 |
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.
April 2011
In Tibetan monastery faceoff
nears crisis point [April 27] by Saransh Sehgal, there is an
indifferent allusion to a "Tibetan area of China's southwestern Sichuan
province". What would a socially progressive American think of a "Hispanic area
in Arizona", "black area in New York", "Italian area in Chicago" or "Hawaiian
area"? Probably, one will ascribe regrettable vestiges of American racism or
ethnic intolerance to such segregation. Then the most glaring are the "Indian
Nations"; are the Indian Nations, with their significant degree of autonomy,
political progress granted from the American empire to defected foes, or are
they vestiges of racism of a nation to some of its people? The latter, I
believe. The Indian Nations are only a legal quagmire that impedes social
progress in the United States. Advocates for Tibetan autonomy are championing
for segregation of some people from their nation. Can a progressive nation
cater to the present generation of ethnic parents’ desire to preserve a culture
by isolating their offspring from the majority?
If the answer is yes, then coercive busing of black children to be exposed to
white children is social injustice or a human-rights violation (by definition
busing is a restriction on the freedom of association). At first, 85% of black
parents elected to send their children to all-black schools when given the
alternative of integrated schools.
One should study the vituperations of Danial Akaka in 2000 as he denounced the
US Senate for rejecting his bill, with the senate citing the American
"tradition of assimilation" (Has it really existed across the racial divide?).
The Akaka Bill could have granted the Hawaiians cultural autonomy. The US wants
national unity and assimilation; why wouldn't China? What would Americans think
of the rhetoric of "We urge in the strongest possible terms both the American
authorities and the Hawaiians (such as Daniel Akaka) to exercise utmost
restraint"? Would such rhetoric be equally provocative and distasteful? Jeff
Church
USA (Apr 29, '11)
The debate still rages among historical wonks about exactly what historical
event marks the end of the the Roman Empire. Was it when Alaric's Visigoths
partied excessively hardy in downtown Rome in 410 AD? Or when the last Roman
Emperor in the West was deposed by barbarian Germans 66 years later? All those
are fine "Big Picture" examples of imperial demise, but I suspect the average
Roman citizen would say something infinitely more mundane, like the day a loaf
of bread cost a couple of healthy slaves or when all the imperial bodyguards
were blonde and couldn't speak Latin. It's really the little things that mark
the end of empire, and all the grand history book stuff usually trails the
everyday obvious by quite a few years. So if we fast forward to today, we see
little things that are beginning to add up fast in Wonderland; children's
favorite teachers being sacked by bankrupt states, the once weekly restaurant
treat becoming once a year event, the vacation touring the state's parks
becomes a weenie roast in the backyard, potholes not getting fixed, houses in
the neighborhood foreclosed or abandoned, the neighbor's drug dealing son being
paid a bonus for joining the army in Afghanistan, the mall down the road
closing, new homeless faces appearing at the intersection, etc. Maybe there
will be a "Roman Event" moment for future historians to mark the terminal
stages of American hegemony, and then again maybe not. Methinks in the minds of
each American there will be scores of such historical markers, all very
personal, heartbreaking and demeaning.
Hardy Campbell
Houston TX USA (Apr 29, '11)
[Re Carter heads North amid
South's doubts, April 27] In Washington, the buzz is that US President
Barack Obama is rethinking US policy toward North Korea, yet at the same time
bolstering the South Korean president's openly hostile posture towards the
North. If the US president thinks former president Jimmy Carter and other North
European leaders with "neutral" credentials can pull the US chestnuts in Korea
from the very fire Washington continues to let blaze, he better think again.
It will take political will and dealing directly with Pyongyang to do that.
Although "the Elders" might prove marginally useful, their so-called private
initiative is diluting the hard political choices and changes in creaky policy
that are needed.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Apr 28, '11)
[Re Tibetan monastery
faceoff at crisis point, April 27] I notice with disappointment that
you continue to give prominence to the writings of Saransh Sehgal. I have
always enjoyed much of Asia Times Online's output as it seemed to come from
genuinely independent journalists and that the output was balanced in contrast
to much of the major state-owned or corporate media.
Mr Sehgal's articles are however a detriment to that image, given that he seems
to be an imbedded propagandist for the Tibetan government in exile in
Dharamsala. To print allegations of his nature without balance or the
opportunity of the Chinese government to respond has all the hallmarks of the
slippery slope from serious journalism to tabloid sensationalism.
What can we look forward to next? "Hamas members eat Jewish Babies!" courtesy
of a Mossad press release? Please do better and keep up your standards.
Keith Nelson-Tomsen
United Kingdom (Apr 28, '11)
Editor's note: The article contained several official Chinese quotes, and as
much as we would like to, we can't visit the area as journalists have been
banned.
I have just read [Iran
banks on East to evade sanctions, April 26] by Avi Jorisch, and was not
surprised with what was stated there. Jorisch seems to overlook Israel's
illegal nuclear weapons and how they came to be - with United States help. With
the US donating the plutonium for the first nuke weapon. What about the Geneva
Convention which Israel violates daily. Where is the outrage? Apparently not at
Asia Times Online. Just look at the US economy and one can see Jorisch had no
expertise to share with the US Treasury Department.
What has happened to ATol? It looks to have transformed itself into nothing
more than a Western propaganda tool. With writers like Victor Kotsev,
Spengler/David Goldman and Peter Lee. Their writings are very slanted towards
the US/Israel. Times are a' changing, it is the 21st century and ATol still
seems locked in the last century.
