican’s bishops in China have received, replaced in China by Communist Party bishops). The intrigue here is that the Panchen Lama’s job is to select the next Dalai Lama when the current Dalai Lama dies. In other words, having replaced the Panchen Lama selected by the Dalai Lama, China intends to take over the religion entirely by having the Party’s fake Panchen Lama appoint a Communist Party Dalai Lama as the next Dalai Lama, thereby absorbing Tibetan culture and religion into the Communist Party dogma, a takeover that has taken 60 years.

What could we see about the Catholic Church in 70 years if China were to take it over in China? Since the One Belt One Road plan is basically China’s Trojan Horse to infect every participating country throughout Europe, Africa and Latin America with Communist Party dogma and loyalty, it is likely the Party will attempt to influence all Catholics within its “sphere of influence” to abide by its Catholic dogma with Chinese Characteristics instead of the Vatican’s dogma.

Thus could end Rome’s reign over its own church and the billions of Catholics, replaced by Beijing’s. The Pontiff is seriously miscalculating if he believes he can outlast the Chinese Communist Party. It is a dangerous game he is playing with a regime with no morality. Very dangerous.

 

Grave Danger Posed by China’s Trojan Horse – One Belt One Road

I have written before here about the grave danger posed by China’s One Belt One Road initiative – it is China’s Trojan Horse in Europe, Communist Chinese lucre a smokescreen for the Chinese Communist Party’s power grab, continuing battle with the U.S. for influence, and for the Communist Party’s hegemonic designs.

Greece fell prey to China because it has been the EU’s pauper, and bristled at its treatment at the hands of German/EU austerity in response to Greece’s uncontrolled spending. Hence, China’s offer of billions to Greece was most opportune for the Chinese Communist Party and welcome for Greece – and as usual, any money China “invests” has strings – strings to support its totalitarian system, its political evil, and its continuing assault on Western democracy and any kind of freedom.

In an article published in the Taipei Times on Monday, January 8, 2018 on p. 5 (Europe Wary of ‘One Belt One Road’), the article notes “The former NATO chief said that Greece — a major recipient of Chinese largesse — had in June last year blocked an EU declaration condemning Chinese rights abuses.” Here is the rub – take money from China, kneel to Uncle Xi and his political agenda. The march of the Chinese Communists begins with the infection wrought from within its Trojan Horses. Greece bent over for Uncle Xi. More to come in Europe.

I for one don’t trust France’s Macron to resist China’s Trojan Horse offerings, trading access to a fake Chinese market (there is no Chinese market except for Chinese companies so long as foreign companies are required to partner with Chinese local partners, themselves Communist Party Trojan Horses) for softness on Communist China’s political demands and violations of human rights and every other fundamental French principle. France has been perennially rushing to China to get better market position and to tell the Emperor Xi his clothes are most lovely. I haven’t trusted President Trump with such issues either, the bright light of China’s phantom market a very juicy mirage hard to resist. Trump also is not so enamored with Democracy as he is with Businessocracy, and evening out the playing field with Communist China is a priority – but even that comes with risks of Trojan Horses. There is also the North Korea chess game that China has been playing with the U.S. for 25 years, and playing it very well against the Clinton, Bush and Obama administrations, and continuing with the current administration, though Trump’s unpredictability and bullish attitude has China unnerved. The EU’s stance on North Korea and Iran is disappointing – appeasement at its worst.

Europe does not have the backbone to resist Communist China’s hegemony and political moves, because Europe has no stomach for conflict (its foreign policy is basically “appease, appease, appease”) and is so eager to jump on any advantage over the US with Chinese trade when there are conflicts, such as North Korea or the South China Sea. We do not see Europe sending carriers to the region or supporting the US in its opposition to North Korea’s nuclear ambitions (only softness, weakness and more appeasement). The same can be said of Iran, where Europe has lined up with China and Russia in failing to comprehend the value of a strong hand against a rogue enemy like Iran. Europe’s suicidal embrace of the enemies of democracy is both surprising and disgusting, turning my stomach every time I see it (note the loving comments made yesterday by High Representative of the European Union (EU) for Foreign Affairs and Vice-President of the European Commission Federica Mogherini about Cuba and dictator Raul Castro, like the words of a lover). Consequently, I have no faith that Europe can resist Communist China’s quest to plant as many Trojan Horses as possible around Europe. Let’s remember that Europe failed to act to stop the conflagration in Syria, instead following Obama’s Oppeasement policy there, and the result was millions of refugees flooding Europe, something that will change adversely European culture, society and politics for many generations. Already many people are fearful of travel to Europe, caring about where it is safe…

