Tag: funding

Is it really possible that a hot war, instigated by the US, would occur between China and Taiwan?

I think that is important to address the issue of Taiwan and China. I believe that I need to do so because the USA is trying to start a war there. The drums for war are beating loudly. Really, really loudly. What the HELL is going on?

America is a military empire and it needs a war to exist. It’s always wanted one, two or three, as well well know. Right now the USA is involved in eight simultaneous wars, which could be reduced to seven if the (so called Afghanistan pull out) actually occurs.

But yeah. All evidence is that the United States is “throwing it’s weight around” trying to provoke a mighty World War.

(To) throw one's weight around, to To use one’s wealth or standing to manipulate others; to act officiously. 

This expression dates from the early twentieth century and uses weight in the sense of “authority.” John P. Marquand had it in H. M. Pulham, Esquire (1941): “Bo-jo was a bastard, a big bastard.

-Throw weight around - Idioms by The Free Dictionary

All you need to do is read the slant of the “news” out of America. Such as this piece of reprehensible trash…

Really?

Seriously?

Are you fucking kidding me?

I will admit that the anti-China articles have improved in their “sneakiness”. All you need to do is read the text to pull out the “boiler plate” anti-China screeds. Like this one from my Tech channels…

And the source for all this information? Why it’s the “United States Government”. That’s it. No other information on names or actual validation channels. Jeeze!

So the USA is busily running their anti-China screed, and they are still poking the Panda. But will it result in a hot war over Taiwan?

We should look into this. Here we tie together some most excellent articles and then weave them together for a better, more comprehensive picture about what is going on, why and who the culprits are.

We will start with this, it is one of the better articles on the subject. Edited to fit in this venue and all credit to the author.

Taiwan Strait: A Shooting War Involving China, Taiwan and the US?

Washington’s Arms Sales to Taiwan

By Prof. Joseph H. Chung
Global Research, April 26, 2021

We are witnessing the fourth Cross-Strait Crises. Chinese and American armed forces are undertaking dangerous, spectacular and threatening show of military might. What makes the present crisis different from the previous ones is the fact that it happened during and after the mutual cold-war declaration by Washington and Beijing in Anchorage, Alaska on March 18-19, 2021

The world is wondering how far this military show will go. Many are afraid of a shooting war involving China, Taiwan and the U.S.  Indeed, many are even afraid of the possibility of the third world war which will kill us all.

However, I do not share such pessimistic views. My view is that the inter-China cold war is likely to remain cold, not hot, because none of the three actors involved in the conflict – two Chinas and the U.S.- will gain from the shooting war.

The Sino-American shooting war – if there will be one – will be ignited somewhere else.

Summary

My argument may be summarized as follows.

First, the U.S. does not want the inter-China hot war, because through its ambiguous Taiwan policy, it can continue to sell weapons to Taiwan and, at the same time, keep Taiwan as the primary outpost of its China containment policy.

Second, China is not eager to declare a hot war with Taiwan, because Taiwan has not provided the reasons for China’s Taiwan invasion.

What would force an invasion of Taiwan by China?

There are four reasons for China’s Taiwan invasion including [1] the declaration of Taiwan independence, [2] internal turmoil inside of Taiwan, [2] military alliance with another country, [3] acquisition of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and [4] negotiations under the violation of the 1992 Consensus for “one-China”.

None of these conditions are present.

Therefore, China has no reason to invade Taiwan.

Taiwan does not want a war with China

Third, Taiwan does not want the hot war with China for the reason that it will be most likely defeated. As well as the cost of such defeat will be too high in terms of economic development and the loss of its identity. In fact, if and when China wins, it is extremely likely that both of the two China’s will be united under the banner of PRC.

The U.S. does not want inter-China hot War

To understand Washington’s role in the inter-China conflict, it is important to understand its Taiwan policy.

Washington’s Taiwan policy is based on [1] the three joint communiqués, [2] the Taiwan Relations Act of 1979 (TRA) and [3] the Six Assurances imposed by Ronald Reagan in 1982.

The followings are the contents of the three Communiqués, TRA and the Six Assurances.

The First China-U.S. Communiqué (28 February 1972)

  • The U.S. Government acknowledges (not accept or recognize) that all Chinese in either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but One China
  • Taiwan is a part of China
  • The U.S. Government does not challenge this position
  • . It reaffirms its interest in peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by Chinese themselves
  • With this prospect in mind, it affirms its ultimate objective of the withdrawal of all the U.S. forces and military installations from Taiwan.

The Second China-U.S. Communiqué (January 1, 1979)

  • Neither should seek hegemony in the Asia-Pacific region or any other region of the world.
  • Each is opposed to efforts by any other country or group of countries to establish such hegemony
  • The government of the USA acknowledges the Chinese position that there is but one China and that Taiwan is part of China
  • PRC is the sole legal government of China

Third China-U.S. Communiqué (August 17, 1982)

  • The U.S. Government attaches great importance to its relation with China.
  • It has no intention of infringing on Chinese sovereignty and territorial integrity or interfering in China’s internal affairs or pursuing a policy of ‘two Chinas’ or ‘one China, one Taiwan.’
  • The U.S. Government states that it does not seek to carry out a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan
  • Its arms sale to Taiwan will not exceed, either in qualitative or in quantitative terms the level of those supplied in recent years
  • It intends to reduce gradually its sales of arms to Taiwan, leading over a period of time to a final solution.
  • The U.S. Taiwan policy cannot be changed by the president and requires the consent of the Congress.

The Taiwan Relations Act (enacted by the U.S. Congress on April 10, 1979)

The principal contents of the Act is in Section 2 of the Act

  • Taiwan is treated as a country, a nation or a state as sub sovereign nation
  • Informal diplomatic relations are carried out by the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT)
  • The U.S. Government normalizes its diplomatic relations with PRC (Beijing) under the condition that the future of Taiwan will be determined by peaceful means.
  • Any efforts to determine the future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means including by boycotts, or embargoes, a threat to the peace and security of the Western Pacific are grave concern to the U.S.
  • The Sino (Taiwan)-U.S. Mutual Defence Treaty is terminated.
  • The U.S. Government does not intervene in case of invasion by People’s Republic of China (PRC)
  • The U.S. Government provides arms of defensive character and maintains the capacity to resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan
  • The decision related to the quantity and the quality of defence articles and services is determined by the Congress and the president.