Fortunately I can read writers like Pepe Escobar and Jim Lobe at other news
websites that give progressive articles about the future of the world,
politically and economically.
Bob Vann den Broeck (Apr 27, '11)
Editor's note: We just can't win; only the other day we were berated for being
blindly anti-US/Israel, and communist to boot.
[Re Sleepwalking
into the imperial dark, Apr 21, '11] Tom Engelhardt's penetrating essay
should be a necessary read for all Americans attempting to understand the times
they live within. For those astute in geopolitics, and those lacking this but
equipped with heightened intuition, we knew "The American Century" had ended at
the end of the last century (if not before). But Americans refuse to accept the
decline of their nation seeing only their shrinking pay check, rising food
prices, family members failing to find work or empty store fronts. It is a
temporary recession only and they are just the unlucky ones. Few have the grasp
of some Europeans undergoing austerity of what players and forces are at work
controlling their economy, their politics, and hence their fate. The US
President Barack Obama loyalists continue to wear rose-tinted glasses searching
for "green shoots". Those given to anger and hatred are directed to blame other
Americans, other nations, other people of a different color and religion; the
remainder waits for someone on TV to tell them a reasonable and believable
rationale for what is befalling them. Underneath this facade and enforced
denial lurks the truth that no one wishes to hear or wishes to tell - but in
their heart, they fear the worst. But did a Roman know he/she was living
through the fall of empire? The Desert Fathers knew and took to the sands.
Empires are born and die, like humans. The sun sets and the sun rises. Today it
is setting in the West and rising in the East. And no man can change the
rotation of the heavens - not even the U.S. Military together with the
investment classes of New York and the City of London. We accept nature but do
not accept the natural forces behind changes in history. We rather would
believe that human beings control all events and are therefore to be praised or
blamed for those events. We do not follow the Tao, but the Dow.
The future is Asia, say the Heavens. And China holds the "Mandate". In a future
of national and international conflict ahead, remaining steady is the hardest
task. If ones roots are firmly planted, one will not be uprooted or tossed by
the turbulent winds. And do keep in mind: Not only do good things come to an
end, but bad things do too. The most peaceful path forward for Americans is to
"accept", and allow history to be its judge.
Michael T Bucci
Damariscotta, Maine
USA (Apr 26, '11)
In Sleepwalking
into the imperial dark, [Apr 21, '11] by Tom Engelhardt, the author
makes some fine observations, but the central thrust that the US is an empire
is flimsy. The rhetorical accusations neither define imperialism nor
substantiate that the US is an empire. He writes: "We still have our
globe-spanning array of semi-client states; our military continues to garrison
much of the planet; and we are waging war abroad more continuously than at any
time in memory." All these do not define imperialism. I simply ask does the
current US have a policy of self-aggrandizement for material gain or
nationalistic yearning at the expense of others nations, and to cling to tiered
citizenships? (If assimilation took place then it is no longer an empire
without new self-aggrandizement as the meaning of self will have changed.) I
suggest that if the US does not so it is not an empire. (China gets oil
contracts just the same.) The current entity of the US does not have a
historical parallel that can be summarized in one sensational category. Britain
was an empire at least since the 19th century to World War II. Qing China was
also an empire, except that the history of the major part of the East Asian
continent for over 1,000 years had been mutual aggression or attempt of
conquest, and aggression was on people of the same race so later assimilation
had been more viable. (Qing subdued the Mongolians, whom once subdued Song
China, and the Tibetans were once a militant aggressor toward Tang China.) I
would say that the US is a socially progressive state not bent on
self-aggrandizement but is suffering from religiosity and ideological fervor of
freedom and democracy.
US decline was seeded in 1947 championing for Israeli statehood and later
support for Israel that are seminal to the Middle East quagmire from which it
cannot extricate itself. Long periods of peace and Western social progress are
the causes for the rise or resurgence of many developing countries, which are
now out-competing the US. The US is in decline not because of failure of
imperialism, but due to its religiosity and the inescapable collateral
consequence of peace and social progress initiated by the self-edification of
the West.
Jeff Church
USA (Apr 26, '11)
[Re North Korea: Calculus of
an existential war, April 20] Is North Korea's fear of war existential?
Let's not forget that a state of war has existed for the last 61 years between
the North and South Korea, the United States, and a host of United Nations
members. Although a 1953 armistice has kept it frozen in time, events as recent
as the exchange of fire between the South and the North along the Northern
Limit Line in late November 2010 reinforced Pyongyang's stance that without a
peace treaty the likelihood of war has not vanished.
Many senior officials in North Korea are veterans of the Korean War (1950-1953)
and have strong memories of the utter devastation that US airplanes visited on
their country. So the fear of war is palpable in North Korea. The forward
policy of South Korea's Lee Myung-bak has heightened tensions. Both Seoul and
Washington still foster the illusion that the North will collapse. As long as
South Korea and the US put off ending the Korean War and other issues,
including the nuclear, North Korea will fear renewed war on the Korean
peninsula.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Apr 21, '11)
Wen won't solve China's
crisis of faith [April 20] by Wu Zhong, China Editor, is itself a leap
of faith. That is, the belief that morality derives from faith is a great leap
in faith. Morality, its functional form and salubrious to society, is a mix of
the basic human awareness and fear of punishment. For myself, I will never
commit murder due to basic awareness of right and wrong, not based on faith,
and I will not commit insurance fraud or tax evasion because I fear punishment
(otherwise I likely would). It is no shame to be intellectually honest. I
believe a society consisting of people like me will be fit to live in. Economic
progress is seminal in creating effective fear for punishment. First, citizens
will have more to lose; second, the means to mete out punishment fairly will be
enhanced.
