Across China, dozens of dissidents engaged in a national hunger strike to protest the Chinese government’s human rights policies have gone missing or been detained. Aparently this is one of the ways that the Chinese government has prepared for the convening of the National People’s Congress (NPC), the country’s parliament, which went into session on March 5. The trouble began… return to article
-
subscribe to print magazine
-
email this article to a friend
-
Reader Comments (28)Page 1 of 1 pagesNow you see them, now you don’t!
Hey, folks, in case you have been thinking of China as a billion plus target market for U.S. goods — Wake Up!
This is a totalitarian run country masquerading as a convert to capitalism. When “subtle” doesn’t work go back to Plan A…
We say, “Be happy,” You shut up, smile and bow.
(Which is, of course is just what the top players do if WE complain about small trade violations such as copyright, patents, quotas, etc.)
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 9, 2006 at 8:03 AM WTH, let’s not be the darking pot calling the kettle black.
In case you haven’t noticed, Rumsfeld and the whole PNAC crowd is working hard to make China and Russia our enemies again so that they can relive the comic book days of their Cold War youth. I expect to see a lot more news in the future about how awful the Chinese government is to citizens who want “democracy” and “freedom”. Whether the stories are accurate or overblown matters not. The point is that all good Americans are supposed to hate China and think that they are our enemies. (Be prepared for a lot of empty shelves, btw.)
Though I have no doubt that China is a totalitarian state, I also don’t doubt that our government is no more concerned with Chinese citizens having “democracy” and “freedom” than the Chinese government is and we won’t be donning our haloes and invading China for regime change.
Though you won’t find it in the MSM, WTH, all the nuclear powers are now embroiled in a political battle over the weaponization of space. And China is conveniently located near the Caspian Sea, where there is reputed to be the biggest reserves of oil and natural gas in the world, which is rumored to be an exaggerated claim. Nevertheless, if you look at a map or globe you can watch the creep toward the oily basin, and expect to hear a growing media thunder of the evils of nations that surround the Caspian Sea and don’t take orders from us.
The realpolitik is not being televised.
All of this may soon be overshadowed by blow-back from Pakistan. We’ll see. Big things, and Too Big Things are just over the horizon. I’m curious to see who our “allies” will be six months from now.
Posted by wileywitch on Mar 13, 2006 at 1:53 PM Can’t help but repeat earlier misgivings I’ve expressed about China as a rising economic power. Others of you have responded with the advice that I don’t hastily assume they’ll be able to sustain the pervasive controls they wield, now that they’ve decided to hook up with market economics. Too much control equals too little wealth growing, and so they’ll lighten up, to paraphrase what I’ve been advised.
But what keeps coming to mind is my usual severe suspicion about the attractiveness of power and its use. Add to that the increased wealth and regional/global clout that is on the rise in China. Sorry, but I don’t find myself feeling confident that democratic freedoms will gain much ground there, even if they are capitalist running dogs now, or whateverthehell they used to say back in the Cultural Rev.
Rich powermongers are better able to keep control than broke ones. This is one I’d be glad to be wrong on.
Posted by Kuya on Mar 14, 2006 at 2:08 AM Kuya, China is certainly a rising economic power. There are also public uprisings all over the place (we don’t hear much about workers’ revolts) by workers who want their piece of the pie---they know the pie is getting bigger, and their government is running all over the place putting out fires (so to speak), especially when there are workers who are not getting paid at all, for some reason.
They also have a lot of majorly catastrophic floods. But I digress.
Bicycles are being ordered off roads and roads are being made wider to accomodate the growing middle class in China that has cars now, and wants to buy, buy, buy. I’m guessing that they will be busy with “growing pains” and economic expansion for a while before they go into SuperPower mode, if they do so. And if they aren’t provoked to do so.
China has shown far more restraint in the nuclear arms race than any of the other declared states---until now. Our government has decided that China is our enemy, while they produce almost everything on our shelves. China, having discovered that it is our enemy and major supplier is beefing up its military now. As threatening as that might appear, it just means that they aren’t stupid and/or too poor to defend themselves.
I can’t imagine even Rumsfeld being stupid enough to attack China, but this administration beats the imagination to death. Boy would we get our asses kicked in a conventional war with China. So we’d use nukes.
What would we do if China decided to impose its own sanctions on us and stopped supplying us with goods? The Chinese leaders are developing good relations with leaders all over the world and are finding new markets for their wares. They may be able to destroy us economically, but that wouldn’t be because they are big and evil, it would be because we outsourced our manufacturing and let robber barons empty the treasury, and committed a whole host of other ruinous- for -everyone- but- the -very -rich deeds.
