|
|
|
|
Please provide your name or a
pen name, and your country of residence.
Lengthy letters run the risk of being cut.
Please note: This Letters page is intended primarily for
readers to comment on ATol articles or related issues. It should not be used as
a forum for readers to debate with each other.
The Edge is the place for that. The editors do not mind publishing one
or two responses to a reader's letter, but will, at their discretion, direct
debaters away from the Letters page.
[Re Obama steers
the peace train, August 26] On which track is United States President
Barack Obama steering the peace train in the Middle East? It looks as though
the Palestinians are being shunted onto a siding while the more substantive
negotiations are being conducted with Israel. Even if, as Jerrold Kessel and
Pierre Klochendler write, the Israelis and Palestinians will soon sit down at
the "peace table", do not rule out wily Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu using more delaying tactics. They have one end: full and complete
occupation of the West Bank. Obama may try to untie knots, but since the 1967
war, the US has allowed Israel to do as it pleases. Try as he might, Obama is
going keep running the peace train at low gear, and if say negotiations similar
to the North Ireland peace accords take place, by the time years pass Israeli
settlements will dominate any vital space on the West Bank, leaving the
Palestinians nothing. A more radical approach is called for, which is out of
Obama's ken.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 31, '09)
After reading China-EU
ties caught in vicious cycle[August 19], by Professor Jian Junbo of
Fudan University, one cannot help but wonder what fault the Chinese side might
have in maintaining the "vicious cycle" described by Jian. The article says the
relationship between China and the European Union lacks stability, and
cooperation is mostly limited to the economic sphere. Jian goes on to claim: "A
lack of mutual trust stands out as the most obvious obstacle to the strategic
partnership becoming a reality. This can be partly - or perhaps completely -
blamed on some negative policies of the EU and its members." He asserts that
this situation is mainly due to the EU's propensity to complain about China's
human-rights record and the Tibet issue, as this is typically perceived by the
Chinese side as interfering in China's internal affairs. Jian further states
that China's human-rights record has improved, and that China tends to view
criticism from the EU, and America, as an attempt to contain China's rising
global power. China never tries to interfere in other countries internal
affairs, he adds. Then the professor concludes that both sides need to resist
becoming competing global ideological centers, his reason for this last
statement, presumably, is to provide a gloss of balanced criticism along with a
little practical advice. If a lack of trust troubles Sino-EU relations, might
not one side's tendency to eschew transparency present difficulties to
establishing that trust? A central feature of Western criticism of China's
human-rights record - and a host of other issues - is China's lack of
transparency or openness, whether in Tibet or other regions of China, along
with its persistent efforts to deter foreign efforts in obtaining information
on such matters. While China has indeed made significant progress on many
aspects of social development, its progress to date on basic legal and
human-rights issues remains well below a level commensurate with its economic
development. From this perspective, continued Western criticism of China on
human-rights issues is both appropriate and desirable. Certainly it takes two
parties to quarrel, but if one is writing mere editorial opinion, not analysis,
then giving fair consideration to alternative views, or a null hypothesis, is
not required. But then, one does not need academic credentials, or academic
discipline, to write editorial opinion pieces.
Dmuel
United States (Aug 31, '09)
[Re Libya welcomes
a hero, August 28] Unfortunately, the analysis presented by the authors
on this matter is lopsided on several counts and does not stand the test of
evidence that is already in the so-called "public domain". The evidence that
the authors overlook is:
1. Around July 1988, (five months before the downing of Pan Am Flight
103) an Iranian Airbus was deliberately downed by the USS Vincennes and
Iran's leadership publicly announced a bounty of $1 million for anyone who were
to avenge that attack on behalf of Iran.
2. The US Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA), based on its intercepts,
concluded in its memos of 1988/89 that the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 was
carried out by Ahmad Jibril of the PFLP-GC [Popular Front for the Liberation of
Palestine-General Command] on behalf of Iranians in retaliation to the bombing
of Iranian Airbus.
3. These DIA memos were available to the Scottish authorities
prosecuting Abdel Basset Ali al-Megrahi at Camp Zeist but their existence was
withheld from the trial judges and, for that matter, from the defense team of
Megrahi.
4. The police notebook (which noted that a fragment of a circuit board
from the timing device purportedly used in the detonation had not been
recovered during scouring of the wreckage - but planted) was taken away by
Scottish prosecutors involved in Megrahi's prosecution and never seen again.
5. An independent forensic examination of this "planted" piece of timer
circuit board established that it did not contain traces of the explosives it
was supposed to have helped detonate.
6. The Swiss company MEBO that manufactured the timer also sold the
"implicated" detonation timing device to East German security services which
were still under the iron grip of the USSR and much closer to the openly
leftist PFLP-GC operatives.
7. The Maltese shopkeeper who "identified" Megrahi at the trial had in
fact been paid US$2 million for the "identification" and he now lives a life of
luxury in Australia.
For these and other reasons one is left with no choice but to reject the
analysis presented by the authors of the article.
Dr Rashid Hassan (Aug 31, '09)
In China's tale of two
restive regions [August 27], Kent Ewing is oblivious to the
fundamental question: Do the human beings called the Tibetans today need to
retain their culture in order to be happy to a greater extent, analogously,
than those now called the Uyghurs? I believe human beings called the Tibetans,
Uyghurs, Hawaiians, Norwegians and Cherokees do not need to retain any culture
in order to be happy. Moreover, I believe happiness comes from being included
socially in a society; in fact, therefore, happiness is in the process of
losing one's culture. Based on Ewing's curious references to China's
"repressive policy" and "Western, particularly American, prejudice and
hypocrisy", the reader should really think about the whole issue of minority
cultural preservation. There is indeed American hypocrisy and prejudice. It is
less in the distinction between affinity toward Tibetan Buddhism and aversion
toward Uyghurs as Ewing suggests; actually, it is in the assumption that
assimilation in the US is social progress, but in China it is cultural
genocide.
Jeff Church
USA (Aug 28, '09)
[Re Libya welcomes
a hero, August 27] There are several problems with the article.
Firstly, several United States Central Intelligence Agency officers were killed
and the article does not mention anything about them. Without knowing what
those officers were investigating, it's hard to tell definitively why the plane
was brought down and by whom. Some things are not discussed in any situation
other than in person back in Washington. It's quite plausible the officers were
returning to report on something and they were killed so that they would not be
able to fully brief others. Secondly, the La Belle disco bombing was not a
Libyan attack but an attack by supposedly Syria or a Syria-connected group or
much more likely someone who was clever enough to "pin" the crime on Syria
while convincing the US that Libya should be attacked. The US hit Libya and
started the long-term process of undermining Muammar Gaddafi and Libya. Syria
might have been "spared" (it most probably was not guilty) because it was still
serving a useful purpose to Israel and the US in Lebanon and was on bad terms
with Iraq, a posture that Israel wanted to see maintained. Before the attack,
the US (or someone else) told the Soviets to remove their ships from Libyan
ports and the Soviets did not inform the Libyans that they were about to be
attacked, which is something that causes one to wonder about the wisdom of
Libya now considering the possibility of letting the Russians have a base in
Libya. I feel sorry for Libya because it has been a victim over and over again.
With regards to Pan Am Flight 103, the most likely culprits are the United
Kingdom/Jordan/Israel, France and Germany (in order of decreasing likelihood).
With regards to the intercept of Libyan communications implicating Libya in the
La Belle bombing, such intercepts can be manufactured quite easily. With
regards to the recovered timer fragment from Pan AM Flight 103, according to at
least one report, it did not show evidence of having been subjected to the
inferno of the first second of an explosion.
Adam Albrett (Aug 28, '09)
[Re China's tale of two
restive regions, August 27] The West's romance with Tibet is best
exemplified by the very popular James Hilton novel Lost Horizons. The
rise of new-age philosophy and the popularity and spread of Buddhism in the
West, including the Small Vehicle school practiced in Tibetan Buddhism, has
helped the cause of Tibet and the Dalai Lama. The plight of the Uyghurs has
remained absent from the world's consciousness until now. Beings's blame of her
for the unrest in Xinjiang province has catapulted the exiled Uyghur
spokeswoman Rebiya Kadeer into a prominence she was long denied. The withdrawal
of Chinese entries in an Australian film festival, owing to the showing of a
documentary on Kadeer, have increased the flow of ink and media commentary on
Xinjiang, and the harsh Chinese rule in Xinjiang. Although Kadeer probably will
never attain the stellar attraction of the Dalai Lama, the sad history of the
Uyghurs in Xinjiang does make headlines. The biggest fly in China's ointment
comes from Taiwan. There, Taiwanese president Ma Ying-jeou - who has cozied up
to Beijing - in a desperate attempt to save his political skin and that of the
ruling Kuomintang party - has invited the Dalai Lama to come to Taiwan to pray
for the dead and injured from the recent Typhoon. The invitation has roiled
China no end.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 28, '09)
The problem with Francesco Sisci's idea for Chinese troops to be sent to
Afghanistan in his article,
Chinese troops offer an Afghan solution[August 26], is that it goes
against Chinese interests. China's plan is to be the sole superpower of the
21st century, so they are overjoyed as the present superpower, the United
States, wastes trillions of dollars and burns itself out with its incredibly
stupid foreign military adventures. As the Chinese leadership knows, if your
enemy is in the process of destroying itself, do not come to their aid. Sisci
is also wrong about his views of Pakistan's relationship with the Taliban and
al-Qaeda. The Taliban came to power in Afghanistan not against the wishes of
Pakistan, but with the complete backing of the Pakistani Inter-Services
Intelligence agency. When the US cut off military aid to Pakistan because of
its pursuit of nuclear weapons, Pakistan vowed vengeance against the US. In
fact, they acted more like a jilted lover than a spurned country. Most people
do not know that there was a Pakistan hand behind the September 11, 2001,
attack. General Mahmoud Ahmad, the head of the ISI, had ordered US$100,000 sent
to Mohammed Atta, the ringleader of 9/11. This story was reported in Asia Times
Online on April 8, 2004, in
9-11 and the Smoking Gun. Also, Pakistan provided nuclear weapons aid
to Iran to get even with the US. Some people are foolish enough to talk about
the Abdul Qadeer Khan [A Q Khan] network as being responsible, however, there
never was an AQ Khan network, there was a Pakistani ISI network which employed
Khan. The US is backing a hopelessly corrupt government in Afghanistan which
will never be able to defeat the Taliban when their only real goal is to enrich
themselves. To show you how dumb the US is, President Hamid Karzai's brother is
said to be the largest heroin dealer in Afghanistan and heroin is one of the
major sources of financing for the Taliban. So I have no hope that the US can
come to its senses and even less hope that China will come to our aid.
