To Fight A Trade War With Terrorist Supporter - China

FreepForever | Nov 7, 2001 | FreepForever

[FreepForever]

My understanding is Jiang is scheduled to step down next year after their 16th People's Congress. The point is not stopping China having the Olymppic. As a Chinese, I know "face" is more important than life in this part of the world. Having a widely boycotted Olympic is not good for China's face.

[FreepForever]

Thanks!

I haven't had the chance to read the book. I hope it is not as prophetic as Tom Clancy's.

:-)

[harpseal]

I get to flag you for a change.

Stay well - stay safe - stay armed - Yorktown

[FreepForever]

Well. I am an old man and my last wish is to see the demise of Communist China in my remaining years. I just hope FreeRepublic's server is secured. If you stop hearing from me, you'll know that the National Security Police have just paid me a little visit....:-)

[Jeff Head]

Take a look at the site, you can get one there, either Ebook download, or Printed copy through the mail.

I'd be interested in your comments.

www.dragonsfury-breathoffire.com

Regards ... I have the same wish ... an end to Communist Red China and a re-establishment of constitutional republican prinicples and liberty.

[betty boop]

Excellent post, FreepForever. Thank you. best, bb.

[American_Patriot_For_Democracy]

This essay is being written to all those China-lovers and sympathizers; to all those who declare that China will (and maybe even should) eclipse the United States as a world power and economic powerhouse. China is loaded with many serious problems. It's "destiny" is not exactly a sure thing, and it is not necessarily headed for the dominant economic power of Asia. Its arrogance is symptomatic of Communist contempt for all democratic nations such as Israel, India, the United States, Britain, Australia, and the other NATO powers. China is not out of the woods yet, by any means.

Let's review some of the serious issues facing China today:

(1) The Communist Chinese Legal system is one of the most primitive and juvenile systems known in the world; it is a complex amalgamation of Confucian and Taoist custom, interspersed with statute, largely criminal law and rudimentary civil code that has only been in effect since January 1, 1987. New legal codes have been in effect since January 1, 1980. Constant and major efforts are constantly being made to improve the civil, administrative, criminal, and commercial law. The concept of "stare decisis," i.e., that the law should remain the same, except for an occasional re-evaluation of precedent, is totally foreign there. In other words, the judicial system in China does not make any cogent sense. If any business needed some type of legal resolution, that convoluted judicial system would choke them. Not to mention that in any arbitration situation betwen China and another country doing business with them, the PRC could intervene, at any time, and influence the business decision to the adverse consequences of the unlucky company which did business with them in the first place;

(2) The Falungong sect and the China Democratic Party are considered serious threats and potential rivals to the People's Republic of China, and could seriously harm the stability of the government there, or any of the foreign businesses which find themselves unlucky enough to invest money there;

(3) Although in late 1978 the Chinese leadership began moving the economy from a sluggish Soviet-style centrally planned economy to a more "market-oriented system." The authorities switched to a system of household responsibility in agriculture in place of the old collectivization, but instead of democratizing the government, Communist China instead increased the authority of local officials and plant managers in industry, permitted a wide variety of small-scale enterprise in services and light manufacturing, even while declaring that they had "opened the economy" to increased foreign trade and investment. On the darker side, the leadership has often experienced, in its hybrid system, the worst results of socialism (bureaucracy and lassitude) and of capitalism (windfall gains and stepped-up inflation). Thus only a handful of the political and moneyed "elite" control the entire infrastructure of the PRC, over one billion people. And they literally have the power of life and death over everybody there. Beijing thus has periodically backtracked, having to retighten central controls at numerous and unstable intervals. The government has had a hellish time (a) collecting revenues due from provinces, businesses, and individuals; (b) reducing corruption and other economic crimes; and (c) even keeping afloat the large state-owned enterprises, many of which have been shielded from competition by subsidies, and have been losing the ability to pay full wages and pensions. From 80 to 120 million surplus rural workers are adrift between the villages and the cities, many subsisting through part-time and low-paying jobs. Popular resistance, changes in central policy, and loss of authority by rural cadres have weakened China's population control program, which is essential to maintaining growth in living standards. Another long-term threat to continued rapid economic growth is the rapid and massive levels of deterioration in the environment, notably air pollution, soil erosion, and the steady fall of the water table, especially in the north. China continues to lose arable land because of erosion and economic development. Weakness in the global economy in 2001 could cripple growth in exports;

