Many readers of this blog will ask, quite rightly, why my seeming preoccupation with China in the posts. In fact, at the outset, this post should have been placed as a Foreword to the Blog.
The answer is simple: the media, the US and most other governments are narrowly focused on Iraq and the Middle East and to a great extent ignore the developments in Asia, in particular those involving China.
Most news about China centres on the trade deficit, outsourcing and loss of US jobs to China. These are also salient issues, but there are bigger stakes, political ones, that are having global impact, events that are in play, but being overlooked by a public uneducated and poorly informed by media about the region.
As has often been the case, the world, and chiefly the United States, is generally reactive to events. That is to say, it only takes note of happenings in a region of the world when a crisis is already full blown. The reaction is usually one of shock or surprise and more often than not inappropriate, frequently disastrous and hasty decisions are made by a government merely because it was unprepared to deal with the matter and needed to be seen as in control by a nervous and even more ignorant public.
Thus, although this blog will deal with geopolitical questions throughout the world, I make no apologies for the focus on Asia, and the individual topic of China. The latter looms larger in influence on the world with each passing day and it behoves the public, governments and media to prepare for the consequences by understanding the history and staying abreast of events in that area.
baoluo
26 November 2005
How to Find All Previous Posts
Please Note:
On the left sidebar are listed only the most recent ten posts. In order to view all previous posts, one must scroll down the full text posts on this, the right side of the home page. At this writing there are 38 posts available.
Thank you
On the left sidebar are listed only the most recent ten posts. In order to view all previous posts, one must scroll down the full text posts on this, the right side of the home page. At this writing there are 38 posts available.
Thank you
Condolezza Rice, Dominatrix
When Condolezza Rice was appointed Secretary of State she stated she would be a travelling Secretary of State, more so than Powell who had to stay in Washington and spend his time shoring up Bush’s image and wonky policies by appearing with him at every press conference.
Once Bush secured his reelection, there was no longer need for pretense, no longer for believable Powell to give loyal support to Bush’s lack of credibility. He could come out of the closet and unleash his secret foreign policy weapon – Condolezza Rice, Dominatrix!
Condolezza was set to both play nice and crack the whip with visits in Palestine, Canada, Russia, China, France and Germany.
So, here in this post, will begin a series which will be devoted to Rice’s peregrinations and policies; we will follow and evaluate the results of her approach and objectives.
Aside from her trendy fashion splash wearing her S&M working leather outfit, she has not made an auspicious start.
So far Russia, Iran, N. Korea and Canada have told her not to bother. Iran has said they will not tolerate interference in their affairs and will continue with nuclear development. Russia echoed Iran’s sentiments and signed an agreement to assist Iran in its nuclear plan. Putin and Bush had a “candid” conversation which means that Putin told him to stay out of internal Russian affairs while Bush tried unsuccessfully to reply without a speech prompter by his side, or on his back. Rice, despite being a specialist in Russian affairs, apparently has not been able to bring her expertise to bear on this issue.
Canada’s liberal PM could not muster enough votes to support Bush’s Nintendo Missile Defence system, so Rice cracked the whip and cancelled her trip to Canada. Dear oh dear, how will Canada be able to survive without a visit by Condolezza Rice?
Latin America? My dire warnings of impending disaster are, alas, proving all too correct. What has Rice done to counter the trend toward ant-Americanism in South America? What has she done to counter the influence of Chavez, of a growing move to the Left in Bolivia, Argentina and Uruguay? This is not to mention the keystone of Brasil led by Lula who has cozied up to Chavez. All China has to do is wait for the Latin fruit to ripen and drop in their lap.
At this writing she is in the Middle East, as the saying goes, beating a dead horse, trying to resuscitate the corpse of US foreign policy in that region. The Palestinians quite understandably do not take her or the Bush State Department seriously seeing them as a stalking horse for Israel. We have not had an impartial approach to the Israeli/Palestinian problem since the days of Jim Baker and Brent Scowcroft and the present policy is without question the most biased ever in favour of Israel. With the Evangelicals increasing influence in foreign policy and education that is not likely to change in the foreseeable future. Her recent much ballyhooed role in bringing the Palestinians and Israelis to an agreement on access to and from the Gaza strip is little more than a band-aid applied to a gaping wound. She, like Dubya, is a dedicated Evangelical and brings with her all that ideological baggage common to evangelicals – moralistic preaching and arrogant belief in the superiority of Western style democracy and Christianity.