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Aug 27, '09)
[ReChinese troops offer
an Afghan solution, August 26] M K Bhadrakumar has often written on a
Chinese role in Afghanistan in the pages of Asia Times Online. Yet, as far as
memory serves me, he has not suggested a military one. Geography alone tells us
that China cannot ignore Afghanistan. The firestorm of Islamic fundamentalism
and its influence on China's misguided policy toward the Uyghurs has added a
new dimension to Uyghur nationalism. The war in Afghanistan has also become a
training ground for Uyghurs, which spells no end of headaches for Beijing.
Francesco Sisci offers a hypothetical role for the People's Liberation Army in
joining the war in Afghanistan against the Taliban. He suggests a [total] troop
strength of 400,000, which even the United States and its European allies are
loathe to commit to. Perhaps Sisci is too close to his subject matter, residing
as he does in Beijing. China is not adventuresome. It will use military force
in China itself, but its last "foreign" incursion was to Vietnam in 1979, and
its troops did not do well.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 27, '09)
[Re The truth is
adrift with the Arctic Sea, August 25] As the article points
out, there are so many bizarrely missing and conflicting pieces of information
about the temporary disappearance of the Arctic Sea that any kind of
far-fetched scenario can be invoked. But the proposed explanation covered seems
as unlikely as any: "a former Russian military officer based in Ukraine,
Vladimir Filin, posted an article entitled, "Biochemical weapon which [Prime
Minister Vladimir] Putin intends to drop on Jewish heads". Filin writes that
the Arctic Sea, under the cover of a load of Finnish timber, was
delivering a shipment of weapons to Iran via Algeria. What a roundabout way of
doing things. A shipment via Finland and Algeria has way too many chances of
going astray. A glance at the map shows that a quick trip across the Caspian
Sea would involve no other countries and be much more private and secure. I
recommend the frequent use of maps, as well as a general knowledge of world
geography, as a great help in understanding world events both great and small.
The explanation of an illegal cargo by another letter writer [Adam Albrett,
August 26] seems much more straightforward - but then why wouldn't the Russians
just say so, and why would the ship have to be "hijacked" twice?
Dean Sherwin
USA (Aug 27, '09)
[Re The truth is
adrift with the Arctic Sea, August 25] What happened is very simple to
explain. The Russians simply captured an illegal shipment that was supposed to
have been delivered to Israel without the knowledge of the Russians. Things are
no longer as chaotic in Russia as they once seemed. There is also extensive
double- and triple-crossing happening all over the world.
Adam Albrett (Aug 26, '09)
[Re China trade
pact carries price-tag query, August 25] Although the Association of
Southeast Asian Nations might not have a clear idea as to where it fits in
China's opening up to Southeast Asia, centuries-old reflexes of trading with
the Middle Kingdom will quickly surface. For the members of ASEAN, which are a
hodge-podge of uneven economic development, sailing their ships of continued
growth to a Chinese wind could ensure good returns in a global economic
downturn which has affected them less then in the West. Of course in the
future, the price tag may be onerous, but for the present, ASEAN is not hedging
bets on the strong benefits trade with China could bring.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 26, '09)
Osama bin Laden. Now that's a name we heard constantly in the immediate wake of
the September 11, 2001, attacks. He was the devil, the bogeyman and the tax
auditor all rolled into one turbaned terrorist. He was vilified, condemned and
made America's most wanted, with a bounty on his head to boot. He was the
alleged mastermind of the despicable attack, a bankroller of evil-doers and a
card-carrying member of the Death-to-America Fan Club. All sorts of villainous
powers were assigned this sinister Saudi, to the point that one could expect to
see him appear in the next Batman or Spiderman sequel in cahoots
with the Joker. But as other enemies appeared on the horizon, we heard less and
less of the omnipotent monster America loved to hate. Apparently, in
Wonderland, even the devil only gets 15 minutes of infamy. Saddam Hussein
easily slid into the new role of public enemy number one, since he sat on a
whole lot of oil-bearing real estate. And it was easier to catch the Iraqi
leader snuggled in his spider hole than the conspicuously tall Osama, despite
the numerous guarantees from former United States president George W Bush's
gang that they would nab the most evil man on the planet. Before long, Bush
would begin blithely dismissing the value of snagging the Muslim malefactor he
once swore to bring to old-style Texas justice. The media spoke less and less
of him, focusing instead on a whole new cast of Osama-wannabes with
unpronounceable names. And when was the last time anyone even heard current US
President Barack Obama mention, let alone threaten, the man with the name that
rhymes with his? Of course, all that assumes there ever was any intent to
apprehend or kill Bin Laden. Golden on-the-platter opportunities to do so
escaped the competence (or desire) of both former president Bill Clinton and
Bush. Indeed, there is much to suggest that Bin Laden is the Islamic version of
Lee Harvey Oswald, a fall guy who would take the rap so long as he got his cut
and could walk away to (not) talk about it (this important point he doubtless
learned from the real Oswald's demise). His numerous connections with the
Central Intelligence Agency, Afghan heroin farmers, warlords and mujahideen and
the Pakistan Inter-Services Intelligence agency sound very similar to Oswald's
numerous connections with the mafia, US Marines, CIA, Federal Bureau of
Investigation and KGB ... I'll rest on my observation that the US no longer has
an interest in the man they hold responsible for the horrors of 9/11. And no
one in Wonderland finds that even a little suspicious?
Hardy Campbell
Houston TX (Aug 26, '09)
[Re Pyongyang plays
'funeral diplomacy', August 24] The funeral of former South Korean
president and Nobel peace prize winner Kim Dae-jung let not only Pyongyang, but
also Seoul and Washington play some diplomatic cards. As Donald Kirk reminds
us, the logjam in United States-North Korean and North and South Korean
relations burst after the visit of former US president Bill Clinton to
Pyongyang. It is interesting to note that before going to Pyongyang, Clinton
stopped in Seoul and that on the heels of his visit came Hyun Jeong-eun's, the
CEO of Hyundai Group. It is fair to suggest that as individuals of high
prominence, both Clinton and Hyun bore messages from the US and South Korean
governments. Kim Jong-il held Kim Dae-jung in high esteem for his "Sunshine
Policy" and treated him with the respect that a younger brother has for his
elder brother. So, even if the high-ranking North Korean delegates had not
planned to meet South Korea's President Lee Myung-bak, Pyongyang would have
still sent members of the government to honor Kim Dae-jung's memory. Finally,
no one has mentioned that former US secretary of state Madeleine Albright
represented the Barack Obama administration at Kim's funeral. She met with Kim
Jong-il in October 2000. What is clear is that the key players in the new US
opening up to North Korea are former members of the Clinton White House.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 25, '09)
Actually, the article does mention Albright: "At the head of the official US
delegation was Madeleine Albright, who as secretary of state met Kim Jong-il in
Pyongyang in October 2000." - ATol
Spengler's article,
Palestinian problem hopeless but not serious [August 18], is an
abomination. ... To belittle Palestinians and distort history in this manner is
disgusting. There is an equally simplistic alternative solution that Spengler
seems to have missed: stop all American subsidies or aid to Israel and
demilitarize it. Why single out only the Palestinians when it comes to cutting
foreign support? Israel wouldn't last a week without its US "payroll" and the
Israelis are getting a lot more of other people's money than the Palestinians.
...
Ida C Henderson
Ottawa, Canada (Aug 25, '09)
[Re Listing
boost for China's military, August 21] China's People's Liberation Army
(PLA) has launched its own website in Chinese and English. Once an area of
secrecy hidden from public view and scrutiny, China's economic growth has made
it confident enough to lift the veil on the powerful role the PLA plays in its
development. The website is also a move to quiet the fears of its neighbors,
trading partners and potential competitors. ...
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 24, '09)
I was amazed by Henry CK Liu's article:
The US-China trade imbalance[Apr 1, 2006]. While we are ever inundated
in the United States with discussions of monetary policy, they inevitably
result in the reader wondering why about everything. Liu's article answered
that question for me, for the first time after years of searching, and it was
such a clear explanation that I was able to comprehend the basics immediately.
Elegant. Please extend my heartfelt thanks to Liu not only for the pleasure of
reading his article, but also for revealing the answer to a question I'd long
asked.
Eric LaBrant (Aug 24, '09)
The latest article by Spengler
Palestine problem hopeless but not serious [August 18] can not pass by
without a serious reaction. A basic myth of modern Israel is that it was an
"empty land", meaning that as the Jewish immigrants "returned" to the land of
Israel from the early 1900s onward, they found an empty land waiting for them
after 2,000 or so years of diaspora. Somehow the Palestinians and other Arabs
kept on intruding in this fantasy, ever more violently as more and more
immigrants pushed them out of their lands. Golda Meir, Israeli prime minister
in the late 1960s and early 1970s, once said, "Who are the Palestinians [?]
