International + SHARE
by Marielena Montesino de Stuart
COMMUNIST CHINA: Strategic and Economic ‘Agent Provocateur‘
Beijing takes to the air: “Sir, will that be champagne… or missiles?”
But this is not about serving Dom Pérignon in First Class, nor about providing the best in commercial airline safety and comfort. This is about how the Chinese manipulate the commercial airline industry to better serve their military power in the air, with strategic positioning which gives the Chinese Communist government stronger and faster access to the Asian neighborhood, and beyond.
As a strategic industry, the Chinese commercial airline industry directly feeds the technology that the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) needs. The PLA is the joint military organization of all land, sea, strategic missiles and air forces of the People’s Republic of China. Chinese armaments include sea-launched missiles, both nuclear and conventionally armed, nuclear and diesel submarines, cruise missiles, intercontinental ballistic weapons, combat aircraft and bombers, and anti-satellite weapons.
Rest assured these are not loving thoughts.
Back in Beijing, bureaucrats are becoming masters at marketing, because appearances matter– particularly to diplomats and business interests on both sides. So, the Chinese government has even named one of their commercial airlines “Joy Air”– like any industry that needs a positive image.
And, who’s helping “Joy Air” remain joyful?
Not Your Usual Chinese Firecrackers: Missiles and fire power
To remedy this situation the Chinese Communist dictatorship began to focus on China’s commercial airline industry, as a mechanism to upgrade its defense capabilities.
Beijing began to amalgamate civil and military activity, through military-to-civilian and civilian-to-military technological sharing.
The Chinese Communists set up enterprises disguised as civilian projects– such as the ARJ-21 and the C919 commercial airline projects, in order to gain access to technology that could be fed into their military and defense departments. This deceitful activity has been disguised for a long time under programs labeled as “cooperation” and civilian R&D (Research and Development).
Communist China’s participation in such R&D and technological exchange programs has fueled the growth of their military aerospace capabilities– turning China into a growing threat to the United States, and other nations.
Beijing may not want to reveal everything it has up its sleeve, but it is sure happy to show off some of its military capabilities. Enough to scare others.
In a congressional report, Shirley Kan, Specialist in National Security Policy Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division described how on January 11, 2007, at 5:28 pm EST, China conducted its first successful direct ascent anti-satellite (ASAT) weapons test, launching a ballistic missile armed with a kinetic kill vehicle (not an exploding conventional or nuclear warhead) to destroy its own Fengyun-1C weather satellite at about 530 miles up in low earth orbit (LEO) in space.
The weapon was fired from a mobile transporter-erector launcher (TEL). China reported that it used a two-stage, solid-fuel medium-range ballistic missile that was launched from a TEL. A U.S. intelligence official testified to Congress that the U.S. designation of this ASAT weapon is SC-19. A National Security Council spokesman issued the White House’s public response on January 18, 2007 stating that “China’s development and testing of such weapons is inconsistent with the spirit of cooperation that both countries aspire to in the civil space area.”
In February, 2008, a year after the Chinese ballistic missile show-of-force, the United States proved it could do the same thing by firing a heat-seeking missile against one of our own satellites.
There’s no lack of warnings about China’s growing military capabilities, and the way in which it is obtaining intelligence and military technology.
Here’s an excerpt of the testimony given by Mary H. Saunders, Deputy Assistant Secretary for the Manufacturing International Trade Administration on May 20, 2010, before the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission’s Hearing on China’s Emergent Military Aerospace and Commercial Aviation Capabilities:
“In 2008, China established the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China Ltd. (COMAC) to focus on the commercial aircraft market. Other Chinese companies are involved in the commercial aircraft market, too. The extent to which the creation of COMAC, and other efforts to separate commercial from military work are effective, remains to be seen. It is clear, however, that China intends to develop new capabilities through its commercial programs, some of which could then be used to support its military programs.”