The Six Assurances

The administration of Ronald Reagan unilaterally added in 1982 “Six Assurances” to the TRA and this has become the mains part of the U.S. Taiwan policy

  • The U.S. Government has not agreed to set a date of the termination of its arms sale to Taiwan.
  • The U.S. Government has not agreed to consult with PRC (China) or ROC (Taiwan) for arms sales to Taiwan.
  • The U.S. Government does not perform the mediation role between ROC and PRC
  • The U.S. Government has not agreed to revise the TRA
  • The U.S. Government has not revised its position regarding the sovereignty of Taiwan
  • The U.S. Government will not exercise pressure on Taiwan to enter into negotiation with PRC.

The positive aspect of Washington’s Taiwan policy is the termination of the bloody civil war between ROC and PRC which caused the two cross-strait crises (1954 and 1958); the civil war lasted until 1979.

But, the end of the inter-China civil war was also desirable for Washington as well, because Washington badly needed China to counter the aggressive assertiveness of the Soviet Union in Asia.

So, Washington and Beijing were strange bed fellows with different dreams. Another possible reason for the U.S. initiative to end the inter-China civil war was the fear of Beijing’s victory over Taipei, which means the loss of a lucrative American arms market and reliable outpost of China containment strategy.

On the other hand, Washington’s Taiwan policy is characterized by the amazing ambiguity of Washington’s perception of the cross-strait problems and tactics which was most likely designed to maximize the American interests at the expense of China’s interests.

What comes out of the three communiqués, the TRA and the six assurances may be summarized in terms of the issue of regional hegemony, the legal status of Taiwan and the American arms sales.

Regional ambiguity

In the second communiqué of 1979, there are items preventing China from becoming a hegemonic power in the region. Neither the U.S. nor China should seek for hegemonic power in Asia. But the U.S was already the hegemonic power there.

The second feature of Washington’s Taiwan policy is its contradictory and ambiguous position regarding the legal status of Taiwan.

In the joint communiqués, the U.S. acknowledges that China is one and Taiwan is a part of China and that Beijing is the sole legal government of China. But this should mean that since Taiwan is a part of China, Beijing should also govern Taiwan.

But, in the Taiwan Relations Act, Taiwan is given the status of a de facto sovereign country.

China can argue that Washington did not respect the contents of the joint communiqués. But Washington can say this: “We have never accepted one-China regime, we said we acknowledged the regime”. Here, we see the strategic political ambiguity of Washington.

In fact, in the TRA, it says that Taiwan is treated as a nation of sub sovereignty. The U.S. has established de facto diplomatic relations with Taiwan conducted through the American Institute in Taiwan (AIT).

Here, Washington’s position regarding the sovereignty of Taiwan is not clear. The hidden purpose of the U.S. could be to make the sovereignty issue ambiguous so that it can change its position in function of needs.

Washington’s Arms Sales to Taiwan

Now, as for the issues of arms sales to Taiwan, the U. S. is even more ambiguous.

In the third communiqué, the U.S. says that it has no long-run plan of arms sales to Taiwan.

Yet in the same communiqué, the U.S. says that it will reduce arms sales, which contradicts each other.

In the TRA, the Sino (ROC)-U.S. defence Treaty is terminated.

This is a very, very important point. One that is purposely being left out of all media communication originating out of the United States. The TRA ended Taiwan as a US Protectorate.

Therefore, Washington should not intervene militarily if and when Taiwan is in armed conflict with Beijing.

But, already, in media, the US intervention in case of PRC’s Taiwan invasion is openly discussed.

One wonders what the reliability of the joint communiqués, the TRA and the Six Assurances is. It’s as if the United States simply ignores inconvenient rules, treaties, and agreements that it has signed.

Now, in the Six Assurances, it is written that the U.S. has no date for the ending of its arms sales to Taiwan. The U.S. is not obliged to consult PRC or ROC for its arms sales to Taiwan. So, Washington has absolute freehand in handling the arms sales to Taiwan.

In short, the U.S. Taiwan policy is so confusing and so ambiguous that it has useful flexibility for the sales of arms to Taiwan. The following table shows the pattern of American arms sales to Taiwan.

Table: Washington’s arms sales to Taiwan by U.S. Presidents

The table above allows these observations.

  • Washington’s arms sales to Taiwan has increased over the years, which is contrary to what the U.S. Government had promised.
  • The Trump administration spent as much as US$ 4.45 billion per year which represents as much as 30% of Taiwan’s annual defense budget of $15 billion
  • By and large, the Republican Party sells more than the Democrats.
  • Washington sells more when the anti-Beijing liberal party of Taiwan, the Democratic and Progressive Parry (DPP) is in power, that is, under the DPP government of Chen Shui-bian (2000-2008) and under the DPP government of Tsai Ying-wen (2016-2021)

This has an important meaning.

Remember that the DPP is the party which seeks independence of Taiwan.

Hence, the data can be interpreted as Washington’s strategy of encouraging the independence movement leading to ROC-PRC tension and more U.S. arms sales to Taiwan.

So the United States is actively encouraging an armed conflict between Taiwan and China. Though everyone realizes that ultimately Taiwan would be absorbed into China as a result of the conflict.

So, Does the USA want a Hot War over the Taiwan strait?

Now, coming back to the question of whether the U.S. wishes hot war over the Taiwan Strait, the answer is that it will not want the hot war.

The USA does not really want a Hot War, even though it is provoking one.

The reason is because, the hot war means the unification of China and Taiwan will no longer be able to play the role of Washington’s primary China-containment outpost and its function of being the lucrative market of American military equipment’s.

Neither PRC (People’s Republic of China) nor ROC (Republic of China-Taiwan) wants the hot War.

Are Taiwan and China enemies as described in the Western media?

When we discuss Taiwan and China, it is important to remember that they once were enemies. This was around fifty years ago.

The army of the ROC was defeated in 1949 and Chiang Kai-sek fled to Taiwan and continued the Republic of China which was created in 1912 by Sun Yat-sen. The civil war between ROC and PRC continued until 1979.