(4) Communist China has as many as 16% of its population below the poverty line (2000 esimate) - I thought Communism was supposed to take care of that completely? I mean, you ARE giving up all of your basic and fundamental human rights in exchange for economic security, aren't you?

(5) The Communist Chinese labor force is by far one of the least skilled forces in the entire world, and will be unable to compete with the modern technologically savvy Western world. - by occupation, the PRC divides its people into agriculture 50%, industry 24%, and services 26%. Where are your techies? Your geeks? Your innovators? Your artists? Answer: they are suppressed, jailed, murdered, or "re-educated;"

(6) The unemployment rate in the PRC is staggering for a Communist nation that supposedly can cure all of society's ills: urban unemployment is roughly 18%, and there is substantial unemployment and underemployment in rural areas;

(7) Although China's exports are $232 billion a year, it's imports clock in at about $197 billion. You may think that's just fabulous, but wait until you get a load of the fact that Communist China's external debt is a whopping $162 billion. Guess that eats into their profits a little bit, huh;

(8) The PRC's roadways are still primitive - highway total is 1.4 million km, but the paved ones are only 271,300 km, while unpaved dirt roads dominate the landscape at 1,128,700 km;

(9) The PRC seems to have a military beef with nearly everyone. They have more enemies than any country I have ever heard of, and each one of them wants a piece of China's hide. Some examples of these China-hating countries include (a) India - most of the boundary with India is in dispute, (b) Russia - there is a dispute over at least two small sections of the boundary with Russia that remains to be settled, despite a 1997 boundary agreement, (c) Tajikstan, where large portions of the boundary with Tajikistan are indefinite, (d) North Korea, where a 33-km section of boundary with North Korea in the Paektu-san (mountain) area is indefinite, (e) Malaysia, Philippines, Taiwan, Vietnam, and possibly Brunei involved in a complex dispute over the Spratly Islands, (f) Vietnam (man you are going to love those guys) with disputes in maritime boundary agreements in the Gulf of Tonkin, awaiting ratification, (g) the Paracel Islands occupied by China, but claimed by Vietnam and Taiwan, (h) claims by Japanese-administered Senkaku-shoto (Senkaku Islands/Diaoyu Tai), and finally, (i) Taiwan, which detests China;

(10) Another wonderful problem the PRC faces is the illicit drug market. The PRC is a major trans-shipment point for heroin produced in the Golden Triangle, producing massive criminal activity and murder, and Communist China has an unprecedented and growing domestic drug abuse problem. The PRC is also the world's leader in the supply of such illegal substances as chemical precursors and methamphetamine.

Conclusion: I do not think China will emerge as the major power of Asia by 2015, as is being predicted by many liberals, communists, socialists, opportunists, and other academic "schlup-schwanzes.". But it is important that we, as Americans, remain vigilant, and understand that it depends upon us, the consumer, to boycott Chinese products and services, and to force our democratically elected politicians, as well as our overfed and overpaid corporate CEOs, to do the same. If we need a consumer market, and if the powers that be respond with, "labor is cheaper in China," then counter with, "Why not India?" India is democratic, free, religiously, racially, and culturally diverse and tolerant, also has roughly 1 bilion people as in China, is closely allied to the United States, is a military powerhouse, shares borders with our greatest threats, Islamic Fundamentalism and Chinese Communism, has a clear common law based legal system, is predominantly English speaking, is technologically advanced, secular, and was once a British colony like Australia and the United States. It has a deep and strong friendship with the State of Israel, and is struggling right now to make democracy work. It is the duty of every red-blooded and patriotic American to support them in their struggle, because their struggle is almost exactly the same as ours.

