This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
Sol Sanders | Follow the money No. 105 | A confusion of roles
"Oh, what a relief to fight, to fight enemies who defend themselves, enemies who are awake!"
Ch’en Ta Erh
Man's Fate
Latest from Uncle Sol, a version of which may appear in the Washington Times on Monday next. Chris
Follow the money No. 105 -- A confusion of roles
Sol Sanders <solsanders@cox.net>
Minxin Pei, the most original of current Sinologists, makes the point authoritarian/totalitarian regimes inherently prioritize requirements for protecting regime leaders over long-term national interest. To preserve the former’s power, they sacrifice the latter’s needs. In the process, they encourage breakdown in the world order. Beijing is now demonstrating the phenomenon in spades.
By using its UN Security Council veto, Beijing exacerbated the already intractable problem of Syria. Under the propaganda rubric of non-interference in others’ internal affairs, it blocks [along with its camp follower, Moscow] a fumbling, U.S. “lead from behind”, international effort to force out a brutal, Damascus regime. Eroding, it nevertheless has troubling entangling political and ethnic tentacles to all the countries around it.
Tagging along, Russia’s fading Prime Minister -- but apparently president again to be -- Vladimir Putin is trying to pull a rabbit out of the hat: to preserve some semblance of the old Soviets’ strategic influence in the Arab world with its former Syrian satellite. It’s so much bluff. Russia neither has resources -- including military -- nor, in the end, can it be assured a guiding role on an unknowable successor regime despite the celebrated talents of Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. And, surprisingly, for once, the Arabs are united in wanting to dump Asaad and his problems before he spreads chaos to the whole region.
Whatever else motivates the Zhongnanhai, the one-party Chinese state Beijing GHQ, there’s paranoia about the North African Jasmine revolutions – so far away but instilling fear their infection might somehow ignite China’s own growing domestic political kindling. Furthermore, that scent of Jasmine further frightens China now turned acrid as an Arab Spring rapidly drifts into hands of Islamic radicals. With its own 25 million Muslims, especially the rebellious Turkic Uighurs of vast Singkiang bordering on Central Asia, it has experience with Islamic terrorism.
Communist Chinese leadership has plenty of other intruding realities. Obscured by events elsewhere, there is again a wave of protest among the repressed Tibetans in southwest China. With a deteriorating situation in neighboring Afghanistan and with its ally Pakistan in domestic turmoil, Beijing must worry about all its Central Asian borders. All that is above and beyond almost daily news of local dissidence as Beijing’s economy has to climb down rapidly off high growth. There is plenty of promise for tough decisions awaiting a still contested generational change of leadership this fall.
Chinese leaders repeatedly shoot themselves in the foot. No one is more dependent on Mideast stability and its oil supply than China’s economy. By siding with the crumbling Basher al-Asaad regime – rather than joining the belated Western and Arab League effort to finesse a negotiated succession to that Mideast powderkeg -- Beijing is threatening its own vital interests. Beijing also supports Assad’s sugardaddy, Iran, against an almost universal allied effort [again with Moscow’s notable exception] to block the mullahs’ nuclear weapons.
If a breakout of the escalating Syrian conflict or an Israel/U.S. military attempt to halt Iran’s progress toward nuclear weapons sets off even a 200-day regional conflict, it would be catastrophic for the Chinese economy. Han Xiaoping, chief information officer of the China Energy Resources Net, recently warned China's estimated reserve of only 110 million barrels would last only 46 days if there were a Persian Gulf closure. China's dependence upon imported crude is far greater than the United States’ with some 40% coming from the Gulf. But only a declining 11% actually comes from Iran, the rest from the Arab states now unsuccessfully lobbying China to help defuse the Syrian timebomb and halt Iran’s nukes.
Western leadership, notably among the U.S. naval military, has tried to persuade itself and the world Beijing’s growing power would be a “peaceful rise”. That was the phrase, now abandoned in the Beijing lexicon, formerly used by Chinese scholars and propagandists to describe how a renascent China would not repeat the bitter history of a burgeoning Germany’s bloody ascent into world leadership in the 19th and 20th century. Alas! Abandoning the phrase may be symptomatic of where Beijing leadership now thinks its primary interests lie.
Unfortunately, corrupt Chinese leadership – based on “revolutionary” genealogy, that is elevation of scions of old Communist families – increasingly dominates Beijing decision-making. If that continues to be the case, China will become an even greater source of international friction, threatening its world partners as well as its own future.
sws-02=11-12
»
- advertisements -
Perhaps this is all because China is protecting its oil sources? Why would it support the Western backed Saudis? Why share oil with the West? Every major power would want its own primary source.
China isn't likely shooting itself in its foot, it is likely acting in the only way possible. Tossing the dice may be the only choice against an entrenched enemy seeing to disrupt its major Middle Eastern supplier.
Either Whalen has joined the Zionist Psychopathocracy, or succumbed to the mind control radiation eminating from his local GWEN tower.
Can someone please explain to me what this masterpiece of noble geostrategic rationale is doing on zerohedge?
I was wondering the exact same fucking thing.
This piece of statist propaganda was the ZH geopolitical equivalent of the former Leo Kovilakis' inane Keynesian drivel, with both being utterly unworthy of respect.
Shame on you, Tyler.
...Perhaps it's occasionally important to know what the other camp is thinking/planning/propagandizing?
Oh, you mean in the hypothetical situation in which the ENTIRE FUCKING CORPORATE-CONTROLLED MAINSTREAM MEDIA were not full of such warmongering statist bullshit ALREADY?
Give me a fucking break!
Still, when you start to censor,....
I'm sorry, but that is pure bullshit.
Who is talking about "censoring" here? It is called exercising INTELLIGENCE and DISCRIMINATION --- as in discriminating the truth from lies, or honest and intelligent arguments from self-serving, dishonest propaganda.
I am morally offended and intellectually insulted by the cowardice and absurdity inherent in your statement.
By your specious and ridiculous apparent standards, EVERY media outlet of ANY nature should be presenting the exact same range of content and commentary, or else they are "censoring" somebody or some opinion. However, I do not need to read the maliciously untruthful, statist, pro-Establishment propaganda and lies of the financial and political elite --- I am already bombarded by more than enough of that from most so-called "news" purveyors and media sources, thank you.
Right, but only so long as it agrees with your opinion? Everyone needs your benevlolent guidance. Whatever.
The only difference between the US regime and the Syrian regime is that the US regime has the world reserve currency at it's disposal and can buy off the masses with bread and circuses for a few more years, see you in 5-10 years when that comes to an end, you'll see the National Guard and UN Peace Keepers on US soil shooting civilians too
One big difference between Syria and the U.S. is the amount of guns owned by our population. Our forefathers were smart...they allowed us to arm ourselves not just to protect us from forces from beyond our shores, but from tyrants from within as well. If our leadership were ever to turn loose our military upon our civilian population, I'm guessing it would be the worst asswhooping our troops ever were engaged in...there are a lot of Americans who believe that liberty and freedom should be defended and that some principles are more important than life itself, and most of them have guns and know how to use them. We have had one civil war and the good guys won. I would expect it to be no different if it ever happens again.
"We have had one civil war and the good guys won."- Oh really ? The Agressors won, the South didn't even want a war they just wanted independence
Are you sure the good guys won the civil war? The winners always write the history. Lincoln started trampling the Constitution.
Well written imperialist hokum.
Should sell well in the Washington Times -
Mike Pettis seems to have pissed off someone in Beijing....
http://www.mpettis.com "account suspended"
Let's hope not...
Sol Sanders writes:
« ...authoritarian/totalitarian regimes inherently prioritize requirements for protecting regime leaders over long-term national interest ... »
You're talking about the fascist United States of America, right?
The US Congresspeople and Senators change less often, than the members of the Communist Party Congresses in China!
And the inner circle of American oligarch families just about don't change at all.
Sol Sanders, you are a TOOL of the American regime.
And this applies to more than just authoritarian/totalitarian regimes.
Look at the pain the Greek Parlimentarians intend to inflict on the Greek people.
20% cut in minimum wage
150,000 layoffs
But if the money flows into Greece you can bet your bippy that each of those parliamentarians will be making just as much as before
"Pei identifies the core problem as corruption, which he says is both ‘endemic’ and ‘systemic.’ Over the past few decades, the government has become larger and more decentralized, allowing it to also become more predatory. Political decentralization was introduced with the intention of stimulating economic initiative, which it successfully did, but it has also led to greater levels of corruption and the frequent bribery of local officials. Some local governments, says Pei, have become ‘mafia states’ allied with criminal gangs. (p.132) Rather than enforcing honesty, the party survives through patronage."
http://chinabookreviews.weebly.com/4/post/2008/07/5.html
"Power is becoming too formidable and cruel. It is out of control, and without limits. It has kidnapped society and strangled reform. Facing this, finding a solution is a matter of vital importance. In a situation where special interest groups have choked off the possibility of various types of progress, building a just society and enacting reform is difficult."
Guo Yunhua, Chinese sociologist, paraphrased by Mike Pettis:
http://finance.townhall.com/columnists/mikeshedlock/2012/02/11/when_will...
This should all be sounding quite familiar to readers in 'Western democracies'...
What did you expect? You are aware rcwhalen is a Newt supporter?
Anyway, this article is an absolute piece of toilet paper. It can only be taken seriously by those living in that landfill between hockey and tacos who probably enjoy simplification such as "the Arabs" of Syria. Jesus. Can you please be more general you historian you? Good guys will be good and bad guys bad goes the idiotic Hollywood scripted existence Americans wish to live in, yet somehow, there are apparently enough useful idiots to turn this into a self-fulfilling prophecy. Chaos, madness and complete break-down of sanity is now what America wishes to project beyond its borders. That much is clear.
How dare China not accept its place in the Western-dominated world. How dare China have interests that do not fit into the US's plan to 'democratize' and 'globalize' the world. How dare the grandchildren of the Mao generation try to find their own way toward greater freedoms and independence. They should just comply with the US plans for the world and all of their troubles will be over...right?
The US and its EU allies are out making enemies of people all around the globe and yet its China that sits on a foreign policy precipice? And, what...the US government does not have its own elite class and corruption?
Meanwhile, China is getting oil from US-financed Brazil, Venezuela, Russia, and, soon, Canada - among other non-ME nations. That's not what most would call shooting themselves in the foot.
What a homer. We should follow the money that supports this hegemonic attitude.
What will we do! The Chinese must be trampled. They usurp the role of the U. S.
Can't have that.
Whether you like it or not, China's national interest lies in defending its supply of oil: not in allowing all the Middle East oil to fall into Western hands. China must ally with Iran. China also must continue to court Russia. I doubt China cares much about the fate of Syria. However, China's erstwhile allies, Iran and Russia, require Chinese support for Syria-- and the partnership of China and Russia is an unnatural thing (destined to fail, but in both nation's interests for the moment). In order to maintain this relationship, both China and Russia must make some awkward geostrategic decisions. China's foreign policy is a rational extension of its nation interest-- not some inexplicable manifestation of some "revolutionary genealogy."