This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Sol Sanders -- Follow the Money No. 70 -- On China
A version of this column is scheduled to be published Monday, June 13, 2011, in The Washington Times
Follow the Money No. 70 -- On China
By Sol Sanders
I haven’t read Dr. Henry J. Kissinger’s latest book, On China. But as someone who for most of his adult life has lived in China’s shadow, including reading, thinking, exchanging ideas with students of that civilization, I was interested. But now I leave evaluating the work to scholars, as some have already done http://www.weeklystandard.com/articles/message-dr-k_573239.html
That’s come about because I heard the good doctor recently laying out a strategy for “accommodation” with China. One could excuse the cacophony of bromides -- many fallacious -- Dr. Kissinger trotted out in this wide ranging NPR interview. http://onpoint.wbur.org/2011/05/12/kissinger-on-china Time was short, the interlocutor unskilled, and the subject matter vast. But here is the crux of what Dr. Kissinger had to say:
“…through thousands of years of Chinese history, I know no example where outside pressures about the domestic structure of China produced domestic changes in, in [cq] China. ...”
This is stultifying, a misconception so wrong it puts into question any analysis Dr. Kissinger might otherwise make. In fact, although obviously a most original civilization, China nevertheless – like all other societies – has been impacted, often in revolutionary fashion, by outside forces. Space prohibits even an outline of such convoluted episodes. But let me site three chronologically dispersed examples:
• In the first century of the Common Era, Indian Buddhism entered China. It not only upended Chinese metaphysics but introduced such everyday artifacts as bridges, tea and the chair. [The Impact of Buddhism on Chinese Material Culture, John Kieschnick, Princeton University Press, 2003]
• As a result of a humiliating defeat by the British in the First Opium War [1839-42], Taiping, a heterogeneous Christian sect, led two decades of bloody revolt. Before it was subdued [by China’s “alien” imperial rulers, the Manchu, with the help of foreign military] state levies shifted from land to trade and military power from central armies to regional warlords. Slavery, polygamy and foot-binding were banned if not eliminated. Most importantly, the Taping reaction to foreign intervention ended China’s isolation.
• In 1949, after decades of Japanese invasion, the Chinese Communists established a unified government modeled on the USSR to be massively aided for almost two decades by Moscow. While conventional wisdom now holds the Chinese Communists have shed all but the rhetorical trappings of Marxist-Leninism, its economy remains largely in government hands, a complete break with China’s centuries of market economics [That concept, ironically, was passed to Europeans as laissez-faire by late 16th century European Jesuits in Beijing!]
Dr. Kissinger’s formulation is no blooper.
It underpins his proposed strategy for dealing with Beijing’s growing power. It equates to his 1970s call for “détente” in The Cold War. That was to be an acceptance of Soviet power for a hoped for extended period of relaxed tension. That strategy proved precarious until Moscow imploded in 1990 -- in no small part as a result of confrontation tactics by Pres. Ronald Reagan.
Historical analogies are misleading and often dangerous but marginally useful. China today does constitute a somewhat similar problem. While no sane person in the West and Japan advocates military engagement, not to recognize American interests are jeopardized by an increasingly powerful hostile China is to ignore reality.
That indeed, has been until now Washington’s modus operandi:
• The U.S. has made great efforts to bring China into the highest world councils with Beijing responding by courting pariah regimes threatening peace and stability.
• Washington has pursued free trade and investment with China while Beijing responds with unfair trade practices, protection for state corporations and markets, and financial manipulation.
• Washington has sought open exchange of military information and lent security for an expanding China trade, but Beijing rejects transparency and secretly pursues a rapid military buildup against an unidentified enemy.
• These American policies have strengthened the power and influence of a highly vulnerable Chinese regime, one facing great economic ambiguities and unpredictable political challenges.
Washington is now reexamining how to restrain what could well be a new aggressive formidable power. It must not repeat the long prelude to World War II when East Asia storm signals were largely ignored – incidentally, then too involving a burgeoning commercial relationship [with Japan].
That requires extensive, intensive and knowledgeable debate about Beijing’s capacities and goals -- and America’s abilities to meet them
Dr. Kissinger contributes little to this gargantuan undertaking.
sws-06-10-11
»
- advertisements -
Kissinger should be hung.
http://www.silverdoctors.com/
Bad attitude guys like you insist on dredging up uncomfortable references that were supposed to stay down the memory hole. The ADL and like organs of the ally state went to bat instantly for lil' Sandy and it was a big fat nothing.