One Belt, One Road will look bright and shiny to the EU’s infrastructure starved members. But the cost of that infrastructure is political suicide and being indebted to Communist China, a tyrant who demands obedience to its “life with Chinese characteristics.”

Australia is Walking a Fine Line between America and Communist China – a Dangerous Game

“America will lose, and China will win. America will cease to play a major strategic role in Asia, and China will take its place as the dominant power.” This is from a White Paper published from Australia. Whoever said this is a flaming idiot. It is a self-fulfilling prophecy from people who are either sinophiles or interested in China’s ephemeral (and largely non-existent) markets, all subject to Communist China’s vast manipulation and regulation, peremptory, if necessary for the Party’s benefit. This fatalistic approach in Australia has caused it to adopt a basically very troubling suicidal trajectory for some time.

Referring to a well-written article by Sushil Seth, a commentator in Australia, which appeared in the Taipei Times on December 30, 2017, p. 8 (“Counterbalancing Chinese Leverage”), I have the following observations.

President Obama withdrew the United States from world leadership because he is a weak, insipid, feckless and appeasing idiot (and of course he is the most admired man according to Newsweek because everyone just loves a sensitive, kind, understanding America – until they need someone to defend them, then they want the American juggernaut at their side). He was most uncomfortable being the world’s most powerful man, and his mistaken belief that he could extend an open hand to the world’s worst regimes, betray our closest allies, and sing Kumbaya backfired, and in the horrible vacuum he left, Russia and China leapt in. It will take some years to get that back.

Let me be very clear about one thing. Donald Trump’s presidency is the child of President Obama’s failures. Trump would never have succeeded if Obama has not driven the US bus so far to the left and so far from its role in the world that it disappeared over the horizon. Now we are dealing with that. But for all of his own idiosyncrasies, and they are many, Trump’s unpredictability does have an advantage (similar to Ronald Reagan’s “power”) to intimidate and in some sense have an effect on rogues, who would be far more comfortable getting up in Obama’s face, than Trump’s, because they knew Obama would never pull any trigger, and they also deeply fear that Trump is just itching to pull any trigger (not that he will).

Congress is 100% behind the US presence in Asia, and while the American president traditionally pussyfoots around with Russia and Communist China, the Congress never does. It supports Taiwan by vast majorities, and would also support Australia and Japan and Korea to the same extent. However, Australia has elected leaders who have been vastly at odds with American policies, and that has caused some dissonance. Australia is playing perhaps a dangerous game of both sides, feasting at Communist China’s trough, and expecting the US to protect it within America’s enormous penumbra.

Like it or not, the US is the only country in the world that can contain the likes of Communist China and Russia, North Korea and Iran and Syria, and Turkey, and the Arab world, and all of the other hot spots which pop up all over at any given time. For some reason I cannot understand, Australia has spent ten years pushing America away, and then complains that the US is not engaged in Asia. Huh? You cannot have it both ways. Australia is our deep ally, our long time friend, our brother in arms (sigh, sister, trans, whatever other words are necessary now). We hope for Australia to stop pushing the US away in order to feast in China, because the longer any country feasts there, the deeper into China’s trap they fall. It would behoove Australia to make up its mind what it is doing. If Australia thinks that a full blown democracy can become the ally of the world largest and most dangerous totalitarian government, good luck. You don’t stand a chance, because China’s trojan horse is already parked in Sydney and it has begun to manipulate the environment from within. You can do business with the Chinese Communist Party, you can trade with them, you can even smile with them, but you can never ever, ever, ever trust them.