Freedom is not free, it requires constant upkeep and maintenance. If we no longer fight to maintain those freedoms, both physically and economically, we run the risk of no longer remaining free.

God bless the U.S.A.

[Slingshot]

Yes, this is interesting. Why are there so few comments on what the Chinese are doing successfully. Yes, so very many of them are in poverty or close to it. The political leaders have a large problem just keeping everyone employeed. This is not a joke.

We have seen a cataclysmic event in front of our eyes that covered 16 acres. The affect has been world wide but concentrated in the USA.

The Chinese don't need to be militarily stronger than us to stop us. Imagine the impact on the USA and the world if just one major city is attacked.

Therefore, we need RENEWED effort to confront and joust with ALL the different countries and entities that are aimed at us now. We will need to be willing to use preemptive force on many fronts. This has already changed our legal philosophy and legal actions against many people.

To Survive we have changed as a nation.

As individuals we will do the same.

Tyranny??? How far?????

[Slingshot]

You well delineate the deficincies of China. I don't like their form of government either.

But, is it possible you are stating why they cannot accomplish what they say they are going to do.

What if you stated the reasons they will be able to.

Then state what are the reasons we will be able to block them.

[zog]

--thanks for the inside view FreepForever and the flag to it Miss Boop.

query? My analysis shows that china must make an expansioninst move well within this decade. Numerous factors involved, you have primarily touched on some in your essay, in particular their leadership's use of both foreign and external "threats" (USA, japan, india, falun gong, and etc) to keep the populace looking for enemies, instead of looking within at their own leaders, the lack of employment for almost one hundred million adults. And the realities you pointed out too, severe lack of domestic energy and fresh water, the two most viatl things necesary for both agricultural uses and manufacturing.

If they run out and "need", and cannot "pay", that leaves 'take", in other words. And nations "take" by warfare, that is the only option that's ever available usually.

So, do you think that there is a possiblity of a major military move by them, and if so, would you have a timeframe? I am thinking in around two years or so the first signs of overt moves, building very slowly to a final overwhelming first strike with WMD, unless the global economy collapses faster than that, or if normal world supplies of oil are disrupted. Then, it might come sooner. What are your views on that? I see what we SHOULD be doiung with china, but I have less than zero confidence that any consortium or US politicians or business leaders will take any necessary steps like that, the rice bowl hijacking for example, it would be too devastating to the short term profits of their clients mostly. Clients being defined in order as the international arms and construction firms, their branches and suppliers, then down the list. Large global agricultural is important, but I doubt china would allow that to take over their market, treaties, after all, are words meant to be taken as lies written on pieces of paper. most nations think of treaties that way. WTO or not, china won't bankrupt themselves for food, they'll go the north korean route first, I am thinking. or seek subsidised food, like russia did-successfully- for years, to free up capital for military expansion.

[tallhappy]

There are a large population of XinJiang and Tibetian Muslims near the border. If the China government wants to help the Taliban, they can simply open the border and let them enter Afghanistan (perhaps with weapons supplied). China's Central Government has always wanted to get rid of them anyway.

Yes. But at the same time, read this article, about non-Uighur Muslims in China.

It is conceivable these are whom the CCP use.

It is very hard to know.