Case closed.
Today's China ? A Frankenstein cobbled together by Chicom xenophobia, Corporate America myopia (long term thinking as long as their dicks), and American politicians, whose sole purpose is enriching themselves, country be damned. How do we vote in these weiners ?
All else is just background noise; even Nixon's old left hand man. Mr."peace with honor", as the last American helicopter lifted of the American embassy in Saigon. Some peace, some honor.
The Chinese government is terrible, but then so is this article. Even though Kissenger is so wrong as to make Pol Pot look good, China is not a danger to any Western 'democracy'.
All they want, people and in my opinion government, is freedom from domination by the American (Frecnch, Russian, British etc.) empire.
Our relationship is about money and who benefits from the Chinese-American trade. Corporate America has gotten rich from our Chinese trade policies. Corporate America controls legislation and foreign trade policies, therefore therefore the current policies toward China will not change until there is a disruption in our business/banking/monetary policy relationship.
I ask myself what is a country to do in the face of American military behavior and the number of bases around the world? Do we see any act of self-protection as a threat? Sometimes we ignore the ramifications of our own actions. Our military spending is unsustainable long-term, and we can't afford a cold war with China either.
The arrogance of the American elite never ceases to amaze.
"The U.S. has made great efforts to bring China into the highest world councils with Beijing responding by courting pariah regimes threatening peace and stability." "Washington has pursued free trade and investment with China while Beijing responds with unfair trade practices, protection for state corporations and markets, and financial manipulation."
READ: The U.S. has made great efforts to bring China into the pax Americana so as to allow multinational corporations to exploit cheap Chinese labor. China has no desire to become a client state to the interests of American multinationals.
"Washington has sought open exchange of military information and lent security for an expanding China trade, but Beijing rejects transparency and secretly pursues a rapid military buildup against an unidentified enemy."
READ: America has nothing left to sell the Chinese, except military technology, because multinationals have taken all production from America to China. The Chinese wish to spend their "free trade" money on military technology. Multinationals are happy to sell this to the Chinese. Stupid American politicians find out after the fact and cry foul.
yea, well, if this article is about taking down an 80 year old fart who long ago had his day, then kudos to you. if it is about making astute observations about the chinese american tension, it has failed miserably. your argument is that the u.s. is placating china
bullet points i will respond to in underline
That indeed, has been until now Washington’s modus operandi:
• The U.S. has made great efforts to bring China into the highest world councils with Beijing responding by courting pariah regimes threatening peace and stability.
china was terrorised by japan and russia for decades. while america defeated japan in 44, it then forced japan to serve as an american vessel for controlling chinese waters. the u.s. has also done nothing to 'open' japan and arguably has helped foster anti-chinese sentiment in japan by never requiring the japs to pay tribute nor even formally apologize for their behevior in wwii. the chinese, aligned with russia post wwii, saw what happened to the ussr, and understand the u.s. role. unlike the ussr, the chinese government has not overspent itself on military spending and is well aware of the dangers to its own economy of an escalation with the u.s. the chinese people themselves are distrustful of all governments, many of them love the u.s. , are u.s. citizens, and are attempting to bring u.s. culture back to china ( the same cannot be said of u.s. citizens going to china). besides imperial intervention in the middle east and south america, the u.s. has exercised military naval and airforce maneuvering on the southern coast of north korea, only a short distance for missles aimed at beijing. the u.s controls the straights of mallaca and is heavily alligned with singapore. not to mention, the u.s. operates a massive base in okinawa and guam, the equivalent of the ussr placing missiles in cuba ( oh wait, they tried that ). china is trying to deal with north korea without outright invading/occupying nk. this would require china go to war with north korea. north korea is a parasitic overly militarized country that uses its weapons to blackmail the rest of the world to feed it's hungry population. one day, north korea will have war with south korea, or whoever .......china knows this and wants to stay out of its way because north koreans will present a huge refugee problem, and the nk government also can threaten china with its own weapons. not even canada or mexico has nukes.
