|
|
|
|
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.
December 2011
[Re The Kim is dead!
Long live the Kim!, Dec 19] Listening to commentary on the death of Kim
Jong-il is an exercise in the fears, the joy that the wicked witch is dead, and
the downright display of not really knowing what is happening in the Democratic
People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) by North Korea watchers. The coverage is and
will continue to be cartoonish and one-sided without any claim towards balance.
Kim Jong-il was a complex man, warts and all, who worked tirelessly in the best
interests of his people and his country. He never forgot that technically the
DPRK was still at war with US-led UN troops and a hostile South Korea that only
had one policy in mind regime change, and were unwilling to end the 61-year-old
Korean War with a peace treaty. Not only that, the US, the Republic of Korea
(ROK), and their European and Australian allies were willing to deny a climate
challenged North Korea, food to feed its people, preferring to hold North
Koreans as hostages to starvation. So much for benevolent responses by nations
who boast of being democracies.
Furthermore, by shunning Kim Jong-il's overtures to direct negotiations without
preconditions, the US, the ROK and others deliberately kept themselves in
ignorance of what was happening in the DPRK.
Consequently in the endless chatter that is occurring in the wake of Kim
Jong-il's death, vilification of him, his heir, and his country continue in
well worn ruts. Any nuanced approach is dismissed without a by your leave.
Madeleine Albright reached a critical yet not unsympathetic appreciation of Kim
Jong-il after meeting him in Pyongyang in 2008. She is more the exception than
the rule in assessing Kim Jong-il's legacy.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Dec 20, '11)
[Re The war is
pronounced dead, Dec 16] The tenor of the US's moving farewell ceremony,
officially called "So long, towelheads..." - Pepe Escobar
After reading another of Pepe Escobar's anti-American tirades, I must take
exception at his lack of journalistic finesse. C'mon Pepe, we're Americans. We
think we are the world's policemen and official bullies, but is it proper
technique to call us out like that?
Maybe you should take a writing course from Kim Myung Chool? While also
laughable, at least he backs his incessant drivel up with "facts" and not
constant attempts at yellow journalism.
Jay Clark
United States (Dec 20, '11)
[Re A dictatorship
without a dictator, Dec 16, '11] How do we know the Iraq War is Over?
Because Obama said so. Just like he said the Recession was over. Just like he
said Osama bin Laden is dead. Just like he said Wall Street is reformed. It is
fitting that in Wonderland, its elected leader makes things so by simply saying
they are so. He need not worry about trivialities like proof, facts or reality;
he merely waves his hand and Presto! All WonderProblems disappear in a poof of
smoke and in the reflection of mirrors.
Take the so-called termination of the fiasco in Iraq. While it may be true that
American combat personnel controlled by the Pentagon have departed stateside or
been redeployed to Afghanistan, there are thousand of CIA agents and operatives
(both Iraqi and American), mercenary troops and security personnel, "aid"
personnel and advisers present. There will be plenty of US presence in Iraq
buried deep within its administrative and security apparatus for quite some
time to come. And while it may be tempting to segregate the conflict in Iraq as
a separate war that one can say is "over,' it is more correct to characterize
Iraq as one act in a very long play, with a parallel act in Afghanistan that
promises to last even longer. And that play is far from over, for it poses the
decaying remnants of Anglo-Saxon hegemony versus the whack-a-mole nuisance of a
resurgent Third World that has had quite enough of Judeo-Christian sermonizing
and hypocritical finger-pointing.
The fact that Wonderland had to resort in the 21st century to an old-style
colonial invasion reminiscent of 19th century British redcoats shooting down
spear-hurling pollywogs indicates how our mentality is actually regressing into
a fondly remembered Anglo-Saxon past, rather than looking forward to a more
complex brown and yellow future.
The very act of replicating discredited anachronisms ensured that the
neighboring Islamic Republic will secure a nuclear weapon, thus ensuring in its
turn an irreversible commitment of American resources to further Middle East
interventions. And all Americans should be aware that the Pentagon has a
detailed operational plan for seizing Saudi oil fields when and if so required,
a plan that has not been implemented solely because such an act would put all
pretence of a non-war with Islam to bed, once and for all.
A war over in Wonderland? Perish the thought! (or more accurately, blast it
with an M-16!)
Hardy Campbell
United States (Dec 19, '11)
[Re Chinese
gunboats on the Mekong, Dec 16] Brian McCartan stated that "there is a
growing perception in Beijing that it must take measures to protect its
economic interests abroad". This is certainly not the perception in Beijing but
of the West. The primary concern in Beijing is the rampant killings of Chinese
nationals that it needs to protect.
Wendy Cai
United States (Dec 19, '11)
[Re
Indian Punchline] Of late, much ink has been spent examining the impact
of US re-engagement in Asia. Though the Obama administration's
China-containment policy appears to circumscribe Chinese influence and at times
causes Chinese leaders headaches, a deeper analysis shows that heightened US
presence in Asia is at this juncture good for China, in more profound and
far-reaching ways than Washington (and perhaps Beijing) may presently realize.
At the end of the day, the future of Asia-Pacific and beyond won't so much
depend on what the US does in the region, but rather on how China
manages/exploits the challenges that lie ahead.
John Chen
United States (Dec 19, '11)
I am replying not so much to the article as to the letter in rejoinder by
Zhuubaajie of Hong Kong, who takes offense at the suggestion of Chinese
manipulation of its markets against US (and other foreign) companies.
First of all, the markets are not at all asymmetric as he states. American
suppliers to Walmart and similar companies face the same demanding contract
terms as he refers to. It is Chinese suppliers who choose to do business with
Walmart and accept the contracts. If they don't like it, they should do as our
company does, and look elsewhere for business.