Even though the civil war was terminated, the ROC and PRC relations have not been smooth partly because of the past history and partly because of different political and economic regimes. In other words, there are always the possibilities of hostility in the cross-strait relations.

However, they have established viable relations which have been beneficial to both through political and economic cooperation.

The Risk of full Taiwan Independence from China

Aside from the American and British media harping on the desire for Taiwan to be free of the “oppressive yoke” of the “brutal Communist Dictatorship”,  the real truth is something else entirely.

The evolution of the Taiwanese political orientation may be measured in terms of the way in which its presidents consider the legal status of Taiwan vis-à-vis PRC.

The evolution of Taiwanese political leaders’ perceptions of Taipei-Beijing political relations is shown below. By and large, such relations have evolved by the following periods.

  • The civil war period (1949-1979)
  • The period of good relations (1979-1998)
  • The period of hostility (1998-2008)
  • The resumption of high level dialogue period (2008-2016)
  • The frozen relation period (2016-2021)

The period of civil war (1949-1979) was characterized by two cross-strait crises and never ending armed conflict between two Chinas.

During the friendly relation period (1979-1998), Deng Xiaoping met frequently the head of the Nationalist Party, Kuomintang (KMT) in order to develop cooperative relations.

President Chiang Ching-kuo (1980-1988) of KMT, son of Chiang Kai-shek, declared the three NOs:

      • No declaration of independence,
      • No unification of Chinas and
      • No use of force between the two Chinas.

On July 9, 1999, President Lee Teng-hui (1988-2000) of KMT defined the ROC-PRC relation as “country to country relations.” So, there is no need for the independence declaration.

However, Lee’s visit to the Cornel University Alumni in 1995 alarmed Beijing and it led to the 1996 show of military might of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) of  PRC.

This was, in fact, the third Taiwan Strait crisis.

During the period of hostility (1998-2008), President Chen Shui-bian (2000-2008) of the anti-PRC party, DPP, changed the name of “Chunghwa Post Co.” to “Taiwan Post Co.” He changed also the name of “China Petroleum Corporation” to “Taiwan Petroleum Corporation.”

But, under KMT president Ma Yong-Jeou (2008-2016), the old names came back. This episode shows how Taiwanese people are sensitive about the identity of Taiwan vis-à-vis China of main land.

In 2008, Ma Ying-Jeou of KMT (2008-2016) took over the power and the friendly relations across the Strait were resumed.

The year 2008 was marked by the efforts of PRCs president Hu Jintao to improve the bilateral relations across the Taiwan Strait. On March 26, 2008, he talked to President G.W. Bush, who endorsed the 1992 consensus on “One China”..

President Hu Jintao also met the Chairman of the KMT, Wu Po-hsing, who also accepted the 1992 Consensus.

As for President Ma, he defined the bilateral relations as “One Country on each side” or “two states in the same nation.”

In 2016 began the current period of contention. The power went back to DPP and Tsai Ying-wen became President. Tsai’s perception of Taiwan’s legal status was not more certain than those of other Taiwan presidents.

Her victory has put Beijing in even uncomfortable position. In 2016, Beijing cut all communications with ROC.

But, in the same year, some leaders in Taiwan being aware of the deteriorating cross-strait relations formed a Taiwanese delegation composed of eight magistrates and city mayors went to Beijing to improve the relations.

However, the cross-strait relations were not peaceful. In 2018, PLA conducted military exercises which surely alarmed Taiwan.

In 2019, Xi Jinping reaffirmed his position in favor of “one China, two systems.”

President Tsai Ying-wen refused Xi Jinping’s idea.

To the surprise of the world, in 2020 Tsai Ying-wen won the election again; the world was expecting that she would take more radical position regarding Taiwan’s independence.

True, her victory has encouraged the independence movement in Taiwan and pro-independence political parties and civic organizations asked for a referendum on independence.

However, Tsai maintained her position that since Taiwan is already independent country, there is no need for the declaration of independence.”

To sum up, none of the presidents of the major parties, the KMT and the DPP, opted for the declaration of Taiwan’s independence.

True, there are some pro-independence parties such as The Taiwan Independence Party, the Taiwan Solidarity and the Formosa Alliance, but they have no electoral support.

Thus, the danger of Taiwan’s declaration of independence seems nonexistent and therefore, Beijing has no reason to invade for now.

Taiwan People’s Perception

What has intrigued me is the Taiwanese people’s perceptions regarding Taiwan’s legal or political status. There are four public opinion polls which are meaningful.

In the poll of 2008 by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) no less than76% of the respondents rejected the idea of “one China, two systems.”

In the 2017 poll by MAC, 85% of the respondents said that the future of Taiwan should be determined by the Taiwanese themselves.

In the 2019 poll by MAC, 75% of the respondents rejected the 1992 Consensus (There is only one China which should be governed by PRC).

In the 2020 poll by the Academia Sinica, one finds very interesting phenomena.

  • 73% of the respondents identified themselves as Taiwanese.
  • 27.5% of them identified themselves as Chinese-Taiwanese
  • 2.4% of them identified themselves as Chinese
  • 52.3% of them would prefer the postponement of the question of Taiwan independence and keep the status quo
  • 35.1% of them prefer immediate independence
  • 5.5% of them would prefer immediate or eventual unification of China.

In the Poll of MAC, 90% of the respondents refused PLA’s military threats.

To sum up, the Taiwanese are eager to greater autonomy, even independence, but they seem to avoid military confrontation by postponing the solution of the independence issue.

In short, Taiwan does not want a shooting war with China.

Economic Cooperation

There is another reason why the ROC-PRC hot war will not take place. It is the cross-strait economic cooperation.

Taiwan has achieved a remarkable success in economic development.

In the 1960s, the per capita GDP was as low as $60. Now, in 2020, its GDP (nominal) was $730 billion USD and the per capita GDP was $32,000. This is, in fact, the miraculous achievements of the Taiwanese people.

The information industries account for 35 % of the country’s industrial production. The semi-conductor producers such as Taiwan Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) and the United Microelectronic Corporation (UMC) are world leaders. Taiwan is the 13th largest producer of steel; its steel products are exported to 130 countries. The most spectacular entrepreneurial performance has been shown by the SMEs accounting for 85% of industrial outputs.

Such achievement has been possible because of the courage, the innovative entrepreneurial spirit, the productivity and, especially the hard work of the Taiwanese.

However, Washington’s economic aid, its imports of Taiwanese products and technology transfer have all contributed. In addition, we should not forget the cooperation between Mainland China and Taiwan.

Under President Chiang Ching-kuo (1978-1988), two important semi-official organizations were was established: the Strait Exchange Foundation (SEF) under ROC’s Mainland Affairs Council and the Association of Relations across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS) under PRCs Taiwanese Affairs Office.

These two organizations have been the center of bilateral political and economic cooperation. They have initiated the three links: postal services, transportation and trade.

The Taiwan’s Investment Guidelines and similar measures taken by ROC have led to mutual business investments.

In fact, 40 % of Taiwan’s outbound FDI stock went to Mainland China. Chinese tourists contribute to more than 40% of ROCs tourist industry. The Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement of 2010 is another mechanism of the bilateral economic relations.

Above all, Taiwan depends heavily on China for trade. In 2020, the value of Taiwan’s total exports was $ 345 billion of which 29.7% went to China. In the same year, the value of Taiwan’s total imports was $ 286 billion of which 22% came from China.

It is true that the RCO-PRC relations are not peaceful. But these economic relations are beneficial enough to keep the status quo as long as possible.

The conclusion of my analysis is that none of the three actors involved in the cross-strait drama wants shooting war.

      • China doesn’t
      • Taiwan doesn’t
      • The United States doesn’t.

The United States. The U.S. does not want the hot war because it will mean [1] the unification of China, [2] the loss of Taiwan as the primary China-containment outpost and [3] the loss of the lucrative arms market.

Taiwan. Taiwan does not want the shooting war, because it will mean the complete destruction of its economy, and the loss of its autonomy becoming one of the Chinese provinces.

China. China does not risk the hot war because [1] Taiwan prefers the status quo; [2] it has no intention of getting weapons of mass destruction; [3] there is no internal turmoil; [4] it does not seek military alliances.

But the United States wants high stress and tension

However, even without the shooting war, as long as the Sino-U.S. cold war continues, the cross-strait tension will continue.

Washington will sell more military equipment and services and Taiwan will have to play the dangerous role of Washington’s the primary outpost of China containment strategy and that of main buyer of American military weapons.

I wish to add this.

The bilateral conflict between two Chinas like all other major bilateral conflicts is an integral part of Washington’s strategy of global hegemony. One of the most productive components of the American global hegemony is the proxy war, that is, some member country of Washington’s alliances will fight for the U.S.

Japan might be asked to play this role, because Japan is the best qualified for such task; it is a world class military power and it has the ambition of dominating Asia again; to do so, Japan has to destroy China. I hope I am wrong in thinking such an awful thing.

Finally, I would like add this too…

Taiwan is a country which has achieved an amazing economic miracle of which all Chinese should be proud. Taiwan has established viable democracy under very challenging conditions; this is a regime which will surely contribute to the further advancement of China’s socio-political system.

…

Well, perhaps it is the Taiwan oligarchy that is pushing this issue. Not the Taiwanese government, and not the American government. Perhaps it is the oligarchy inside of Taiwan, and the greedy evil neocons in America that is driving up the stress levels in the Taiwan strait.

Because if Taiwan, China and the USA doesn’t want a war, then why are we talking about this?

Tanks and Think Tanks: How Taiwanese Cash Is Funding the Push to War with China

By Alan MacLeod
Global Research, April 26, 2021
MintPress News 22 April 2021

 

Twenty years ago, a group of neoconservative think tanks used their power to push for disastrous wars in the Middle East. Now, a new set of think tanks staffed with many of the same experts and funded by Taiwanese money is working hard to convince Americans that there is a new existential threat: China.

At MintPress, we have been at the forefront of exposing how Middle Eastern dictatorships and weapons contractors have been funneling money into think tanks and political action committees, keeping up a steady drumbeat for more war and conflict around the world.

Yet one little-discussed nation that punches well above its weight in spending cash in Washington is Taiwan.

By studying Taiwan’s financial reports, MintPress has ascertained that the semi-autonomous island of 23 million people has, in recent years, given out millions of dollars to many of the largest and most influential think tanks in the United States.

This has coincided with a strong upsurge in anti-China rhetoric in Washington, with report after report warning of China’s economic rise and demanding that the U.S. intervene more in China-Taiwan disputes.

These think tanks are filled with prominent figures from both parties and have the ears of the most powerful politicians in Washington.

It is in their offices that specialists draw up papers and incubate ideas that become tomorrow’s policies.

They also churn out experts who appear in agenda-setting media, helping to shape and control the public debate on political and economic issues.

Twenty years ago, a group of neoconservative think tanks like the Project for a New American Century, funded by foreign governments and weapons manufacturers, used their power to push for disastrous wars in the Middle East.

Now, a new set of think tanks, staffed with many of those same experts who provided the intellectual basis for those invasions, is working hard to convince Americans that there is a new existential threat: China.

The Brookings Institute

In 2019, the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the United States (TECRO) — for all intents and purposes, the Taiwanese embassy — donated between $250,000 and $499,999 to the Brookings Institute, commonly identified as the world’s most influential think tank.

Taiwanese tech companies have also given large sums to the organization.

In turn, Brookings Institute staff like Richard C. Bush (a former member of the National Intelligence Council and a U.S. national intelligence officer for East Asia) vociferously champion the cause of Taiwanese nationalists and routinely condemn Beijing’s attempts to bring the island more closely under control.

 

TECRO featured prominently among myriad defense interests on the donor rolls for both the Atlantic Council, left, and Brookings Institute

In mid-April 2021, Brookings held an event called “Taiwan’s quest for security and the good life,” which began with the statement that…

“Taiwan is rightly praised for its democracy. Elections are free, fair, and competitive; civil and political rights are protected.” 

...

“most consequential” challenge to the island’s liberty and prosperity is “China’s ambition to end Taiwan’s separate existence.”

According to another organization’s latest financial disclosure, TECRO also gave a six-figure sum to the Atlantic Council, a think tank closely associated with NATO.

The Atlantic Council

It is unclear what the Atlantic Council did with that money, but what is certain is that they gave a senior fellowship to Chang-Ching Tu, an academic employed by the Taiwanese military to teach at the country’s National Defense University.