FINALLY AND MOST IMPORTANTLY japan committed to massive nuclear energy projects in order to comply with american demands that japan be able to attack china without having a conventional military. the u.s. has stripped japan of a military force while forcing japan to sustain a capability to turn massive ammounts of nuclear fuel into weapons grade fuel for warheads, many of which are TACTICAL SMALL NUKES AIMED AT ALL CHINESE CITIES. the japanese may not have these missiles ready and loaded, but the fuel is there, the weapons designs are there, the parts are probably even ready and waiting in guarded rooms stretegically placed near nuclear reactors around the country to be assembled within 24 hours of a crisis. -----[ maybe even one of these sites near fukushima]
how do i know this? read between the lines fool. the u.s. like all smart empires needs vassal states to do its bidding while being able to deflect responsibilty for support or even organizing hanus behavior. saudi arabia in bahrain? israel blowing up iraqi, syrian , and soon enough iranian nuclear facilities? , and yes, japan. why not australia and new zealand? because they are neither close enough, threatened enough by common hostilities, nor enslaved enough by us. empire, for us to tell them what to ( and thank god for that )
japan is a nuclear turkey. the u.s has placed japan on a suicidal kamikaze mission against china should china try to do anything, while simultaneous stripping japan of any real ability to defend itself let alone to conduct scaled purposeful non-suicidal aggression. the u.s. and militarily zombified japan. japan is the walking dead and china knows this. should china's dragon attempt to breath fire, the japanese zombie will make it pay a high high price. but will nonetheless destroy itself in the process.----this works out great for the u.s. , our military are strategic geniuses, and this pisses china off. it would piss me off if i were chinese military, being neutered at the ballsac like that. go u.s.!
• Washington has pursued free trade and investment with China while Beijing responds with unfair trade practices, protection for state corporations and markets, and financial manipulation.
this is huge b.s. . don't blame china for the fact that the u.s. government is dominated by corporate globalists who will stop at nothing to replace expensive u.s .labor with cheaper foreign labor (not only chinese) and that u.s. labor is too molified by facebook, fructose, and fucking every other distraction, too change u.s. government policy. trade and mercantilism are a game that china plays well and the u.s. poorly. the u.s. has the weapons and the military to play this game the way we want, don't blame anyone else, that is some tim geitner bullshit like blaming china for currency manipulation.
• Washington has sought open exchange of military information and lent security for an expanding China trade, but Beijing rejects transparency and secretly pursues a rapid military buildup against an unidentified enemy.
the weapons game is won by whoever SELLS the most weapons. it is part of international trade. the u.s. sells more weapons than anyone, and many of them to china. it's that simple. sell weapons, purchaser uses them and buys again. if there is a 'real' war weapon sales end and counterparties must produce their own or get supplied by allies. blaming china for a military buildup, are you kidding? the u.s. navy bullys china constantly. the chinese are buying and making submarines. they don't even have a genuine aircraft carrier other than the retrofitted russian skeleton of a compromised test carrier they started outfitting this year for exercising and learning about carriers.
• These American policies have strengthened the power and influence of a highly vulnerable Chinese regime, one facing great economic ambiguities and unpredictable political challenges.
this is not even a point, it is vague meaningless gibberish . the u.s. has chosen to stregthen china and to help the chinese grow themselves out of the crushing starvation style poverty that their communist leaders planned for them through the post war decades. i believe the u.s. has done a great thing here because a poor starving china would have weighed down asia, and with it , the u.s. generally. when the tide rises, all boats rise, and the u.s. has done a great thing encouraging china to lift itself out of poverty, and with it, the rest of the world.
+1
The middle kingdom didn't cultivate population of 1,3billion souls by being aggressive.
More likely they've been civilising the picts for the past 200 years or so - something that proved tricky for even the Romans.
Thoughout history China welcomed western astronomers, geographers, mathematians, mercenaries and businessmen, only to expell all of them in the end. Books have been written on this very theme ,and I believe it is what Kissinger had in mind.
If history is to repeat, China will again close its doors to western "Barbarians" when it suits them. That day may be near as they have already obtained most of western manufacturing know-how, technology, and currency--- which may become worthless soon. Time to use that currency to buy hard commodity assets in other countries and throw out the infidels who are bankrupt and unable to provide a consumption market justifying purchase of more US bonds. Yes, China with a domestic consumption market of over a billion in population, will become self sufficient and zenophobic at the same time which will create global financial and resource tensions. For many US firms like GM , Ford and thousands of outsourcers it could be a disaster.
It could be a disaster and serve them right, the short-sighted gluttons.
Perhaps a disaster, perhaps a blessing.
What does China manufacture that we can't make here? Bring back our factory jobs....sounds like a pretty good idea to me.