Tai Ming Cheung, an Associate Research Scientist from the Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, University of California, San Diego also made the following statement during the same hearing, on, May 20, 2010:
“China’s aviation industry wants to turn from Cinderella into the belle of the global aviation ball. With strong political backing, ample funds, and privileged access to fast-growing domestic civilian and military markets, the country’s aviation industrial barons are pursuing an ambitious strategy to build an internationally competitive, innovative and comprehensive aviation design and manufacturing base within the next 1-2 decades.”
What is disconcerting is that China’s progress in military capabilities is taking place in plain sight, with plenty of U.S. government public warnings– which President Obama and American corporations doing business with China choose to ignore.
London: April Fool’s Day, 2009
When Obama announced his campaign for the presidency, claiming that he would bring “change”– what most people did not understand was that “change” meant yielding to China’s influence and economic power.
On April 1, 2009 President Barack Hussein Obama and China’s Communist Dictator, Hu Jin Tao, met in London during the G-20 meetings, to discuss Sino-US relations and the world economic crisis– a crisis which seems to affect everyone, except Communist China, which is getting stronger day by day– both financially and militarily.
The meeting in London was an important one for the United States, because it defined how President Obama would deal with China.
Hu Jin Tao praised the China-US relations under President Obama, as being off to a good start.
In other words, America was behaving.
Hu Jin Tao invited President Obama to visit China. Obama accepted the invitation.
During the London visit Obama and Hu Jin Tao also agreed to hold a series of talks titled “China-US Strategic and Economic Dialogue” in Washingon DC, with the first round scheduled for the summer of 2009. The dialogue was divided into two tracks: the ‘Strategic Track’ and the ‘Economic Track.’
It looks like the ‘Economic Track’ must have served as Obama’s marching orders, since by the time Obama arrived in China in November 2009 he looked more like a client visiting his lender, than the President of the United States. So much so, that China was most interested in financing the Obama Health Care Plan, by carrying the U.S. Treasury notes.
The London meeting served as a platform for the Communist Chinese dictator to extend invitations, left and right– or request RSVPs.
Admiral Gary Roughead, US Chief of Naval Operations was invited to visit China to attend the big events planned for the 60th anniversary of the founding of the Navy of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army. One can only imagine how impressed Admiral Roughead must have been when his counterpart, Vice Admiral Wu Shengli, displayed all his red power.
But Admiral Roughead’s visit to China, along with any strategic talks may have come too late, when considering our strategic Air Bases, vis à vis Chinese nonnuclear missile capabilities:
While America faces a growing challenge with China’s aggressive military strategy, China continues to benefit greatly from our aerospace technology. The following chart, released in September, 2010, shows the annual U.S.-China aerospace trade, from 2001 to 2009:
(Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, September 3, 2010).
Anti-Access and Area Denial
The biggest threat that China presents with its advanced air and missile capabilities is the increased ability of the People’s Liberation Army to inhibit U.S. military operations in the Asian theater. This is referred to as China’s “anti-access and area denial strategy.” It can also deter third countries from intervening in a conflict between China and Taiwan, and areas where there are territorial disputes, including Japan.
Areas of Territorial Disputes:
Update: The United States Department of Defense Releases Unified Command Plan 2011
The following press release was issued by the U.S. Department of Defense on Friday, April 8, 2011:
The Department of Defense released today the updated Unified Command Plan (UCP), a key strategic document that establishes the missions, responsibilities, and geographic areas of responsibility for commanders of combatant commands. Unified Command Plan 2011, signed by the President on April 6, assigns several new missions to the combatant commanders.
Every two years, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff is required to review the missions, responsibilities, and geographical boundaries of each combatant command and recommend to the President, through the Secretary of Defense, any changes that may be necessary. As in past years, the 2011 review process included the combatant commanders, service chiefs and DOD leadership.
The U.S. Department of Defense released the following revised map of the combatant commanders’ areas of responsibility:
The press release from the U.S. Department of Defense continues as follows:
Significant changes made by UCP 2011 include:
– Shifting areas of responsibilities boundaries in the Arctic region to leverage long-standing relationships and improve unity of effort. As a result of this realignment, responsibility for the Arctic region is now shared between USEUCOM and USNORTHCOM rather than USEUCOM, USNORTHCOM and USPACOM as directed in previous UCPs.