In turn, Tu authored Atlantic Council reports describing his country as a “champion [of] global democracy,” and stating that “democracy, freedom and human rights are Taiwan’s core values.”

A menacing China, however, is increasing its military threats, so Taiwan must “accelerate its deterrence forces and strengthen its self-defense capabilities.”

Thus he advises that the U.S. must work far more closely with Taiwan’s military, conducting joint exercises and moving towards a more formal military alliance.

In 2020, the U.S. sold $5.9 billion worth of arms to the island, making it the fifth-largest recipient of American weaponry last year.

Other Taiwan-employed academics have chided the West on the pages of the Council’s website for its insufficient zeal in “deter[ring] Chinese aggression” against the island. “A decision by the United States to back down” — wrote Philip Anstrén, a Swedish recipient of a fellowship from the Taiwanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs — “could damage the credibility of U.S. defense guarantees and signal that Washington’s will to defend its allies is weak.”

Anstrén also insisted that “Europe’s future is on the line in the Taiwan Strait.” “Western democratic nations have moral obligations vis-à-vis Taiwan,” he added on his blog, “and Western democracies have a duty to ensure that [Taiwan] not only survives but also thrives.”

The reason this is important is that the Atlantic Council is an enormously influential think tank.

Its board of directors is a who’s-who in foreign policy statecraft, featuring no fewer than seven former CIA directors.

Also on the board are many of the architects of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, including Colin Powell, Condoleezza Rice and James Baker. When organizations like this begin beating the war drums, everybody should take note.

…

The Hudson Institute

Perhaps the most strongly anti-Beijing think tank in Washington is the conservative Hudson Institute, an organization frequented by many of the Republican Party’s most influential figures, including former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, former Vice-President Mike Pence and Arkansas Senator Tom Cotton.

The words “China” or “Chinese” appear 137 times in Hudson’s latest annual report, so focused on the Asian nation are they. Indeed, reading their output, it often appears they care about little else but ramping up tensions with Beijing, condemning it for its treatment of Hong Kong, Taiwan and Uyghur Muslims, and warning of the economic and military threat of a rising China.

Over the years, Hudson’s efforts have been sustained by huge donations from TECRO.

The Hudson Institute does not disclose the exact donations any sources give, but their annual reports show that TECRO has been on the highest tier of donors ($100,000+) every year since they began divulging their sponsors in 2015. In February, Hudson Senior Fellow Thomas J. Duesterberg wrote an op-ed for Forbes entitled “The Economic Case for Prioritizing a U.S.-Taiwan Free Trade Agreement,” in which he extolled Taiwan’s economy as modern and dynamic and portrayed securing closer economic ties with it as a no-brainer. Hudson employees have also traveled to Taiwan to meet and hold events with leading foreign ministry officials there.

The Hudson Institute also recently partnered with the more liberal Center for American Progress (CAP) to host an event with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen, who took the opportunity to make a great number of inflammatory statements about the “ever more challenging threats to free and democratic societies” China poses; applaud the U.S.’ actions on Hong Kong; and talk about how Taiwan honors and celebrates those who died at the Tiananmen Square massacre. TECRO gave the CAP between $50,000 and $100,000 last year.

The Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS)

It is the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), however, that appears to receive the most Taiwanese money.

According to its donor list, Taiwan gives as much money to it as the United States does — at least $500,000 last year alone.

Yet all of the Taiwanese government money is put into CSIS’s regional studies (i.e., Asia) program. Like Hudson employees, the CSIS calls for a free trade agreement with Taiwan and has lavished praise on the nation for its approach to tackling disinformation, describing it as a “thriving democracy and a cultural powerhouse.”

Although acknowledging that the reports were paid for by TECRO, CSIS insists that “all opinions expressed herein should be understood to be solely those of the authors and are not influenced in any way by any donation.”

In December, the CSIS also held a debatesuggesting that “[w]ithin the next five years, China will use significant military force against a country on its periphery,” exploring what the U.S. response to such an action should be.

Like the Atlantic Council, the CSIS organization is stacked with senior officials from the national security state. Its president and CEO is former Deputy Secretary of Defense John Hamre, while Henry Kissinger — former secretary of state and the architect of the Vietnam War — also serves on its council.

The Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD)

The CSIS accepts money from the Global Taiwan Institute and the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy (TFD) as well. The former is a rather shadowy pro-Taiwanese group that appears not to disclose its funding sources.

The latter is a government-funded organization headed by former Taiwanese President You Si-kun.

Every year, the TFD publishes a human rights report on China, the latest of which claims that “the Chinese Communist Party knows no bounds when it comes to committing serious human rights violations” — accusing it of “taking the initiative” in “promoting a new Cold War over the issue of human rights” and trying to “replace the universal standing of human rights values around the world.”

Ultimately, the report concludes, China “constitutes a major challenge to democracy and freedom in the world.”

 

Joseph Hwang of The War College in Taiwan speaks at a CSIS about how Taiwan acts a buffer to protect US data infrastructure from China

The Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation

The TFD has also been a major funder of the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation, a far-right pressure group that insists that Communism has killed over 100 million people worldwide.

Last year, the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation added all global COVID-19 fatalities to the list of Communist-caused deaths on the basis that the virus started in China.

The Foundation also employs Adrian Zenz, a German evangelical theologian who is the unlikely source of many of the most controversial and contested claims about Chinese repression in Xinjiang province.

Other funded anti-China Think-Tanks

In the past 12 months, TECRO has also donated six-figure sums to many other prominent think tanks, including…

MintPress reached out to a number of these think tanks for comment but has not received any response.

“It would be naive to believe that Taiwan’s funding of think tanks is not pushing them to take pro-Taiwan or anti-China positions,” Ben Freeman, the director of the Foreign Influence Transparency Initiative at the Center for International Policy, told MintPress, adding:

After all, why would Taiwan keep funding think tanks that are critical of Taiwan? There’s a Darwinian element to foreign funding of think tanks that pushes foreign government funding to think tanks that write what that foreign government wants them to write. Taiwan is no exception to this rule.”

TECRO is not just sponsoring American think tanks, however.

the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI)

It has also given funds to the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI), a hawkish and controversial group described as “the think tank behind Australia’s changing view of China.” The country’s former ambassador in Beijing described ASPI as “the architect of the China threat theory in Australia” while Senator Kim Carr of Victoria denounced them as working hand-in-hand with Washington to push “a new Cold War with China.”

ASPI was behind Twitter’s decision last year to purge more than 170,000 accounts sympathetic to Beijing from its platform.

“We must be ready to fight our corner as Taiwan tensions rise,” ASPI wrote in January, having previously castigated the West for being “no longer willing to defend Taiwan.”

Who is behind all this money, ultimately?

ASPI — like Brookings, the Atlantic Council and others — are directly funded by weapons manufacturers, all of whom also have a direct interest in promoting more wars around the world.

Thus, if the public is not careful, certain special interests might be helping move the United States towards yet another international conflict.

While the situation outlined above is concerning enough, the Foreign Influence Transparency Initiative’s research has shown that around one-third of think tanks still do not provide any information whatsoever about their funding, and very few are completely open about their finances.

Freeman maintains that, while there is nothing inherently wrong with foreign governments funding Western think tanks, the lack of transparency is seriously problematic, explaining:

This raises a lot of questions about the work they’re doing. Are their secret funders saying what the think tank can do in a pay-for-play scheme? Are the funders buying the think tanks silence on sensitive issues? Without knowing the think tank’s funders, policymakers and the public have no idea if the think tank’s work is objective research or simply the talking points of a foreign government.”

Freeman’s study of the Taiwanese lobby found that seven organizations registered as Taiwan’s foreign agents in the U.S.

Those organizations, in turn, contacted 476 Members of Congress (including almost 90% of the House), as well as five congressional committees.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi was their most frequent contact, the Californian being contacted 34 times by Taiwanese agents. Pelosi has been a great supporter of Taiwanese nationalists, successfully promoting pro-Taiwan legislation and proudly announcing that the U.S. “stands with Taiwan.”

Foreign agents working on behalf of Taiwan also made 143 political contributions to U.S. politicians, with former Alabama Senator Doug Jones the lead recipient (Pelosi was third).

Losing China, regaining Taiwan?

The reports listed above understand the dispute as purely a matter of Chinese belligerence against Taiwan and certainly do not consider U.S. military actions in the South China Sea as aggressive in themselves.

That is because the world of think tanks and war planners sees the United States as owning the planet.

America has the right to go and do anything that it desires anywhere on the globe at any time.

To this day, U.S. planners bemoan the “loss of China” in 1949 (a phrase that presupposes the United States owned the country).

After a long and bloody Second World War, Communist resistance forces under Mao Tse-tung managed to both expel the Japanese occupation and overcome the U.S.-backed Kuomintang (nationalist) force led by Chang Kai-shek. The United States actually invaded China in 1945, with 50,000 troops working with the Kuomintang and even Japanese forces in an attempt to suppress the Communists. However, by 1949, Mao’s army was victorious; the United States evacuated and Chang Kai-shek retreated to Taiwan.

The Kuomintang ruled the island for 40 years as a one-party state and remains one of the two major political groups to this day.

The war between the Communists and the Kuomintang never formally ended, and Taiwan has now lived through 70 years of estrangement from the mainland. Polls show a majority of Taiwanese now favor full independence, although a large majority still personally identify as Chinese.

While many Taiwanese welcome an increased U.S. presence in the region, Beijing certainly does not.

American military is getting ready for a war

In 2012, President Barack Obama announced the U.S.’ new “Pivot to Asia” strategy, moving forces from the Middle East towards China. Today, over 400 American military bases encircle China.

In recent months, the United States has also taken a number of provocative military actions on China’s doorstep.

In July, it conducted naval exercises in the South China Sea, with warships and naval aircraft spotted just 41 nautical miles from the coastal megacity of Shanghai, intent on probing China’s coastal defenses.

And in December, it flew nuclear bombers over Chinese vessels close to Hainan Island.

Earlier this year, the head of Strategic Command made his intentions clear, stating that there was a “very real possibility” of war against China over a regional conflict like Taiwan.

China, for its part, has also increased its forces in the region, carrying out military exercises and staking claims to a number of disputed islands.

A new Director of National Intelligence (DNI) report notes that China is the U.S.’ “unparalleled priority,” claiming that Beijing is making a “push for global power.” “We expect that friction will grow as Beijing steps up attempts to portray Taipei as internationally isolated and dependent on the mainland for economic prosperity, and as China continues to increase military activity around the island,” it concludes.

In an effort to stop this, Washington has recruited allies into the conflict. Australian media are reporting that their military is currently readying for war in an effort to force China to back down, while in late April 2021 President Joe Biden met with Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga to shore up a united front against Beijing vis-a-vis Taiwan.

In February, the Atlantic Council penned an anonymous 26,000-word report advising Biden to draw a number of red lines around China, beyond which a response — presumably military — is necessary. These included any military action or even a cyber attack against Taiwan. Any backing down from this stance, the council states, would result in national “humiliation” for the United States.

American fantasy dreams

Perhaps most notably, however, the report also envisages what a successful American China policy would look like by 2050:

[T]he United States and its major allies continue to dominate the regional and global balance of power across all the major indices of power;… [and head of state Xi Jinping] has been replaced by a more moderate party leadership; and … the Chinese people themselves have come to question and challenge the Communist Party’s century-long proposition that China’s ancient civilization is forever destined to an authoritarian future.”

In other words, that China has been broken and that some sort of regime change has occurred.

Forked tongue speak

Throughout all this, the United States has been careful to stress that it still does not recognize Taiwan and that their relationship is entirely “unofficial,” despite claiming that its commitment to the island remains “rock solid.”

Indeed, only 14 countries formally recognize Taiwan, the largest and most powerful of which is Paraguay.

Along with a military conflict brewing, Washington has also been prosecuting an information and trade war against China on the world stage.

  • Attempts to block the rise of major Chinese companies like Huawei, TikTok and Xiaomi are examples of this.
  • Others in Washington have advised the Pentagon to carry out an under-the-table culture war against Beijing.
  • This would include commissioning “Taiwanese Tom Clancy” novels that would “weaponize” China’s one-child policy against it.
  • And, bombarding citizens with stories about how their only children will die in a war over Taiwan.

Republicans and Democrats constantly accuse each other of being in President Xi’s pocket, attempting to outdo each other in their jingoistic fervor.

Last year, in 2020, Florida Senator Rick Scottwent so far as to announce that every Chinese national in the U.S. was a Communist spy and should be treated with extreme suspicion.

As a result, the American public’s view of China has crashed to an all-time low.

Only three years ago, the majority of Americans held a positive opinion of China. But today, that number is only 20%. Asian-Americans of all backgrounds have reported a rise in hate crimes against them.

Cash rules everything around me

How much of the United States’ aggressive stance towards China can be attributed to Taiwanese money influencing politics?

It is difficult to say.

Certainly, the United States has its own policy goals in East Asia outside of Taiwan.

But Freeman believes that the answer is not zero. The Taiwan lobby “absolutely has an impact on U.S. foreign policy,” he said, adding:

At one level, it creates an echo-chamber in D.C. that makes it taboo to question U.S. military ties with Taiwan. 

While I, personally, think there are good strategic reasons for the U.S. to support this democratic ally — and it’s clearly in Taiwan’s interest to keep the U.S. fully entangled in their security — it’s troubling that the D.C. policy community can’t have an honest conversation about what U.S. interests are. 

But, Taiwan’s lobby in D.C. and their funding of think tanks both work to stifle this conversation and, frankly, they’ve been highly effective.”

Other national lobbies affect U.S. policy.

The Cuban lobby helps ensure that the American stance towards its southern neighbor remains as antagonistic as possible.

Meanwhile, the Israel lobby helps ensure continuing U.S. support for Israeli actions in the Middle East.

Yet more ominously with Taiwan, its representatives are helping push the U.S. closer towards a confrontation with a nuclear power.

While Taiwanese money appears to have convinced many in Washington, it is doubtful that ordinary Americans will be willing to risk a war over an island barely larger than Hawaii, only 80 miles off the coast of mainland China.

You would think…

But now, I’m not so sure…

US Seeks South China Sea Conflict

By Tony Cartalucci
Global Research, April 24, 2021
New Eastern Outlook 20 April 2021

 

Despite hopes by some that with Joe Biden a new US foreign policy will follow – US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has reaffirmed Washington’s committment to seeking conflict in the South China Sea under the guise of “standing with Southeast Asian claimants.”
Reuters in their article, “US stands with SE Asian countries against China pressure, Blinken say”  would claim:
.
Secretary Blinken pledged to stand with Southeast Asian claimants in the face of PRC pressure,” it said, referring to the People’s Republic of China.
China claims almost all of the energy-rich South China Sea, which is also a major trade route. The Philippines, Brunei, Vietnam, Malaysia and Taiwan have overlapping claims.
The United States has accused China of taking advantage of the distraction of the coronavirus pandemic to advance its presence in the South China Sea.

The US announcement confirms that a confrontational posture toward China will continue regardless of who occupies the White House – as US tensions with China are rooted in unelected  Western special interests and their desire to remove China as a competitor and potential usurper in what US policy papers themselves call “US primacy in Asia.”

US Primacy in Asia

One such paper titled, “Revising US Grand Strategy Toward China,”…

…published by the Council on Foreign Relations in 2015…

…not only spelled out the US desire to maintain that primacy in Asia vis-a-vis China…

… but also how it would use overlapping claims in the South China Sea as a pretext to justify….

…an expanded military presence in the region and as a common cause to pressure China’s neighbors into a united front against Beijing.

The paper would note specific US goals of militarizing Southeast Asia and integrating the region into a common US-led defense architecture against China.

It is a policy built upon the US “pivot to Asia” unveiled as early as 2011 and a policy that has been built upon in turn during the last four years under the Trump administration – demonstrating the continuity of agenda that permeates US foreign policy.

Turning Disputes into Conflict 

Maritime disputes are common throughout the world – even in the West.

Just at the end of last year, the Guardian in an article titled, “Four navy ships to help protect fishing waters in case of no-deal Brexit,” would report:

Four Royal Navy patrol ships will be ready from 1 January to help the UK protect its fishing waters in the event of a no-deal Brexit, in a deployment evoking memories of the “cod wars” in the 1970s.

The 80-metre-long armed vessels would have the power to halt, inspect and impound all EU fishing boats operating within the UK’s exclusive economic zone (EEZ), which can extend 200 miles from shore.

In terms of such disputes, the waters of the South China Sea are no exception.

Not only does China have overlapping claims with the nations mentioned in the Reuters article – each nation listed has overlapping claims with one another.

This results in sporadic disputes between all of these nations – occasionally resulting in the seizing of  vessels and the temporary detaining of boat crews.

However – these disputes are regularly settled through bilateral methods – including disputes between Southeast Asian nations and China itself.

A high-profile example of this unfolded in 2015 where a US-led legal case was brought to the Hague on behalf of the Philippines regarding Chinese claims over the South China Sea.

While the Hague ruled in the Philippines’ favor – Manila declined to use the ruling as leverage against Beijing or to seek Washington’s assistance – and instead pursued bilateral talks with Beijing directly on its own.

It is a case that demonstrates the desire by Washington to escalate what are ordinary maritime disputes, into a regional or even international crisis – not unlike the US’ strategy in the Middle East which it uses to justify its perpetual military occupation there.

More recently the issue of the South China Sea has come up at ASEAN Summits.

Al Jazeera in its article, “ASEAN summit: South China Sea, coronavirus pandemic cast a shadow,” would cite Malaysia’s take on the issue, noting:

“The South China Sea issue must be managed and resolved in a rational manner,” Malaysia’s Foreign Minister Hishammuddin Hussein told the meeting. “We must all refrain from undertaking activities that would complicate matters in the South China Sea. We have to look at all avenues, all approaches to ensure our region is not complicated further by other powers.”

While the US poses a champion for Southeast Asia – it is clear that its efforts are unwelcome and viewed instead as a source of instability – not a path toward resolution.

It is almost certain that it is Washington the Malaysian foreign minister was referring to when he mentioned “other powers.”

Just as the US nominated itself as protector of European “energy security” in its bid to obstruct the Russian-German Nord Stream 2 pipeline – the US has inserted itself into relatively routine maritime disputes in the South China Sea – not to “stand with” the nations of the region, but to serve as an excuse to impose its “primacy” over them.