They don't exist." The myth was that these people (who did not exist) appeared
from somewhere else and should "go back" there, wherever that was. Now Spengler
wants this accelerated by essentially starving them out. For generations,
Israel has reduced Palestinians to slavery, prison or exile, and if they fight
back for their land and freedom, they are "terrorists" who must be punished
because "Arabs understand only force", a recurring Israeli statement. To follow
Spengler, they live in refugee camps because they like it there. Maybe he
should move in with them and see how he likes it. The reality is that
Palestinians are the indigenous people of the land. They are Semites in
language, in racial appearance and in culture. In their vast majority they are
descendants of the Israelites who were not displaced by the Romans after the
wars of 70 and 130 AD but stayed on in the intervening centuries and over time
changed religions. ... At best, Israel's policy would have them live on ever
more restrictive reservations (like the American Indians) or be like
Bantustans, hemmed in on all sides until they somehow disappear. The Bantustan
analogy is very apt, considering that Israel was the apartheid Republic of
South Africa's best friend for decades, and their only friend to the last
minute. Taking Spengler's nauseating advice, why not stop US subsidies to
Israel, without which it would immediately sink to the economic level of, say,
Jordan. Then maybe Israelis will "go back" to Russia or Brooklyn, where they
came from. Or maybe Spengler will build some refugee camps for them. ...
Kali Kadzaraki
Houston, Texas (Aug 24, '09)
Amidst the howling at the moon and gnashing of teeth about the ruinous costs of
health-care reform, Wonderland is silent about the costs of two ongoing and
open-ended wars. There is nary a peep in the talking-heads media of the sums
being spent daily (estimates of up to US$200 million a day) to fight phantom
foes who have shown no inclination to stop fighting Judeo-Christian
neocolonialism. By comparison, public option health-care costs are but a spit
in the proverbial bucket, with at least the potential of providing some lasting
social benefit. Even the most optimistic neo-conservative prognosticators can
provide, at best, a watered down version of near-term quasi-semi-pseudo victory
in either Iraq or Afghanistan, with the very real prospect of indefinite
occupation of both countries to maintain this fiction. Such an occupation,
coupled with the costs of maintaining 1,000 plus military outposts, bases and
installations worldwide, dwarf by a gargantuan margin the costs of even the
most generous public health welfare (in the truest sense of that word). But the
mouth-frothing, right-wing fascists, who accuse United States President Barack
Obama of being like Adolf Hitler have no qualms about ruining the nation via
military-industrial expenditures. ... As far as they're concerned, the US
exists only to be that instrument of divine retribution and Chosen One
hegemony, and above all else, economic security, well-being of its citizenry,
education and all the other bleeding heart agenda items of the liberal left,
can be sacrificed on the altar of American imperialism. ...
Hardy Campbell
Houston TX (Aug 24, '09)
Sreeram Chaulia's Wary
India frisks North Korean freighter [August 20], like similar
essays written by Indian nationalists, once again puts India at the forefront
of international strategic posturing. It is by no mean a coincidence that this
comes after a string of militaristic maneuvers vis-a-vis India's purported
nemesis, China, especially at the border of India's state of Arunachal Pradesh
and southern Tibet. Most sober Chinese minds dismiss these maneuvers as nothing
but desperate Indian attempts to curry favor with its chief patrons, the United
States and its Western allies, to possibly earn India an easy entrance ticket
into a future Asian treaty organization aimed at the containment of China.
Fortunately, a collision is not imminent as common sense still prevails in more
sober and wiser minds. Intelligent individuals like Congress party president
Sonia Gandhi and current Prime Minister Manmohan Singh have consistently said
that the world is large enough to accommodate the aspirations of both India and
China. China welcomes and treasures friendship and goodwill from its equally
culturally enlightened neighbor but at the same time will let no slightest
illusion be entertained as to whether India would emerge unscratched and
triumphant from any foreseeable conflict.
Lee WS (Aug 21, '09)
[Re Wary India
frisks North Korean freighter, August 20] India has had the honor of
testing United Nations Resolution 1874, which allows member states to board
North Korean vessels on the high seas. Sreeram Chaulia characterizes India's
pursuit of North Korea's MV Mu San as an expression of the paranoia that
has gripped the United States and its allies over North Korea ... Singapore, it
seems, chose to look the other way when Mu San put into port. India did
not - as Chaulia notes, the North Korean vessel had anchored in "sensitive
waters" off the Andaman and Nicobar coast. Furthermore, since everyone thinks
Pyongyang is purveying nuclear technology, and the Indian islands lie close to
Myanmar, a simple exercise in false logic came to the conclusion that the
vessel had to be carrying a nuclear cargo. Wrong. It turned out in the vessel's
hold was 16,500 tons of sugar destined for Persian Gulf ports. Moreover, tarred
with the brush of sanctions, any country's ship would try to run from another
country's attempt to stop and board it. As to why there was a "state official"
aboard the Mu San without saying what that means, communist
countries usually have a political commissar watching the crew. In brief, wary
India for all its trouble came away with egg on its face and UN resolution 1874
looked kind of silly.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 21, '09)
Dear Editor, Abdul Baset Ali al-Megrahi was convicted of the murder of 275
people [in the Lockerbie bombing]. As a believer in the death penalty I see no
reason why it should not be exercised for such crimes. However, in his case
there is one overwhelming mitigating circumstance. He is clearly innocent. When
the investigation of this began it was widely accepted that the trail led
clearly to Syrian-backed Palestinians acting at the behest of the Iranians who
were, not unreasonably, miffed about the United States having shot down an
Iranian passenger plane on its regular route across the Gulf (made considerably
worse by former US president Ronald Reagan's decision not to courtmartial the
captain of the ship that fired the missile but to decorate him). Then Syria
joined us as our patriotic ally in the first Gulf War and suddenly, for no
evidence-based reason, the frame moved from Syria to Libya. Eventually the
Scottish judiciary participated in fitting up the two Libyans in the world
closest to the line of travel of the bomb and convicted one, justifying
fitting-up Libya. Now Libya is our patriotic ally in exploiting its oil for
large amounts of money and as a way of making Europe less dependent on Russian
oil. So Megrahi is released. Almost every judge in the Scottish judiciary was
involved, at some point, in the Megrahi fit-up. ... While the "compassionate"
release of Megrahi will hardly bring back the years for this innocent man it is
at least something. Clearly the legal system, in international affairs, has
shown itself endlessly submissive to political requirements and almost
completely unconcerned with justice, or even law.
Neil Craig
Glasgow (Aug 21, '09)
I'd like to comment on your reader Pritam Banerjee's [letter August 19] post on
David Gosset's article Xinjiang
serves as pan-Asian pivot [August 18]. First of all, a "Go West" policy
is not unique to China. The United States had its own version when it wanted
California to be developed. China neglected Xinjiang when it was busy with the
Japanese invasion and civil war, leading Westernized minds like Banerjee to
claim that Xinjiang was almost independent. Now that Xinjiang is targeted for
development, the same people claim that China is "Sinicizing" it. How brilliant
they are! Xinjiang has about 500 mosques and all ethnic groups can speak their
own dialect. The usage and teaching of Mandarin is required just as English is
the prime language in the US. If Banerjee is going by the imperial yardstick,
then India would still be part of Britain. I am sure he would be glad to still
call himself British.
Wendy Cai (Aug 20, '09)
Many thanks to Pritam Banerjee for his letter [August 18] commenting on the
article by David Gosset,
Xinjiang serves as pan-Asian pivot[August 18]. He has revealed the real
strategy of foreign meddling in Chinese politics. Some Indians and their
mentors in the United States and Europe will not recognize Tibet and Xinjiang
as Chinese territory even after all these years. If they could not extend the
British rule in Hong Kong or guarantee "their man" stays in power in Taiwan,
then they certainly will not allow any power to come between them and their
exploitation of the "new world" of Tibet, Xinjiang, and West and Central Asia.
Now that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization has advanced as far into Asia
as Nazi Germany could only dream of, all it takes is for the US and Japan to
open another front in the East to realize the grand old dream. The US and Japan
could join forces with Vietnam, Thailand, Malaysia, etc and move across Myanmar
to meet NATO in India. It would be game over for West Asia and Central Asia,
eh, Banerjee? Some dreams really die hard, don't they?
M Azad
UK (Aug 20, '09)
Jian Junbo's article Taiwan's
'opportunist' president alters tack [August 10], unwittingly provides a
solid argument against the unification of Taiwan and China, as it clearly
demonstrates how the otherwise educated Chinese elite like Jian, an assistant
professor at the Institute of International Studies at Fudan University in
Shanghai, completely fails to understand what Taiwanese think and what
democracy is all about. In that respect, this is a useful article, in terms of
serving as an eye-opener for those in Taiwan who support unification or believe
that the younger of generation of Chinese, which has seen more of the world, is
becoming more democratic. Ironically, many Taiwanese would agree with Jian's
opening statement, that President Ma Ying-jeou is an "opportunist" who "appears
to lack foresight and strategy, with hesitation and self-contradiction manifest
in his mainland policy". They would do so, however, for altogether divergent
reasons, as we shall see later. For now, let us take a close look at the pledge
Ma is alleged to have made and the reasons why, from Jian's perspective, Ma is
contradicting himself. Jian argues that "fresh in the people's minds" - this
would be in November last year - Ma made a "solemn pledge" to "uphold the 'one
China' principle stipulated in the [Republic of China, ROC] constitution". What
Ma actually "pledged" was to abide by the constitution - which was amended in
1991 and reads that cross-strait relations are a "state-to-state" or "special
state-to-state" relationship - and the so-called "1992 consensus" for the
SEF-ARATS [China's semi-official Association for Relations Across the Taiwan
Straits (ARATS) and the Taiwan's Straits Exchange Foundation (SEF)] talks,
which refers to "one China, separate interpretations" or alternatively "one
China, respective interpretations". We should remember that the "1992
consensus" was crafted (by a small group of individuals rather than through a
democratic process) so that the Taiwanese leadership would have room to
maneuver, and provided the very flexibility that Jian now perceives as
"opportunism" and contradictory. It also implies recognition, on Taiwan's side,
that China will not sit down for talks unless Taipei refers to "one China". In
other words, the term is being forced on Taipei as a precondition for talks.