– Giving USNORTHCOM responsibility to advocate for Arctic capabilities.
– Codifying the President’s approval to disestablish U.S. Joint Forces Command.
– Expanding U.S. Strategic Command’s responsibility for combating weapons of mass destruction and developing Global Missile Defense Concept of Operations.
– Giving U.S. Transportation Command responsibility for synchronizing planning of global distribution operations.
UCP 2011 continues to support U.S. defense security commitments around the world while improving military responsiveness to emerging crises.
The announcement of these “significant” changes in the 2011 Unified Command Plan, was followed by Admiral Robert F. Willard’s testimony on April 12, 2011, as U.S. Navy Commander, U.S. Pacific Command, before the Senate Armed Services Committee on U.S. Pacific command posture. Admiral Willard’s testimony included the following statements:
China continues to accelerate its offensive air and missile developments without corresponding public clarification about how these forces will be utilized. Of particular concern is the expanding inventory of ballistic and cruise missiles (which include anti-ship capability) and the development of modern, fourth- and fifth-generation stealthy combat aircraft. In conjunction, China is pursuing counter-space and -cyber capabilities that can be used to not only disrupt U.S. military operations, but also to threaten the space- and cyber-based information infrastructure that enables international communications and commerce. Absent clarification from China, its military modernization efforts hold significant implications for regional stability.
China’s rapid military expansion coupled with its unclear intent poses a concern to the U.S. and many regional nations.
Meanwhile, U.S. corporations continue to feed China technology
The U.S. suppliers to the Chinese ARJ–21 program include:
Eaton Aerospace, Rockwell Collins, Sagem, Aircraft Braking Systems, B/E Aerospace, Goodrich, Goodrich Aerospace (Hella), Hamilton Sundstrand, Honeywell, Kaiser Electroprecision, Kidde Aerospace and Defense, MPC Products, and Parker Hannifan.
U.S. corporations that provide components to the Chinese C919 project include:
General Electric, Eaton Aerospace, Rockwell Collins, Honeywell, Goodrich, and Parker Hannifin.
As described above, Hu Jin Tao extended an invitation to President Obama to visit China in the fall of 2009. During his visit to Beijing in November 2009, President Obama went so far as to pledge that he would expedite Federal Aviation Administration certification of the ARJ-21, in order to help the Chinese government avoid obstacles to future international sales. A scary move, considering that the ARJ-21 had been flagged for not meeting safety standards.
We don’t expect that the Chinese government is going to care if a plane full of Chinese people crashes.
We expected, however, for Obama to care.
So, exactly what did President Obama accomplish during his visit to Beijing in November, 2009?
Obama cautiously mentioned human rights; however, no political prisoners were released before, during or after Obama’s visit to China.
Obama also mentioned China’s undervaluation of its currency (an ongoing economic ploy by China’s government). China has responded with nothing but excuses.
Obama’s 2009 visit to China left an image of America being brought to its knees, in front of the Communist giant.
This is not surprising, considering that by the time that Obama arrived in Beijing, China owned $789.9 billion in Treasury notes.
The 2009 April Fool’s Day meeting in London proved to be a fruitful event for Hu Jin Tao.
Hu covered a lot of ground.
It looks like he had Obama in one room, while he was meeting in another room with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev, going over Sino-Russian relations. A few weeks earlier (February, 2009) China had extended a $25 billion loan to Russia, in order to finish the construction of a pipeline between the two countries. In exchange, Russia entered into an agreement that is very advantageous for China’s access to natural resources. The agreement is said to last 20 years.
Hu must have been happy to flaunt his influence around London in 2009. After all, China has also become the big winner in the Central Asia economic battle with Russia.
China is now the main source of foreign investment and aid to Central Asia. This is not favorable to cultural and ethnic separatists, who are losing support from a neighborhood much too eager to please China, and eager to follow Beijing’s diplomatic lead.
Russia’s Gazprom lost a bid against China’s National Petroleum Corp., to buy a 50% stake in Kazakhstan’s biggest oil company.