One cannot equate profit margins in businesses such as Walmart with those of
Boeing, etc. How much IP is involved, for example, in making cheap brass screws
that one finds at Home Depot (which, by the way, are so poorly made that they
shred under slight pressure from a screwdriver, which is also Chinese made and
of low quality).
Of course the international aircraft market is dominated by Boeing, Airbus,
etc. So also the other industries that took Western companies many decades and
enormous sums of capital investment to grow from scratch. Meanwhile, thirty
years of Maoism so damaged the Chinese economy and starved and frightened its
people it is no wonder they are coming from far behind in the global economic
race. This is not the fault of Walmart, etc. The Chinese themselves have to
accept responsibility.
And if some Chinese entrepreneur wanted to start a chain of attractive
restaurants in the USA, serving authentic Chinese items, Americans would
welcome them in.
If Chinese companies choose to specialize in commodity products, they should
not expect anything but the same low profit margins that their American
counterparts earn.
I visit China regularly on business, and find the country infinitely
interesting. But one cannot agree with the author's point of view.
Midwest Entrepreneur
United States (Dec 19, '11)
[Re Did the
Pentagon help nip the Arab Spring?, Dec 14] What relationship to
domestic United States affairs does the Pentagon's special anti-demonstrator
training in the Middle East have? To answer this question, one needs to think
of the use of drones, and the federally coordinated campaign against the
#occupy demonstrators in the US itself.
It appears as though the US military and other federal government agencies are
gaining experience in crushing opposition to a ruling elite. They will find
this very useful in coming years when the American public finally wakes up to
the reality that our government has been stolen from us by what President
Eisenhower called, "the military industrial complex".
Some tests at crushing dissent already have been made in the US. The most
recent were the federally inspired and directed crackdowns on #occupy across
the continent, the setting up of restrictive "free speech" zones, and the use
of drones by police in North Dakota. One does not need too vivid an imagination
to extrapolate that to conceive of a concerted campaign to deny US dissidents
any opportunity to peacefully demonstrate their opposition to government
policies and actions.
Welcome to the totalitarian future of the United States of America.
Tom Gerber
United States (Dec 16, '11)
[Re China and the shadow
of German history, Dec 14] I think US arrogance and imperialism is
scarier than China's, just as I think the taking away of US human rights with
the "National Defense Authorization Act" more sincere than it's "defense" of
the human rights of Liu Xiaobo or anyone abroad (see Benjamin A Shobert's
US Congress fights China on all fronts, Dec 15.
Lester Ness
China (Dec 16, '11)
[Re Hardy Campbell's letter, Dec 14] Enlightenment doesn't come easily to
someone as white and trashy as me, but Hardy Campbell's recent letter (ATol,
Dec. 14, 2011) certainly helped me along. There is a peaceful, almost catatonic
state induced by the utter simplicity of his logic: Americans have killed
Muslims, therefore America is at war with Islam.
I began to wonder how many other religious wars America has fought. The answer
clearly is ''Many''. Allende's Chile. Noriega's Panama. Ortega's Nicaragua.
Remember the Maine? Roman Catholics all. And who can forget the wars against
Buddhism, in Korea and Vietnam? White, trashy, Anglo-Saxon Episcopalian damned
near wiped out even trashier, whiter Baptists in a religious pogrom that
Americans have always mistaken for a civil war.
Shintoism hasn't been heard from since the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
And as for you corn-fed yahoos who carry on about ''How can there be a danged
American war against Islam when Islam is the fastest growing religion in
America; when Shi'ites are now able to practice their religion freely in Iraq
and Afghanistan; when we provide more financial aid to the Palestinians and
Egyptians than any other nation; when Serbian massacres of Bosnian Muslims were
halted thanks to our actions; and when Kosovo Muslims think of Americans as
their saviors?'' My answer to you is, you're being logical. And logic, as
anyone in a catatonic state with enlightenment just around the corner knows, is
a tool that the whitey uses to oppress non-whiteys the world over.
Geoffrey Sherwood
United States (Dec 16, '11)
[Re Popping the Jeju
bubble, Dec 15] Matthew Hoey wants us to believe his anti-American lies
about what is going on with the building of a South Korean naval base on Jeju
Island. He writes, "If completed, the military base will be home to both US and
South Korean naval vessels", that is a lie, the base will house only South
Korean navy ships. He believes that 1,800 villagers should have more power than
the South Korean government or the other 46 million citizens of the South. He
sites the views of Rebecca Johnson of the leftist Acronym Institute; but how
fair is she?
On the Acronym Institute website they write, "further states are viewed as of
proliferation concern or have programmes which have been exposed and are now
being addressed and dismantled. These include Iran, North Korea and Syria."
North Korea explodes two bombs and is not listed as a nuclear power and has no
intention of giving up their nuclear weapons just as Iran is racing headlong to
become a nuclear power, so we see Mrs Johnson is also incapable of telling the
truth.
Mr Hoey believes that if South Korea should seek to defend itself this could
"undermine regional stability". However I would agree with Mr Hoey in that the
US should end its military commitment to South Korea due the the increasing
level of hatred towards the US by ever growing numbers of South Koreans.
Perhaps the Dear Leader might be able to teach the South some manners. A few
years in a gulag might help some leftists shed their rose colored glasses,
however the complete failure of ten years of leftist rule in the South has not
stopped Mr Hoey from being a sunshine fool.
Dennis O'Connell
United States (Dec 16, '11)
[Re NATO dreams of
civil war in Syria, Dec 14] I am quite amazed at the biased,
anti-United States articles Pepe Escobar writes.