That ''…China produces no great scientist or inventor…'' (in spite of its
miraculous economic progress) is due to subdued faith is also a great leap.
Science is not based on faith but on intellect and determination. Moreover, the
yearning for specifically Chinese scientific breakthroughs and inventions is an
offshoot of nationalism and parochialism.
Especially at this and the next stage of economic development for China, it is
far more critical for the Chinese to be among the first to make full use of any
scientific breakthrough or invention, irrespective of the nationality of the
scientist or the inventor. The rapid dissemination of information in today's
technology diminishes the value of being the first in science and invention.
Perhaps some revolutionary inventions in the West are due to greater
individualism. Could faith in China or East Asia really promote individualism?
I don't think so. Fundamental Westernization might promote individualism in
East Asia, eventually after a few more decades in the modern information age.
Jeff Church
USA (Apr 21, '11)
[Re S&P adds
own footnote to crisis, April 19]
Chan Akya treats S&P's role in the great financial debacle gently by
sending it to a footnote. S&P, Moody's, Fitch and other ratings agencies
willingly aided and abetted the big banks in the mortgage market scam. They did
so out of fear of loss of business but more out of greed, in the same way the
big boys of Wall Street saw the huge profits to be made from complex financial
instruments.
S&P and its sisters, like the banks, got away with murder. S&P
downgrading US sovereign debt is like a fleeing thief calling the police. It's
a slight on the very US government that refused to chastise any of the parties
that created the global recession. If that ain't irony, I don't know what is!
Mel Cooper
Singapore (Apr 20, '11)
[Re Staying human:
Vittorio Arrigoni's legacy, April 18] Thank you for publishing Ramzy
Baroud's beautiful tribute to Vittorio Arrigoni who died violently a few days
ago at the hands of his kidnappers in Gaza.
Mary Hughes Thompson
Los Angeles, California (Apr 19, '11)
[Re Crooked Indians,
April 13]
Shame on Asia Times Online for allowing Chan Akya to use a broad brushstroke in
depicting Middle Easterners and Central Asians in unusually ugly hateful terms,
("have their collective heads up their own backsides"). Were I as rude as this
gentleman whose articles consist mostly of quotes from others, I could demolish
many of the clueless assertions he has made in his past articles about cultural
matters, revealing just how superficially he understands the world beyond his
own. But I have better things to do with my time than to disprove one whose
judgment is solely based on the marketworthiness of nations.
It's his right to dislike some while liking others. And admittedly not all is
rosy in the Middle East and the 'Stans, far from it, but nor is it anywhere
else, including in those countries the writer admires the most. Instead of
looking at their problems from a historical perspective to pinpoint the causes
of their present predicament, he should try to read and educate himself a
little more on inherent merits and inherited cultural riches which, admittedly,
do not fit into a value system that places free-market speculation above all
else as the measure of civilization.
I guess his head is too deeply engaged in that orifice where he would place the
collective heads of others and that blinds him to the subtleties of historical
trends and cultures about which he and his like have no inkling at all. No
wonder he chooses anonymity as did another contributor of the same ilk until
very recently. Thankfully, Atimes has a roster of credible and knowledgeable
writers who make up for the shortcomings of the aforementioned.
Fatema S Farmanfarmaian
London (Apr 19, '11)
[Re Making room for
China, April 19]
I think China and fellow BRICS nations are well aware that they will at some
point need to stop supporting the US debt markets in order to effectively rein
in "hot money" and soaring inflation. However, with the greenback still playing
a pivotal/dominant role in international trade and finance, changes to the
current global monetary structure will take place gradually. That being said,
when the point of no return is reached whereby it becomes evident that the
dollar’s reserve role will be supplanted, unraveling of dollar hegemony will
betide in a hurry.
John Chen
USA (Apr 19, '11)
[Re Hong Kong gets an
unlikely hero, April 14] "The game is rigged in Hong Kong to allow the
rich to get richer as the poor get poorer and everyone else just scrapes
along."
Sounds like the USA as I knew it.
Lester Ness
Kunming
China (Apr 18, '11)
[Re US's Plan B for
North Korea ... Track II, April 15]
Let's not forget that when Jimmy Carter returned from Pyongyang with the
detained US citizen Aijalon Mahli Gomes in 2010, he was also a bearer of a
letter from Kim Jong-il to President Barack Obama seeking to reduce tensions on
the Korean peninsula. Obama did not respond, as far as we know. Such letters,
however, have a long shelf life, and if we believe Peter Lee, Obama may very
well be considering Kim's offer. And as in the past, Carter can and probably
will play an important role in reconsidering failed US policy toward North
Korea. Any breakthrough may come after Secretary of State Hillary Clinton
leaves her post. It is interesting, too, that former US ambassador to Seoul
Donald Gregg turned up in Seoul this month. He is a proponent for keeping
channels open to the North. In addition, China's three-step plan to get the
South talking to the North suggests a possible Peristroika with
Pyongyang.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Apr 18, '11)
[Re Drones shatter
US-Pakistani trust, Apr 14] Among the various themes of disinformation
put out by the US military is the claim of high precision of drone attacks.
This claim then is used to bolster the assertion that only militants are
attacked by drones; that civilians are not targeted. Lo, a drone attack in
Afghanistan killed two American soldiers, because the drone operators thought
they were militants. Looks as though the vaunted precision of drone operators
belongs with the "Emperor's New Clothes".