Not even mild-mannered Brent Scowcroft, former National Security Advisor and long time Bush Senior friend in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg (see the New Yorker 31 October) could resist criticism of Rice. If you have not or cannot obtain a copy, herewith his take on Rice, “
He correctly point out Rice’s forte is narrow and in the Russian domain, not Asia, not the Middle East. Because of the American preoccupation with Iraq little attention is given to more important areas. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed to attend an important Asean meeting. Moreover, the Americans have sought to use successive Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation (Apec) summits to push their agenda of security and counter-terrorism - issues which are less central to Asian countries.
Her academic credentials like so many of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld appointees are impeccable academically but lacking “in the trenches” experience. Wolfowitz was another example of the ivory tower pundits and one who led us into the present quagmire in Iraq. Rice with her doctoral badge is in some respects more dangerous because she brings with her the baggage of evangelical religious beliefs and unquestioning loyalty to Bush who has no foreign policy credentials, in practice or on paper – the blind leading the blind.
Finis
Once Bush secured his reelection, there was no longer need for pretense, no longer for believable Powell to give loyal support to Bush’s lack of credibility. He could come out of the closet and unleash his secret foreign policy weapon – Condolezza Rice, Dominatrix!
Condolezza was set to both play nice and crack the whip with visits in Palestine, Canada, Russia, China, France and Germany.
So, here in this post, will begin a series which will be devoted to Rice’s peregrinations and policies; we will follow and evaluate the results of her approach and objectives.
Aside from her trendy fashion splash wearing her S&M working leather outfit, she has not made an auspicious start.
So far Russia, Iran, N. Korea and Canada have told her not to bother. Iran has said they will not tolerate interference in their affairs and will continue with nuclear development. Russia echoed Iran’s sentiments and signed an agreement to assist Iran in its nuclear plan. Putin and Bush had a “candid” conversation which means that Putin told him to stay out of internal Russian affairs while Bush tried unsuccessfully to reply without a speech prompter by his side, or on his back. Rice, despite being a specialist in Russian affairs, apparently has not been able to bring her expertise to bear on this issue.
Canada’s liberal PM could not muster enough votes to support Bush’s Nintendo Missile Defence system, so Rice cracked the whip and cancelled her trip to Canada. Dear oh dear, how will Canada be able to survive without a visit by Condolezza Rice?
Latin America? My dire warnings of impending disaster are, alas, proving all too correct. What has Rice done to counter the trend toward ant-Americanism in South America? What has she done to counter the influence of Chavez, of a growing move to the Left in Bolivia, Argentina and Uruguay? This is not to mention the keystone of Brasil led by Lula who has cozied up to Chavez. All China has to do is wait for the Latin fruit to ripen and drop in their lap.
At this writing she is in the Middle East, as the saying goes, beating a dead horse, trying to resuscitate the corpse of US foreign policy in that region. The Palestinians quite understandably do not take her or the Bush State Department seriously seeing them as a stalking horse for Israel. We have not had an impartial approach to the Israeli/Palestinian problem since the days of Jim Baker and Brent Scowcroft and the present policy is without question the most biased ever in favour of Israel. With the Evangelicals increasing influence in foreign policy and education that is not likely to change in the foreseeable future. Her recent much ballyhooed role in bringing the Palestinians and Israelis to an agreement on access to and from the Gaza strip is little more than a band-aid applied to a gaping wound. She, like Dubya, is a dedicated Evangelical and brings with her all that ideological baggage common to evangelicals – moralistic preaching and arrogant belief in the superiority of Western style democracy and Christianity.
Not even mild-mannered Brent Scowcroft, former National Security Advisor and long time Bush Senior friend in his interview with Jeffrey Goldberg (see the New Yorker 31 October) could resist criticism of Rice. If you have not or cannot obtain a copy, herewith his take on Rice, “
He correctly point out Rice’s forte is narrow and in the Russian domain, not Asia, not the Middle East. Because of the American preoccupation with Iraq little attention is given to more important areas. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice failed to attend an important Asean meeting. Moreover, the Americans have sought to use successive Asia Pacific Economic Co-operation (Apec) summits to push their agenda of security and counter-terrorism - issues which are less central to Asian countries.
Her academic credentials like so many of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld appointees are impeccable academically but lacking “in the trenches” experience. Wolfowitz was another example of the ivory tower pundits and one who led us into the present quagmire in Iraq. Rice with her doctoral badge is in some respects more dangerous because she brings with her the baggage of evangelical religious beliefs and unquestioning loyalty to Bush who has no foreign policy credentials, in practice or on paper – the blind leading the blind.
Finis
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)