With the exception of Taiwan and Tibet, which are geographical control issues (if I’m not mistaken), China doesn’t appear to be all that concerned with ideological hegemony, though these are issues that the U.S. can use to pick a fight with China. I’m opposed to what China has done to Tibet, of course, but yet more opposed to provoking the giant, which will just lead it to beef up its military and nuclear weapons programs yet more.
I understand your concern, and I’m not dismissing it. But I think that our own rich powermongers are still very much the threat of the day, especially if they go broke. If the world survives them going broke, then we’ll see what China is made of.
In our lifetimes, I think the most worrisome thing about China is our government provoking it. China has a real military --- they aren’t led by a bunch of clowns.
Posted by wileywitch on Mar 14, 2006 at 12:15 PM China has a bad habit of political repression, especially noted post-Tianenmen Square (& yet we the people stilll are greedy enough to do business with one of the most anti-globalization sentiments on our suffering planet).
Also, take a look at their environment. I bet the Russians are loving the acidic rain. But enough of the digression....We still must remember & support those Chinese willing to stand up for change. This in the form of non-governmental organization (NGO’s). The number of these org’s is growing, esp. in the 1990’s. They include the China Green Foundation as well as the China Children & Teenagers Fund. These org’s are allowed to exist so long as they steer clear of politics & do not DIRECTLY challenge gov’t policies. Simply, the Chinese DO challenge their gov’t by forming & joining org’s that do the work the gov’t should.
We must remain alert about this sleeping dragon. Economically, the are nearly wide awake, but regarding human rights, they are near -if not at- the bottom. What willl the future bring? Who knows? One thing is certain, & that is that China must allow more freedom of speech. alas, that might now happend anytime soon. If the give power, they will lose it. That is their fear.
Posted by i_am_the_walrus on Mar 14, 2006 at 3:54 PM Hello, i_am_the_walrus.
I’m all in favor of NGOs helping out where they are welcome (though I think the Chinese government would not be over-the-top paranoid, if they suspected that some of these groups were fronts for the CIA). I am all in favor of human rights and non-abusive governments.
However, I must say that I don’t think I “must” do anything about it, anymore than I think the Chinese should feel like they “must” do something about our abuses at Guantanamo, Abu Graib, Bagram, and other gulags spread around the globe.
As for buying their products, that’s a horns of the bull dilemma. My main concern, on my personal level, is that because of American abuses with the “war on terror” pretext, Russia, China, and many other nations and groups are being blatantly abusive toward any group they can call “terrorist” by a definition as elusive as ours.
Posted by wileywitch on Mar 14, 2006 at 7:13 PM WW,
I hear you say a lot of what you disagree with (and, after you redact all your anti-corporate rhetoric, I agree with most of it) but I would like to know what you think we should do about China.
Given, of course, that they are a repressive and totalitarian regime and the average Chinese person shouldn’t be treated like that.
As for all the cheap shots against Rumsfeld, I’d be curious to hear what your feelings are about Clinton, given that when he was Pres, he provocatively sailed the USN through the Straits of Taiwan, flying the flag, as the mainland Chinese were merely testing their missile systems out across the Straits and the tiny island of Taiwan.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 17, 2006 at 1:37 PM They have a rising youth movement working for democracy. This is NOT the time to bomb their country or take any action that will create disorder that the government will (naturally and predictably) crack down on. I don’t think we have to do anything about China. Have we not made enough antimonious, and tragically impossible situations in the MIddle East ?
We should consider ourselves lucky if China doesn’t get too concerned about what to do about us.
We need to take care of our own problems. We don’t seem to be doing a heckuva job rebuilding New Orleans, or preserving our own rights, what are we going to do for China?
Since you brought up my “cheap shots” about Rumsfeld, do you have something you want to say in his defense?
Don’t like Clinton, but at least he had the couthe to maintain protocols with other world leaders. So did Bush I.
Posted by wileywitch on Mar 17, 2006 at 9:34 PM Jay and Wiley,
I have been willing to cut the administration a lot of slack due to my being convinced this war is genuinely our biggest single national threat — ever.
The military did a great job with the invasion — kept colateral damage to a minimum with our superior technology.I can understand the unilateral approach in large part due to fear of other attacks being imminent (and later evidence of trade deals between Saddam, Germany, China and Russia).