Lou Vignates
United States (Apr 15, '11)
[Re China tips Seoul to lead
nuclear talks, Apr 14] You cannot stint China for trying its best to
get the stalled six-party talks out of the muck and mire where South Korea and
the United States have left them. Beijing has assumed a thankless, but
necessary, task and is doing it with due diligence.
Its new three step plan to get the South talking to the North may bear fruit.
However it is not the North who does not recognize the South, but rather the
South who, under Lee Myung-bak, refuses to acknowledge the North as a valuable
partner. Now, it looks as though China has switched to a charm offense to move
Lee off ground zero and interacting with Kim Jong-il.
Andrei Lankov should take a dollop of his own advice: since Pyongyongologists
in South Korea, the US, and elsewhere latch on to any rumor to darken North
Korea, when they are proven baseless and false, these scholars and journalists
and analysts do not have the courage to admit that they were wrong.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Apr 15, '11)
[Re China tips Seoul to lead
nuclear talks, Apr 14] Amidst all the handwringing and brow fretting
over North Korea's nuclear program, one potential menace from the Land of Kim
has managed to slip by the American people completely undetected. Until now,
that is.
Soon to appear at your next WonderCinema will be the remake of the 1984 Cold
War classic, Red Dawn. In that flick, the Soviets teamed up with some Che
Guevara wannabes to invade the heartland of Colorado. But with the Russian bear
defanged, another bogeyman had to be found, a foreign and alien people and
ideology that strikes fear into every red blooded 'merican who buys at WalMart.
But the images of Chinese Commies looting and ransacking a prostrate USA struck
fear into other hearts as well, namely the execs at MGM who worried about
Chinese investor reactions to their country being portrayed as a yellow version
of warmongering, intervening America. So, with the aid of computers and special
effects: Voila!, Chinese marauders become North Koreans and I daresay at the
end Supreme Leader and failed Director Kim Jong-il will get the comeuppance
that a terrified Uncle Sam can't effect in real life. I hope it's a hit too. I
want to see the sequel where the armies of Grenada, Andorra and San Marino are
kicking a __ and taking names in downtown Manhattan.
Hardy Campbell
United States (Apr 15, '11)
[Re Great Soviet
hero became a Russian hero, Apr 13] Having seen the coverage of the
50th anniversary of Yuri Gagarin's flight may I say how depressing I found it
that virtually none of it was forward looking. A week ago SpaceX announced that
in 2013 or early 2014 they would launch into orbit the equivalent of more than
the maximum take-off weight of a fully-loaded Boeing 737-200 with 136
passengers. Falcon Heavy can deliver the equivalent of an entire commercial
airplane full of passengers, crew, luggage and fuel all the way to orbit. This
is not quite matching the growth in air travel by the 50th anniversary of the
Wright Brothers, when daily commercial air travel of about that size already
existed but neither is it that far.
To be fair, when the Wright Brothers first flew the press took a long time to
actually report it. A tradition is being maintained.
Neil Craig United Kingdom (Apr 15, '11)
[Re The trouble with
China's brands, Apr 1] The Brutal Truth About Asian Branding: And How
to Break the Vicious Cycle by Joseph Baladi, makes interesting points. Other
perspectives seem missing, however.
First, branding is a big topic in business schools because the audience is made
up of future executives with eyes on bonuses. The social economists, however,
should do research on the net impact of price premium due to branding on the
average workers and low ranking supervisors. Are workers of premium brands paid
much more than their counterparts in generic products? What is the true
difference to national wealth between a premium brand and a generic product?
There seems to be a premature presumption.
Second, within the Chinese domestic goods market, what is the material
distinction between a national brand and a foreign brand with heavy
manufacturing presence in China? What is the difference to China between a
Geely brand and a GM-China brand, Geely innovation and GM innovation? The
nationalistic Chinese may see a great difference, but in truth the difference
is small.
Honda-China might remain virtually Japanese (perhaps the Japanese are still
nationalistic and ethnocentric), but GM-China will not be virtually American
for long. In fact, GM-China will have a heavy Chinese flavor. Americans, who
were once virulently racist, have become quite ethnically cosmopolitan. There
is a great deal of truth in elite educated Americans having a spiritual need to
become ethnically rootless, and many have approached ethnic rootlessness. One
may say that such spiritualism is in response to ancestral transgression and
also to justify America as a nation.
There is also the formality of the American Equal Opportunity Employment law
that heavily influences human resource practices globally, and the simple truth
of the Chinese consumers demanding high level managerial Chinese presence in
foreign subsidiaries. When there are continual profits, there will be continual
plowbacks.
Last, Chinese brands in the Western market have the handicap from the disrepute
associated with the low level of democracy, Tibet and Taiwan issues. This is a
price that China is paying. Even with these issues, China is still growing
fast. Would the Chinese economy overheat with more international Chinese brands
and less disrepute?
Jeff Church
United States (Apr 15, '11)
[Re Biding time for an
orderly rise, Apr 13] Part three in Francesco Sisci's series was not in
par with the previous two. The title is succinct but the content is a letdown.
A reader can appreciate more from intuition deriving from the title than
reading the content. The premise is dubious, the historical focus misplaced,
and insightfulness is not presented (for peer pressure perhaps).
The title suggests that finally a Western writer is pointing to the elephant in
the room, but the content is an inquiry to its whereabouts. First, China is
likely not at all interested in being ''number one''.