With all due respect - What does he expect? Power politics is a reality. Like
[Secretary of State] Condoleezza Rice once stated; "Great powers do not just
mind their own business''; if they did, they would be out of business.
I like reading Escobar. I find him intelligent, witty, clever, informed and
ethical - but what is his point? There are two ways to look at the world - the
way we would like it to be, and the way it truly is. Welcome to the planet!
Bask in its gore, hypocrisy, double talk, crimes; it is all part of the game
and we have very little control over it. This does not mean we have to accept
those that would rather "blow it up, rather than give it up". We must always be
fighting for what we believe is in the right and makes us human, but that only
comes when we can look, with open eyes, at our part in it.
I wish Escobar would simply give us an alternative vision with which we can go
soundly to sleep at night without being awakened by the nightmares which we
create.
Joseph Giramma (Dec 15, '11)
[Re NATO dreams of
civil war in Syria, Dec 14] The Syrian government, we're told, has "a
real, battle-tested army." And, "as for the opposition ... they are a joke."
Why, the Free Syria Army is "infected with mercenaries and what scores of
Syrian civilians described as armed gangs".
Just goes to show, following Pepe Escobar's preference for incumbent repressive
Arab governments - might makes right. Sundry "armed gangs" are no match for
"battle-tested" government forces adept at slaughtering civilians and torturing
children to the tune of 5,000 Syrians (not mentioned by Escobar - the views of
"scores of Syrian civilians" are much more relevant).
But it is all of a piece - the good Arabs vs the bad Arabs, Escobar-style. The
"real, battle-tested" Syrian army is up to anything Arab Spring revolutionaries
can throw at it.
Jim
United States (Dec 15, '11)
[Re Did the
Pentagon help nip the Arab Spring?, Dec 14] Let's face it: the Arab
Spring caught the United States sleeping. It took the Obama administration a
long moment to figure out what to do: It would jettison Hosni Mubarak but keep
strong ties with Egypt's military; Gadaffi's overthrow was a no brainer, etc.
Running fast in place, Washington threw its weight where it counted most:
encouraging conservative forces while backing mild reforms. Furthermore, the
Obama administration could live with there being long-repressed Islamists who
could and would win at the ballot box. For them, good ties with the US means
stifling radical implications of what the Arab Spring stood for.
So, you can say that the rise of religious conservatism and the US seek grosso
modo mutual advantages, minor differences notwithstanding.
Consolidation of power is in play and that suits the Obama administration just
fine.
Abraham Bin Yiju
Italy (Dec 15, '11)
Asia Times Online readers have to know one thing first; I am not making these
stories about Wonderland up. As ridiculous and preposterous as they may seem,
they actually have occurred in the Land Which Knows No Limits to the Absurd.
Having said that, I relate the following, which in my wildest dreams I could
not have made up.
The Florida Family Association (FFA) has lodged protests against a reality TV
program that depicts how everyday Muslims in Wonderland live. Their complaint?
That this "offensive" program shows these Muslim Americans living pretty much
as all other citizens in this BizarroLand live; ie, having boring,
everyday-normal Joe Schmoe lives. The FFA (clearly a club where white
trashiness is a prerequisite) contends that showing Muslims as being something
other than blood-thirsty jihadist terrorists who have "Death to Amerika" in
Arabic script tattooed on their foreheads is dishonest propaganda intended to
lure Americans into some weird never-never-land of tolerance and acceptance of
this pagan religion.
Now, ATol readers may at this point be tempted to shrug their shoulders and
say, "OK, there's always some nut-job groups out there protesting something in
Wonderland, but that doesn't mean they have any effect on anything else."
T'were it so. The protests (which evidently other right wing racist groups
chimed in with also) convinced a major advertising sponsor to terminate their
financial support of this "offensive" program; the sponsor said that,
regardless of the rights or wrongs of the protests, they didn't want to be part
of anything "controversial." (As if their decision wasn't?)
So it is with attempts to foster understanding here - a country where
ignorance, misinformation and myths count for so much more than anything
resembling education or empathy or understanding. In Wonderland, where one
cannot show blatant discrimination against blacks or Latinos or Asians, Muslims
are the one acceptable group that can be pilloried and harassed in the open
with minimal consequences.
Most Americans have not bought into the obvious lie that the US is not at war
with Islam, when the daily reports of Americans killing Muslims all over the
globe saturate the media, so reactions like that of the FFA are naturally just
what the apparatchik in Washington desire. With Obama and his neo-con gang
stoking the fires of war with Iran, preparing the WonderPublic for a major
conflagration with yet another Islamic state requires precisely this kind of
rabid frothing-at-the-mouth Cro-Magnonite fervor. It should be no surprise
either that groups like the FFA represent the basest denominator of the
so-called "Christian" neo-con evangelical mad-dog right wing. My only solace is
that their Muslim-hating children will be manning the front line come the next
inevitable war in the Middle East. Merry Christmas!
Hardy Campbell
United States (Dec 15, '11)
[Re More
Pinocchio than Teddy, Dec 13] Mr Morici provides well-deserved
criticism of Barack Obama. Certainly I would never associate him with Teddy
Roosevelt, Lincoln or any other past president. He is too weak-kneed and wedded
to expediency to compare to any past president with courage. His rhetoric will
always soar above his accomplishments.
It is obvious that he is built that way. But please don't tell me that any of
the right-wing radicals running for the Republican nomination would be better
and wouldn't run America into the gutter of tyranny.