What it does not mean, however, is that Taiwanese accept that there is only one
China and that Taiwan is part of China (a tiny minority does). This is an
important distinction that Jian fails to make. Jian then accuses Ma of saying
that Beijing should recognize the realities across the Taiwan Strait, that
there is the ROC and the People's Republic of China (PRC), or "two Chinas".
What gall, on Ma's part, to state what is, indeed, a reality! (To get even
closer to reality, we'd have to say that there is, indeed, only one China, and
that is the PRC, while that concept called the ROC is in fact Taiwan, a
sovereign country across the Taiwan Strait.) All this, added to Jian's
allegation that Ma told visiting Dutch parliamentarians on August 2 that he
doesn't intend to hold any political talks with Beijing, is evidence, in the
author's mind, that Ma "is a person who cannot adhere to one principle from
beginning to end". Based on a number of speeches and interviews Ma has given,
there is no indication that Ma does not intend, at some point, to discuss
political issues with Beijing. As has already been clearly explained by his
administration, however, and as has been the case since the secret cross-strait
talks and SEF-ARATS meetings began in the early 1990s, Taipei prefers to
negotiate on less contentious issues first and to keep difficult political
matters for last. But Jian has no time for this. Ma is an "opportunist" who is
"dizzy" with his cross-strait successes, which are making him speak
"thoughtlessly" (meaning "irrationally" the same kind of accusations that have
so often been leveled at supporters of Taiwanese independence, as opposed to
the "rationalism" of those who support unification). Ma's wavering and failure
to adhere to his "pledge", in Jian's view, indicates that he does not support
"one China", which in Beijing's paranoid view is tantamount to supporting
independence. The author also sees evidence of a Ma volte-face in his request
that Beijing remove the 1,500 short-range missiles it aims at Taiwan before any
talks on a peace accord can be held. Jian writes that Beijing has "no problem
in practice with removing those missiles as long as Taipei formally agrees to
stop and even fight any form of support for Taiwan's independence". Jian
conveniently forgets that Ma has also pledged not to declare or support
independence for Taiwan. Anyone who has even but a superficial understanding of
the Ma administration would know that there is no chance that it will support,
let alone assist, the Taiwanese independence movement. However, as it is an
elected government in a democracy, it simply cannot engage in the "stopping"
and "fighting" of Taiwanese independence supporters Jian would ostensibly see
as evidence of Ma's commitment to "one China". Taiwan isn't China, where brute
force and police-state measures are used to fight, stop and silence dissidents.
What this ultimately means for Ma's "pledge" to abide by the "one China"
principle while not supporting independence is that as president in a
democracy, he must perform a balancing act. Whether Jian likes it or not, Ma
cannot simply ignore legislative and presidential elections and forge ahead
with his cross-strait policies. Doing so would be political suicide. In fact,
it would risk undermining the very political end Jian so obviously desires. As
such, Ma is forced to cater to various sociopolitical factions - including
factions within his own party, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). As happens
in any democracy, this requirement to cater to, or at minimum appease, factions
(political, social, economic, external) with different objectives forces
leaders to adopt a more centrist position, which in Taiwan's case means the
"status quo". It also means saying things that may sound contradictory, or
adopting policies that, prima facie, may appear unwise, as was the
intensification of cross strait economic exchanges at a time when China was
strengthening its military posture, which occurred while the pro-independence
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) under president Chen Shui-bian was in power.
Jian continues by writing that "What 'One China' means in Beijing's view is not
the PRC, nor of course the ROC, but a nation with independent sovereignty
covering both the mainland and Taiwan and a history of 5,000 years. It is based
on such a vague definition of 'one China' that detente on the strait in the
past year has become possible." What he omits, however, is that this "one
China" would comprise unequal partners, in which the PRC is the predominant
force and the ROC a mere subject, which has implications for the desire of
Taiwanese to unify with China (not to mention the authoritarian nature of the
PRC leadership, or the fact that Taiwan has been ruled separately for at least
114 years). "As a graduate of Harvard University's Faculty of Law," Jian
writes, "Ma Ying-jeou must understand clearly that world leaders should not
easily be swung by public opinions in society if he is really interested in
their best interests. The fact that some Taiwanese are advocating for the
island's independence cannot be a legitimate excuse for Ma Ying-jeou to refuse
political dialogue with Beijing or deny 'one China.'" In this passage we find
Jian unashamedly exposing his total lack of understanding of democracy. In
democratic systems, leaders are inevitably swayed by public opinion, and those
who refuse to do so are swiftly phased out through electoral retribution. The
claim that strong leaders know what is in people's "best interests," meanwhile,
not only is undemocratic, but derives from a sympathetic view of
authoritarianism, which Taiwan thankfully managed to rid itself of after 40
years under such rule. Observations such as "When given the opportunity, [Ma]
should use his authority and power to push for cross-strait political mutual
trust. Now, since he will soon take the chairmanship of KMT, he should think
less of his own re-election in 2012 and launch a historic meeting with Chinese
leader Hu Jintao" also demonstrate Jian's disregard for democracy. His comment,
meanwhile, that "some Taiwanese are advocating for the island's independence"
is misleading. "Some" gives the impression that there are only a handful, while
masking the fact that close to 90% of people in Taiwan support neither
independence nor unification - in other words, they want the "status quo" to
continue. Facing this, as well as mounting criticism that Ma is going too fast
in his cross-strait policies, or that he is making Taiwan dangerously dependent
economically on China, Ma is compelled to adopt a more centrist political
stance and to proceed more slowly. Furthermore, there are signs that the Ma
administration has been less than transparent, and sometimes altogether
undemocratic, in its dealings with China, which if proven will further add to
domestic pressure. What from across the strait is seen as a slow, wavering and
"opportunist" Ma is, on the other side, seen as "selling out" to China and
endangering the sovereignty of Taiwan by proceeding too fast and giving too
much. And yet, Jian warns that Ma should focus less on his re-election bid in
2012 (or that of his officials, who are entirely effaced though Jian's focus on
strong authoritarian leadership) and accelerate the pace of negotiations,
showcasing the same impatience displayed by Jiang Zemin in the 1990s, who said
that talks on unification could not go on indefinitely. Jian concludes by
writing that "If Ma thinks the future of Taiwan should be decided by Taipei and
the country's 23 million Taiwanese, then he must also realize that cross-strait
relations are also partly decided by Beijing and China's 1.3 billion Chinese,
not just by Taiwan." This is just the kind of friendly reassurances Taiwanese
need from their Chinese "compatriots" - if you decide your own future
democratically, we'll use the crushing weight of 1.3 billion Chinese (and its
military, we can assume) to bring you back in line, to force you to love us.
Let us hope that Jian, who is now a visiting scholar in Denmark, learns a thing
or two about democracy before he pens his next article pretending to know
what's best for Taiwanese and their leaders.
J Michael Cole
Editor and columnist at the Taipei Times and author of Democracy in Peril:
Taiwan's Struggle for Survival from Chen Shui-bian to Ma Ying-jeou
Neihu, Taipei, Taiwan (Aug 20, '09)
[Re Through the (North
Korean) looking glass, Aug 18] Bruce Klinger provides a good timeline,
yet he preaches a dig-in-your-heels approach to dealing with Pyongyang which
has proven unproductive. Let's look at United States President Barack Obama's
latest tack: Obama has "privatized" US foreign policy; his administration is
taking cover behind a smokescreen of visits by prominent elected officials,
retired office holders, and former US presidents. Take the case of Senator Jim
Webb, who as a private citizen obtained the release of John Yettaw and a visit
to Aung San Suu Kyi, which the Burmese military junta refused to United Nations
secretary general Ban Ki-moon. Look at former president Bill Clinton's mission
of mercy to North Korea to seek the release of the two American journalists
Euna Lee and Lisa Lang. Two "unofficial" trips to see the highest officials of
either country. The public is asked to go along with the charade that the White
House has not changed direction in foreign policy. Yet the results are plain to
see. Obama has opened these back channels of discussion and horse trading while
at the same time mouthing humble platitudes of protests of human-rights
violations, kangaroo courts, and so on.
Mel Cooper (Aug 19, '09)
[Re Xinjiang serves as
pan-Asian pivot, Aug 18] It is quite interesting to see how David
Gosset brushes aside the demographic terrorism and economic apartheid that has
been practiced by the Chinese regime on Uyghur and Tibetan peoples for five
decades. For Gosset, it is quite alright if an entire people are culturally and
economically decimated as long as there is "economic development" and Xinjiang
emerges as a "pivot" of economic growth and stability in Central Asia. This
argument legitimizes the official Beijing position and just tries to add some
liberal gloss to it by ignoring the following facts:
1. Economic development can happen without practicing demographic
terror. China has pushed millions of Han Chinese into Xinjiang and Tibet in the
name of development and hopes that such "Sinification" of these areas will
eventually result in their total integration into China. This is a classic
imperial tactic. In India, states like Sikkim and Mizoram have explicit laws on
land ownership that limit the movement of outsiders into these regions and
prevent locals from becoming minorities in their own territories. Both these
states are doing well in an economic sense. Kashmir also has similar
protection, but the cause of violence in that region is more complicated by
geopolitical reasons. And despite decades of tension and secessionist violence,
Kashmir remains majority Muslim and Kashmiri. Democratic India wants to
integrate with the consent of the those minority actors who have a problem with
the idea of united India. China does it by steamrolling the local population,
destroying their linguistic and religious rights, and replacing them with the
majority population.