Plus, if America wants to be, we are largely self-sufficient from a resource perspective. China is not. Let them pull in if they want to. Let them focus on shifting from export to domestic markets. Maybe some of those Barbie Doll factories can shift to making chop sticks. We should try some of that elixer ourselves & make our own Barbie Dolls. China is generations away from reaching the critical mass needed for a consumption society. In fact, much of their energy and resources are spent on just trying to fed and shelter that huge population mass.....and it is not getting easier for them.
The author starts off with a gross misunderstanding of Kissinger's comment. Dr. K's comment should be interpreted as referring to 'overt' external pressure by an outside power aimed at securing a specific outcome. This is true. The examples the author cites in refutation are historical events not specific political pressure. For example, if the US tries to pressure China on its exchange rate, it will not work. But that does not mean that China will not change as a result of inevitable events like the rise of its middle class, increasing wage demands, global inflation. There is a subtle difference between the two causes and outcomes.
Saber rattling. The next logical outcome to our financial morass. It's all China's fault.
UUnfair trade. Non US sanctioned Foreign policy. Hackers. Human Rights abusers. Baby killers. Currency manipulators. Communists.
What more bad can we say about them? Hard workers? Savers? Manufacturers?
The next logical outcome to our financial morass. It's all China's fault.
It is hardly China's fault that they exploited the traitorous myopia of Corporate America. But this one-way relationship with the US is crumbling away.
"Ask not what you can do for your country, ask what you can do for Walmart" does not make a country great.
Hackers. Human Rights abusers. Baby killers. Currency manipulators. Communists. YES !
Hard workers? America has this.
Savers? Can't save in America when the churners and skimmers won't pay interest on savings accounts.
Manufacturers? Every Chinese plant was built by Westerners using Western technology and Western capital. China's contribution was free land, no taxes, and slave labor.
In 2 decades the Chicoms have gathered Western technology for free and are watching their enemies eat themselves alive on the debt treadmill.
Our morass today is;
1. China's fault (free and unfettered access to the U.S. market for a few trinkets paid to the Clinton foundation, etc.).
2. control of the American economy by the parasites (the FIRE class that produces nothing but steals much)
3. and a political class that has yet to see they have burned the house down to its foundation.
+++
well said. just another version of Orwell's Emmanual Goldstein. enough of these people already.
Sanders is correct; the United States is not 'China's parent', but out of enlightened self-interest has tried to help them into the community...the "community of nations". And now they must pay the real freight, and stop mooching off the neighbors.
Aside from this, the #1 thing we can do to really, really shake up China is to exercise our rights per Article 16 and unilaterally withdraw from that disastrous Cold War sop-of-an-agreement, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967. Then go back to the Moon with every intention of establishing sovereign property rights (the Treaty prohibits) for those who follow, making discoveries or developing other commercialized processes.
It's the same principal as the Pacific Railroad Act's effect on 50+ years of American economic dynamism, from 1870-1929, only in this case it would turbocharge America for the next 500+ years....fuck the Chinese.
Chinese labor built those railroads.
Chinese labor built those railroads.
That is the PC position and it is wrong. Chinese were only one nationality that worked on the railways, and they largely only laid track.
It was hard and dangerous work for everybody, but the Chinese made far more money in America than what they could in China, and they sent their wages back to China, exactly like they do today.
Anyone for ping-pong?
This article is a prelude to War. Neatly lays out all the things the United States has done to help China "grow up" only to be treated like a talking head.
Got news for United States...this is the exact result of "bad parenting"...your children will behave towards you how you behave in general and we clearly have been setting a shitty example of how "developed" nations should behave.
Neocon horseshit. Neither Kissinger (a war criminal) nor Sanders deserves serious attention, unless one wishes to be a state-power-worshipping sycophant.
Like so many intellectuals who 'know China', you & Sanders simply get it wrong.
What you misconstrue is that being affected by outside influence is not the same as allowing someone or something to affect change in China. China only changes if it wants to. Yes, they have 'been impacted' by outside forces, but only of their own choosing, at their own time, on their own terms. China only changes if and when it wants to and NOTHING the west, Kissinger, all of Academia, you or I do, say or think will get them to do something they do not want to do, before, unless or until they want to do it.
Why did China wait until 1949 to go communist? Shouldn't it have lead the world and gone communist in 1849? Will it still be communist in 2049?
Too bad you didn't learn something reading those "DC" comics...