Jim of Southern California
United States (Dec 15, '11)
Well, well, well, what is the latest ruckus in Wonderland all about these
holidays? Seems like more than a few are outrageously indignant that a new
building design in South Korea reminds them of the 9-11 "attacks". Seems like
they think there's some kind of conspiracy afoot to humiliate Uncle Sam
about that sad autumn day. Or, perhaps, these new "9-11 conspiracy theorists"
are feeling a tad guilty that they've allowed their government to pull another
fast one on them, akin to the country rube who gets snookered by the carnival
con-man by playing the Which-shell-is-the-pea-under? game.
Leave it to Wonderlanders to take their genetic narcissism to a new level of
self-absorption, seeing things in foreign designs that they're sure is intended
to poke fun at their creaking Empire's tottering collapse. The European and
South Korean architects who created this "floating cloud" concept are,
naturally, shocked that anyone could extrapolate from their intentional design
a symbol of the Twin Tower's perfectly symmetric collapse, which all sane
Wonderlanders knows could not have been intentional. But I guess we can all see
a new trend arising among the WonderSensitive; foreigners owning Afghan dogs or
wearing Afghan shawls are making sly innuendo about Amerika's debacle in
Afghanistan, any DJ playing the Flock of Seagull's 1980s hit "I Ran (So Far
Away)" is clearly alluding to Wonderland's impotence viz the drone-killing
Islamic Republic, and how dare anyone name their child Katrina after what
happened to New Orleans in 2005?
Hardy Campbell
United States (Dec 14, '11)
[Re North Korea's end
heralds the real crisis, Dec 12] Victor Fic's interview with Jennifer
Lind is yet another recitation of a rosary of great sorrows when it comes to
the "implosion" North Korea. We are offered assumptions, fanciful computer
modeling, and downright wish fulfillment. Tarted up in 21 century lingo, Lind
has nothing to offer than a reheated version of the same end of the world
scenario one heard 20 years ago.
Of course the rub comes with the simple fact: when it comes to North Korea, US
intelligence is and remains at the level of the cave man. Had Lind come up with
something like Alan Whiting's RAND study "China crosses the Yalu", we could
give serious attention to her remarks.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Dec 13, '11)
[Re Bear nettles
the eagle, dragon smiles By M K Bhadrakumar, I would like to
congratulate you for the excellent decision in leading with this fine, timely
commentary on US-Russian-Chinese affairs.
I consider Mr Bhadrakumar the eminence gris in salient analysis of Asian
geopolitical dynamics. His writing is credible because of his personal
knowledge of the subject and his reliance on factual detail rather than trite
ideological assertions or speculative theories.
In my view, your choice of journalists like Mr Bhadrakumar can help
immeasurably to sustain a loyal and intelligent readership. Many thanks.
W J Spark
Canada (Dec 12, '11)
[Re Sino-US
relations at vulnerable juncture, Dec 8] What do the numbers say? At
the end of the day, fair trade has to mean equal profits. In that aspect the
trade is ABSOLUTELY AND GROSSLY UNFAIR. In 2010, American companies made more
than US$100 billion in profits in and from China.
American companies were basically given free rein to expand into China.
American auto companies sell more cars in China than anywhere else. Walmart has
350 stores. Yum Brands has the largest restaurant chains in China. Hospital
diagnostic equipment is dominated by GE. The list just goes on. Aircrafts are
dominated by the likes of Boeing. The Gap is now talking about shuttering 22%
of its American stores, and tripling its number of stores in China in the next
few years. Chinese bloggers have long lamented that, of the 30 odd key
industries in China, more than half are dominated by foreign entities, mostly
Anglo American.
Yet with extreme asymmetric treatment, America basically blocked most Chinese
investments into America. What Chinese companies are allowed to have hundreds
of outlets in America? Deal after deal was blocked by the xenophobes in
Washington.
As a direct result of the above, the profit imbalance is at least 5 or 6 to 1
in favor of America (exports to America typically gives the Chinese exporters
no more than 3-5% margins).
What is all this demagogic talk of open markets, when China's is apparently
much more open than America's?
Moreover, you should examine the assertion: "America's greatest economic
strength - its ability to innovate". America's greatest economic strength is
its ability to craft legalese that imposes one-sided relationships on the rest
of the world.
Any Chinese seller dealing with huge American companies like Walmart, would
have to deal with really oppressive contracts of adhesion:
(a) almost nonexistent margins, that in many instances automatically get
adjusted downwards over time;
(b) Intellectual Property clauses that include (as example):
(i) on secrets, what's yours becomes theirs, what's theirs remain theirs; (ii)
after a period of supply (eg,1 year), supplier automatically grants the
behemoth a paid up, perpetual license to use all IP (so the U.S. buyer can go
buy from someone else without having to pay for the IP, and the biggest
infringer does it "legally" with impunity).
No Chinese supplier is big enough to get a fair deal with such behemoths (such
as Walmart or Home Depot, etc). State action is more than justified. It is
surprising that Beijing has not come up with legislation banning many of these
"unequal treaties" imposed on Chinese sellers. This is no longer the 1800's.
Empirically, it is likely that American companies has stolen or robbed Chinese
suppliers of more IP than the other way around.
Zhuubaajie
Hong Kong (Dec 12, '11)
[Re The Dead Drone
sketch, Dec 8] Today, the US military uses drones against the Taliban,
against Pakistan, against Somalia,etc, but let us think about the future. Think
how useful drones could be to Homeland Security (Homeland? Shades of
Vaterland.)
It is so messy for Homeland Security to use police forces of major cities
against the #occupy protestors. Police officers are put at risk. What is the
solution? Of course, use drones. Blast the twittering #occupy people. What?
Some bystanders might be killed? Outrageous; those so-called bystanders
shouldn't be there. They must be as guilty as the #occupy protestors of not
bowing down to the 1%.