2. If Chinese imperial reach, or for that matter imperial reach of any
empire is the yardstick of which territory belongs to which modern
nation-state, then Hong Kong should still be British, and large parts of China
should be claimed by the Japanese. Was Gosset's reference to China's imperial
control of Xinjiang merely to make a historical point, or an echo of Beijing's
propaganda that bases Chinese territoriality on imperial China's geographic
peak?
3. Gosset condescends to accept that not all of Xinjiang's supposed
development has reached "all sections" of the population. The truth is that the
fruits of such development have only gone to Han Chinese and a few Uyghur
clients who have Sinicized themselves.
4. How does Gosset know that most of the nine million Turkic Uyghurs do
not resent Beijing's rule over them? Is there an independent poll, or a free
election to prove this?
5. Given Chinese economic clout, especially in these troubled times,
many international statesmen will bend over backwards to please the guardians
of the Middle Kingdom; Turkey's President Abdullah Gul is no exception. It is
sad that a fellow Turk would disown Uyghur problems and praise their
oppressors, but stranger things have happened in global geopolitics.
All of Asia wants the development of Central Asian regions, and with it
stability and economic progress. No one objects to the development of trade and
transit corridors connecting East, South, and West Asia running through Central
Asia. But this cannot be a Chinese-dominated and controlled project, meant for
the benefit of Beijing and their pet European profiteers in intellectual guise.
Pritam Banerjee (Aug 19, '09)
I am gratified that the great state of Texas has now made teaching the history
of the Bible a mandatory part of a child's educational curriculum. Here's one
Texan that heartily endorses the idea of teaching kids how the Holy Scriptures
have been translated, re-translated, re-written, edited, added-on, modified and
revised throughout 2,000 years by hundreds of doctrinaire illiterates, so that
the idea of a single "inerrant Word of God" is made apparent and clear. I hope
and pray that these self-appointed Biblical scholars show these absorbent minds
that a bible in Ethiopia is not the same as a bible in Poughkeepsie, and that
there are sacred books in some churches that other churches reject because they
have the wrong "inerrant Word of God". I hope the controversies about the Bible
and its meanings are vigorously debated, so that the preachings of their
favorite pastor or priest can be disputed in open church and the benefits of
their Texas educational wisdom can be shared by all. I trust that the Crusades
and the persecutions of Cathars, Huguenots, Templars and Jews is the subject of
classroom discussion, and how all these peoples were shown the benefits of
Christendom. I can only speculate how the discussion will go when the subject
of slavery is brought up, but I am confident that the Texas teachers will have
a ready explanation of why the Bible supported the institution. Yes, this is a
good thing, all in all, and I eagerly anticipate the day the Texas legislature
sees fit to introduce special courses in how the US constitution can be
similarly maimed, vivisected and shredded in the name of ideological fanaticism
and patriotic fervor. ...
Hardy Campbell
Houston, Texas (Aug 19, '09)
[Re Palestine
problem hopeless, but not serious, Aug 18] What a racist diatribe. As
far as I can recollect, the Palestinian people have had to cope with illegal
occupiers and apartheid for decades. This along with every other possible
impediment to economic progress thrown in their way. All the while, Western
nations happily sit on their hands hoping the problem will go away. It won't.
Spengler also cites his old mentor, "As long as all concerned understand that
the comedy is not supposed to have an ending, the Palestinians can persist
quite tolerably in their 'intolerable' predicament". What a grotesque, sick and
uncivilized sentiment. The problem is, as supposedly educated human beings,
these people can't see the connection between their own beliefs and those of
the lunatics who ran Germany from 1933 to 1945. I suspect the diabolical irony
of it all would be lost on them.
Ian C Purdie
Sydney (Aug 19, '09)
[Re Palestine
problem hopeless, but not serious, August 17] When I first started
reading Asia Times Online, I found it to be a very insightful source of
information. Unfortunately, David P Goldman, who calls himself Spengler was
given free reign to post whatever racist propaganda he wants. An anonymous
individual spewing that the Jews are the only eternal people; that Christians
are just wannabe Jews; that America is superior because of its supposed
Christian nature; that not being a nation of fanatics dooms a people to
destruction; that Muslims are culturally defective; that Israel can do no
wrong; and that Israel should be even more oppressive to the Palestinians under
its occupation than even the far-right calls for almost caused me to quit
reading the whole site. I assumed he was just a far-right, fanatical
neo-conservative off his rocker. However, when he finally revealed his name I
understood both his disgusting beliefs and why he stayed anonymous for so long.
... I barely tolerated it for a while because of the infrequency of his posts,
but when I saw "What the West needs to do is cut support to the Palestinians to
lower their quality of life as an incentive for emigration" today, I couldn't
continue to keep quiet.
hcharala (Aug 18, '09)
It is always refreshing, if repulsive, when people speak honestly about their
most immoral desires. Spengler/David P Goldman's recent terrorist propaganda
piece Palestine
problem hopeless, but not serious [August 17] fits the mold perfectly;
I'm sure his chest feels much lighter. Now, I do recall that Goldman supports
all manner of terrorist wars against Arabized populations, especially those of
the Bellum Americana, wars that outnumber by several orders of magnitude the
crimes of al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Perhaps we should be grateful for
such blunt honesty; we can then treat Goldman's economic prescriptions as
terrorist also. A question remains, though: What drives this psychology?
Goldman is sufficiently repressed not to speak his emotional resentment openly,
and bottling up is known to increase resentment, and irrationality. The case
was made long ago that Israel is guilty of far greater violence, both past and
present, than the combined Palestinian groups, yet Goldman yammers on about
Palestinian violence. But perhaps I am ascribing too much rationality to
Goldman. ...
Bingahaba
Canada (Aug 18, '09)
[Re Palestine
problem hopeless, but not serious, August 17] Spengler, aka David P
Goldman, advocates a "starve them out" policy for Palestine when he says,
"lower [their] quality of life". This is reminiscent of the Nazi attitude
toward the Jewish citizens of Germany, and of the official policy of the State
of Israel. What Goldman proposes should be as heartily condemned as we condemn
the Nazi and Israeli policies.
Tom Gerber
USA (Aug 18, '09)
I disagree with Verna Yu's article
China's NGOs fear for the worst [August 14]. I think rather than a
clampdown, what happened is a reminder to [Chinese] NGOs [non-governmental
organizations] of where their limits are. The NGOs must surely have expected
the authorities to push back when they stepped onto "forbidden ground". ...
Advancing the Western propaganda that the Dalai Lama was not involved in
violent terrorist activity in Tibet put the NGOs in the position of a saboteur
of national interests and security. It is good for the future development of
NGOs in China that they know exactly where the boundaries are.
Irene Lim Robinson
United Kingdom (Aug 18, '09)
[Re Freedom comes at a
price in Pyongyang, August 14] The truth comes out in the end. Stripped
to its bare essentials, the 137 days in captivity of the Hyundai technician at
the Kaesong industrial zone, Yoo Seong-jin, was sparked by his love for a North
Korean woman. He tried to encourage her to defect to South Korea, but defection
is a crime in North Korea. He was unfortunately caught up in South Korea's cold
war with the North, and work stopped at the industrial zone, affecting the
investment of the Hyun family, which is originally from what is now North
Korea. Then, former United States president Bill Clinton's visit to North Korea
- and the subsequent release of two US journalists - created an opportunity to
spring Yoo. The Hyun family, a chaebol [conglomerate], has spent
millions upon millions of Korean won trying to encourage detente between
Pyongyang and Seoul. Sanctions and threats are, as any good businesswoman will
attest, bad for business and politics. So as the US tilts towards engagement
even with the Myanmar junta, Seoul is following its lead. The CEO of the
Hyundai group, Hyun Jung-eun, seized the moment and Yoo was released. At what
price? Only time will tell, but one thing is sure; her Hyundai group will
continue doing business with Pyongyang.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 17, '09)
[Re Iran-Venezuela
ties worry US, August 11] Americans like Dennis O'Connell [letter,
August 13], take an almost perverse pleasure in saying that other countries
hate America. Such a chip-on-the-shoulder attitude instantly makes Americans
feel both unique and persecuted. Such a status distinguishes us from all the
others unfortunate enough not have been born here. Even our so-called sister
democracies in Europe are only pale socialist/pinko imitations of the Real
Thing: the USA. All the rest, ie, the non-European nations who do not kowtow to
American imperialism, like President Hugo Chavez's Venezuela, have nothing but
ravenous hatred for God's Chosen People. Nothing, of course, can be further
from the truth. These countries just want American imperialism to leave them
alone, to allow them to practice their own beliefs and ideologies in peace.
They don't want American beliefs shoved down their throats, or to have American
puppets installed at gunpoint as their leaders. Most of these proud nations
have relatives in the US, and watch American movies, television shows and buy
the few non-military products we still make (admittedly, that list gets shorter
every day.) In fact, the truth that the O'Connells will not admit to is that it
is we Americans who hate the rest of the world, not vice versa. We know nothing
about other nations, such as their history, languages, customs or religions. We
remain ignorant of everything that is not American, because to do otherwise
would not only elevate the non-American to almost human status, but
correspondingly diminish our own privileged sainthood. Our hatred for the rest
of mankind is so profound and deep that a world without American hegemony would
be considered an unprecedented disaster, a world scarcely worth existing.
Consequently, we believe that what is of concern for America has to be of the
utmost concern for the rest of humanity. Our hysterical overreaction to the
inside job that was the September 11, 2001 attack was to make this isolated and
relatively trivial incident a world event of megahistorical proportions. ... As
the great tyrant former US president George W Bush put it, "You're either with
us or the terrorists." But much of the world was nonplussed if not elated at
our discomfiture. America is typically the nation which finds flimsy excuses to
invade and attack other countries, or organize coups with Central Intelligence
Agency-paid mercenaries, or arranges ruinous loans through our stooge financial
appendages at the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. ... Maybe America
should wake up, smell the interventionist roses, and repent.