China’s State Development Bank has also invested $4 billion in Turkmenistan’s largest gas producer. There’s no question that China will have tremendous access to natural resources and to the economy of Central Asia, while gas flows through a colossal 4,350-mile Natural Gas Pipeline, designed and built to ship gas from Turkmenistan through Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan– and straight into China.
China is everywhere
The Chinese Communists have had a long-standing presence in Sub-Saharan Africa. Its presence has nothing to do with peacekeeping in the African continent. China’s government doesn’t lift a finger without a plan as agent provocateur.
One of the misconceptions about African civil wars is that they are often looked upon as isolated and localized social and political struggles. China actually plays a significant role– since it is a major supplier of military equipment to Africa, thus fueling and supporting the ongoing massacre (while deceptively acting as “peacekeepers”). China has been actively building large infrastructure projects in African countries that are notorious for their violation of fundamental human rights. Through its aggressive involvement in Africa, China has created an influential platform from which it can exercise economic and political control.
In Sudan, the war-torn land of Saint Josephine Bakhita, the Chinese National Petroleum Company (CNPC) has developed an oil field and constructed a 900-mile pipeline to the Red Sea, so that oil can be sent to China. Several African nations have entered into strategic partnerships with China, in exchange for lines of credit. China has persisted in providing arms to Zimbabwe’s Marxist dictator, Robert Mugabe– a persistent human rights violator. The list goes on.
What about China and the current NATO attacks on Libya?
Libya is an important business partner for China. It is estimated that approximately 30,000 Chinese citizens were residing in Libya until the attacks began. The Chinese population in Libya has been mostly connected with large-scale Chinese construction / infrastructure projects. This explains why China abstained during the recent United Nations vote to intervene militarily in Libya.
As usual, China wants to have it both ways. It wants to continue its tyrannical communist system, while becoming an international and influential economic superpower. A dangerous combination for the world.
China’s strategic position in Tibet
On October 7, 1950 the People’s Liberation Army marched into Eastern Tibet and took control of the Roof of the World, as Tibet is known.
By taking control of Tibet, Mao Tse-tung, China’s communist dictator at the time, showed the international community that China was the real leader in Asia. Why? For one, it demonstrated that India was not capable of defending a small defenseless country like Tibet, further exposing Nehru as the weak socialist Prime Minister of India, willing to appease the Communist giant.
The Tibetan rivers are also of strategic importance to China, and its water shortage
Communists are always coming up with “plans”.
Beijing’s 10th Five-Year plan included water diversion from South to North.
The diversion of water is an ancient theme, and the cause of many battles– and it will continue to be a serious issue for India and other countries affected by China’s water diversion of rivers that rise from the Tibetan region.
Mao knew that the waters of Tibet are vital. Most of Asia’s waters flow from the Tibetan plateau. Tibet’s waters bring life to 85 percent of Asia’s population, which is equivalent to approximately 50 percent of the world’s population.
The Tibetan high plateau is also a vital strategic location for Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBMs) with nuclear warheads which can be pointed at India and other regions. Tibet’s geographical position is a sweetheart of a deal for China’s testing sites and storage of nuclear missiles.
For decades China has denied any nuclear activity in Tibet, while it continued to use it as a territory for manufacturing nuclear weapons, and for dumping of nuclear waste.
The Tibetan freedom cause has gained much support all over the world– and has even been embraced by some Hollywood actors, based on their fascination with the “Yellow Hat” branch of Tibetan Buddhism, and their concern for environmental issues.
Let’s look at what environmentalists are saying, since environmental issues often tend to be a bigger priority than the suffering of human beings under a communist tyranny. Having said that, I have nothing against keeping our natural environment clean– as long as the “environmental” argument does not exclude denouncement of the “communist environment”.