Being first in total gross national product (GNP) is certainly predictable
unless the Chinese economy imploded, but being number one in per capita GNP is
not in the offing. The Chinese military will not fight an all-out war with the
United States and win. There is neither anxiety nor uncertainty. The Chinese
focus is not in being number one but in increasing the material standard of
living for its citizens and maintaining its territories. Second, likely the
Chinese are not embroiled in historical awareness in regard to its territorial
claim, except for Taiwan. (Taiwan evokes passion as it is the seat of the
Nationalists who represented all of China, took most of the Chinese treasury
and many cultural relics and vowed to reclaim the mainland, and is tied to the
history of Japanese aggression.)
For nearly all, the Chinese territorial domain is per international
recognition. Ask an American if history justifies his country’s territorial
domain. The answer is usually along the line that irrespective of history we
are a rootless people and a democracy now. No one wants to part with recognized
territories. The Chinese have wholeheartedly accepted Mongolia’s independence,
per international recognition, which, on the other hand, includes Tibet,
Xinjiang, and Taiwan as parts of China.
Third, the allegation that China would become democratic for the purpose of
befriending the United States is absurd. The top Chinese leadership likely
recognizes the United States is not an arrant enemy and can be dealt with, but
China does not need America to be a friend, which she will not be as she
stipulates conditions for friendship.
Possibly the Chinese, possibly correctly, see that American religiosity is
exhausting the United States in the Middle East quagmire. The Chinese may
become democratic as the growing middle class Chinese relish democracy as an
improvement to their quality of life, not to befriend the United States.
Fourth, the allegation of Chinese military buildup is just that. Chinese
military expenditure, at the proclaimed 1.25% or the alleged 2.5% of GNP, is
not only a right but an expectation even among cordial trade partners. A large
country is expected to finance a large military. Besides, China has many
abutting countries. Many in all sides may view military buildup from the
perspective of recovering Taiwan, but the truth is that the recovery of Taiwan
is incidental to general defensive needs. ''Chinese military buildup'' is not
for internal political requirement because it is quite effective in resolving
the Taiwan issue, a fact the West does not want to accept.
The West desperately wants to see Taiwan independence or indefinite status quo,
but the truth is that reunification is already a certainty, unless the Chinese
economy imploded. Taiwan is an island very vulnerable to attrition and the
mainland will control the island’s economy at will. The stronger the mainland
becomes, the greater will be the impact of any implication on the Taiwan
economy.
Would Taiwan launch the initial attack on the mainland?
The ''Chinese military buildup'' (really waiting until it is enough along with
general defensive reason) is to make sure that Taiwan does not attack first, as
pressure mounts in the decades to come. It allows the chance for Taiwan to
yield to reality without excessive animosity and to promote reconciliation
after reunification. The United States will be powerless to further aid Taiwan
in a way that the people of Taiwan could accept, to say the least.
Jeff Church
United States (Apr 14, '11)
[Re Great Soviet hero
became a Russian hero It makes one wonder how obvious the discovery
that the great Soviet hero Yuri Gargarin is now a Russian hero. During the
great patriotic war against the Nazis, Joseph Stalin never shied away from
elevating tsars as models for the Soviet people to emulate in resisting the
foreign invader. More to the point, Gargarin, a half century ago, for those of
us in the "undeveloped world" became a source of wonder and admiration for
besting the West.
Mel Cooper Singapore (Apr 14, '11)
Pepe Escobar has been writing very informative articles on the Arab revolutions
(or unrests, depending on one's point of view ...), for more than two months
now. Asia Times Online is to be commended for allowing readers worldwide to
access these original and interesting analyses.
From a geostrategic point of view, another most important event has been the
nuclear disaster in Japan. I think it has not been covered as it should.
This is unfortunate, because this major event cannot be over-estimated. In a
few weeks time, it will be the anniversary of the Chernobyl disaster, in 1986.
This disaster broke the remainding level of faith Soviet citizens had for their
government, and can be considered as a major contributor to the meltdown of the
Soviet Union.
Up to now, Japanese have had a rather unreasonable confidence in their own
clique in power, but this could change with an enormous planetary impact; the
Japanese, along with Chinese, being the main creditors of the worldwide
economy. It's been years that I haven't read on ATol articles by Gavan
McCormack, a specialist on Korea and Japan. It could be time to read a thorough
geopolitical analysis of the present situation by this excellent researcher.
Gabriel Bittar
Australia and Switzerland (Apr 13, '11)
Editor's note: Pepe has indeed been a star; we have more coming on Japan, and we
like Gavan McCormack too, but he is not one of our contributors.
[Re Israel the winner
in the Arab revolts and
Hamas gets truce to lick its wounds, Apr 11] Seen from Spengler's and
Kotsev's standpoints, it looks as though Israel is reaping the rewards of
turmoil in the Arab world and in the ongoing struggle with Hamas. Surely there
is an element of truth in each one's perspective.
However as events play out in the Arab world Israel's advantages remain
precarious. Consider the anchorage it has lost with the downfall of Egypt's
Mubarak and the sharp decrease of natural gas - up to 60% - from Egyptian
pipelines.
As for Hamas, it may be girding its loins, but Israel's offer is in response to
Hamas' to quiet, if not stop, the shelling from Gaza. Another unspoken factor
for the Netanyahu's offer lies in the fact that after his trip to Russia and
Europe and Shimon Peres' visit to the US, Israel can no longer rely on
unconditional support from them.
Therefore to slip into a Dylanism: the times are a changing and the winds are
not necessarily favorable to Israel.