What has me really frustrated is the administration’s lack of understanding of the value of communication. They let the media define down the reasons for going in to WMD. They’ve ignored criticisms a simple direct statement would have squelched. They have never admitted any of their terrible misjudgements. The cover-ups and glib remarks have alienated the borderline supporters their base alike.
What communication they have offered has continually sent mixed messages:
We are at war, but don’t change your lifestyle and you won’t be expected to make any sacrifices.
They have no concept of crisis management. Regarding torture — while some of the photos and reports are meerly degrading and stupid, hard evidence of physical abuse and even a simple statement it will not be tolerated or condoned (McCain’s) brings a veto threat from Bush.
Regarding homeland security — our borders go unprotected and a “guest worker” program is the solution? The Dubai mess — a foreign (Muslim) owned company is OK. “Ports are protected by the US Coast Guard”… Whose budget was just cut!
As much as I hate to think it, the similarities of the fighting in Iraq and Vietnam are growing. Politicians lost that war and are handicapping this one. To gain support of the locals without occupying and permanently pacifying their neighborhoods is the height of idiocy. We need many more troops. Without them we are jeopardizing our our who are there along with the success of the whole “democratization attempt.”
I have posted my economic views on the “Lies” thread, but let me just summarize by saying there is a rapidly growing, broad-based disagreement with the president’s State of the Union BS showing at even the most pro Bush websites and publications. China continues to ignore our property rights, mistreats its own people, insists on internet filtering cooperation and is controlling western US ports.
The rich are benefitting, the middle class is being squeezed and we are in danger of a violent reaction to it. If people’s problems are ignored by their representatives they will resort to other means.
And to think we declared independence over a tax without representation.
We have NO representation!
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 20, 2006 at 8:40 AM There is another lie they told you WTH---the one about our precision weaponry and superior military cababilities.
For the bombing of military targets in the opening attack we were 0 for 50.
Russia studied our attack and concluded that we relied so heavily on satellites for communications that we could very easily be crippled and left dead in the water.
In aerial combat exercises with India about two years ago, India won---their jets and their pilots were better than ours.
When you hear talk about how splendid and super-advanced our weaponry is, think Boeing, think Lockheed, think Northrup Grummon. That’s who is talking. I’ve read testimony given by representatives to these companies and they are speaking strictly in marketing terms. Scary. The DOD usually knows better---especially with Star Wars, but it seems the military has been taken over by commercial forces and the statesmen that get the kickbacks.
Russia and China have been doing joint exercises.
You, WTH, have not even begun to imagine what the biggest threat to us is.
Have you seen Jarhead yet?
Posted by wileywitch on Mar 20, 2006 at 11:02 AM Ah, when all else fails, prove it with Hollywood movie references…
I suppose you see Syriana as a docudrama as well....
WW, I’d like to see some of the source data you have on those India-US war game results.
Seriously.
I was in the Air Force in th 80s. Now, I am not saying this is what happened in those war games, but we went to Lyon or Dijon on one joint exercise. It was us against the French.
They won.
Of course, no one really played up the fact that the French insisted on the following rules of engagement.
1) The French could “pickle” a shot whenever they had a shot to make.
2) The Americans could only count a “kill” as a “kill” when the American fighter jet was in the “sweet spot”. ie.” 6 o’clock high”
3) The American jets could not use their afterburners, ostentiously as to not disturb the French goats.
4) The French jets did not have the restrictions of #2 an #3.
Yeah, they won. Barely.
Eeven with the above conditions it was like 51 to 49. And only because our commander yielded a couple disputed points, in the name of French honor.
So. Really. I would like to review some of that source data of yours.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 20, 2006 at 12:53 PM Wiley,
A couple of questions:
What did you mean by…
“For the bombing of military targets in the opening attack we were 0 for 50.”
and
“You, WTH, have not even begun to imagine what the biggest threat to us is.”
Is this in reference to Russia And China doing joint exercises? (Which I had not heard.)
Then you asked, “Have you seen Jarhead yet?”
No, I haven’t. I went to imdb.com and also to amazon.com checked out the reviews, but probably won’t see the movie (possibly rent it later). I haven’t been to a theater in years — the music is too loud and dialog too soft for my hearing.
What is your reason for asking about Jarhead? Are you thinking of the need to still rely on troops as well as technology?
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 20, 2006 at 2:07 PM An interesting article about the Chinese backlash against economic reform.
Morgan-Stanley, Andy Xie (Hong Kong)
“Negative sentiment towards the economy has increased rapidly, despite the fast growth....