Hardy Campbell
Houston TX (Aug 17, '09)
[Re Finally, laid to
rest in Pyongyang August 13] No one will deny that North Korea is a
reclusive, repressive society. This said, as Michael Rank observes, it does
have respect for soldiers that fell while fighting it during the Korean War.
Compared with the triumphant Vietnamese who have neglected the graves of
Vietnamese who fought for the Republic of Vietnam or South Vietnam, the grave
in Pyongyang of flight lieutenant Desmond Hinton reveals another side to North
Korea. The transfer of the remains of United States soldiers lost during the
war in Korea remains caught in the cold winds of diplomacy blowing from
Washington. For those who keep beating the drum that totalitarian North Korea
is incapable of change and openness, they would do well to read Rank's article.
Kim Jong-il has extended an "open hand" to those willing to shake it on an
equal footing.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 14, '09)
[Re China throws a
lifeline to Italy's Taranto, August 13] Francesco Sisci's contribution
was so unclear in its main expose that I felt the need to look up Taranto on
the Internet - clearly, its importance as the major military naval base of
Italy is not even mentioned. Nor is the fact that since 2005, this city of
200,000 inhabitants has declared itself to be bankrupt. Taranto is far away
from the main consumer cities of Europe, but yes, it is in the middle of the
Mediterranean and much closer to the big population hubs of North Africa, all
of which have harbors too small for the big container vessels now existing. And
all of them with ruinous waiting times (sometimes weeks) needed for the
unloading of cargo. My interest was aroused when I read that Hutchinson Whampoa
had invested in Taranto. If they want to be there, they must have a reason, and
it is not one of opening a direct line to the Orient - today's largest
container vessels cannot even pass through the Suez canal. However, Taranto
could be a major redistribution hub to the 200 million inhabitants of North
Africa, reloading smaller vessels which could then arrive "just on time" as
they are granted entrance to the ports of Algiers [Algeria], Alexandria
[Egypt], Oran [Algeria], Tunis [Tunisia], and so forth. At the same time, if
the vessels have to wait at the port of Taranto, in direct ownership of HW,
without a crew, most costs are slashed. China and Hutchinson Whampoa mean to
add traffic and cut costs for 200 million-plus possible consumers of goods,
apart from the European Union's 500 million consumers who are already
well-served through the [Spanish] ports of Algeciras and Cadiz, [Dutch ports
of] Rotterdam and Amsterdam, [the German port of] Hamburg and so forth. Also,
it cannot be excluded that, given time, Chinese warships could be inside the
Mediterranean, docking at, and their crews going on furlough in, Taranto.
Eduard Vandoorne
Torremolinos (Aug 14, '09)
[Re Suu Kyi's
detention splits East and West, August 12] Thailand is the Association
of Southeast Asian Nations' current chair. Judging by the BBC interview with
its prime minister [Abhisit Vejjajiva], ASEAN is backing away from any
confrontation with the Myanmar junta after the sentencing of Aung San Suu Kyi.
Asked if he would try to see Suu Kyi, ASEAN's spokesman tried to evade the
question by taking diplomatic cover, saying he would have to consult the
association's members. His interview simply reaffirms the thrust of Larry
Jagan's article. In sum, ASEAN won't do very much in putting the screws on
Yangon's military leaders. It is returning to the reticence of years past.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 13, '09)
For more on this topic, see Suu
Kyi verdict tests ASEAN's resolve, August 13, '09 - ATol
[Re Iran-Venezuela
ties worry US, August 11] The central fact to keep in mind is that
Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez hates the United States and until he is
stopped will take actions to injure the US and its interests. Venezuela only
supplies 1.2 million barrels a day of the US's daily supply of 18 million
barrels. On the other hand, 60% of Venezuela's exports go to the US and US
imports are vital to keep the Venezuelan economy going. Also, the oil in
Venezuela is extra-heavy crude and the US has most of the refineries in the
world that can handle this type of oil. So if the US was to stop buying
Venezuela's crude, they would find it very hard to find other buyers. All this
points to the fact that the US clearly has the power to deal with Venezuela,
yet all the leadership in Washington can do is issue weakly worded statements
against specific Venezuelan policies.
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Aug 13, '09)
[Re Iran-Venezuela
ties worry US, August 11] Were it not for the United States' bungling
military and diplomatic policy, Venezuela and Iran would not have become cozy
partners. Danielle Kurtzleben skates over the fact that the George W Bush
administration tried and failed to oust Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez from
office. The coup worked for a day, then the country rallied and Chavez
triumphantly returned to office. Another fact escapes notice, Caracas, in spite
of shaky relations with Washington, is a purveyor of one-third of the US's oil
needs. The Barack Obama administration's push to implant US troops on Colombian
soil has strengthened Chavez's hand in rallying US allies, such as Brazil,
against an American military presence in Latin America. The climate of
"friendliness" towards the US has remarkably changed since the end of the
former US president Bill Clinton years, yet deep memories of America's military
intervention, Central Intelligence Agency coups, and US Embassy funding of
groups to overturn their own governments are always consciously unforgotten. As
for a symposium on growing Venezuela-Iran ties, is it a little too late to talk
about the horse after the barn door of this issue has been long left open? What
Kurtzieben's article does indicate is that the US really has no policy but
threats and sanctions and impotent anger in dealing with the Tehran-Caracas
nexus.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 12, '09)
[Re Sex and China's
credibility gap, August 11] covers the issue of credibility and the
implied discontent of the Chinese populace. The author claims that Chinese
people trust sex workers more than government officials. It's indeed
sensational. The conclusion was drawn from an online survey. However, no direct
statistics support the author's claim. In fact, the People's Liberation Army
(PLA) is the second-most trusted class of individuals, according to that
survey. Is the PLA part of the Chinese government? To present Asia Times Online
as a balanced news source, unbiased coverage is important. When talking about
the contentment of the Chinese populace, the author may want to research more
credible studies, such as the Pew Research Global Attitude Survey. China was
ranked number one in terms of satisfaction with the national government in
their most recent survey. ... Interestingly, I have never seen ATol do a piece
on Pew Research results over the years.
Walter Chen
USA (Aug 12, '09)
Sudha Ramachandran's article,
Tigers get a boost at the ballot box [August 11], failed to report the
low voter turnout in local council elections held in Tamil areas. Lower than
20% of the population voted in the Jaffna municipal election. This highlights a
clear disconnect between Tamil aspirations and what Sri Lankan President
[Mahinda] Rajapakse wants to show the outside world. The circumstances under
which these elections were held were deplorable. Independent media were barred
from reporting in the electoral regions, which were surrounded by military
checkpoints and gun-toting pro-government paramilitary forces. Not too long
ago, the Sri Lankan government boasted a victory for democracy by staging
elections in the Eastern province under similar conditions, with vote-rigging
on a massive scale and use of false identities reported. The outcome of these
election results is not widely published in the Western media, unlike the
Iranian protests. With over 280,000 of the Tamil population still under
extended retention, everyone seemed to know it was too early for a democratic
"show".
Shanthy Vadi
New Hamburg, Canada (Aug 12, '09)
Actually, the article quite clearly states "this interpretation overlooks the
poor voter turnout, especially in Jaffna". - ATol
[Re Gayatri Devi,
the last of the maharanis, August 5, 2009] I thought Raja
Murthy's thumb-sketch portrayal of the life and times of the princes of India
and the nation's history from the late 18th to early 20th centuries was pretty
good given space limitations. But his verdict on the whole group of princes as
" ... a tribe of weak imperial flotsam and jetsam ... " was too harsh and needs
some sympathetic understanding. There were many patriotic rulers who saw
clearly the danger posed by outsiders [but still] fought and lost their
kingdoms, independence and also their lives against the combined forces of
"Britain and their Indian allies". But then, there was a positive fallout in a
historic sense. The experience of being ruled by the British turned out to be a
catalytic agent for many Indian reformers, mystics, intellectuals and
nationalists to re-examine the nation's history after centuries of decay and
servitude and re-assert themselves. This process was in the form of absorbing
ideas from European Enlightenment in areas of modern education, military
science, law, political rights, science and technology, acceptance of an active
and inquiring mind, etc ... An eminent 20th century Indian historian wrote,
that the total effect was the beginning of an "Indian Renaissance" that set
India on a path towards modernity. In a seemingly unconnected note, I would
like to say that perhaps only the Japanese, after their Meiji Restoration were
ahead of the rest of Asian countries in this respect. Indian nationalist
readers may disagree with me on this topic, but nationalists are not always
rationalists.
Kamath
Canada (Aug 11, '09)
[Re Taiwan's
'opportunist' president alters tack, August 10] Taiwan President Ma
Ying-jeou, a trained lawyer, cannot be trusted. Everyone knows lawyers twist
facts to their own advantage. If Ma cannot come across and discuss conditions
for the unification of China, then China should not be too timid to use force.
A short-term pain is better than a long-term pain. The Kuomintang lost China
because they failed to rule China during their time. Ma should realize that his
action will only bring more suffering to Chinese. A continued stalemate in the
Taiwan Strait is not a good thing as the Chinese in Taiwan are gradually losing
sight that they are Chinese. Time is not on China's side.
Wendy Cai (Aug 11, '09)
[Re South Korea's first
rocket ready - at last , August 10] South Korea is preparing to launch
a satellite on a long-range missile developed with Russian technology. A
peaceful launch, says Peter J Brown. North Korea's launch of a satellite on a
long-range missile on the other hand has brought the region, through United
States-initiated sanctions, towards renewed tensions and fears of a nuclear
war. Seoul's missile will fly over Japan; yet Japan has not raised its fist in
anger as it did towards Pyongyang's launch in April, in spite of the fact that
North Korea gave fair warning weeks in advance. South Korea now has the ability
to launch missiles, which does muddy the waters on the Korean peninsula. It is
equally true that Seoul's rocket could function as a weapon of war, but this
has hardly raised an eyebrow of concern in Tokyo. It should ruffle the brow of
Washington, as the US has not encouraged missile development in South Korea.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 11, '09)
Surely you can find a more relevant spot for Hardy Campbell's lucid and
informative letters. Since the former United States president George W Bush
years, as far as I was concerned, Texas was relegated to the bin of history.
