Displaying posts categorized under

FOREIGN POLICY

Victor Davis Hanson: China’s contempt for US – they seek global hegemony and this is how we’re helping them China’s defiant provocations are not just verbal

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/china-contempt-usglobal-hegemony-victor-davis-hanson

Two weeks ago in Anchorage, Alaska, Chinese diplomats dressed down Secretary of State Antony Blinken and national security adviser Jake Sullivan. Both seem stunned by the broadsides.  

Not since newly elected President John Kennedy was humiliated at the Vienna summit in June 1961 by USSR strongman Nikita Khrushchev have American diplomats been so roughly manhandled by a Communist government.   

China’s defiant provocations are not just verbal. Nor are they aimed only at our high officials. 

New York University students at a satellite campus in Shanghai were manhandled and jailed by Chinese authorities in two separate incidents earlier this month. Some U.S. diplomats in China were recently subjected to anal swab testing for COVID-19 – supposedly “in error.” 

These examples of humiliation and harassment could be multiplied. China has engaged in the insidious and systematic theft of U.S. patents and copyrights. It brazenly violates trade agreements, manipulates its currency, dumps products below cost on world markets, engages in cyberwarfare, expropriates Western technology, and stonewalls accurate information on the origins of COVID-19.  

If China gives out money, it believes it owns the recipient. In the last five years, New York University has received some $47 million in gifts from China. The U.S. Department of Education recently cited Stanford University for failing to report more than $64 million in donations from Chinese sources since 2010. It’s no surprise that China recently sent a visiting researcher to Stanford who turned out to be connected with the Chinese military.  

Hollywood claims that it is woke. But a recent study revealed that some directors had selected lighter-skinned actors, bowing to the preferences of Chinese movie-goers and the lucrative Chinese film market, slated to become the world’s largest in 2021.  

Biden Peddles Obama’s Sham Vision of the Middle East He continues a radical transformation of the Democrat Party’s views on Israel. by Shmuel Klatzkin

https://spectator.org/biden-israel-middle-east-obama/

In an article in Tablet in early March, Lee Smith showed how Barack Obama’s degrading of America’s alliance with Israel and his wooing of Iran were motivated essentially by a plan to transform the Democrat Party. To that end, foreign policy was subordinated. The party of Truman, the three Kennedy brothers, and Skip Jackson had consistently moved American policy towards a strong alliance with Israel out of a basic sympathy with its cause and with that of the Jewish people still suffering persecution around the world (think of Jackson’s powerful support of the cause of Soviet Jewry).

Truman’s choice to recognize immediately the newborn state of Israel was a decision that came from his deepest sense of right. He overrode not only his State Department functionaries, whom he dismissed as the “striped-pants boys,” but also the man he respected above all others in government — George Marshall.

Marshall was the architect of victory in World War II and the visionary savior of the freedom of western Europe after the war. His opposition to Jewish statehood was his anticipation that the fledgling Jewish state would not stand a chance against the combined forces of all the Arab states united against them. He foresaw the bloodbath and desolation that so many in the Arab world boasted would happen and did not want to see the Holocaust continued. He staked his career on this, for the best of reasons, saying to not follow his advice would lead to his resignation. Indeed it did, though Marshall waited to leave so as not to embarrass his boss or discredit the government of the country he served so well and so selflessly.

What was true for Truman became mainstream when, gradually, the magnitude of the evil of anti-Semitism was revealed in its utter horror as the Holocaust sank into civilization’s consciousness. It was not a question of left or right, but of basic moral sobriety and plain human decency, that the kind of ideology and government that thrives on such hatred must be opposed, whether it is Hitlerism, Stalinism, or Khomeinism.

This was firmly established in the power structure of the Democrat Party, where so many Jews felt at home. And, Smith points out, this is what Obama came to transform radically.

US must prepare for cold war with China By Lawrence J. Haas

https://thehill.com/opinion/international/545215-us-must-prepare-for-cold-war-with-china

The United States and China show growing signs of entering a long-term cold war, strikingly similar to the U.S.-Soviet cold war of decades past and demanding the same dogged determination that Washington displayed during that earlier conflict to protect its interests and defend its allies.