[FreepForever]

Yes, American_Patriot_For_Democracy has once again pointed out all the deficiencies existed in China for half a century. I must compliment him for his thoroughness (he can talk any PRC net spy under the table). The inclusion of juval’s view in my essay is simply to call your attention to the disastrous trend, ie: China’s economy is going upward while USA’s is going downward. It doesn’t reflect my view but it definitely intensifies my worries. The trend’s direction is much more important than the timeframe here. Whether it is 2015 is irrelevant. What we have to do now is to narrow and, much better, to reverse the existing trend. American_Patriot_For_Democracy’s historical facts and figures are all correct but what he has left out is to focus on the most recent trend, especially after the Sept 11 attack. Can you see China is already busy capitalizing on the after-effect of the Sept 11 attack right now? Now, China can safely claim that she is the safest and most secured place for foreign investment in the world. Foreign investments in China has increased by 20% this year and is still growing.

There are two factions in the PLA. The hawks and the moderates. The hawks are trigger-happy and are screaming “fight the American” everyday on the media. And, pressuring the government to take a firmer stance against USA. The moderates are silent. You never know where they are and how many of them. But when the Communist make a military move against Taiwan, chances are they might take the plane off the runway but bomb Beijing instead. So, how aggressive and militant will China be depends on the delicate balance of power (and their influence on the CCP) between these two factions. Unfortunately, after the Sept 11 attack, the hawks are gaining a much bigger influence in the government.

The recent turn of event is not optimistic at all. The most adverse after-effect of the Sept 11 attack is that Bin Laden had proven that a direct attack on U.S. soil is NOT that UNTHINKABLE as they had previously perceived. The moderates in the PLA is proven wrong and speechless.

Emboldened by the attack, the hardliners in the PLA would certainly pressure the CCP to take a much harder and hostile stance towards America, in the name of “national pride”. I foresee that they will continue to escalate conflicts and test America’s bottomline and tolerance by making limited military movements in Asia. The timeframe depends on America’s reaction, determination and resolve to maintain a formidable force in the Pacific Rim. Any sign of hesitation and indecision will be seen as a sign of weakness by the PLA, thus leading to more hostile actions. A quick and decisive response is the key to any stand-off with China. Taiwan is not the only hot spot there. What if China threatens military actions if the US does not remove her military bases in Japan and South Korea?

Would that lead to an all out exchange of WMD? Again, US’s resolve is the sole deterrent here. China’s nuclear arsenal is still lacking in volume, if not in technology. Everybody knows that America’s nuclear power is many folds larger than that of China. But the hawkish PLA’s brinkmanship and adventurism are leading them itching to test America’s WILL to use WMD as an option (what if China calls your bluff in an eye-to-eye confrontation?). Due to the imbalance of nuclear power, I expect that any Chinese attack on America will be a combination of a Bin Laden style terrorist attack PLUS nuclear attack on major cities. China knows that her lack of a blue water navy is making them difficult to engage in a lengthy military conflict with America. So, their attack would be a quick preemptive strike with devastating force. If America survives the first strike and retaliate in full and unlimited force (with WMD, of course), my money is still on America to win the war eventually. I would even double my stake if Bush is still the president. However, that very much depends on how chaotic America’s home front is and how crippled America’s military is after the first strike. I remember reading somewhere that Clinton had signed an Executive Order saying: “In the interest of world peace, the USA would absorb a first strike by a nuclear aggressor.....”. Could anyone of you verify this? If true, which US cities did he plan to sacrifice? New York, Chicago or San Francisco? I just can’t imagine that a President can sell out his country like this. This is out right treason. Is his real intention to drill Americans to survive a nuclear first strike? Thank you, Mr. Clinton.

To answer Slngshot’s question, China’s major concern in whether to confront the US militarily is her economic strength. If China thinks that her economic power is so strong and sufficient to sustain a world wide economic sanction for a reasonable period, there is a greater chance that she will venture into such brinkmanship action. Yes, it is a gamble. And, like all gamblers, his confidence is directly proportional to the amount of money he has. If that happens, all the foreign investments in China will become “economic hostages”. It’s your money anyway. Along this line of thinking, is the slowing of China’s economic growth (voluntarily or involuntarily) one way to avert war?

Yes, “zog”, you are right. History has taught us that nations with excessive processing power (labor, work force, etc.) but insufficient natural resources have a much higher tendency to “take” (or loot) from other nations. That is the case with the Japanese-Sino war in WWII. With 1.3 billion rice bowl to fill, China’s unemployment and underemployment might encourage her government’s willingness to resort to invasion of other nations.

I disagree that China will look to North Korea and Russia as a food supplier. North Korea is literally living on UN aid right now and is regarded by the Chinese as a poor distant relative. If China ever develops a problem in food production, Russia will be the first one to walk away. They simply don’t have that kind of surplus to feed that many. Furthermore, my game plan is not to starve China. It is just one way to narrow the currently widening trade deficit as a mean to slow down China’s pace to overtake America’s economy power in the long run.

I enjoy the very illuminating and educating discussion with you. I have learned a lot from you. God bless you all. My prayers will always be with you and President Bush.

[FreepForever]

Thanks for the link, talhappy (you read Chinese too?).

Yes, that’s what I mean. These ARE the people that the CCP uses to help the Taliban and prolong the war for America.

China will definitely not send their regular PLA to help the Taliban. This will destroy whatever small credibility China has in the international arena. There are many sects of Muslims in China. The more moderate sects are city dwellers and will only protest US strike on Afghanistan or take it to the street, at the most. These Muslims are mostly homogenized by the Hans and is not considered a threat to the CCP.

The more militant fanatics are mostly located on the border. These people are willing to take up arms to help defend the Taliban (China’s buddy). The CCP is more than happy to let them jump the border and enter Afghanistan.

It serves 3 purposes: 1) shows the Taliban some support because it embarrasses China to support terrorists with words now (after their claim of “fighting terrorism with America”); 2) prolong the war for America; 3) get rid of some armed terrorists in China’s territory (if they met Allah, it’s just fine).

[Dukie]

Good morning 'seal and thnks for forwarding this most well thought out post. I heard a most troubling piece on the news that concern over the stability of Pakistan and the security of its estimated two dozen nuclear weapons has prompted some thought of temporarily moving them to nearby China for safe custody.

FreepForever - if you've not seen the post on a new novel concerning PRC geopolitical strategy go to Breath of Fire

[FreepForever]

If they are talking about moving the Pak's warheads to China, I wouldn't be too alarmed. China never have a short supply of that anyway. But if they are moving the ICBMs complete with nuclear warheads to China, that's another story, particularly in such a volatile region. What if India misread the situation and take the opportunity to attack the Paks when their nuclear are in transit? Let's wait and see how things develop. If you got more details, please keep me posted.

Thanks for the link. I have ordered a hard copy version of the Breath of Fire. The 500 page ebook version is a bit too much for a vision impaired old man like me.

[FreepForever]

My post #32 is meant for all of you. I just forgot to include your names there. Sorry.

[zog]

--thanks for the reply. I ned to completely clairfy one point. when I mentioned the north korea option, I meant that the PRC would emulate north korea as in the military and political leadership would get all the food, and let everyone else starve. And they would also seek to get direct grant/aid from the west, like russia did with food, and now how we are literally paying off and giving in to blackmail from the north koreans. We are paying tribute, and I would expect china to do that first, at least up to the point of an extreme agressive war, where their soldiers would be turned loose to completely live off of their forward advances. An all or nothing assault.

I actually expect them to do this at some point in time, anyway, and am planning for it. Running simple math numbers show's pretty conclusively that they have zero choice-expand aggressively or implode soon. I think the US WILL face a first stike using both externally launched WMD, and also quite extensive internally set off devices, and other sorts of attacks. I would give the inevitability of that and the probabilty into the high 90 percentile range right now, and especially once the middle eastern and central asia oil fields start being divided up militarily, and when a more generalised and extensive israeli versus everyone else regionally war occurs. There's enough oil for EITHER the west, or asia, but not enough for both. And water is right behind that, even though it's almost not talked about in wargaming circles.