Once the public has failed to object to the use of drones against such a group
the way is open to use the drones against anyone those in power don't like in
the US. And it will avoid having to put the politicized police in peril.
Lou Vignates
United States (Dec 9, '11)
[Re The Dead Drone
sketch, Dec 8] Nothing is more persistent in racist Wonderland than the
insistence that 'merican-made technology is just way too advanced for those
non-white people "over there." Despite the fact that most PhDs and master's
degrees in the sciences and engineering in WonderUniversities are foreign
non-whites, the image of yellow Asians or brown Muslims being able to equal or
exceed US technological achievements seems beyond the imagination of the
average WonderJoe.
Witness the curious tale of the downed drone in Iran. The latest disinformation
campaign from the CIA and Pentagon purport that 1) The drone the Iranians are
showing on TV may be fake and 2) Even if they do have the drone, those mad
mullahs are way too primitive to do anything with it. As a perhaps limited
concession to growing reality (something the average Wonderlander resists with
all their might), the prospect of Chinese engineers getting their hands on the
drone's sophisticated electronics makes even the Anglo-Saxons pause. It is
curious, though, that the Iranians are dissed for their supposedly limited
engineering abilities at the same time we are wailing at the moon like
love-struck coyotes about Iranian scientists developing hydrogen bombs, devices
that can pose their own sticky wicket issues for the novice H Bomb Builder. But
we've harbored these delusions forever, unable to fathom how A-bombed Japan
could make better cars than Detroit or how Asiatic Russians could actually
build an atomic device.
Of course, this lack of respect for non-whites in the field of science is
merely an extension of Anglo-Saxon contempt of anyone not suitable for posing
in a Waffen SS recruitment poster. The brain freeze refuses to acknowledge that
one of many symptoms of imperial demise is this lack of science/math expertise
in the true blue GI Joe Uberlander. Previously, the blue eyed wags could always
rationalize this by saying these non-white geeks would stay stateside and
prevent the lack of Anglo-Saxons in these fields from affecting the economy.
But as these colored gurus see their home country economies advancing and
Wonderland tottering, more and more will vacate these shores to return home,
exposing glaring gaps stateside that cannot be papered over or rationalized
with neo-con cow paddies.
The lack of logic in all this should be apparent to all, but evidently it
isn't, as we allow politicians to stifle innovations in green technologies that
everyone outside BlunderLand knows are the keys to winning the 21st Century.
Instead, these 15th century minds prefer to insist on 19th century technologies
to save a country whose slide into the abyss appears irreversible, if for no
other reason than we keep pushing it with all our might off the cliff. I'm
certain the Asians will have the technology available to salvage the wreckage
into something useable.
Hardy Campbell
United States (Dec 9, '11)
[Re War clouds
gather in the Middle East, Dec 8 ] Victor Kotsev brings nothing new to
the table: Israel has long signaled its desire to take out Iran's nuclear and
weapons programs. The irredentism right wing government of Bibi Netanyahu is
itching once more to visit a refurbished "Cast Lead" on the Gaza Strip.
The Zionist state is bereft of any ability to respond to the changing
conditions among its Arab neighbors other than going ballistic militarily.
The growing chorus of condemnation of Israel and the reversal politically of
its fortunes remind one of the Austro Hungarian empire on the eve of the Great
War. The analogy may not be that off: the Zionist elite is aching to fulfill
what Sigismund Freud called a "death wish".
Abraham Bin Yiju
Italy (Dec 9, '11)
[Re Koreas set to avert
a 2012 apocalypse, Dec 8] The handwriting has noticeably been on the
wall for the past year: the failure of South Korea's president Lee Myung-bak's Drang
nach Norden policy to provoke North Korea has found a response in South
Korean voters. The resumption of food supplies to the North is an indication of
the softening of Lee's policy. Another is the rejection of the Grand National
Party's candidates. South Koreans yearn for a return to the "Sunshine Policy",
it goes without saying. Still more, North Korea has been able to attract
investments from abroad as well as pursuing internal reforms slow as they may
be.
On the other hand, it looks as though the US, too, has come to accept the fact
that the North is a nuclear power. Pyongyang's plans to build a light water
reactor is a sign that it is pursuing a peaceful use of atomic energy to
rebuild its decaying infrastructure. We should not forget that the US promised
to help build such reactors almost 20 years ago but reneged on its promises.
Furthermore, the Obama administration is opting for building light water
reactors in the South. Obviously, Washington doesn't see the contradiction in
its logic of calling for a denuclearized North while pushing for a nuclear
equipped South.
Still, 2012 is not going to turn into the Armageddon as South Korean and
American hardliners wish.
Nakamura Junzo
Guam (Dec 9, '11)
[Re Terrorists can
also bestow favors Dec 7] M K Bhadrakumar wrote: "... during the past
decade, Afghanistan never descended to sectarian violence.'' This, he fails to
note, is mainly because the US had the Taliban on the run, essentially reduced
to hiding behind the ISI's skirts in Pakistan. His comment only refers to the
past decade, while later in his article he admits that, before 9-11 and the US
rout of the Taliban-run government in Afghanistan, there was plenty of
sectarian violence, though ''sectarian'' glosses over the fact that it was
entirely caused by the Taliban terrorizing the Hazara Shi'ites.
Bhadrakumar says the Taliban are now a PR-savvy organization concerned with
portraying a ''flexible'' and ''moderate'' image, when the only flexibility
they've ever shown is whether to murder an opposing tribal leader, or to
massacre his entire family. Bhadrakumar's comment that ''sectarian tensions in
Afghanistan could easily spread into Pakistan'' is laughably bizarre
considering that nearly all sectarian bloodshed in Afghanistan in the 1990s was
at the hands of the Taliban, guided by Pakistan's ISI. And the current
terrorism against the Shi'ites is almost certainly from Pakistan.