A Winter 2010 Penn State Environmental Law Review / Commentary titled, “China’s Dumping Ground: Genocide Through Nuclear Ecocide in Tibet” offers the following description of the nuclear environment in Tibet:
“Grave concerns have arisen about China’s nuclear buildup and environmental degradation in Tibet, both of which have come to the forefront of international attention. Through uranium mining, nuclear research and design, and subsequent nuclear dumping, the Tibetan plateau has transformed from ecologically balanced and independent to an area so environmentally degraded that the water that flows through Tibet has affected surrounding countries.””China’s use of Tibet for its nuclear production and dumping effectively constitutes genocide of the Tibetan people. The United Nation’s Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide defines genocide as: Any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethical, racial or religion group, as such: (a) killing of members in the group; (b) causing serious bodily injury or mental harm to members of the group; (c) deliberately inflicting upon the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; (d) imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group; (e) forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.””By intentionally exposing Tibetans to an environment degraded by nuclear waste, the ecocide of Tibet results in the eradication of ethnic Tibetans.”This Comment will discuss the genocide of the Tibetan population through nuclear environmental degradation. The history of China’s ethnic cleansing of Tibetans through ecocide…”
Circular Economy: Communist China wants to show the world their concept of “quality of life”
Decisions, decisions: Reincarnation or Communism?
President Nicolas Sarkozy of France undoubtedly must have waited anxiously to speak to Hu Jin Tao, during his visit to London in 2009. Indeed, just before the G-20 meeting Sarkozy met with Hu in an apparent effort to neutralize the bad blood between them since the year before, when China went ballistic over Sarkozy’s meeting with the Dalai Lama– the spiritual leader of the Tibetans, and until recently, their de facto political leader in exile.
But why was the communist dictator so upset at Sarkozy?
It appears that Sarkozy met with the Dalai Lama in an attempt to make amends after avoiding the Tibetan spiritual leader during an earlier visit to France– at which time Sarkozy was trying to avoid offending the Chinese government.
Sarkozy, who must have been also feeling the pressure from those who support the freedom of Tibet, finally met briefly with the Dalai Lama in December, 2008, while the latter was in Poland, at a meeting of Nobel Peace Prize winners. Sarkozy was in Poland attending a meeting about “climate change” with nine eastern member states of the European Union.
The meeting between Sarkozy and the Dalai Lama was seen by China as a recognition of Tibet’s right to freedom from China. In protest, Beijing cancelled an EU-China summit which France had been scheduled to host.
China’s foreign minister, Qing Gang had this to say: “We resolutely oppose the Dalai’s separatist’s activities in any countries in whatever capacity, and contact with foreign leaders and him in whatever form.”
France has been expanding its business with China, so Sarkozy was only willing to take the Dalai Lama issue so far.
But now Tibet will have a new leader.
The 52nd anniversary of the Tibetan National Uprising took place on March 10, 2011, and it was announced that the Dalai Lama would hand over Tibetan leadership to an elected representative. The Dalai Lama arrived at his position as spiritual leader through reincarnation, according to Tibetan Buddhism. The new leader, who will be referred to as the Kalon Tripa (Prime Minister) will arrive at his position through a democratic election process, which will allow him to represent the Tibetan government-in-exile.
This was a smart move aimed to fortify the Tibetan political forces in exile– by moving the focus away from the “reincarnation of the Dalai Lama”– a religious belief which scares the daylights out of the atheist Chinese Communist government.
Beijing may control the rivers that flow from Tibet, but it cannot control the fact that a new “reincarnated” Tibetan spiritual leader will keep showing up.
So, the Tibetans have carried out their own form of ‘separation of church and state’, in exile, in order to throw Beijing off balance, thus disrupting the Chinese government’s manipulation of the political environment in Tibet, which is focused on its spiritual identity.
Now when heads of state meet with the new Tibetan leader in exile (to be announced at the end of April) they better be prepared to discuss the freedom of Tibet– since this new Prime Minister will arrive at his position through an election process– not reincarnation.
France wants to please Beijing… but so does the U.S.
In spite of Tibet’s reality under Chinese Communist occupation, during the 2009 London soirée a statement was released both by France and China, where both countries agreed to establish a new strategic dialogue, and France reaffirmed its ‘One China’ policy, as follows:
“…France fully recognizes the importance and sensitivity of the Tibet issue and reaffirms its adherence to the one-China policy and the position that Tibet is an integral part of the Chinese territory, in accordance with the decision made by General Charles de Gaulle, which has not changed and will remain unchanged. Based on this spirit and the principle of non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, France refuses to support any form of ‘Tibet independence’.