Abraham Bin Yiju
Italy (Apr 12, '11)
[Re 'Subtle power' reshapes
global village, Apr 11] This is insightful on the adjunct modern
factors on why China rises, but still misses the most basic thrust. The author
states, ''but the evolving geopolitical environment favored China's
re-emergence: the collapse of the Soviet Union offered to the Chinese
leadership new strategic options in Central Asia, in Northeast Asia but also in
Southeast Asia, the post September 11 geopolitical tensions allowed Beijing to
advance its interests without too much American attention, the financial crisis
exposed Wall Street's excess but underlined Beijing's prudence, and the
disorder in the Arab world is not a major cause of concern for the Chinese
policy-makers but constitutes a real challenge for the West and its allies.''
While these are fine observations, they are not seminal. To appreciate China’s
modern resurgence, one has to honestly acknowledge the global social condition
resulting from virulent Western racism and international political texture of
survival/prosperity of the fittest when China fell in the 19th and the first
half of the 20th centuries.
There was an England that used military force to impose drug trade and
enervated China, and a Japan that launched naked aggression on China. It was
not so much the European Industrial Revolution per se but the Europeans’
unscrupulous deployment of the products of the revolution that was crucial to
the fall of China. Was there an aggressive Japan bent on conquest of China or
an England (or a United States) fanciful of compelling Chinese importation of
opium during the Cultural Revolution or the Great Leap Forward in the 1960s?
No, at that time many parts of the world were under the influence of Western
social progress leading to the global de-colonization movement and the Civil
Rights Movement in the United States.
Lamenting the resurgence of China is tantamount to lamenting Western social
progress. The truth really may be this simple. Also, the more modern Western
belief in the limitation of ''China's structural inadequacies'' (to ''apprehend
Beijing's 'subtle power' or its extraordinary adaptability'') is expiring with
the massive trade deficits. The truth is that China has had a long tradition of
business prowess; how much ''freedom" or "innovation'' is needed for a country
to advance to developed status is the question that possibly has been answered.
Last, whether China will Westernize more and more may not be the result of any
directive of the Chinese government; rather, it is based on technology of
communication and presentation, and personal predilection. The urban Chinese
are quite Westernized; just look at the way most of them dress! Have nearly all
the urban Chinese, Hans and ethnic minorities, committed cultural suicide under
Western influence by the way they dress?
Jeff Church
United States (Apr 12, '11)
[Re Israel and Hamas
in a dangerous game, Apr 8, 11] The dangerous game is low-level
warfare. Israel is at a crossroads: on one hand, former high-ranking military
officers and the heads of Mossad and Shin Bet are calling for a settlement with
the Palestinians. On the other hand, members of Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu's right-wing government are itching to relaunch a Cast Lead-style
preemptive strike to once and for all defeat Hamas. Israel's over the top
response to rockets fired from Gaza is providing the excuse - if an excuse is
ever needed for the Zionist state - to wage war.
As in the past, Israel has been unable to triumph over Hamas. In order to
"smash" Hamas, Netanyahu will have to give the green light to a "scorched earth
policy" against everyone living in Gaza, a step it won't take lightly, for it
would bring universal condemnation.
Recent history should teach the Israeli government lessons: twice it has waged
war in Lebanon, and twice it had to withdraw without pride in a job well done.
And then there are the warning signs which Netanyahu, it seems, is ignoring:
the UN, and in the last few days the IMF are inching towards a "de jure" let
alone a "de facto" recognition of a free and independent Palestine on the
Israeli-controlled West Bank, which would seriously derail the Zionist state's
illegal expansion based on hoary biblical claims.
Yes, we are witnessing a dangerous game that might force Israel to throw in the
towel or face economic loss and political support.
Abraham Bin Yiju
Palermo (Apr 11, '11)
[Re Seoul agonizes over
feeding the North, Apr 6] Two cheers for Donald Gregg! He is a man of
broad vision in trying to persuade the hidebound South Korean Lee Myung-bak's
regime to send food to the North, which is suffering the aftereffects of brutal
weather conditions which wiped out crops.
Lee has the same visceral dislike of Kim Jong-il that George W Bush has. His
government is hiding behind the red herring that any food given to North Korea
will favor the military. This time that excuse is rendered lame by the
appearance of David Austin of Mercy Corps, recently returned from a tour of the
most badly affected North Korean provinces. On the influential PBS Nightly News
Hour 10 days ago, he handily dealt with that objection.
Up until South Korea and United States government cut off humanitarian food aid
to the North two years ago, Austin's organization had signed a protocol with
the Kim government whereby Mercy Corps had full control of the reception,
accountability, and delivery of food to the needy in North Korean provinces hit
by famine. According to Austin, no food went to the military.
Will Gregg succeed in persuading the Lee government? That remains to be seen.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Apr 7, '11)
[Re Goldstone now
praising Israel, Apr 5] Judge Richard Goldstone's opinion piece in the
Washington Post had the effect of a hand grenade thrown into an unsuspecting
crowd.
What Goldstone says he did not know then but knows now does not fundamentally
derail the UN report's conclusions. But as Israeli journalist Aluf Benn points
out, the South African jurist's remarks is a "major public relations coup" for
the Zionist state.
Shimon Peres, speaking to the Jerusalem Post, gave the whole game away: Israel
in pursuing a strategy of collective punishment against the people of Gaza, to
induce them to rise up and overthrown Hamas, cannot but be interpreted as
targeting the civilian Palestinian population.
In fact, as Israeli government's Marc Regev called for the repudiation of the
"Goldstone Report" by the UN he was selective in his remarks. Erase the
condemnation of the Israel Defense Forces but keep the condemnation of Hamas
for war crimes. Obviously, his words are nothing but the continuation in a war
of words of Israel's pre emptive blitzkrieg "Cast Lead", which violated on many
levels the rules of war and international law.