Like the U.S.-Soviet conflict, the Sino-American one is rooted in competition between alternative political and economic systems — one free and democratic, the other unfree and authoritarian — for influence around the world, with enormous implications for the well-being of billions of people.

Also like the U.S.-Soviet conflict, Washington will need a comprehensive strategy to “contain” Beijing’s expansionist impulses. While (hopefully) avoiding a military confrontation with Beijing, Washington will need to maintain an unchallenged military capacity to protect its presence in Asia and other regions as China seeks to dislodge or overshadow it, and to use public diplomacy effectively as the two nations compete for the loyalty of grassroots populations around the world.

The signs of long-term U.S.-Sino conflict are unmistakable, and similarities to the cold war of yesteryear are uncanny.

During the cold war, Soviet leaders boldly predicted an inevitable victory, as the United States presided over what they considered a decaying capitalist structure. Speaking to the United Nations in late 1960, for instance, Nikita Khrushchev mused that “socialism is replacing capitalism” across the developing world.

The CCP Is a Threat. Why Won’t the President Call It One? By Jimmy Quinn

https://www.nationalreview.com/2021/03/the-ccp-is-a-threat-why-wont-the-president-call-it-one/

What recent speeches by Biden and Blinken say about the administration’s wrongheaded emphasis on cooperation with China.

Top Biden administration officials have largely kept their promises to vigorously compete with China. Building on the Trump administration’s China policies, they’ve pressed Beijing on its horrific human-rights abuses, bolstered U.S. support for Taiwan using the previous administration’s framework, and built out the Quad of Pacific democracies. In addition to that, the Biden team’s own focus on multilateral action has started to yield some results: This week, they announced sanctions on Chinese officials, coordinated with the U.K, the EU, and Canada, to punish CCP officials for their role in the Uyghur genocide.

But this flurry of activity has been joined, puzzlingly, with a deliberate effort to leave room for meetings such as last week’s rancorous U.S.-China summit in Alaska and President Biden’s decision to invite the CCP’s general secretary to a global climate summit.

To hear Biden appraise the challenge posed by the CCP is to listen to a meandering description of his recent phone conversation with its general secretary Xi Jinping, as he did yesterday. “I made it clear to him again what I’ve told him in person on several occasions: that we’re not looking for confrontation, although we know there will be steep, steep competition.”

No one wants a military conflict, but if calling out an authoritarian regime’s human-rights abuses and international bullying is anything, it is confrontation. In other words, the policies and statements of the president’s own administration belie a need to call the situation what it is, and not a sugarcoated version of the truth.

The problem is not that officials have backed down from speaking out on the CCP’s transgressions. On a trip to Tokyo earlier this month, Secretary of State Antony Blinken accused Beijing of using “coercion and aggression to systematically erode autonomy in Hong Kong, undercut democracy in Taiwan, abuse human rights in Xinjiang and Tibet, and assert maritime claims in the South China Sea” in violation of international law. If that doesn’t put a fine enough point on matters, Blinken has accused the Party of genocide in Xinjiang and referred to Taiwan as a “country” (a notable use of the term for a top U.S. official) as the mainland continues its airborne harassment of the world’s only Chinese democracy. Blinken and Biden both have defined this contest as a fundamental battle between democracy and authoritarianism in the 21st century.

Biden Sends $15 Million in COVID Aid to “Palestinians” Who Have Half Of US Fatality Rate Fri Daniel Greenfield

https://www.frontpagemag.com/point/2021/03/biden-sends-15-million-covid-aid-palestinians-who-daniel-greenfield/

Last spring, Senate Democrats were obsessed with saving Hamas from the coronavirus.

Eight Senate Democrats, including Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren, dispatched a four-page letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, demanding to know what America was doing about the coronavirus.

Not in America. In Gaza.

According to the Senate letter, “as of March 24, the first two cases of COVID-19 were confirmed in the Gaza Strip.”

That’s two cases. Two. The United States has over 200,000 as of now.