The U.S. is not going anywhere. We are the only hope to help solve some of the world’s worst dilemmas. Europe is hopelessly indecisive and completely based on appeasement, which as we have seen, is useless against evil regimes, who simply lie, sign and breach (e.g. N. Korea, Iran, Communist China (already breaching the 50-year agreement with the UK regarding Hong Kong, as though Great Britain would do anything about it)).

I can tell you that out of 330 million people in the US, there are no more than a handful who believe “America will lose, and China will win”

These are tough times. Tough times call for resolute actions. Who else is going to be resolute? We’ve always relied on Australia to be right there by our side. We hope for that to continue for a long, long time as we love our friends from down under.

The Truth Today is Very Popular – How About some Diplomatic Truth? Jerusalem is the Capital of Israel, and Taiwan is not Part of China, and is Independent and Democratic!

For 50 years, the international community, including the impotent United Nations, has pretended the historical connection of 3,000 years between Jerusalem and Israel dating back to King David did not exist. The diplomatic convenience of appeasement, an act of allowing a lie to be treated as the truth, did nothing for peace.

For 50 years, the international community, including the impotent United Nations, has pretended that the historical separation since 1895 between China and Taiwan did not exist, and has been willing to pretend Taiwan is part of China, for “diplomatic purposes” (read this as “greed”). The diplomatic convenience of appeasement, an act allowing a lie to be treated as the truth, did nothing for peace, and has allowed China to grow in belligerence and hegemony, threatening the world with totalitarianism, “socialism with Chinese characteristics”.

Previous international policy on the Palestinians has failed miserably. In 1995, Congress passed the Embassy Act directing the US embassy be moved to Jerusalem, the capital of Israel. President Clinton failed to sign the law, and it went into effect without his signature, his having failed to return it to Congress during the permitted time. However, Clinton, Bush and Obama all suspended the law for the past 25 years. Now, President Trump has actually complied with the law, saying out loud what has been true for 3,000 years.

Let the Palestinians and the rest of the world face the truth, the fact that Jerusalem and Israel are inextricably connected as they have been since King David declared Jerusalem the capital of Israel around 1,000 B.C. Appeasement has no chance of success, and hopefully the days of appeasing the Palestinians is over. Threatening violence in the middle-east because of this decision is nonsense. It is already burning in chaos with internecine conflict between Shia and Sunni, and many other peoples and sects clamoring for influence, territory and wealth for greedy leaders. Israel has nothing to do with this never-ending conflagration. All Israel ever did was turn a desert into an oasis, something the Palestinians should take note of, if they could put down their AK-47s, suicide belts and bombs, and Jew-hating long enough.

Let the world start acknowledging the truth that the Emperor Xi is naked, that he has no new clothes, that this is the truth, and that Taiwan is a free, independent, democratic nation of peace.

I hope today is the first day of the rest of our lives accepting the truth in diplomacy instead of decades of diplomatic lies and appeasement of evil. Let’s hope the American President’s fulfillment of his promise to the people of Israel is the beginning of “telling it like it is” and starting to get things done in solving the world’s worst conflicts. After the past 8 years of Obama’s polite appeasement and giving evil a pass in the name of false “peace”, it took less than 11 months and a little New York chutzpah to move America in the right direction. I hope it is just the beginning, and that China is next on the list to get a wake up call to something called “the truth”.

The Pyongyang Shuffle Redux

The Chinese Communist Party’s strategy of playing the White House and the EU for suckers is in full swing with attempts to resume the six-way talks with North Korea once again, only this time after North Korea violated every single other agreement, developed long range missiles and a hydrogen bomb all because Obama and the West did nothing about it, except take away Kim Junior’s allowance. This was Obama’s solution to every single international problem (sanctions, or lifting them) and I can’t think of a single example of it working, and in fact it made each situation worse (Russia with Crimea, Ukraine, or Iran, Cuba, N. Korea, Syria, etc.) because it left the actions with little downside and emboldened each horrible regime to double down on infamy.

We imagine Chinese Premier Li Keqiang is on his way to North Korea, riding the secret train, and right now we are back in the midst of the Pyongyang Shuffle Redux, a dance choreographed by the CCP and Kim Jong-il, and now Kim Jong-un, which has been the number one hit in China and North Korea for the past 20+ years.

Oh, to be a fly on the wall when the two “leaders” meet (Li has been diminished as Xi has been elevated, and Kim Junior leads by exterminating all perceived enemies, it seems, including family members).

Kim: (to Li, while watching some old Elvis movies): “Congratulations on sixty-eight years of absolute power. It is almost as long as my family’s 69 years of absolute rule.”

Li: “Thank you. One party rule is definitely the way to go, especially when your family or your best friend runs the party (they both laugh). Now, as for the purpose of my visit, we want you to try to be nice for a change.”

Kim: “I’m always nice.”

Li: “Yes, well, the Americans don’t understand that. We want you to offer them something. A meeting perhaps in exchange for movement on your nukes. Give Tillerson something he can work with.”

Kim: “I’m not giving up the nukes.”

Li: “I know that, you know that, but they don’t know that, and we like it that way. As long as they think you are being genuine, we will have this very useful leverage over them. It’s called ‘six-way talks’, but we know it’s ‘four plus two talks’. As long as they don’t know that, it’s better. If you play along with us, we will take care of you, as always.”

Kim: “Yes, and along those lines, I need some more beluga. And lots more of that Dom Perignon you sent last time, the limited edition – though I hear there’s a nice Perrier-Jouet limited edition for a mere fifty thousand Euros – you can have someone stop off in Epernay next time you’re scamming the Europeans. And duck – fat, juicy duck, and lots of it. You know what I like.”

Li: “Anything for your people?”

Kim: “Oh, them. You can also send along some trainloads of rice and cabbage. The people love rice. You can never have enough rice – or kimchee.”

Li: “Okay. So, this is how it works. Right now, the world is anticipating this trip of mine. I will go out there, and face the cameras, and put on a look of serious contemplation, like this (makes a stern face – Kim laughs). Then I will tell the reporters with a straight face that we have made some progress towards denuclearizing the Korean peninsula, talk about peace in Asia, common goals, blah blah blah. Maybe I will call it a breakthrough, give a little gift to Trump.”

Kim: “But we’ll know better (chuckling).”

Li: “Right. Do you want to stand next to me?”

Kim: “No, not this time. We can find some old footage. I put on a lot of weight with that champagne and caviar diet, and I look fat and a little puffy and weak. I can’t appear to be the powerful juggernaut I am commanding a two million man army if I weigh more than 150 kg and have trouble walking. It’s okay. It’s part of my enigmatic personality if I don’t appear. The people accept my lofty nature.”

Li: “Okay then. So, we offer them some movement, and then let’s plan to string out these latest talks until after Trump’s next State of the Union address in late January, 2018. That’ll give him something to brag about, and soften him up on human rights, democracy, Taiwan and Tibet, and other areas, like trade. We can make some good progress in our plans. Then, say March, you can pull out, or fire some missiles or anything to justify breaking away from the talks, and we will start all over again. Just don’t hit anything with the missiles.”

Kim: “Can I hit something uninhabited? It’s getting boring spending all this money to sink my missiles in the ocean. The boys need something to encourage them.”

Li: “Not at this time. It’s a delicate balance with all those American ships and the aircraft carrier parading around in our sea just off our coast. And don’t get too close to Guam. Ever. This guy in the White House is not the same as Obama, who wouldn’t hurt a fly. Trump is just itching to roll out some nukes. We don’t need that right now.”

Kim: “Okay, okay. I get the point. You know how to make me happy. What will your position be in March?”

Li: “Mock surprise and horror of course. But don’t worry, it’s only for show. I’ll send along some nice dumplings and a few hundred fat ducks on the next train, and see if I can get someone to stop off in Epernay. And maybe some Krug 1995.”