Sooner or later it will come out how the Israeli authorities "persuaded"
Goldstone to sing another song when originally they did everything to thwart
his investigation.
Abraham Bin Yiju
Italy (Apr 6, '11)
[Re Goldstone now
praising Israel, Apr 5] The interesting thing is that those criticizing
Israel cannot hold the candle to Israel in terms of GDP, science, business,
arts, education - especially education - and human rights. The more they attack
Israel, the more prosperous the Jewish state becomes.
So Israel is here to stay and to continue providing its citizens with an
amazing lifestyle. A lifestyle which is only possible via democracy and a
creative spirit. Democracy, a creative spirit, prosperity, wealth, freedoms,
human rights are and will always be unknown to places like Syria.
Ysais Martinez
United States (Apr 6, '11)
Isn't it interesting how, in a democracy that prides itself on the freedom of
its media, the transparency of its government and its open public exchange of
ideas and opinions, just how much energy is devoted to keeping things secret,
hidden and obscure?
Take the Fed's recent legal battle to avoid having to publically divulge which
banks snorted like hungry little piggies at the Fed's discount window in the
Great Crash of 2008, borrowing billions in cheap taxpayer-backed loans. They
came up with all kinds of noble reasons for this attempt at obfuscation but in
the end, they just didn't want any more dirty laundry being aired about the
banking industry's latest demonstration of legalized robbery.
And as if to rub our noses in the gooey irony, US President Barack Obama
recently accepted an award for his "transparent" government behind closed
doors, with no advance publicity to sully the blinding transparency. Obama has
also declared war on leakers, those pesky White House critters who decide when
he isn't being crystal clear enough and disseminate information the closet-GOP
president prefers to be "semi-transparent."
Evidently, in the official thesaurus of the new Bush III administration,
transparency is defined as invisibility, silence and ignorance. But the thin
veneer of pretend free speech isn't confined to government ; a history channel
TV miniseries on John F Kennedy was scrubbed because of political pressure and
fears of "bias" (translation; we don't want people watching JFK chasing skirts
between manufactured crises).
Evidently there was real fear that some icon-rebuffing history might leak into
the mythosphere of Wonderland. The list of America's Do-As-I-Say-Not-As-I-Lie
goes on and on, of course. The persecution of Julian Assange is just another in
a long series of American efforts to keep its deceitful foreign policy out of
the glare of sunlight, while repeated efforts by al-Jazeera to have its news
programs broadcast in the US are torpedoed by corporate America as well as the
Obama Lie-ocracy, ever fearful that he be identified as "going easy" on his
secret religion of Islam.
Heaven forbid the average American Zombie gets to hear something other than its
own home-grown twisted and myopic propaganda. Yessiree, Free Speech is alive
and well in the Land That Truth Forgot, just so long as it sticks to the
script. Otherwise, there's a military tribunal in Guantanamo that would love to
have a word with it.
Hardy Campbell
United States (Apr 6, '11)
[Re Pastor Jones and a
dreaded ghost, Apr 4] I thank M K Bhadrakumar for another excellent
article. The thing is, at the end of the day you do end up having to negotiate
with opponents you can't defeat. Are they murderous thugs? War criminals? Very
probably. (Our hands aren't clean either).
Do we have to talk to Khairullah in particular? Maybe not.
Francis
Canada (Apr 5, '11)
[Re Why the
Republicans can't find a candidate, Apr 4] As usual Spengler makes many
excellent points about why the American Republican party cannot seem to find a
credible candidate to oppose President Barack Obama's re-election campaign in
2012.
However, I think that Spengler has missed one very simple explanation. Obama is
a corporate shill par excellance. The big money likes him. He talks like
Franklin Delano Roosevelt, but he walks like Marie Antoinette. Among other
sell-outs, he has just finished transferring trillions of public dollars to
Wall Street insiders, which he proposes to pay for by gutting social security
and raising regressive taxes on wage income and productive enterprises.
Obama has very powerful friends. Any mainstream Republican must hesitate to
challenge Obama: I suspect they realize that the fix is in. Look what happened
to Hilary Clinton when the oligarchs decided that Obama was a much better
whore. I'm not a Clinton groupie, but the media coverage was astonishingly
one-sided. A joint ticket of Jesus Christ and George Washington could not
survive that kind of massive media slur campaign.
Obama hardly even has to go through the motions. It's all set. Anybody
challenging him - Republican, Democrat, Independent - will be at best ignored,
or possibly given the full Nader treatment: they are only in it for the ego,
they have no chance, it's pathetic; why do they embarrass themselves by even
thinking that they can win?; don't throw your vote away on such a trivial
hopeless candidate, yada yada yada ...
Obama 2012. Because you are a sheep too stupid and pathetic to vote for anyone
we don't tell you to.
Timothy Gawne (Apr 5, '11)
[Re Egypt moved by
deep waters, Apr 1] If Egypt renews ties with Syria and Iran, it will
not abrogate treaties with Israel. Kotsev cannot have it two ways: if the
military is so entrenched in the mechanisms of state and economy in Egypt - a
military that has long cooperated with Israel - why will this endanger Israel?
Turkey for example maintains ties to Iran and to Israel. Anakara has suffered
the sting of prime minister Netanyahu misadventures, but has not broken
relations with the Zionist state, despite opening to Hezbollah in Lebanon and
Iran. And Egypt is too busy trying to put its house in order. So where the
external threat to Israel?
Mention Iran and the Zionist state's knees begin to buckle. Kotsev is simply
using Tehran as Israel's whipping post. If Israel has anything to fear, it is
its own policies which are to the public's eye, incapable of change.