[FreepForever]

OK, now I understand what you mean. You seems to miss the gist of my scheme. How can China complain when America sells them much cheaper and better agro products? This is a good news to Chinese consumers by getting more value for their money. Can America complain and threaten Japan when Sony and Toyota flooded the US’s electronic and automotive market? Why does China spend 17 years of hard negotiation to enter the WTO? WTO is about free competition.

Look, Russia and North Korea can get food aid because they are really poor and food production is insufficient to feed their people. China is relatively rich (by developing country standard). Food supply is abundant. My game plan is to change the supplier (from local to imports). Its effect is not to reduce their food supply but to replace it with US imports. It benefits their consumer but damage their long-term economy. They lose the market because their own agribusiness is way too inefficient. We are not talking about starvation here. Can France obtain food aid/grant when their own farmers are driven out of business by cheaper Spanish products?

How can China obtain any international food aid/grant just because their local food market is flooded with everything (from rice to wheat, from meat to chicken) from America? Can China ask the UN for aid just because they don’t like the “Made in USA” label on their food? This is a joke.... Can they ask the UN: “We are going to start a war with our biggest food supplier, America, so, can you grant me some aid?” Or ask the US: “We are going to attack your country very soon. But, ...er... since you are our biggest food supplier and we cannot fight a war with empty stomach, can you support our cause and grant us some food aid?”

Trade war or hi-jacking their rice bowl or not, if America sits there and do nothing, Australia is going to grab a major share of the food market in China. Do you want to see that? Trade war or not, food exports to China is still a good business. Why give that to somebody?

China’s military and nuclear is still insufficient to attack America but enough to keep America from intervening in her aggression in Asia. If China ever attacks America, the reason is not for food (if they cannot produce, they can buy), oil (they have a vast reserve of natural gas in the west) or water (China floods every other year, only that the rain is not falling in the right place). Why do you think China wants to attack America? They want to occupy California? Texas? Or New York? Does Jiang or his successor want to sit in the White House managing 300 million foreign white devils? Do they want to turn America into a communist country? No, your assumptions are totally wrong. China will only attack America under one of the three scenarios.

1) America’s economic and military force is so depleted that she is totally defenseless. Under this scenario, Iraq, Iran and even Cuba can make a move on America, not only China. So, this is the least likely.

2) If China wants to expand and make a military move against Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam or India, America is their single biggest obstacle. If America responds with blockade, economic sanction, or direct military intervention, China will threaten nuclear strike on US territory. Under this scenario, would America back off and watch China expands and becomes a superpower? Or, would America call their bluff and risk an attack on US soil? What would you do if you were the US president? One way or the other, you are doomed either way. What choice do you have?

Can America stay safe by turning her head the other way in Asia politics? When a fierce gang of robbers want to rob a bank, they have to shoot down the police patrolling that street first. Otherwise, they will risk a gunfight with the police during the robbery. The question is: Would China attack America first, BEFORE they make a move on Asia’s countries? Or would they just fight with America during their act of aggression?

3) China’s basic survival is being threatened to a stage that an immediate expansion is imminent and becomes the only option. This may be driven by internal need and/or political pressure from her military. China’s ruling party, the CCP, sees their stepping down from power as a death sentence. They fear that they would be shredded to molecules by the long oppressed mass public in a bloody uprising or revolution. So, they would and prepare to do anything just to stay in power. If the CCP’s existence is being threatened in any way, they will wage a war with America to divert public attention and rally them in support of the government.

[zog]

--thanks! Your scenario #3 seems the most likely to me at this point.

[Dukie]

Good afternoon, FreepForever. I believe that the object of discussion were the Pak nuclear warheads themselves, not the missiles. If I'm not mistaken, the Paks would be using the F16s we sold them as their delivery systems, rather than the missiles which are not yet fully dveloped.

BTW: I have an adopted niece from your native land who will be an American for a whole year next month. Regards & blessings to you.