Kim: “There’s one other thing. My son.”

Li: “What about your son?”

Kim: “Well, that’s the thing. I’m not finished making sons yet, so I don’t know. But when I do know, I need your promise you will support him in all that he asks. He will need to consolidate his internal power. I will have taught him to play this little game of ours. At this rate, it can keep going for at least another 30 or 40 years years. By the way…”

Li: “Yes..?”

Kim: “I’ve got a little something going on the side with that nice fellow, the Ayatollah. Quite a little supply thing going on. It’s good cash right now. Any problems?”

Li: “No, not at all. But do understand that at the U.N. we will sound upset. But we won’t vote upset. Don’t worry. And stop using ships that can be tracked.”

Kim: “Okay. That guy is always begging for a nuke. ‘Give us one, even a little one, something nuclear, anything…’ He won’t take no for an answer.”

Li: “Well, you can give him something very small, but make it defective, and you can blame it on the sand or Israel. This nuclear intrigue gives us more leverage over the Americans, but we need to control the Iranians in different ways. They copied this game from you and play it well, and we go along with them on watering down the Americans’ sanctions, but they don’t listen to us like you do – they don’t like champagne and caviar, and they don’t want nukes just to play – they want to actually use them. You at least understand us. The Iranians hate us, and love us at the same time. Actually, they call us ‘infidels’ behind our backs, but they buy our weapons every day, anyway. As long as we can use them to make the Americans sweat without risking nuclear war, we’re happy.”

Kim: “Yes, well, they are all westerners as far as I’m concerned. Maybe they will kill each other off. Here, have some more kimchee, and a Big Mac. Wash it down with this Moet you sent me for my birthday.”

Li: “Don’t mind if I do.”

Stay tuned for more of the Pyongyang Shuffle as the saga continues.

Appeasement is not a Viable Strategy with North Korea, as 25 Years of it has Shown

An article appeared in the Taipei Times on Sunday, October 29, 2017 on p. 6 regarding the North Korean crisis entitled Talking Must be the Only Answer by Ian Inkster  http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/editorials/archives/2017/10/29/2003681233/3

Mr. Inkster very instantly and blithely dismisses the most important concept identified by President Trump, that “the US has been talking to North Korea, and paying them extortion money, for 25 years,” at the outset of Inkster’s article.  President Clinton made the horrific mistake of trusting North Korea in 1992, and the agreement with North Korea was violated by North Korea before the ink was dry. Years of Chinese prevarication, talking, and “statesmanship”, as Mr. Inkster lovingly suggests, in particular over the past 8 years by the great statesman President Obama, produced nuclear weapons, long range missiles and a hydrogen bomb. So much for statesmanship. As I mentioned before in my blog post, and here, and in others, President Reagan scared the Iranians so much they released the hostages they had held for a year within hours of his inauguration, after years of wimpiness from President Carter. Curiously we find ourselves in a similar position, with 8 years of extraordinary wimpiness from President Obama followed by a very loose and sometimes scary but apparently resolute cannon (despite not being the brightest bulb in the marquee of life).

Mr. Inkster refers to the Cuban Missile Crisis. He must have viewed it as a young teen through the foggy mist across the pond. From here, in New York, a hop, skip and jump from Washington, I saw and felt President Kennedy’s “bluster”, which Mr. Inkster says Kennedy did not display, but his spine, and his temerity, his willingness to meet move with move and show of strength with show of strength, and the backdoor channel ready to receive a message of contrition from Khrushchev is what made the Russians back down and get the missiles out of Cuba, not “statesmanship” alone. In those days, the US had 16 times as many nuclear weapons as the Soviets, and Khrushchev knew it. Were Kennedy instead Jimmy Carter or Barack Obama, Cuba would be a colony of the Soviet Union with nuclear missiles on our doorstep. Make no mistake. Kennedy played chicken well, and Khrushchev blinked, and then a basis for resolution was found. Junior knows the score. He is crazy but he is not an idiot. He looks for weakness and tries to exploit it. But like a rat, he has no desire to die.