Bhadrakumar's analysis of the ostensible gains and losses that each party would
realize from such an attack is ineptly flawed. How could any analysis fail to
consider such an attack on Shi'ites in the context of the interminable Sunni
attacks on Shi'ites in Pakistan? Another gaping flaw in his analysis is that he
speaks of ''the Taliban'', as if members of such a loose-knit and
loosely-defined organization are all of one mind. Mullah Omar may be sincere
when he condemns terrorist attacks on Shi'ites. But there are other Taliban,
and organizations in Pakistan, including the Lashkar-e-Jhangvi, and many
individuals within the ISI, who would readily support attacks on Shi'ites.
They, and others like them in the Sunni world, represent the true War on Islam,
which is, in fact, a Sunni vs Shi'ite war.
There is no Western War vs Islam as crackpot conspiracy theorists would like
you to believe. Countless Wahhabis and Deobandis preach hatred of Shi'ites.
This is not news. Bhadrakumar overlooks the most obvious potential mix of
motivations of those who massacred 58 Shi'ites in Afghanistan two days ago:
First, payback for the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) attack on
border encampments populated by Pakistani troops who are always conspicuously
inactive when the Taliban are crossing the border to attack NATO outposts.
Second, a message to Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai and the US that
Pakistan will not allow Afghanistan to reach a political compromise that does
not involve Pakistan's proxies. Third, it is perfectly consistent with their
hatred of the Shi'ites. Fourth, they understand that the withdrawal of American
troops from Afghanistan could be disastrous to their cause. It is much easier
to recruit unwitting Sunnis when the target is American occupiers, rather than
native Shi'ites.
Geoffrey Sherwood
United States (Dec 8, '11)
FutureMan discussed the latest debate going on in FutureLand. "All the evidence
points to America's increasing belligerence in the 21st century being due to
emasculation fears. America's superpowerdom was being challenged all over the
world, so you decided to show how big your manhood was by engaging in all those
unprovoked wars. Any response to that, Mr PastMan?"
I still didn't care for that title, but I foolishly bit his bait. "Well, I
don't know what you mean by 'all those unprovoked wars.' So far we've only had
two in the first 11 years of the new century. And anyway, the idea that
American men are worried about their masculinity is absurd."
FutureMan chuckled, which I knew meant trouble. "Just wait. You still have
imbroglios in Uganda, Kenya and South Africa in your near future, and one doozy
of an intervention in Mexico and later Venezuela. As for your other comment,
our records show that your country's preoccupation with de-masculinization
filtered down to your TV commercials. Can you tell me if you've ever seen ads
for anti-aging, erectile disfunction, balding, obesity, fitness, testosterone
deficiency, prostate problems..."
"OK, OK, I get it, OK? Yeah, well, some men in America are having anxieties
about, you know..."
"No, not just SOME men. Your whole country had this complex about your
collective virility. Your political candidates had to be more macho then their
opponents, even your female candidates had to show their feminine cojones
in order to get votes. As your country got older, doubts about your national
potency arose with each new buck country coming along and kicking sand in your
face. As senility set in and your impotence became more apparent after the
Vietnamese punk kicked your tail, the list of countries you could pick on with
any success got more pathetic; Grenada, Panama, Iraq, Afghanistan, Uganda,
Mexico..."
His logic was, once again annoying and irrefutable. I could only offer feeble
comebacks. "We're a superpower, and sometimes we have to show the world who's
boss."
FutureMan wasn't buying it. "But if you were a REAL superpower, would it really
be necessary to have to show it over and over again? And against piss-ant
countries? No, no, that won't wash. The real reason you need to shower bombs
and missiles and all those other long tubular weapons that explode is because
that's the only way you can show yourselves you've still got sack, that you
haven't been feminized and liberalized by all that sissy democracy humanitarian
stuff you don't believe in."
I was quite for a moment, absorbing his relentless truth. Then I saw something
on the TV and told FutureMan I'd call him later. There was a really good deal
on anti-balding ED pills that will make me lose weight. Hardy Campbell
United States (Dec 8, '11)
With Wonderland entering its terminal stages of decay and inevitable
dismemberment, the status of global polarity merits discussion. Whereas the
"classic" Cold War involved a bipolar schism of global influence between two
economic ideologies, the post-Amerika era is witnessing a fissiparous division
between the erstwhile winners and a panorama of different actors no longer
beholden to atavistic categorizations.
The West, ie Wonderland and its EuroStooges, is now permanently debilitated by
their two decade long post-Cold War celebration of economic euphoria and
delusion. The Soviet Union disappeared altogether, replaced by a cautious
Russia and a score of squabbling cousins. But the Third World, which the West
and the Communist bloc treated with contempt and exploitation, has now begin to
flex its muscles and is carefully selecting economic partners and security
arrangements. China deserves its own category, as it played an intermediate
role in the Cold War between all the principal actors. Today, it is poised to
supplant America as the engine of growth and dominance. In this regard they are
carefully creating connections of mutual benefit with the Third World as well
as the Russians.
Iran can be perceived as the new China, hostile to the tottering West but
cozying up to the likes of Venezuela, Argentina and other formerly hostage
members of the Western bloc. For this reason China and Russia finds the
Iranians and their oil wealth a useful counterweight and distraction for a West
still determined to uphold their decaying neocolonial policies. Slowly but
surely, other Third Worlders traditionally allied with the white powers are
seeing the handwriting on the wall and distancing themselves gradually from the
ex-hegemons.