Abraham Bin Yiju
Italy (Apr 4, '11)
It must have been tempting this past April 1 for Obama to announce that the
United States intervention/non-war/limited kinetic action in Libya has been a
hoax, a gag, a spectacular pre-April Fools' Joke. He could have stood at his
presidential podium and laughed and smiled that signature fake smile of his,
all the while explaining how the entire Operation Odyssey Dawn had been a
gargantuan prank, intended to lampoon the whole Democracy-at-the-Point-of-a-Gun
foreign policy of the decayed Empire.
If he had done that, all the questions about how the no-fly zone, that was
intended to prevent Muammar Gaddafi from bombing his own citizens then morphed
into a clandestine Support-the-Rebels-but-Don't-Get-Caught-Doing-It campaign to
oust the mad colonel, would have gone away, subsumed by the sighs of relief
from a puzzled electorate.
The Nobel Peace Prize winner could have dismissed all the unflattering
comparison with other presidents who wantonly ignored constitutional law about
going to war unilaterally. He could have justified the frightening expenditure
of billions of Chinese-backed dollars that we do not have. He could have
stifled the unfounded hopes of other beleaguered freedom-yearning dissidents
that they too could be liberated by the might of righteous imperial arms.
But no, April Fools came and went, with Obama still pretending the best of
Hell-paving intentions, leaving all of us the same fools that supported
Bush-with-a-Jump-Shot in the first place.
Hardy Campbell
United States (Apr 4, '11)
[Re Lee's summit gamble
on North Korea, Mar 31] Believe it when it happens. South Korea's
President Lee Myung-bak can rest on economic laurels so going to the North to
meet Kim Jong-il may not be so important. Or will it?
Lee's policy to bring North Korea to its knees has failed badly. In its wake,
it has set teeth in the South on edge lest war break out. On the first
anniversary of the sinking of the Cheonan too many questions remain
unanswered, and deal with the ineptitude of the vessel's crew and the way Seoul
handled the matter, especially its refusal to publish their findings in full
until almost six months later.
And even then doubts remain. No one has taken seriously Russia's claim that the
South Korean corvette churned up the dormant torpedo which pull the ship up.
Only one voice in the US gave support to that idea: Donald Gregg former US
ambassador to South Korea, and owing to age and his approach to the North, he
is summarily dismissed by his peers.
What has Lee to offer should he go to Pyongyang? If he insists on an apology,
he's barking up the wrong tree. Is he flexible enough to change his tack? That
is the question.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Apr 1, '11)
[Re Democracy: One
nation, indivisible, Mar 31] How interesting that Asia Times would
publish a screed by a "Mr Peaceman" that sounds like a prep school essay
assignment. His unreal picture of the United States political conditions sure
has the flavor of a series of class lectures.
Take the praise for the "two-party" system. Peaceman has no concept of the
reality of minor voices being muffled by the maneuvers of the two parties he
praises. In state after state, the Republicans or the Democrats when they take
power, pass laws to make it impossible or nearly so for other parties to get on
the ballot. The result has been that so many people are unable to vote for
someone they wish that the percentage voting continues to drop.
A national rise to near 40% of "independent" voters registered is another
measure of the crowds who do not believe that either major party represents
them. The commonly voiced comment heard is that to choose between Democratic
and Republican is to choose, "the lesser of two evils."
Peaceman also seems to have no clue about the wearing away of our freedoms by
all levels of government in the US. The ironically named, "Patriot Act", is
aimed at the true patriots who would safeguard our Constitutional liberties.
Get real, Peaceman. Get real, Asia Times.
Tom Gerber
United States (Apr 1, '11)
The ongoing drama at the Fukushima power plant highlights the delicate,
farcical Alice-in-You-Know-Where games that the nuclear industry has played for
decades with the public. They will speak of levels of radiation "thousands" of
times greater than "normal," but no problemo, people!
It's only radiation, after all, just like sunlight and microwaves are only
radiation! The detection of plutonium, only the most toxic substance in the
solar system, merits only a scoffing dismissal, as if it were as innocuous as
soot or mildew. The pooh poohing of the dangers of radiation has condemned
thousands of people around the world to ghastly deaths and passed their mutated
legacies to generations thereafter.
And so and so on as the glowing Red Queen swings the mutated three headed
flamingo-lizard in her daily game of Uranium Croquet, all the while praising
the wonders of nuclear power between mushroom cloud croquet ball detonations.
Ever since the atomic genie escaped from its lead bottle, the scientists have
had to keep their mouths shut while the businessmen, politicians and Cold War
propagandists extolled the virtues of the latest demonstration of American
ingenuity, the power of the universe that would illuminate God's Chosen Ones
with energy "too cheap to meter."
The overselling, hyperbole, exaggeration and out-and-out lies that have been
told to a fascinated and discombobulated public about nuclear power commenced
on July 16, 1945 (the day the sun rose twice at Los Alamos, new Mexico) and, as
we see all to well, in Japan, the only country subjected to atomic war. The
irony of that fact, coupled with the Faustian bargain the Japanese made with
their malefactor, makes hearing the pablum being meted out to a frantic public
sickening in the extreme.
Note I make no moral judgement about the pros and cons of the insidious science
of the atom; for a resource poor island nation with images of world power
dancing in their heads, the decision to Go Nuke makes perfect sense. But
trivializing dangers that can affect generations just because you don't want
negative publicity should be considered a humans rights crime.
Hardy Campbell
United States (Apr 1, '11)
February & March Letters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