In Europe, the strategy for everything has always been, compromise, compromise, compromise. Even with Hitler. Even with Russia. Even with Iran. Even with N. Korea. Particularly with China. It is this unwillingness to show strength to achieve compromise that has always led to horrible deals. I am not surprised by this (and Europe had a willing partner in Obama, whose foreign policy was taken directly from Europe’s playbook, which is why his foreign policy was reviled in the US, and loved abroad).

As soon as Trump spoke his mind (and the more unhinged he sounds, the better at present for strategic purposes) the European members of NATO were on their hands and knees begging for talks with N. Korea. To what end? To what compromise? To give a lunatic encouragement? Let an insane regime have a hydrogen bomb? There will be no resolution to this situation unless NATO grows a spine and plays its part (which is not begging, but rather trying to convince junior that Trump would love to test the US arsenal), and when North Korea weighs its options well, it will find a way to save face and back down.

And the answer is not relying on China. China has been playing the North Korea game for 25 years, playing every President and every administration and Europe for fools, just as the Palestinians have. It is a farce. Bullies only understand one thing. A punch in the nose, or the very real threat of one. Tea on the veranda is not the approach.

 

Chairman Xi’s Chinese Dream – Only the Manual Can Discern the Truth

Regarding an article which appeared in the Taipei Times on Tuesday, Oct. 24th on P. 8 entitled “‘Chinese Dream’ will become a nightmare”, and with a nod to Chen Fang-ming (陳芳明), who wrote the article, confusion regarding Xi Jinping’s real motivations and intent can be discerned from reference to the Chinese Communist Party Manual of Commonly Misunderstood Terms (the “Manual”), which is essential when attempting to parse CCP policies, statements and doctrine. Now that Xi has become Chairman Xi, and venerated to the status of Mao, it becomes important to understand Xi’s true intentions.

First, the article refers to a proposal by the Chairman/ President/Leader/Commander/Icon/Top Guy/Numero Uno Xi Jinping called his “Chinese dream”, a slogan which came with the goals (according to the article) of “prosperous, strong, democratic, civilized, harmonious, free, fair, abide by the rule of law, patriotic, just, honest and friendly”, words which are uncommon normally having anything to do with the Chinese Communist Party run government in Communist China, possibly the world’s worst and most repressive totalitarian regime.

Referring then to the Manual, we can more easiliy understand what Xi meant when he talked about these goals in the context of his “Chinese dream”. Xi has used the word ‘democracy’ before, but clearly he is referring to the definition of “democracy” in the Manual, which is “democracy with Chinese characteristics”. In the Manual, the definition of “democracy with Chinese characteristics is “the right to vote for the Chinese Communist Party slate of candidates in the order provided, a right given to only those members of the Party given permission to attend and vote according to Party directions at the National Congress held every 5 years”. There is another second definition, written in smaller print that says that the definition of democracy in the Manual is “2. No democracy – see Freedom”

Going on then to the definition of ‘freedom’ in the Manual, we find some help in understanding Xi’s animus. “Freedom” is defined in the Manual as “The right and legal obligation to obey each and every order, rule, regulation, law, statute, directive, policy and dictate of the Chinese Communist Party and each and every of its representatives at all times and in all places, failure to follow which is punishable by any means dictated by the Party.” That clears that up, doesn’t it? The Manual offers a secondary definition as follows “Freedom – 2. No freedom”.

Now we are getting a better idea of just what Xi meant by his liberal pronouncement for the future of Communist China.

As to “prosperity”, there can be no question that China has been more prosperous than at any time in the history of the Chinese Communist Party, in large part because it abandoned ‘communism’ and adopted “communism with Chinese characteristics”. In the Manual, ‘communism with Chinese characteristics’ is defined as “not communism per se, but rather allowing free enterprise under strict control by the Party, and all enterprises subject to control by the Party to the greatest extent possible, and otherwise open to free exchange of capital subject to Party rules and regulations, violation of which are punishable by death”. Basically this is capitalism with Chinese characteristics, otherwise known as “prosperity” for Party members, until the Party decides a member is too powerful, and then prosecution for corruption is required.

As for “strong”, the Chinese Communist Party is certainly set to become stronger under “Chairman” Xi, considering the power the Communist Party has accumulated, and Communist China itself has become stronger partly because it has been devoting double digit parts of its GDP to its military, partly because through espionage it keeps stealing technology and advances from others (mostly the US). Also, as liberal democracies in Europe have become weaker and more reliant on Chinese Kommunist Kash, Communist China has become stronger through weakening resistance to China’s temptations, large bucks and its enormous supposedly “open” markets. However, in the Manual, “open markets” has been defined as “segments of the Chinese economy open to foreign entities under strict regulation by the Party, and only when a local Chinese partner participates in at least 50% ownership of the entity, such Chinese partners subject to absolute control by the Party”. Also, though the Manual is silent, it is well-known that the Party philosophy on local partners is they have 3 years from acquiring their interest in the foreign business to steal all available IP, set up backdoor avenues for walking products and technology out the back door, and to acquire complete control of the business, or set up a competing entity which can take over the business that is left when the foreign owner runs away.

As for civilized, I presume Xi is referring to the Party no longer starving its citizens or murdering them in public. However, all that the Party has done is taken these tools inside, where all options are available to the Party to ensure compliance with any of its dictates. Being one of the worst human rights violators in the world, Beijing has a long way to go to reach “civilized”. In the manual “civilized” is defined as “The Party rules require the government to conduct its security processes in a civilized manner, especially during official secret arrests, torture, and blackmail.” It’s not much, but it’s an improvement.

Xi loves using the term “harmonious”, but the true nature of this concept is set out in the Manual, where “harmonious” is defined as “every citizen following the Party’s instructions in every aspect of life in Communist China obediently, and making sure not to criticize the Party or the government under any circumstances.” It is easy to see how wonderful it is for China to be harmonious for Chairman Xi.

As for “fair” and “abide by the law”, we need to jump around a bit to understand this core principle of the Communist Party. First, “justice” in China is defined as “any ruling made by a Court with the approval of the Party shall be considered full justice.” Though you have to dig through the Manual to find it, “justice process” (also called due process in the Manual) is defined as “having the absolute right as a citizen in the People’s Republic of China to be subjected to the Party’s justice through the rulings made by judges in the Party’s courts with the abolute directives of the Party”. It reads a little differently than other common views of due process. There is a footnote under the entry for “due process” as follows: “2. Due Process – no due process”. Actually, as Xi knows, there can be no due process without an independent judiciary, but as the Manual identifies in the definition of “Court”, there is no independent judiciary in China (in the Manual “Court” is defined as “the tribunal dealing with legal matters subject to the directives of the Party to do justice as the Party shall see fit.” Gotta love dictators. They really know how to get results.

As for honest, the Manual defines honest as follows: “Honest: The truth is what the Party says is the truth. Honesty is absolutely keeping to the truth as mandated by the Party in all things, no matter how ridiculous it seems, upon pain of death.”

As for “friendly”, there is a reference in the Manual as follows: “friendly: see Taiwan”. Under the entry for “Taiwan”, for some reason, it says only: “Grrrrrrrrr.” There is a secondary entry under Taiwan that says “Taiwan: 2. Chinese Taipei, Taiwan, China, China, China, China”.

As we can see, Xi’s Chinese Dream is really not much of a dream, unless you define dream to include nightmare. In the Manual, “Chinese dream” is defined as “the Party becoming the most powerful government in the world, adopting the slogan ‘My name is Chairman Xi, Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!'”

 

 

The Problem for Taiwan and Israel is not China or the Arab World – It’s European Appeasement…Again….Will They Never Learn?