Whereas post-Cold War the term "multi-polar" still signified a Eurocentric
emphasis on the new division of power, nowadays the term truly reflects a
multi-colored spectrum of ideologies, cultures and politics. Discomfiting as it
is to the Wonderlanders and their Europuppets, the new reality foreshadows a
fitting and final liberation from 19th century colonialism that will leave the
ex-colonial powers respectful, if not dependent, of their former colonies.
Ain't irony grand? Hardy Campbell
United States (Dec 6, '11)
Ho hum. Another day, another round of punitive sanctions on Iran by imperialist
stooges. Thing is, Iran and its historic predecessors eat imperialist sanctions
for breakfast. Indeed, without them, perhaps the very essence of being Persian
disappears. In its ancient heyday, when Cyrus the Great and his progeny were
kicking tail and taking names, they were the regional superpower, to whom all
trembled and genuflected. Until, of course, they didn't anymore. Blame it on
the Greeks, if you will, but ever since the battle of Marathon in 490 BC,
Persians have had a complex about not just the West but also its Arab
neighbors. Defeated in numerous wars with imperial Greece and Rome and the
later Muslim empire, the Persians always persevered, either by allowing their
conquerors to be seduced by Persian culture or making deft and tactful
alliances and retreats when necessary. Ironically, they shared this underdog
mentality with none other than the Jews, who for centuries predicted Persian
salvation from foreign oppression and exile (see how well that prophecy turned
out). This siege zeitgeist, forged through centuries of having to live in the
shadow of some greater empire, identified Persianness with the essentials of
Not-the-Otherness; if the Other religion was Roman paganism or Sunni Islam,
Persia would be Zoroastrianism or Shi'ia Islam. If the Other language was
Arabic, Persian would be Farsi. The important thing was that Persia had to be
different and unique from the "barbarians." Even Reza Pahlavi, the Shahanshah
installed by the British and Russians and re-installed by the CIA, recognized
that distinction, to the point of discretely assisting nascent Israel against
its multiple Arab foes. Far from being an American stooge, Pahlavi dreamed of a
new Persian Empire, built on Western technology and sky high oil prices, which
he coerced OPEC into jacking up. Alas, like Icarus, Pahlavi didn't realize the
closer he got to his goal, the more likely his visionary wings of imperial
Persia would melt away. With an economy staggering with the costs of Vietnam
and a recession, Washington realized that the Shah was not going to allow the
continuation of the oil company dominance of the past, which kept oil prices
artificially low in order to prop up Western industries. So the US made a deal
with Iran's erstwhile theological enemy, the Saudis, to undermine
Iranian-inspired oil production quotas and depress the price of oil. This it
did, with the ironic consequence that the crippled Iranian economy helped spark
the Islamic Revolution of 1979. Not the first nor the last time that a
short-sighted WonderStrategy would backfire on quick-fix blinkered Americans.
The present regime claims to be different from the Shah in virtually
everything, but in the goal of preserving Persianness as a distinct brand, they
are soulmates. Wars, invasions, revolutions and sanctions have been and will be
the glue that binds Persians together, all united in their conviction that the
"barbarians" cannot be allowed to win at any cost.
Hardy Campbell
Texas (Dec 5, '11)
[letters] In the article,
Moscow delivers brutal warning over Caspian pipelines [Dec 1, 2011],
Vladimir Socor tries to convince us that Russia might use force to stop the
undersea pipeline. However, I believe the odds of that happening are slim to
none and Slim just left town. Socor states that Russia is "threatening a
Caspian repeat of the 2008 Russia-Georgia war." The problem with that plan is
that Russia shared a border with Georgia but to invade Turkmenistan, Russia
would first have to invade Kazakhstan, a fellow member of the Shanghai
Cooperation Organization. Russia is also hosting the Sochi Winter Olympics in
2014 and does not want a repeat of the Moscow 1980 Olympics. Besides the rate
that the European countries have moved on Nabucco any Trans-Caspian pipeline is
a least 15 years away from completion, and in this economic environment I would
worry about surviving the next six months in 15 years we will be in a new
universe.
Dennis O'Connell
USA (Dec 2, '11)
[Re Ex-inspector
rejects IAEA Iran bomb claim, November 22, 2011] Gareth Porter must be
commended for his excellent investigative skills in exposing the flaws in the
International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) report of November 8, 2011,
concerning Iran. Since most articles describing the IAEA report have
characterized it as a definitive statement that Iran was working on a nuclear
weapon. An example, the article ("US
raises pressure on Iran," Asia Times Online November 23, 2011), states
"an alarming recent report by (IAEA) ... provides substantial evidence that
Iran carried out extensive research on how to make a nuclear weapon ...".
By simply reading the report you find there is nothing new. It only states
"concerns about possible military dimension to Iran's nuclear program." But
what is being reported about it is hyperbole, based on blatant speculative
fiction that misinforms rather than informs. Where is the evidence that Iran is
working on a nuclear weapon? It does not exist. There is no bomb-making
infrastructure and inspectors from the IAEA continue their on-site inspections.
In fact, like all the other previous reports, the "agency (IAEA) continues to
verify the non diversion of declared materials at the nuclear facilities and
outside facilities (LOFS)."
Does Iran have a nuclear program? Of course it does. Is it a weaponization
program? There is no credible evidence to indicate that, as many well-known
intelligence agencies, including Israel's, have attested. The question for
those who continue to promote Iranophobia is, how does it serve America's
national security interests in the region to be at war with Iran? A nation of
80 million people, sitting at the strategic crossroads of East and West, on top
of badly needed energy resources. And who does it benefit?