The latest manifestation of this is the resurgence of anti-reform sentiment.Concerns about structural problems in the economy are often linked to doubts about foreign capital, since the rising influence of foreign capital in China’s economy is one of the most visible signs of its open door policy. I estimate that one-fifth of China’s GDP (over half in the export sector) is produced by foreign-owned firms, which would make China the most open large economy in the world.”
http://www.morganstanley.com/GEFdata/digests/20060321-tue.html#anchor1
---------------------------
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 21, 2006 at 2:59 PM I estimate that one-fifth of China’s GDP (over half in the export sector) is produced by foreign-owned firms, which would make China the most open large economy in the world.”
Of course, that door keeps opening and closing, like a one-way fish trap. China’s economic modernization and technological aquisition strategy has been to open the doors, let the investments and technology in, then close the doors and send those foreigners home with empty pockets.
I have issues with classifying that as an “open” economy.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 22, 2006 at 8:39 AM Jay,
“I have issues with classifying that as an “open” economy.”
Ah, Yes!
A few years ago there was a WSJ front page article concerning New Balance shoes. NB had set up a factory in China which was Chinese operated — I had been buying their brand for some time. They were notified that the China company was no longer interested in continuing the arrangement.
NB discovered “their shoes” being sold through Hong Kong at far lower prices. NB had been profiting on the China production cost/US sales price, but now were being undercut. China had the tools, the patterns, the training and no longer needed NB.
At the time of publication their aptent appeals had all been for nothing.
I also remember Mike Holland being asked on CNBC about his emerging markets fund — a major part was a Chinese tire manufacturere which had been doing very well. So well theyy didn’t needto be a part of a mutual fund and in spite of a contract just pulled out.Holland’s reply to, “How can they do that?” was. “How can you stop them?”
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 22, 2006 at 9:00 AM Taking my own advice and Googling wiley’s assertions, I found that our Air Force indeed got their clocks cleaned by the Indian Air Force in the past two Cope India Joint Exercises (2004 and 2005).
Flying, among other aircraft, the Russian SU-30, Indian forces forced a win/lose ratio to the point that U.S. F-15Cs were defeated more than 90 percent of the time in direct combat exercises against the IAF.
American Air Force commanders and pilots remarked on how surprised they were by the skill and training of the Indian fighter jocks.
Officials from the 3rd Wing at Elmendorf did not provide specifics about how their aircraft fared, but said the experience is causing the service to reevaluate the way it trains its pilots for air-to-air operations.
“What happened to us was it looks like our red air training might not be as good because the adversaries are better than we thought,” [Commander, 3rd Wing Col Mike] Snodgrass said. “And in the case of the Indian Air Force both their training and some of their equipment was better than we anticipated.”
“Red air” refers to the way the Air Force simulates enemy capability in air combat training. Because the service has assumed for years that its fighters are more capable than enemy aircraft, the U.S. pilots that simulate the enemy, known as “red” forces, in air combat training are required to operate under rules that constrain their combat capability.
“We have always believed that our technology was superior to everyone else’s technology, that we would fight a somewhat inferior adversary, so we have had to supply a simulated adversary from our own resources; we call that ‘red air,’” Snodgrass said.
However.
Not to discredit the IAFs laudable accomplishment, let me quote the following description of the “rules of engagement” for those exercises,
The Cope India exercises consisted of air combat maneuvers in which pilots would practice their fighter tactics and fly against each other one-on-one, as well as simulated combat scenarios. It was during this simulated combat, which included both “offensive counterair” and “defensive counterair” scenarios, that the Indians proved the most formidable, according to the 3rd Wing officials. In the offensive counterair scenarios, a small number of F-15Cs would attempt to intercept an enemy strike aircraft en route to a target that was guarded by a larger number of Indian fighters. In the defensive counterair missions, the F-15s would attempt to defend a target against Indian fighters.
In these offensive and defensive missions, four F-15Cs were usually flying against 10 or 12 of the same model Indian fighter, according to Col. Greg Neubeck, deputy commander of operations for the wing’s 3rd Operations Group and exercise director for Cope India. The 3rd Operations Group is responsible for the 3rd Wing’s flying mission.
The Indians flew a number of different fighters, including the French-made Mirage 2000 and the Russian-made MIG-27 and MIG-29, but the two most formidable IAF aircraft proved to be the MIG-21 Bison, an upgraded version of the Russian-made baseline MIG-21, and the SU-30K Flanker, also made in Russia, Neubeck said. He emphasized the fact that U.S. forces were always outnumbered in these scenarios, but said the missions proved more difficult than expected.