So the Boxers in the Boxer Rebellion were resisting what exactly? A foreign economic and political order that was definitely NOT being imposed from the outside? And they were receiving support from the throne in the form of Dowager Ci Xi...and they failed. China was forced to change (yet again) due to outside pressures and forces. Yet another example... Your "counter-argument" is just air. Hot, at that. You refute none of his evidence (or mine) and merely assert that China is invincible and immutable throughout time. I'm well aware of (and subscribe to) the theory of China's power to Sinicize, but you make no sense.
Henry Kissinger - when is it time for his hideous-looking d'neph or whatever the alien consciousness is called, to be extracted from his used-up shell and transplanted into a younger human host?
Or does his feeding on un-baptized children reverse the aging process?
Henry The K - from lowly jeep driver for the Allies after WW v2.0 to Master of the World.
So Kissinger is a colossal idiot when it comes to Chinese history...hmmm. This might explain why he thought it would be a good idea to make buddy-buddy with them to spite the Soviets. The author could have also cited the tributary demands that Genghis Khan placed on the Chinese which resulted in a failure to pay, an invasion and the establishment of the Mongolian Yuan Dynasty. Or for a less esoteric example, the 21 Demands that Japan placed on China about 80 years ago that led to the breakup of the central state and the rise of warlord cliques, a Communist hinterland, and collaborationist governments. But who needs facts when you're Henry Kissinger. He should have listened to Napoleon who advised letting China sleep.
I guess Napoleon should have let Russia sleep, but that is monday morning histrionics... I love these paranoid supermen who go one step too far...that makes for many dead in terrible conditions but for good reading subsequently. We are a lucky generation the "boomers". So far...
"The enemy of my enemy is my friend". That is what Kissinger exploited in the Sino/Russian relationship. China and Russia still do not agree on the northern border.
China today is building up its economic and military might against the country that built modern day China- the USA.
China has more spies in the West that the Soviet Union ever had and their are more Chinese living in the West that have families back in China, that can be leaned on, when necessary.
China is no friend of the USA.
Sorry, but this is silly entitlistic banter. Do you actually believe that the US built China? Where did you go to school?
Kissinger is Bilderberg; that's all one has to know. Their agenda is his agenda. Their statements are his statements. He reminds me of one James Cramer; just another ass clown.
Kissinger is no idiot. Kissinger is a brilliant negotiator who succeeded very much in cementing the Sino-Soviet split. Don't let your dislike of the man cloud your judgement of his character. He is undoubtably as crooked as it gets, but he is no idiot.
I hear he's now going to be put in charge of cleaning up FIFA corruption. A man as well versed in corruption as Kissinger is great for the job. I can't wait to see the show trials. I do hope they televise them.
Kissinger was born in 1923. He is 88 years old for crying out loud. Really, how much longer do you suppose he will be around to trouble the counsels of the weak and foolish? Two years? More? We'll dance on his grave.
Requiem for Allende? Requiem for Cambodia? Requiem for Operation Condor? Requiem for Egypt?
The irony of it is that according to the post of David Pierre here...during the War..HK as Operation Paperclip operative was helping NAzi criminals...as that was 'reason of state' then; as would be sanctuarising the 'oil patch' in the 70s and supporting Israel afterwards.
He's Jewish too. They're probably getting a special place in hell ready for that boy.
Well, we (America) have been ceding our manufacturing base to mainland China, by providing capital, engineering expertease, and a willing consumer market.
While it is great to be able to exchange depreciating fiat paper for real goods, it weakens our defensive capabilities by ruining our supply chains and industrial base which you could argue in a major war are just as important as the militery itself.
Since on the face of it trading real goods for fiat paper makes little sense and the Chineese leadership must realize that it is akin to a form of slavery for a lot of their citizens, it makes me suspicious of their true underlying motives.
I could by wrong and just a paranoid factory hick but I have been suspicious of their leader's motives for years and our leaders just suck.
Some very astute observations there, lieto.
On top of that, Kissinger is simply flagging the next step in the globalist strategy: convergence with China and Russia as the US and Euro economies go into depression.
It's somewhat ironic that the result of the West "winning" the Cold War is to find itself coming under the resurgent Russian and Chinese umbrella as bankrupt dependents. A significant portion of the blame for that can be laid squarely at Kissinger's treacherous feet ... especially since it looks like it has been the plan for over 50 years.
If you want to know why China accepts paper in return for real goods, the answer is in the history texts. Have yourself a look at the relationship of the US/UK during the 19th century. You may find some striking similarities.