A second example of blatant speculative fiction and misinformation concerns the
anti-government demonstrations in Bahrain during February and March of this
year. Iran was widely blamed. for the unrest. Now it turns out, that is another
falsehood. ("Iran
gets a mini-break- in Bahrain," Asia Times Online November 28, 2011).
The Bahrain government-authorized report by an Independent Commission of
Inquiry said on November 24, 2011, concerning the protests, that despite claims
by the Bahrain government and its supporters "the proofs presented, submitted
to the Commission, did not show that there was a clear relationship between the
events that took place in Bahrain and the role of the state of Iran." Which
raises another question. What has happened to honest truth telling by the media
that was supposed to inform the reader rather than to inflame?
Fariborz S Fatemi
Former Professional Staff Member
House Foreign Affairs Committee
Senate Foreign Relations Committee
McLean, VA (Dec 1, '11)
In Rivals under the same
heaven [Nov 30, '11] by Jian Junbo, as in most articles on US foreign
policy on China, the word "containment" is a hot button that has far fewer real
consequences than hyped. The author goes as far as to say: "By now, it seems
Washington has nearly shown all of its cards about comprehensively containing
China." All these cards are ethereal. They have no effect on China gradually
achieving most and enough of its national objectives while avoiding conflict
with the US. Most of these cards are either insurance policies that will never
be exercised or inconsequential gesturing. Military bases around China are not
the same as one on Taiwan. Arms sold to Taiwan, at limited levels and
quantities at high prices, are useless because Taiwan will never have the
courage to use them to start a war. The suspension of the building of a dam in
Myanmar has little consequence. The 2,500 US Marines in Darwin will be on
vacation during their stint, while that of their sons and grandsons might
matter a little. The US has indicated that it has no diplomatic position on the
South China Sea issue in that it indicates no opinion on the validity of
claims, just that the freedom of navigation there shall not be restricted.
Obama even praised China on being peaceful on the matter during a meeting with
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao. A trade pact that excludes China will be vitiated
by China's true competitive power.
The truth is that containment is an insurance policy and it is not
constriction. China should be somewhat indifferent to containment, with a rigid
non-contracting device. Contracting would be, for example, overtly reneging on
the Shanghai communiques and abetting Taiwan independence, or installing WMD or
deploying troops on the island. The US is far from willing or able to constrict
China.
The author should understand the US better. First, it is a state founded by
racism and European territorial expansion, from a domestically more democratic
and politically advanced Europe. Second, it has seen tremendous social progress
motivated by remorse for ancestral transgressions. These are the precursors of
"containment" and "engagement" respectively. The US is a rootless ideal state
(with lingering religiosity), with the same ideal about freedom and democracy
for whites even when it was extremely racist. US foreign policy toward China
stems from these twin pillars and is thus quite predictable to those who
understand modern America.
If the author understands the current US, he would not place weight on all the
cards of containment. He should also have known that a rootless ideal state
will not be receptive to any historical cultural facets (not altogether
accurately depicted) that are supposed to predict China's peaceful rise. The
USA sees only recent deeds, but is limited in power to react to what arouses
suspicion.
As long as China can manage its environmental problems and trade friction, and
thus put 2-3% of GDP into defense without neglecting other vital needs, most of
its national objectives will be achieved in due course, enough to not have
conflict with the US, containment or not.
Jeff Church
USA (Dec 1, '11)
As we approach Christmas Day and the 20th anniversary of the USSR's demise, the
multiple ironies of what has transpired since then beg consideration. In 1991,
all of Wonderland and its minions rejoiced at capitalism's triumph, supposedly
putting to rest all the revolutionary bombast of the left and its aspirations
for social justice. Karl Marx and his defeated followers were once and for all
shown to be shadows in the wind, while Adam Smith and his triumphant adherents
emerged as the last ideology standing. But the football match that is History
frowns on early celebrations of victory.
Since the hammer and sickle was hauled down the Kremlin's flagstaff on that
cold December evening, we have seen the supposedly victorious West score some
spectacular own-goals; the numerous self-inflicted economic crises, the endless
quagmire wars, the deterioration of job production, the emergence of class
conflict. In other words, all the things Marx predicted would happen to
capitalist states, has happened.
The crowing irony, the one that sticks in the craws of every Republican neocon
who still flinches when Korea or Vietnam are mentioned, is that the capitalist
West is now playing second fiddle to the largest communist party on the planet,
to the very Asian nation that kicked WonderBooty in those lost Not-So-Cold
Wars. The once-smug Caucasian capitalists will insist that China is only
nominally a communist state, and that they practice as hard-headed a capitalism
as any blue eyed devil. But that is missing the point entirely. The fact is,
the Chinese Communist Party has refused to be hidebound by their ideology's
limitations, whereas the West refuses to acknowledge their ideology's gross
defects, as was so amply demonstrated in 2008. So the pragmatic communist is
outdueling the theoretician capitalist, who refuses to bite the invisible hand
that doesn't feed him anymore. The triumph of the socialist idea will only be
evinced in the future when the individualistic capitalism that has brought the
West to its knees is refuted once and for all. Additionally, to make the
transformation complete, the so-called Christian West will have to own up to
the fact that Jesus Christ Himself was a long-haired pacifist anti-capitalist,
who chased the moneylender/bankers out of the Temple and distributed welfare to
the masses. That idea will not digest easily in the gut of the average
evangelical BIble-thumping neo-con, convinced that Jesus will return someday in
a Cadillac. But to do that Jesus will first have to perform yet another
miracle, bringing back from the dead yet another US industry done in by
WonderIncompetence.
H Campbell
Houston, Texas (Dec 1, '11)
November Letters
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
All material on this
website is copyright and may not be republished in any form without written
permission.
Copyright 1999 - 2010 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
|
|
|
|