I salute the prowess and skill and daring and skills of our Indian allies.
I challenge any and all uninformed criticism as has been displayed above.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 22, 2006 at 12:55 PM Since at least WWII, it has been the American military strategy, particularly when considering the superior numbers of the Soviet Union during the Cold War, to have the best equipment on the field of battle. Thus, even if the enemy has a numeric advantage, our technological force multipliers would prevail.
The only thing that the “failure” of the Cope India exercises has demonstarted is the need to push ahead with the aquistition of the F-22 Raptors and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, both light-years ahead of the 30 year old aging F-14/F-15/F-16/F-18 fleet.
Even far superior to the F-117 Stealth Nighthawks, which are scheduled to be replaced by the far superior F-22 Raptors in the next few years.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 22, 2006 at 1:09 PM I am sorry, but I just can’t resist. As I research Cope India more and more, it is becoming clearer and clearer that much of the anti-American, anti-capitalistic rhetoric flung about this site is barely that.
http://vayu-sena.tripod.com/exercise-cope-india-article02.html
At India’s request, the U.S. agreed to mock combat at 3-to-1 odds and without the use of simulated long-range, radar-guided AIM-120 Amraams that even the odds with beyond-visual-range kills.
No, I lied. I really am not sorry.
Let’s hope this fiasco encourages diatribic posters on this site to back up their fantasies with facts.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 22, 2006 at 1:59 PM Jay, I am sorry, but I just can’t resist. I knew I would find you worshipping at the altar of American military might and capitalism.
No, I lied. I really am not sorry ; )
Posted by David in Canada on Mar 25, 2006 at 2:41 PM David,
Nothing wrong with being strong and free.....
;)
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 27, 2006 at 9:42 AM Do you have to be strong to be free? Or free to be strong?
Posted by David in Canada on Mar 27, 2006 at 1:23 PM David, you have the cadence of appearing to make a point, but I fail to see it.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 28, 2006 at 8:41 AM David/Jay,
“Do you have to be strong to be free? Or free to be strong?
Any who are free — yet not strong, probably have some good, strong friends.
If not — their freedom is likely at risk.
Posted by whattheheck on Mar 28, 2006 at 2:15 PM Jay, try harder.
I see that Whattheheck found a point in my cadence worth thinking about.
Posted by David in Canada on Mar 28, 2006 at 7:33 PM David,
Sorry about that. I guess I wasn’t paying attention to the blatantly obvious.
The point about making a point is that you are trying to get somewhere....
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 29, 2006 at 8:24 AM Damn.
Sometimes I shoot my mouth off just to get the last word in.
David. Sorry. Truly.
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 29, 2006 at 9:05 AM That’s okay Jay. Easily forgiven.
I might ask your forgiveness for the worshipping at the altar of American military might crack.
But I won’t. Because maybe I already have it.
I believe it’s a given that to forgive is to be forgiven.
Posted by David in Canada on Mar 30, 2006 at 8:28 PM No apologies necessary. Like I said, nothing wrong with being strong and free.
In whatever order…
;)
Posted by Jay Cline on Mar 31, 2006 at 7:49 AM Page 1 of 1 pages -
register a new account »Posting Security
Also by Jehangir Pocha
- China Plays Hardball with Soft Power
Out with strongman Mao and in with svelte-suited diplomats and film personalities: Chinese leaders have learned the value of a warm smile and firm handshake - Eyes Off the Prize
As Iraq dominates U.S. attention, China, India and Iran are emerging as the next world powers - Rebiya Kadeer: The Uighur Dalai Lama
Falsely imprisoned, this human rights activist is fighting the Chinese government's right to rule her people. - Chinas Growing Desert
Overgrazing is stripping arable lands, creating the potential for ecological refugees - China Dissidents Disappeared
Officials round up 'bad elements' as the National People's Congress starts its session - When Red Goes Green
A burgeoning Chinese environmental movement tries to stem the devastation wrought by the country's massive economic transformation.
Popular Discussions
- The 9/11 Faith Movement
Many Americans believe 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. government
1968 posts since Jul 11 06 - What’s the 411 on 9/11?
891 posts since Dec 21 05 - Democrats: It’s the War
659 posts since Nov 1 05 - Was the Presidential Election Stolen?
459 posts since Jun 19 06 - A Fundamental History Lesson
The rise of National Socialism proved politics and religion don't mix
426 posts since Oct 10 05
© 2006 In These Times | Reprint Policy | Privacy Policy | Powered by Expression Engine | RSS Feeds