The two sides hold the view that in the context of profound changes in the international political and economic situation, China and France, both as permanent members of the UN Security Council, shoulder major responsibilities in maintaining world peace and promoting development. The two sides stand ready to strengthen dialogue and coordination and jointly respond to global challenges including the international financial crisis.
Acting in this spirit, the two sides decided to conduct high-level contact and strategic dialogue at a proper time to enhance bilateral cooperation in various fields and promote the harmonious and steady growth of China-France relations.”
The United States echoed France’s ‘One China’ policy agreement. The ChinaDaily reported on November 17, 2009 that the U.S. and China reiterated that “the fundamental principle of respect for each other’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is at the core of the three Sino-US joint communiques which guide China-US relations. Neither side supports any attempts by any force to undermine this principle.”
Sadly, this ‘dance of veils’ continues between China and its trading partners– while human beings are slaughtered at Beijing’s command.
The Falun Gong
Beijing’s military and economic march throughout the globe is as systematic and persistent as its persecution of dissidents inside China.
In May 2010, the United States and China held the fourteenth round of the bilateral human rights dialogue. These talks resumed in 2008 under President Bush, after a six year interruption. The discussions were led by President Obama’s Assistant Secretary of the Bureau of Democracy, Human Rights, and Labor, Michael H. Posner, and General Chen Xu– China’s Minister of Foreign Affairs Department of International Organizations.
No breakthroughs were reported in 2010, at the end of the dialogue.
Of particular concern in the area of human rights is the persecution and crackdown of the Falun Gong– a spiritual movement that the Communist Chinese government despises. The human rights abuses reported include imprisonment and execution of those who identify themselves as believers of the Falun Gong spirituality. Other reports detail how Tibetan Buddhists, Christians, as well as those identifying with the Falun Gong spirituality are being executed as part of the lucrative organ harvesting trade in China.
In addition to political persecution of dissenters, ethnic and religious groups– the forced massive abortion campaign never ceases, along with massive forced sterilization, sometimes involving entire towns.
Communist China as the World’s Second Largest Economy
During the first six months of 2010, China left Japan behind as the world’s second largest economy. Japan’s tragic natural disaster and nuclear plant crisis will seriously affect that country’s plans of recovery from the global economic crisis. Japan will remain vulnerable as China continues to claim Japanese territory.
China’s economic aspirations have a clear focus on further deepening the United States’ economic disadvantage– through unfair trading practices and manipulation of the yuan (RMB).
The United States’ increasing bilateral trade deficit exceeding $200 billion per year since 2005 is only part of the unfair equation. China continues to dominate as the primary holder of U.S. Treasury securities. China also boasts $2.4 trillion in foreign currency and gold reserves.
While China grows as an economic superpower, it ignores diplomatic exhortations concerning its activities in the South China Sea, where Beijing claims to have “indisputable sovereignty”. We’re talking about some of the busiest navigable waters in the world, which Beijing will now “allow” others to navigate.
Beijing also refuses to participate in denouncing the North Korean nuclear program, while the world watches Pyongyang’s assaults on South Korea.
Since 2009 Beijing has intensified its aggressiveness in territorial claims, with a clear military and economic strategy.
The Other Side of the I-Pad: Chinese Workers Jumping Off Buildings
Foxconn, a Taiwanese-owned company, is considered to be the world’s most powerful manufacturer of electronic products, and operates a massive facility in Shenzhen, which is located in Southern China’s Guangdong Province. Foxconn has been the contract manufacturer for Apple’s I-Pad, I-Pod and the I-Phone.
Many Americans believe that our manufacturing base in China will help the Chinese people live better lives, through exposure to foreign enterprises and business practices.
So, are Chinese workers happy at the Foxconn Shenzhen facility?
The Apple Supplier Responsibility 2011 Progress Report describes the extreme measures that have been taken to prevent workers from committing suicide at the Shenzhen facility. This is not surprising for a people systematically oppressed and persecuted by their communist government. Their jobs at the Apple contract facility have not changed their communist reality.
