Friday, January 21, 2011

US vs Red China

Patriot Post US vs Red China Jan 20 2011

Alexander's Essay – January 20, 2011

U.S. v Red China, Version 3.0

http://patriotpost.us/alexander/2011/01/20/us-v-red-china-version-30/
"[Confinement] to a passive commerce would [compel us] to see the
profits of our trade snatched from us, to enrich our enemies and
persecutors. [Our] spirit of enterprise ... an inexhaustible mine of
national wealth, would be stifled and lost; and poverty and disgrace
would overspread our country." Alexander Hamilton

Hu Jintao, president of the People's Republic of China (as designated
by the central politburo of the Chinese Communist Party, not the
Chinese people), arrived in Washington this week for a lavish state
soiree with Barack Hussein Obama and company. Hu and Obama will meet
eight times, culminating with an extravagant state dinner underwritten
by a loan from China.

After China's Olympic coming out party in 2008, Obama kow-towed to Red
China with a visit in November 2009. Obama expected Hu to reciprocate
in 2010, but the Chinese dictator did not -- a clear signal that
Jintao would come here on his own terms in his own time.

It was no small irony that Hu arrived in Washington on a China Air
Boeing 747-400, a very large affirmation of U.S. trade relations with
China.

Hu's primary objective on this visit is to promote the establishment
of a "G-2" partnership, conferring the honor of the new world order
upon the two most powerful economies in the world (assuming Europe is
not considered one economy, which would demote China to the number
three position).

Obama will chatter about human rights, particularly the oppression in
Tibet and the imprisonment of dissident Liu Xiaobo, who was awarded
the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize in absentia because he was "otherwise
detained." Expect to hear about the incarceration of human-rights
attorney Gao Zhisheng, among countless others. But these concerns are
tantamount to watching a few snowflakes in a blizzard. Complaining to
Communists about human rights violations is a waste of air.
There will also be talk about the impending environmental catastrophes
created by China's economic expansion, and, of course, China's impact
on global climate change.

However, U.S. negotiators are rightly more concerned about bilateral
trade, the valuation of U.S. and Chinese currencies, Chinese
restrictions on export of its natural resources, re-establishment of
military-to-military communications, China's substantial military
buildup and Beijing's influence in North Korea, where the Chinese plan
an economic consortium, undermining U.S. efforts to isolate
Pyongyang's dictator, Kim Jong Il.

Hu, however, is more concerned about China's substantial investment in
the U.S., a two-edged sword, which is the trillion-dollar gorilla
hovering over every other discussions or negotiations between the two
nations. The size and strength of that gorilla is a game-changer.

The evolution of U.S./China relations over the last 60 years can be
characterized by three distinct eras.

In 1949, a Soviet-inspired Marxist/Stalinist revolution subordinated
the Chinese people to the will of a Communist tyrant, Mao Tse-tung.
Mao's 25-year reign of terror resulted in the deaths of some 30
million Chinese during his "Great Leap Forward" to centralize China's
agricultural production. He also supervised the near-complete
eradication of China's cultural and intellectual advances during the
"Cultural Revolution" of the 1960s, when his Red Guard murdered more
than a million Chinese academic and cultural leaders and exiled the
rest to communal farms for "re-education." (Indeed, the Red on the
Chinese flags flying in our nation's capital this week is symbolic of
horrendous bloodshed.)

During this infamous era of tyranny, the U.S. and Red Chinese
governments were Cold War adversaries of the first order.

A second era of U.S.-Sino relations began in 1972, when President
Richard Nixon traveled to the People's Republic of China as a first
step toward opening diplomatic channels and normalizing relations.
This rapprochement was codified over the next three decades with
accelerated trade agreements. The strategic aim of these trade
arrangements in world markets was to create economic bonds that would
deter China from expansionist mischief.

That strategy worked reasonably well until 2008, when Leftist economic
policies helped bring about a crisis of confidence in the U.S. economy
and a politically fortuitous collapse of the U.S. securities markets.
Obama and his socialist bourgeoisie rode that crisis into office.

Subsequently, Red China has underwritten the largest share of Obama's
socialist plan for economic recovery, and now holds more than $1
trillion in Treasury debt (about 7 percent of our total outstanding
debt). Of course, Obama's plan has accomplished little other than
saddling future generations with enormous amounts of debt.

China's U.S. debt holdings have, however, given rise to a new era of
relations with China, replacing the Cold War's mutually assured
destruction (MAD) nuclear standoff doctrine with a new version of MAD
based on an economic standoff doctrine.
Hu says, "We should abandon the zero-sum Cold War mentality." But the
power of China's economic leverage can't be understated, and history
provides no record of a Communist nation holding such leverage over a
Capitalist nation.

The Chinese had no means of attacking North America with nuclear
weapons during the Cold War, and they relied on the protective
umbrella of the Soviet Union's offensive capabilities. But in this new
era, the Chinese have the ability to manipulate their massive U.S.
debt holdings; should they cut off their U.S. credit line and/or dump
their U.S. securities, it could propel our economy into a tailspin.
Red China is well aware of the cards they hold in this latest era.

Both parties know, however, that should China take any action that is
detrimental to the U.S. economy, the result would have dire
implications for the welfare of their own economy. There are 1.2
billion Chinese, 800 million of whom are, in effect, slave-laborers in
Chinese factories; these laborers receive an economic benefit of about
$2,400 per year. If the Chinese Communists want to forestall a
national revolution, they must make every effort to improve the
standard of living of those laborers or risk widespread civil unrest.
Such an improvement will require economic expansion in the range of 10
percent annually -- a daunting task that includes other risks,
including runaway inflation. (In 2010, China's GDP grew 10.3 percent.)
"We have an enormous stake in each other's success," Obama proclaimed
in yesterday's press conference with Hu. "Nations, including our own,
will be more prosperous and more secure when we work together," he
said.

Hu concurred, saying, "We both stand to gain from a sound China-U.S.
relationship, and lose from confrontation."

However, recall if you will that Red China is still under the
oppressive thumb of Hu's Communist regime, and they do not answer to
"the People." Mao may be dead, but his iconic image is ubiquitous in
both urban and rural China, even appearing on the face of every
denomination of Chinese currency. The Russian people tore down statues
of V.I. Lenin soon after the collapse of the Soviet empire. The
prevalence of Mao's image is a good indication that the Red Chinese
government is still alive and well, despite reports of its imminent
demise.

Needless to say the Red Chinese government, like all tyrannical
regimes, does not handle civil unrest politely, as aptly demonstrated
at Tiananmen Square 22 years ago. A likely response to civil discord
would be the absorption of unemployed Chinese into the Red Army and
service corps, bolstered by a resurgence of Communist nationalism.
Predictably, that would be followed by some "creative activity" in the
region to take the minds of the Chinese people off their empty
stomachs.

Thus, China's rapid military expansion in the Pacific is a looming
threat for Australia, Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Indonesia and, of
course, the U.S., as we have critical national interests in the
region.

It has been said that "as goes the U.S. economy, there goes the
world." The same can now be said of China, and this demands the full
and undivided attention of every Western nation.

In the end, however, amid all of the posturing and pretense, the most
valuable natural resource that the United States has in limitless
quantity is Essential Liberty. Though Obama and his Leftist cadres are
doing all they can to constrain that resource, it is the export of
Liberty to China that will best protect our own national interests.

Semper Vigilo, Fortis, Paratus et Fidelis!

Mark Alexander
Publisher, The Patriot Post

No comments:

Post a Comment