The letter quotes an article claiming that in Gaza, “health ministry officials” whined “that just one person infected with the deadly virus would end in ‘complete disaster’”

Fast forward to this year and some 500 Gazan residents in Hamas territory have died of the virus. That’s not exactly a major crisis.

So the Biden administration is directing $15 million in aid.

The United States said Thursday it is giving $15 million to vulnerable Palestinian communities in the West Bank and Gaza Strip to help fight the COVID-19 pandemic, a sharp reversal from the Trump administration which cut off almost all aid to the Palestinians.

Thomas-Greenfield said the $15 million in aid is “consistent with our interests and our values, and it aligns with our efforts to stamp our the pandemic and food insecurity worldwide.”

Food insecurity? Because we’re also funding food aid programs. Food isn’t a bomb, but as a practical matter foreign aid is fungible and non-profits on the ground in areas controlled by terrorists tend to either use local contractors associated with the terrorist leadership or make payoffs to them.

US: The Urgency of Keeping a Credible Deterrence by Peter Huessy

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/17205/credible-nuclear-deterrence

The current consensus position is pretty straightforward. Modernize the three aging elements of the land, sea, and air Triad — strategic bombers and related cruise missiles, land-based missiles, and submarines and related sea-launched ballistic missiles — and build a new nuclear command-and-control system to protect the US from cyber threats, while also refurbishing the nuclear warhead laboratories and facilities.

Some critics, however, want to take down nuclear systems across the board, including: (1) low-yield nuclear weapons on US submarines; (2) the Navy cruise missile, just starting research; (3) the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) and (4) the bomber cruise missile or long-range strike option (LRSO). Critics even want to stop the US from being able to build from 20-80 nuclear warheads annually.

There are also those who want the US to adopt a “no first use” policy. The US deterrent, however, extended over NATO and America’s Western Pacific allies, has historically included the threat of responding to a major conventional attack from Russia, North Korea or China, for example, with the first use of nuclear weapons. Many US allies might legitimately be worried if that option were “undone” by explicit US policy.

Given then the survivability of the current US nuclear forces, the 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR, p.67) determined that, should the US get rid of its ICBM force, the likelihood of a Russian attack on the US nuclear forces would only be increased. But with the entire Triad of US forces modernized, any chance of an attack on the American ICBM force would be “vanishingly small” — a conclusion reached recently by a number of analysts at the Federation of American Scientists.

As the current commander of US Strategic Command Admiral Charles Richard explained, if the US chooses not to modernize, it is choosing to go out of the nuclear business. The old legacy forces simply cannot be sustained much beyond this decade, when the replacements need to be delivered.

Various elements in the US Congress are saying that they want US nuclear policy to go in a decidedly new and different direction. This conflict between views on nuclear deterrence may place in jeopardy the hard-fought bi-partisan consensus created over the past ten years, in which the country agreed to fully modernize the aging US deterrent while also implementing arms control with its adversaries.

The current consensus position is pretty straightforward. Modernize the three aging elements of the land, sea, and air Triad — strategic bombers and related cruise missiles, land-based missiles, and submarines and related sea-launched ballistic missiles — and build a new nuclear command-and-control system to protect the US from cyber threats, while also refurbishing the nuclear warhead laboratories and facilities.

Some critics, however, want to take down nuclear systems across the board, including: (1) low-yield nuclear weapons on US submarines; (2) the Navy cruise missile, just starting research; (3) the Ground Based Strategic Deterrent (GBSD) and (4) the bomber cruise missile or long-range strike option (LRSO). Critics even want to stop the US from being able to build from 20-80 nuclear warheads annually.

‘Money Laundering’ for Terrorists Shoshana Bryen

https://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/insight/

The Palestinian Authority (PA) has been meeting with American, European and Israeli government representatives to end-run both the American Taylor Force Act (anti-“pay for slay”) and the Israeli law prohibiting financial transfers to the Palestinians in the amount the PA remunerates terrorist “salaries.” Why are Western governments having this discussion? Generally, the Israeli government treats the PA like a slightly leprous cousin—odious, but better than the cousin with guinea worm disease. There is a fear among some Westerners that if the PA loses control of its own people, then Hamas—the “worse” Palestinians, with both links to Iran and serious weapons—will make its move from Gaza to the West Bank.

It is not an unreasonable fear, but it undermines the rules of both money and morality.

Money doesn’t care where it’s spent—or by whom on what. While we talk about “dirty money” or “laundering money” to make it clean, the morality of money is with the people who spend it. People who spend money doing inoffensive—or even good—things with their money are still behaving immorally if their money helps bad people do bad things with other money.

It’s a sort of “money laundering” in reverse. If you can make dirty money clean, you can make clean money dirty. Good money becomes bad by virtue of its impact. And otherwise-good people become tainted by their willingness to help bad people do bad things.

Mocking by U.S. Adversaries Shows Biden Admin Neither Feared Nor Respected Ben Weingarten

https://weingarten.substack.com/p/mocking-by-us-adversaries-shows-biden?token

‘America is back’ insofar as we’re reverting to the Obama-era policy of appeasing our enemies, confronting our friends, and putting globalism rather than America first.

America’s worst adversaries are mocking, trolling and rebuffing the Joe Biden administration.

In so doing, they would seem to be delivering a clear message: They neither fear nor respect America under President Joe Biden’s leadership.

Consider what has transpired over just the last week, barely two months into Biden’s tenure.

During the first day of a highly anticipated meeting in Anchorage, Alaska, with the world watching, Chinese Communist Party (CCP) brass responded to criticism of China’s human rights violations from Secretary of State Antony Blinken and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan by shoving anti-American agitprop back into the faces of the senior representatives of a Biden administration that has already embraced a similar “1619 Project”-style narrative about America’s purported enduring evils.

“On human rights, we hope that the United States will do better,” tsk-tsked top CCP diplomat Yang Jiechi. He added: “The challenges facing the United States in human rights are deep-seated” and “they did not just emerge over the past four years, such as Black Lives Matter.”

CCP officials similarly spewed invective in a bid to portray not China, but America, as a bullying and coercive hegemon-wannabe, seeking to impose its values on others.

On the eve of the meeting, Chinese Ambassador to the U.S. Cui Tiankai needled with the question, “Will the U.S. be a responsible stakeholder in global affairs?”—an allusion to the query leaders of the U.S. foreign policy establishment had been asking of China since at least 2005.

Nearly contemporaneous with the Anchorage debacle, and after being called a “killer” by President Joe Biden, Russian President Vladimir Putin responded that “it takes one to know one” and, without a hint of subtlety, challenged the president to a debate. Putin added, “I wish you [President Biden] health. I say that without any irony or joke.” The subtext was clear: Putin was questioning Biden’s mental acuity and fitness.

North Korea Fires First Missiles During Biden Presidency U.S. says Kim regime launched short-range missiles, protesting joint American-South Korean military exercises

https://www.wsj.com/articles/north-koreas-military-carries-out-unusual-activities-near-border-11616508652?mod=world_major_1_pos1

North Korea launched several short-range missiles over the weekend, U.S. and South Korean officials said, in a show of defiance against President Biden and his administration that was widely expected after joint U.S.-South Korea military exercises.

The weekend launches caused no damage and are being viewed more as a symbolic show of strength than one intended to inflict damage or hit any specific targets, according to two U.S. officials.

U.S. officials declined to provide details about the short-range missile launches or even how many were launched. The launches aren’t covered by the United Nations Security Council resolutions that govern such activity, and they were on the “low end” of routine activity from the North Koreans, two senior administration officials said.

President Biden said he didn’t consider the launch a provocation.

“According to the Defense Department, it’s business as usual,” he said at the White House. “There is no new wrinkle in what they did.”

A senior U.S. official said Pyongyang “has a clear menu of provocations when it wants to send a message,” and “what took place last weekend is falling on the low end of that spectrum.”

On Wednesday, Seoul’s military said North Korea had fired two projectiles that appeared to be cruise missiles. The Sunday-morning launches occurred about 30 miles west of Pyongyang, the military said.

South Korean defense officials said the previous day that they were monitoring unusual activity by North Korea’s military in a sector close to the South Korean border. It wasn’t the same area where the suspected missile launches took place.

North Korea frequently fired off short-range missiles even as negotiations between leader Kim Jong Un and then-President Donald Trump’s administration inched on. At the time, Mr. Trump and his administration maintained that the short-range missiles didn’t violate the terms laid out in his discussions with Pyongyang, which failed to yield an accord. CBS News earlier reported the missile launches.

The Biden administration is nearing the end of a review of its policy with North Korea, the senior administration officials said. Next week, national-security adviser Jake Sullivan is expected to meet in person in Washington with counterparts from South Korea and Japan to discuss the U.S. posture with regard to North Korea, the officials said. It follows visits by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin, who traveled to Tokyo and Seoul last week.

Biden Torpedoes Abraham Accords Summit The new administration turns its back on peace between Israel and Arab states in order to pursue deal with Iran Lee Smith

https://www.tabletmag.com/sections/news/articles/biden-torpedoes-abraham-accords-summit

Media reports on March 18 revealed that the United Arab Emirates has suspended its plans for an Abraham Accords summit in Abu Dhabi with Israel, the United States, and other Arab signatories to the historic peace agreements brokered by the Donald Trump administration. Supposedly, the Emiratis are angry with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu for using the UAE’s de facto leader Mohammed bin Zayed as a “prop in his election campaign.”

In fact, as the theme of “election interference” should make clear (the UAE doesn’t have elections), and as has been substantiated by Israeli reporting, the source of the upset isn’t in Abu Dhabi but in Washington. In other words, the Biden administration is interfering in Israel’s upcoming election by strong-arming the Emiratis into publicly distancing themselves from Bibi.

Next week Israel will hold its fourth election in a little more than two years, so in effect Netanyahu has been campaigning for more than 24 months—including in August when he and MBZ signed the agreement. Should the Emiratis have shunned the deal since Netanyahu, like any Israeli prime minister, would invariably present his accomplishment to voters? What about sending an ambassador to Israel, as it did at the beginning of March? What about investing $10 billion, as MBZ told Netanyahu he would? So how does a photo op with the prime minister glad-handing the crown prince of Abu Dhabi on his home turf cross the line?

Plainly, the Obama-Biden team doesn’t care about interfering in Israeli elections or else Barack Obama’s State Department wouldn’t have funneled money to an NGO that campaigned against Netanyahu in 2015. Nor do Arab royals sitting atop petro-kingdoms have much theoretical or practical reason to worry about appearing to back one candidate against another. Smaller powers like the UAE make alliances not with factions but with states—and all parties in Israel support the Abraham Accords. Israel’s strategic class, its political, military, and intelligence echelons, as well as Israeli voters consider relations with Gulf Cooperation Council members a strategic boon. It is difficult to imagine any circumstances short of war under which an Israeli prime minister would think it politically wise to abandon a normalization agreement with any Arab state, never mind a major oil producer.

No, “election interference” is a staple of American political discourse. More particularly it is the rhetoric through which the Democratic Party now pushes information operations, like the Russiagate conspiracy theory holding that Russia interfered with the 2016 vote to put Trump in the White House. News of the canceled visit by the Israeli prime minister was eagerly pushed in the press and on social media by Obama’s Israel point man Dan Shapiro through his proprietary Israel wing of the echo chamber.

Trump and Kushner wondered why the wise men held them in contempt for making peace. What they didn’t understand was that making peace meant the wise men were fired.

But there’s a bigger play here than interfering in Israeli politics by denying Bibi a preelection photo op with Israel’s peace partners in the Gulf. Their larger goal is to weaken or dismantle the Abraham Accords, which by assembling a treaty structure that binds Israel together with the Gulf states structurally interferes with the administration’s stated goal of realigning the United States with Iran—and therefore against Israel and the Gulf—by reentering Obama’s nuclear deal.