Here’s an eye opening excerpt of the Apple Report. Bold added for emphasis:
“In August 2010, the independent team [for suicide prevention] presented its findings and recommendations to Terry Gou [president of Foxconn] and senior executives from Foxconn and Apple. The team commended Foxconn for taking quick action on several fronts simultaneously, including hiring a large number of psychological counselors, establishing a 24-hour care center, and even attaching large nets to the factory buildings to prevent impulsive suicides.”
This feeling of despondence is not foreign to the people of China. Thousands upon thousands committed suicide during Mao’s “Cultural Revolution” (a culture of death, that is)– one of history’s most horrific examples of how a communist government can turn a country into a bloodbath of torture and killings.
Do we have any friends?
China has also embarked on a new stratagem to further overtake the U.S. economy. On April 2009 China entered into an agreement with Argentina, whereby 70 billion yuan, (10.24 billion US dollars) would be exchanged in their respective currencies, for use in trade and investment— thus avoiding the need to buy U.S. dollars to pay for transactions.
On March 29, 2011 the Miami Herald wrote about Hugo Chavez, “freedom of expression” and Argentina, in an article titled, “Hugo Chavez, journalism award winner in Argentina”:
“He [Hugo Chavez] has a sure ally in Argentine President Cristina Fernandez, who sees privately owned media groups as a bigger threat to freedom of expression than state control of airwaves or newsprint. Fernandez is trying to transform Argentina’s communications industry through a law that would break up media monopolies and force cable TV providers to include channels run by unions, Indians and other activists.”
Will Argentina turn to China for more help with its inflationary problems? Just about everyone else does.
Plus, Argentina may be well suited for business and even stronger ties with Communist China. After all, even Argentina’s University of La Plata has bestowed its press freedom award on Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez– despite Chavez’ Beijing-style crackdown on independent or privately owned media companies in Venezuela, and despite Chavez’ strong friendship and support of Castro and his bloody communist dictatorship in Cuba– where there has been no freedom of the press for more than 52 years.
But America cannot expect the rest of the world to take a moral stand against Communist China, as the U.S. turns socialist while bowing to China.
Citigroup and other powerful banking institutions like JP Morgan have been participating in “road shows” promoting the use of the Chinese Communist currency (the RMB) instead of the U.S. dollar, for trade agreements with China. HSBC and Standard Chartered are examples of institutions who offer discounted transaction fees and other financial incentives to companies that trade in the RMB.
The worldwide fast food chain, McDonald’s, became the first foreign non financial company to sell RMB-denominated bonds.
Something to think about before you order that Big Mac.
The unfairness of the U.S.-Sino trade relationship is further detailed in the following chart:
U.S.-China Trade in Goods ($ billion), 2000–2009
The U.S Dept., of Commerce reported that for the first eight months of 2010, China’s goods exports to the United States were $229.2 billion, while U.S. goods exports to China were $55.8 billion, with the U.S. trade deficit in goods at $173.4 billion, an increase of 20.6 percent over the same period in 2009 ($143.8 billion).
Adding insult to injury, China manipulates its currency like a yo-yo.
China deliberately undervalues the RMB in order to make its exports cheaper to buy, and imports more expensive. This is another way that the Chinese government gets foreign companies to invest in China. With this set-up, there is less desire to invest in the United States or in Europe– hurting the U.S. and European job markets even further.
Ironically, the Chairman of the American Chamber of Commerce in China expressed the concerns that U.S. businesses have in China, based on…
“a mounting number of policy challenges ranging from the inconsistent enforcement of laws, to China’s discriminatory domestic innovation policies and regulations that limit market access into sectors that had been increasingly open to foreign investment for the past 30 years. These policies appear to be diminishing the ability of foreign companies to access the Chinese domestic market, right at the time China shifts from being an export-led economy to a more domestic-consumption-led economy.”
Americans doing business with Communist China are suffering discrimination at the hands of the Beijing bureaucrats!
We’re shocked! ♔
(God Bless America!)
© Marielena Montesino de Stuart
I WELCOME YOUR COMMENTS REGARDING THIS ARTICLE: