|
For the duration of William Jefferson Clinton’s
tumultuous two terms, the experts that saw China as antithetical
to everything the United States stands for were roundly and
publicly vilified by Clinton’s propaganda machine.
Anyone who had the gall to speak out against the PLA’s
accruement of all sorts of American military technology, its
assumption of de facto control of the Panama Canal,
its documented overtly illegal influence of the 1996
presidential election as well as the continued
reference to the U.S. as enemy #1 was scorned as racist
trouble-makers. The
media and the Clinton spinners painted China as a “strategic
partner”, a benign Asian behemoth that only needed to be
coaxed by American diplomats in order to bring out their
inherent friendliness. This
humanistic philosophy was employed ad nauseum by the
previous administration to justify the courting of tyrants and
communists.
And if you’re into dementia, that may be a believable
argument, but recent days’ events are fast proving the
contrary, and in the process vindicating those so-called racist
alarmists as being right all along.
The way this crisis is moving along currently, you would
think that China possessed a military equal in might to our
owned armed forces. Why else would the White House and State Department and the
Pentagon proceed with such unwarranted caution? It would seem, that if all of these think-tank experts and
State Department politicos are right, then we have nothing to
fear from the Chinese in the way of military response to an
American show of force. But
we act like the Middle Kingdom is the USSR!
And I can’t figure out why.
Look at the facts of the case:
Our defenseless EP-3 was conducting a routine
surveillance mission over international waters, posing no direct
threat to the People’s Republic.
As has been customary for some time, the Chinese
scrambled fighters to shadow the American spy plane as it
continued a usual aerial intelligence gathering flight around
the Pacific Rim. At
some point, these trigger-happy Chinese fighters threatened to
fire on the American prop plane.
They assumed a much more belligerent, intimidating
posture, as both fighters came up right along side the EP-3.
Somehow one of these jets then clipped our plane, and as
the Chinese pilot spiraled to the sea, the American crew of 24
was forced to make an emergency landing on a Chinese island in
the South China Sea.
Nothing illegal. Nothing
intentional on our part. And
yet, the Chinese are conducting them selves as if this was a
purposeful act of war. They
are currently “detaining”, to use the politically correct
vernacular, 24 of our best and brightest despite the protests,
however feeble, emanating from Washington, D.C.
And to add insult to injury, they refuse to give us back
our plane, choosing instead to gut the aircraft of all its
sensitive equipment.
Now those that take a benign view of China find little if
anything wrong with this confiscation of our people and our
property by a communist regime.
They see the entire ordeal as being of little importance,
a big misunderstanding. Those
of us that show a hint of outrage over our servicemen and women
being held hostage are once again ripped as being too hard-lined
and way over the edge.
Well excuse me for being concerned about
the eroding of my country’s hegemonic status.
As I posited in an earlier column, this arrogant Chinese
defiance articulated in their ridiculous demand for an apology
from us only justifies my assertions that communist China
loathes us and enjoys leading us around like a schoolyard bully
keeping a smaller boy’s football from him.
Our government seems to be doing little to quickly bring
back these American hostages.
Instead of threatening to expel Chinese diplomats from
our shores or threaten to suspend normalized trade relations
with the communist nation, or even going as far as parking a few
action-starved destroyers and carriers around Hainan Island, the
White House asks (not demands) if Jiang Jemin would be so
very nice as to return us our people.
This is utterly embarrassing and unacceptable.
Folks, we’re dealing with a marginal communist power
here, right? Remember,
this burgeoning East Asian country has a long way to go until
they can challenge our super-power status either militarily or
economically…this according to the “experts.”
So if this is the case, why are we treating these rogues
like they’re the veritable 800 lb Gorilla?
Why are we playing the part of diplomatic wimp?
Shouldn’t we be the ones forcing the issue?
The longer this drags out without resolution, the weaker
we look, the more indecisive and vulnerable we appear.
I call on someone to remind our President and our
Secretary of Defense, that the roles are needlessly reversed;
they’re inverted. Instead
of the United States holding all the cards, instead of the
Chinese revering and respecting our deterrence ability, we bow
in the face of these Maoist thugs.
Contrary to the long acknowledged international order,
we’re behaving as if the communist Chinese might destroy us
should we make a bold, authoritative move.
Again, though, it points to an ambiguity in American
foreign policy.
If the Chinese are really nothing more than second-tier
power, then why do we approach the issue with such tentativeness
and caution? Shouldn’t
we be pressing the issue? These
thugs are holding 24 Americans hostage against our will and in
violation of every international law that applies! But we cower nonetheless.
Some would argue that the Chinese would never allow this
to escalate to the brink of conflict, arguing that free trade
and market growth are too valuable for the Chinese to risk war.
To that argument I say nonsense.
The issues here are for more complicated than the
superficial pursuit of money.
If the Chinese were so concerned with making money and
becoming a capitalist power, they would no doubt embrace a much
more accelerated path to modernization.
Nations eager to create and enjoy prosperity don’t
usually preserve a political system that is diametrically
opposed to the pursuit of individual wealth, either.
This crisis is all about honor and prestige and pride,
and has little to do with money.
Open markets are simply a vehicle for the communist
regime to acquire valuable technology that will enable China to
reign as a world superpower (to the detriment of American
hegemony). And
indeed, if you look at China today, the people reaping the
benefits from free markets are communist party officials and
their “yes men.” The
Sino yeomanry, in large part, still lives in poverty and
decadence.
Would we risk conflict with a trading partner, especially
a country with as much potential as China?
This question reflects a terrible turn for the worse in
our collective psyche. The
question suggests that all arguments begin from the premise that
the pursuit of financial glory is everything, regardless of the
moral and sovereignty issues involved in a particular case.
For once, these “experts” need to put money aside and
hark back to the days when American prestige and primacy and
clout overruled these lesser concerns.
We’re talking about American citizens being held
against their will by avowed anti-American communists, for
goodness sakes!
Oh, for the strength and resolve of Ronald Reagan and Cap
Weinberger and Richard Allen!
Our servicemen and women would have been home long ago.
|
Buy Books
The China Threat: How the
People's Republic Targets America
by Bill Gertz
Red Dragon Rising: Communist
China's Military Threat to America
by Edward Timperlake & William C. Triplett II
Year of the Rat: How Bill Clinton
Compromised U.S. Security for Chinese Cash
by Edward Timperlake & William C. Triplett
Hegemon: China's Plan to Dominate
Asia and the World
by Steven W. Mosher
Search
the Web for:
Death Penalty
Ronald
Reagan
Middle
East
MP3
Web Music
George
W. Bush
Saddam Hussein
Online Gambling
Auto Loans
Free Online Games
NFL
Nascar
Britney Spears
|