In an article by Alexander Gorlach, which appeared in the Taipei Times on Saturday, October 21st on Page 8 entitled “Taiwan, China: the European view” Mr. Gorlach states: “Declining support for the values of Western liberal democracy across the world in recent years, which not only led to the Brexit vote but also to a rise in mostly far-right xenophobic movements, does not serve as a breeding ground for compassion and action for a far-away nation such as restricted Taiwan.”

This is a somewhat delusional statement. To think that “liberal democracy”, particularly European liberal democracies, are either compassionate of foreign struggles for democratic evolution or capable of taking action to actually support and protect foreign democracies, is laughable, at best. Two examples which immediately come to mind are Taiwan and Israel, two of the smallest and brightest stars in the celestial glow of democracy, both completely abandoned by those useless “European liberal democracies”.

The height of liberal democracy might be considered the administration of the recent liberal God, President Obama, whose foreign policy doctrine of Oppeasement basically betrayed all of the American allies, most pointedly Israel and Taiwan, and allowed the world to erupt into flames, and evil dictators around the world to hastily move with aggression (and celebrate) while he danced and sang Kumbaya, and said to Putin, “be my guest” as he sped by into Syria to take over the fight there, but on behalf of Assad, not the opposition, betrayed by Obama over and over. Obama did nothing for Taiwan. European democracies have their lips pressed too hard to Daddy Xi’s buttocks to even notice Taiwan, welcoming the One Belt One Road honey trap (extolled on these very pages in article after article by George Soros’ ultra liberal Project Syndicate) with open arms, rubbing their hands together and chortling at the prospects of Kommunist Kash filling their coffers.

In 70 years, the US is the only ally with the guts to pass law after law in favor of Taiwan and keep China at bay. NATO couldn’t without the US, the European powers cannot and will not, nor will the UN. This trend has nothing to do with the death of liberal democracy, but in fact is the direct result of liberal democracy’s tendency to retreat in the face of danger or conflict, and prefer to “negotiate” rather than confront (e.g. totally misunderstanding evil such as N.Korea, and rather than employing an enormous stick and a teeny carrot and a kick in the teeth, are on their knees holding a gigantic carrot and a toothpick, begging Kim to come to the table and talk (and doing the same with Iran, which is an order of magnitude more dangerous)), having NOT learned the lessons from World War II of the dangers of APPEASEMENT and the unquenchable hunger of evil regimes for more power, more land, more death, more everything. Actually, in the case of Israel, its biggest problem is not the Arab nations that surround it (who know they cannot defeat Israel) but rather liberal democracies in Europe, which have done everything in their power to destroy Israel by being weak in convictions, weak in morality, weak in policy, weak in support, weak in their faux liberal democratic ideals.  The same can be said for Taiwan, which cannot rely on liberal democracies around the world for support, except the United States Congress.

China is not a problem of Trump’s making, nor is Iran or N. Korea or the Middle East. These are problems left on the Resolute Desk in the Oval Office by Blinking Barry and his Oppeasement policy on the way out. President Trump has extraordinarily difficult tasks ahead undoing the damage done by Obama in eight years of weakness and betrayal, and in this instance specifically to Taiwan and Israel.

I am skittish about President Trump’s meeting with Xi. Not because Trump is not a liberal, but because he is not the brightest bulb in the marquee of life, and while China has always played three dimensional chess, Trump is having difficulty with checkers because there are two colors. However, I have less fear of Trump meeting Xi than Obama, who bowed to the Chinese leader on several occasions and projected such a weak image of the US, that China has become far more belligerent and aggressive than before Obama’s era of Oppeasement.

When you show me liberal democracies growing spines, I will listen to this “European View” drivel. In the meantime, so long as they appease evil around the world, I will ignore them as the weak, timid, fearful, feckless, useless regimes they are, pretending to be important, while planning the next business trip to Tehran or Beijing. (“hey, China is not so bad, just because the Communist Party is the worst totalitarian regime in the history of the world – they have pandas and lots of money, we just have to say “One China” and keep Taiwan out! And if we sell jets and missile and nuclear technology to Iran, of course they won’t bomb us – they’ll bomb them (Israel)!”).