Any state that could produce the criminals that dragged a man to death behind a
pickup truck and also produce and promote Bush was surely not worth my
attention. Then along comes Campbell and he has modified my view somewhat.
Ken Moreau
New Orleans (Aug 10, '09)
Before too long, American citizens will be obliged to pop a government-issued
"helper" pill into their mouth each morning. The subsequent hallucinogenic
state induced by this Central Intelligence Agency-perfected drug will then
enable us to make sense of the topsy-turvy upside-down America we live in. The
Wonderland of yesterday, full of its bizarre logic and convoluted reasoning,
will thus be replaced by a universe where scurrying white rabbits and melting
clocks hanging from sickle moons seem as normal as a bankrupt nation fighting
two hideously expensive wars with trillions of non-existent dollars and the
daily sightings of green shoots being devoured by unicorns. The Mad Hatter,
otherwise known as United States President Barack Obama, will sit serenely on
his front lawn, sipping tea with the bankers and Detroit managers he's rescued,
while asking them what else he can do to alleviate their suffering. In the
meantime, Treasure Secretary Tim Geithner, in his guise as Don Quixote, will
ride his clueless steed to and fro in the forest of rapacious financial moguls,
desperately seeking to slay the malevolent derivative-floating Bandersnatch.
Alas, that beast will evade him, as it has long since retired with a hefty
bailout and golden parachute, courtesy of the taxpayer. Don Geithner's lovely
Dulcinea of Reform will also not be around, having been seduced by the Wicked
Witch of Wall Street's tempting offers of stock options backed by Congress and
a cozy job at the US Federal Reserve. Hatter Obama will consider ways to reform
the system, of course, by hiring a chimera as Secretary of Illusion and a red
herring as his National Pea-under-the-Shell Czar. After your midday booster
pill, it will all make perfect sense, and you may safely return to your
dumpster home. A military vehicle will be by soon, handing out bags full of new
"helpers".
Hardy Campbell
Houston TX, USA (Aug 10, '09)
[Re No hero for
Pyongyang's other guests, August 7] Donald Kirk makes an important
point about the South Koreans and Japanese languishing or unaccounted for in
North Korea. In all fairness, the Japanese have not been shy about pressing for
information about abducted Japanese over the past several years. Tokyo has cut
aid to Pyongyang as the war of words heated up, and consequently won't budge -
it seems - on negotiations with North Korea until its demands are met. As for
South Korea, former United States president Bill Clinton's visit to Pyongyang
has increased pressure on President Lee Myung-bak over the South Korean worker
from the Kaesong industrial zone held for four months and the four fisherman
who recently strayed into North Korean waters. Not to mention a large number of
South Koreans still in the North from the Korean War. Not mentioned in the
article is Lee's hostile policy towards Kim Jong-il's North Korea, which he
initiated from day one in office in 2008. He has revived tensions between North
and South, in a small version of a cold war. As such, Pyongyang is loathe to
deal with him without an act of repentance (ie, an apology like America's,
which gained the release of its two journalists). There are no indications in
the press suggesting private or back-channel approaches by either Seoul or
Tokyo, to resolve issues. In fact, both capitals' positions are a cause, among
others, for North Korea walking out of the six-party talks in Beijing.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 10, '09)
[Re Hikers lost in
stasis of US-Iran relations, August 7] I would just like to let you
know that I find it very disturbing and worrying that newspapers like yours,
although in the minority, are still reporting about the Iran situation the way
you are. The Iranian people and the whole world have realized what a fraud the
terrorist regime of Iran is, but you still chose to report [on it] as if it is
humane. Please wake up and see the world.
Arman Zolrahmi (Aug 10, '09)
[Re China's fishing
fleet sets challenge to US, August 6] This article highlights a
challenge to Sino-American relations. But the issue does not fall into the
square peg of the issues that Washington deems unimportant, until such times as
they cause a crisis. Such, alas, is the modus operandi of US diplomacy
across the board.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 7, '09)
One of the biggest problems in human communication is the definition of words.
The words that I use have a definite meaning within my experience and
understanding, while someone else using the same words interpret them based on
their own worldview and perspective. Unfortunately, the tendency among literate
primates is to manipulate words to serve the purpose of deluding key audiences.
The word "stimulus" appears deserving of such dubious status. According to
United States President Barack Obama and his propaganda ministers, the federal
"stimulus" will jumpstart the economy from its current malaise - the money will
serve to provide capital needed to get Americans working again. Evidently, the
plan is succeeding, as all sorts of economic indicators, from the stock market
to Detroit car sales, are on the uptick. But when one subtracts the blip caused
by the massive cash infusion itself, the results are more sobering. All "real
world" indicators, minus the artificial resuscitation of Dr Obama, show
continued and precipitous declines. Far from stimulating, the debt-bloating is
merely keeping the dying patient on life support while, vital sign by vital
sign, life ebbs away. Many jobs will never be created again, and many people
will avoid cars from Detroit like they were plague-mobiles. Commercial property
and credit card debt teeters on the brink, and the vitally needed consumers are
hoarding the cash they are convinced they need to keep their families from
living in dumpsters. It seems everyone has already forgotten the failed
stimulus measures of former US president George W Bush, which, though small by
comparison, occurred when the economy was relatively robust. The failure of
that stimulus lies behind the failure of this stimulus; you cannot revive a
patient who refuses to undergo the radical surgery necessary to save their
life. Instead, the disease is exactly what Obama is determined to preserve and
which is fundamentally un-stimulatable. It absorbs the stimulus, like any
malignancy would, without providing any nutrition or energy on its own. The
"stimulus," in reality, is a narcotic, keeping terminal patients from realizing
the dire straits they are truly in - but making the endgame relatively
pleasant. The patient will expire, of course, after all that fake stimuli has
gone up in smoke and all that's left is the cadaver of a failed Third World
state. Still, the word "stimulus" will look good on the tombstone.
Hardy Campbell
Houston TX (Aug 7, '09)
[Re Dear Leader stars in
Bill and Hillary show, August 5] It is a mistake to play down the
significance of former United States president Bill Clinton's trip to
Pyongyang. As Donald Kirk clearly observes, it has the US President Barack
Obama administration's fingerprints all over it, even though Obama and his team
have maintained a complete blackout on commentary. Clinton achieved his
objective: the release of the two American journalists Laura Ling and Euna Lee.
It is also alleged that the former US president handed a letter from Obama to
Kim Jong-il. Unlike former US president Jimmy Carter's unscripted trip to North
Korea 15 years ago - a trip which much angered the Clinton White House,
although it allowed Clinton to open talks with Pyongyang and put mute its
nuclear program - Clinton's visit was choreographed and manipulated by Obama.
It does Obama a disservice to mock Clinton's presence in Pyongyang; it has
blown up the iceberg hindering the possibility of renewed discussions with Kim
Jong-il's government. In an oblique way, Obama has responded to Kim's call for
bilateral negotiations with the US.
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 6, '09)
[Re Even China
faces meltdown, August 5] While I agree with Martin Hutchinson that
China, too, will face a meltdown of some sort in the future, I was bothered by
his comment that China is "aggressive and chauvinist". If China is considered
"aggressive and chauvinist", what words can we use to describe the United
States? Militant? Belligerent? Ultra-chauvinist?
Juchechosunmanse (Aug 6, '09)
[Re Goldman
Sachs, the lords of time, August 5] Julian Delasantellis has joined the
bandwagon of Goldman Sachs debunkers. And rightly so. Goldman Sachs are today's
Rothschilds, heirs to the Fuggers of history's past. In Rolling Stone magazine,
Matt Taibbi described them as a "a great vampire squid wrapped around the face
of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells
like money". Delasantellis zeroes in on Goldman's latest computer wizardry,
which is raking in socially valueless wealth yet is a source of big profits.
This comes hardly a year after its former CEO and US Secretary of the Treasury
Henry Paulson allowed his successor at Goldman, Lloyd Blankfein, to sit in on
the government's rescue of AIG. Paulson's plan made sure that AIG paid Goldman
a goodly US$13 billion or so, to rescue the "lords of time" from failing.
Goldman's alumni are strategically placed in government and in private
industry, and head the Banks of Canada and Italy. The house that Goldman and
Sachs built advises foreign governments, issues debt and equity for them,
manipulates energy markets, and has a hand in mortgages. And Goldman's long
reach doesn't stop here. Goldman Sachs hates the light of exposure. Only
through pursuit of Goldman's office at 85 Broad Street will public action be
encouraged to clip the wings of this seemingly unstoppable investment banking
house that some say, control governments for private gain.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 5, '09)
[Re Goldman
Sachs, the lords of time, August 5] Want to worry about computer-based
trading? Consider that the algorithms used on computers frequently have design
flaws, and that the code written to implement the algorithms frequently has
bugs. Suppose that one or more design flaws or code bugs should pop at a
critical moment.
Tom Gerber
USA (Aug 5, '09)
The latest myth that has sprouted green-shoot-like from the fertile imagination
of desperate Americans is that capitalism can be reformed, that with enough
regulation and oversight those nasty, greedy CEOs with their billion dollar
bonuses will be tamed into meek job-creating pussycats. Former Russian leader
Mikhail Gorbachev had a similar illusion, confident that, given a human face,
socialism could be rescued from the terminal infirmary. United States Secretary
of the Treasury Tim Geithner, he of the Give-the-Looters-More-Loot School of
Economics, is learning the same sad truth that Tovarich Gorby learned. His
latest foul-mouthed tirade against the recalcitrance of Wall Street bankers to
give up their cushy win-win arrangement with Uncle DeepPockets represents an
inkling on his part that perhaps green commissars can be as conservative as the
red variety. Naturally, at first, the bankers will fidget in their chairs,
mumble amongst themselves, then wholeheartedly endorse the new paradigm with
all the crusading enthusiasm of an ex-alcoholic smashing beer kegs. They will
sing the new song of financial restraint, all the while figuring out new angles
and schemes to exploit the generous loopholes their buddies in Congress will
surely provide. Haven't we seen this all before? After every excess of
capitalism there's a renewed avowal to curb the excesses, with
government-nodding donkey committees lecturing the same captains of industry
they feted and cheered when their campaign coffers were being filled. The rules
come out of these committees full of vim and vinegar, iron-bound regulations
that surely will right the abuses of the past. Ah, but then the real
politicians take their knives out and convert a solid screen of
securities-sanctioning steel into a tepid tent of tinfoil. The robber barons
will then become financial termites, undermining the already-weakened
foundation with avaricious alacrity, munching away at the soft underbelly of
compromised SEC investigators, blind-eye congressmen and a public resigned to
living in a tottering, creaking and thoroughly rotten structure. ...
Hardy Campbell
Houston, Texas (Aug 5, '09)
Kent Ewing in his article
China writes new script for mass protests [August 2], made a mistake.
To be charitable I would say that it was a non-malicious mistake arising from a
poor understanding of China. When did Ewing came across a statement by the
Chinese authorities or its official media claiming that mass protests against
corrupt local governments were the "result of foreign schemers and
instigators"? That charge was only leveled at terrorist incidences in Tibet and
Xinjiang. Of couse, as it was a "non malicious" mistake I cannot then say that
Ewing's characterization of the terrorist attacks in Urumqi on July 5 as
another example of mass protest against corrupt officials and Chinese Communist
Party cadres was an attempt to whitewash the foreign political criminals
(American and European) who inspire, organize and fund the World Uyghur
Congress' terrorist activities in China.
Irene Lim Robinson
United Kingdom (Aug 5, '09)
[Re Japan looks for
zone boost in Pakistan, August 3] Japan has a lot of leg-work to do if
it wants to catch up with China's investment in Pakistan. Consider the
Karakoram Highway which directly links China to Pakistan and China's
development of the Gwadar Port on the Arabian Sea in Islamabad's Balochistan
province. Beijing is doing everything right to guarantee that it has an outlet
for its products in Pakistan. The port can also funnel the raw materials it
needs for transshipment to develop its own far west. Although Japan is a
latecomer, it has wisely chosen Sindh province, which lies on the Indus and the
Arabian Sea. Tokyo has the wherewithal, and the technical and marketing
experience to make its investment a boon to that province. Yet it will trail in
the levels of influence China has nurtured with the Pakistani elites,
government, and dissidents.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Aug 4, '09)
There can be no better indictment of American capitalism than the private
healthcare industry. While it might be too great a stretch to directly equate
that industry to slavery, what they do have in common is the profit of humans
at the expense of the health and well-being of other humans. To treat
healthcare as if the physical state of people were microchips or widgets is to
endorse everything Marx said about the cold-hearted cynical exploitation of
workers by monopoly capitalists. The irony is that the industry is successfully
scaring Americans to worry about using a government bureaucrat, who will not
profit from processing their claim. The real terror is them having to deal with
a private industry bureaucrat, who will profit from putting a patient on hold
indefinitely, haggling over minutiae, then telling them their claim was denied
because they're still breathing. Who will win this contest, the insuree or the
Wall Street investor? Slaves, even if held involuntarily, were at least treated
well enough to keep them working. ... Contrast this with private healthcare,
where the incentive is to marginalize the sick out of insurance existence, even
if this condemns them to an early death, leaving only the healthy slaves to
keep turning in those insurance premiums. The Darwinian winnowing of the
insuree rolls by constant denial of reasonable claims is a prime reason we are
in such a perilous state and why reform is essential. But do we really expect
the fat plutocrats who profit from this New Slavery to allow the government,
which already provides a whole litany of services Americans depend on, from
Medicare to social security, to equitably compete? The American South went to
war trying to defend their ill-gotten gains - if they only had had the
neo-conservative hate machine working for them.
Hardy Campbell
Houston TX (Aug 4, '09)
[Re Ten steps to
liquidate US bases, August 3] Dear Editor, All these bases and nothing
to show for it, is there? Now America cannot exercise its power even over
Israel!
TutuG
UK (Aug 4, '09)
It is difficult to square the details of
Pyongyang purges for a new era [July 31] with reports in the global
media on North Korea. Pyongyang has called for direct talks with the United
States to discuss its nuclear program, among other matters. United Nations
secretary general Ban Ki-moon has encouraged face-to-face discussions between
the US and North, to unfreeze the current standoff between the two countries.
Has US President Barack Obama's administration not grasped the full
implications of the death blow Pyongyang has dealt to the six-party talks?
Perhaps. By calling for direct talks, North Korea has knocked China out of the
US equation. It also seeks to isolate Washington from its hardline allies in
Seoul and Tokyo. With the UN seeing merit in North Korea's proposals, the US is
looking more and more isolated. As for the "reported purge" in North Korea, it
looks as though Kim Jong-il's regime is willing to engage fully and directly
with the US. That, I believe, is called an "initiative" and an "opening".
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Aug 3, '09)
[Re A true
espionage page-turner, July 31] After reading Alexander Casella's book
review about The Spy Who Loved Us, I went online and ordered a copy. I
also ordered a copy of Perfect Spy, another book about Pham Xuan An,
published a couple of years earlier. From what I read, I could tell that Pham
Xuan An was truly a hero of Vietnam. After the war, our country went through
another decade or two of post-war trauma and societal rebuilding. But
ultimately, with the new generations having grown up in peace, we can reflect
as a people on what was achieved and how. Pham Xuan An was one of many mythical
heroes of Vietnam who fought against the most powerful empire the world had
ever known, and won. I think one of the things we learn from reading about men
like Pham Xuan An is that America no longer has any heroes. Maybe President
Barack Obama will become our next hero, but probably not. I'm so glad to have
you guys pay attention to this sort of thing.
Bao D Nguyen
Garden Grove, CA
Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam (Aug 3, '09)
[Re China dips its toe
in the Black Sea, July 31] The calls of an impending "Chimerica
divorce" are not only misnomered but also a bit premature - the two countries'
economies have yet to be fully engaged, let alone wedded; whence will come a
divorce? The truth is, China is not in a position where it can "go it alone ...
to buy them global power in their own right", as characterized by Niall
Ferguson. From economics to geopolitics to anti-terrorism, China is, and will
be, in need of United States' cooperation in maintaining overall world order so
that the Middle Kingdom can grow in a relatively stable environment. True, the
current recession has afforded China a great opportunity to make economic and
geopolitical headway, but that maneuvering space is no doubt limited. As for
the US, its recent well-documented dependency on China will likely wax, not
wane, and the reason goes far deeper than America's reciprocal need for Chinese
help in the aforementioned spheres of economics, geopolitics and
anti-terrorism, or even China's vast holding of US Treasuries. With the Chinese
government turning its attention to domestic development, the country's economy
will in all likelihood grow by leaps and bounds, attended by staggering profit
implications. (Herein lies one major difference between the current China and
the former Soviet Union.) Even with forthcoming government regulations, America
will very much remain capitalist in ideology where the profit motive reigns
supreme. So the trillion-dollar question really becomes, will the capitalists
allow their government to deprive them of a profit bonanza? If history is any
guide, it would be imprudent to bet against the moneyed elites, whose power
many believe ultimately preponderates over that of the highest government
office. To be sure, the Sino-US "marriage" is an uneasy one, and a sudden,
unforeseen event could come along and actuate a nasty "divorce". But until
further notice, the show will clumsily carry on.
John Chen
USA (Aug 3, '09)
[Re China dips its toes
in the Black Sea, July 31] China, Russia and Iran clearly own Eurasia.
The only reason the US is in Central Asia at all is because China and Russia
consent to it being there, and the only reason they do is because there is no
better place to bleed America white than the endless labyrinth called
Afghanistan. "Never interfere when your enemy is hanging itself", and, "Keep
your friends close but enemies closer" are prescriptions well learned and
practiced by both Beijing and Moscow. Russia even laid a red carpet of easy
logistics through its territory in order to facilitate the death march of
America's legions into the hellhole. That's what you call a genius
masterstroke. The European Union is a marginal player at best. If geography is
destiny and demography is destiny, then it will remain an outsider for a very
long time, possibly longer than it exists. All of its "Eastern partnerships"
are just geopolitical gimmicks with no future, and its claim to relevance is
contingent on riding one horse (the US) that is in a rather poor shape and is
getting weaker with every step. Despite US Vice President Joe Biden's wishful
thinking, America's biggest problem is not underestimating itself (that is
never the case), but underestimating its opponents. Washington's road to
eventual defeat is called "Gung Ho Boulevard", a venue generously adorned with
"Mission Accomplished" banners. One commodity that the US never seems to run
out of is self-congratulatory rhetoric. Nature will indeed take it course as it
always does, so Moscow can simply relax and wait until the US - itself squeezed
from every direction - runs out of breath and recourses, which by casual
observation can't be far away. Two trillion dollar annual deficits - in other
words Americans selling their children's future incomes so that they can
maintain their present lifestyle - are indicative of "red giant economics",
when a dying star undergoes a huge last-gasp expansion before finally
collapsing into a white dwarf. Russians know this, and Chinese know this. The
only people blissfully unaware of unfolding disaster are those in thrall of
Biden's spellbindingly moronic oratory.
Oleg Beliakovich
Seattle (Aug 3, '09)
July Letters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
Copyright 1999 - 2009 Asia Times Online
(Holdings), Ltd.
|
|
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong
Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
|
|
|
|