The nations of Southeast Asia count China among their largest trade partners, sources of tourism, and for several – a key military and infrastructure partner.

The prospect of a regionally destabilizing conflict originating over long-standing disputes in the South China Sea benefits no one actually located in Asia – and only serves the interests of those beyond Asia seeking to divide and reassert their rule over it.

Who are these people?

Who are these Taiwan Oligarchs that want to start World War III? Most are old men. The youngest is in their 60’s. Most are in their mid to late 70’s and much older. What are they trying to do, and why? Are they so fixated in what happened fifty years ago that they cannot see what is going on right now, and what a bright future lies ahead for them?

MM is providing their names right here for you all to see.

Zhang Congyuan shoes
Tsai Hong-tu & Cheng-ta finance
Daniel & Richard Tsai finance
Wei Ing-chou, Ying-chiao, Yin-chun & Yin-heng food
Jason & Richard Chang semiconductors
Terry Gou electronics
Tsai Eng-meng food, beverages
Barry Lam electronics
Pierre Chen electronics
Lin Shu-hong petrochemicals
Samuel Yin retail
Andre Koo, Sr. financial services
Tsai Ming-kai semiconductors
Rudy Ma finance
Morris Chang semiconductors
Douglas Hsu diversified
Tseng Cheng & Sing-ai petrochemicals
Lin Ming-hsiung supermarkets
K.C. Liu manufacturing
Bruce Cheng electronics
T.Y. Tsai finance
Wang Chou-hsiong footwear
Lin Chen-hai real estate
Scott Lin optical components
Chin Jong Hwa auto parts
Chen Tei-fu herbal products
Chao Teng-hsiung real estate
William & Wilfred Wang plastics
Shi Wen-long plastics
Luo Ming-han & Tsai-jen Lo tires
Xie Weitong cobalt
Chen Yung-tai real estate
Tony Chen electronics
Thomas Wu finance
Cho Jyh-jer semiconductors
Archie Hwang semiconductors
Yeh Kuo-I manufacturing
Shirley Kao food & beverage retailing
Eugene Wu finance
Wang Ren-sheng retail
Wu Chung-yi manufacturing
Tsai Chi-jui shoes
Allen Horng & Tien-Szu Hung electronics
Wu Li-gann electronic components
Tsao Ter-fung food
Lee Tien-tsai beverages
Quintin Wu plastic
Yeh Min-yuen cybersecurity
Huang Chung Sheng recycling
Ho Kuang-chi restaurants

Yeah. I wonder how much of a shame it would be for these people to suddenly stop provoking a war beacause of other issues that they need to deal with.

Conclusion to all of this

The governments do not want wars or conflict in the South China Sea, but the oligarchs do.

They are pushing, and pushing, and pushing for a war.

And “red lines” have been established.

  • For China to invade Taiwan.
  • For China to attack American cities.
  • For Taiwan to get involved with the United States.

And the wealthy oligarchy are pushing these limits.

And this is what is going on right now.

How successful will the oligarchy be? It’s a matter up to the government leadership.

A final word…

It’s propaganda that is pushing the world towards world war III. And this propaganda is very devious and very destructive.

The following is from the US defense department. It shows the nuclear delivery systems of American, China and Russia compared. Imagine that, the only nuclear delivery systems that America has according to the media are airborne!

From the US Department of Defense Nuclear Posture Review.

Do you believe it?

You shouldn’t. It’s false; it’s a lie.

But many do believe it. And that why there is an inherent danger in all these oligarchs pushing the world towards world war III.

Do you want more?

I have more posts in my China Index here…

USA / China

.

Articles & Links

Master Index

.

You’ll not find any big banners or popups here talking about cookies and privacy notices. There are no ads on this site (aside from the hosting ads – a necessary evil). Functionally and fundamentally, I just don’t make money off of this blog. It is NOT monetized. Finally, I don’t track you because I just don’t care to.

  • You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
  • You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
  • You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
  • You can find out more about the author HERE.
  • If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
  • If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.

 

 

 

Get your waders on. The USA has just funded another massive anti-China propaganda campaign

Uh oh. Yup. As if the last four years of “the fire hose of disinformation” wasn’t bad enough, It appears that the neocons on K-street in Washington DC are gearing up for “round two”. Ugh!

This model for propaganda is known as “the firehose of falsehood” because of two of its distinctive features: high numbers of channels and messages and a shameless willingness to disseminate partial truths or outright fictions. In the words of one observer, “...propaganda entertains, confuses and overwhelms the audience.”

A Senate committee has overwhelmingly passed the draft Strategic Competition Act in April 2021, which takes aims at China on multiple fronts, including military, economy and technology.

Of course, China will “take it on the chin“.

To "take it on the chin" 
Meaning; this is a boxing metaphor meaning don't shy away from difficulty stand up for yourself don't complain get on with it be a man; be strong accept the challenge admit your mistakes and accept criticism

-To take it on the chin meaning

The United States is now the world’s most important powerhouse in technology, military might, and innovation. For China, being taken as a competitor by the U.S. is like to be chosen as a competitor by Mike Tyson, says Liu Baocheng.

The act is calling for over $1 billion to increase Washington’s already extensive global influence.

This includes over $650 million to fund foreign militaries in the Indo-Pacific region. The money would go to QUAD members to increase their size, train them to use American military equipment, and expand the size of their military bases so that American troops can use them.

It also includes some $450 million (in a separate budget element) for the Indo-Pacific Maritime Security Initiative. Which sounds really good. But is really funding to support US Navy operations in the South China Sea off the coast of China. Bases and facilities are being expanded to allow for American troops and equipment to be put in place prior to military excursions. This is what happened with Saudi Arabia prior to the Invasion of Iraq by America.

And yet another $300 million to counter Chinese influence around the world. Which is on all fronts, from direct bribes to various national oligarchies, to anti-China “message campaigns” to terrorist efforts, and of course the NGO’s that conduct “color revolutions”. In other words, to give money to terrorists, and instigators so that they would directly fight with Chinese as proxies instead of American CIA, and military troops.

Funding also covers investments to expand American exports to developing markets. Which means that since the primary export of America is military technology, this money would be used to get nations all over the globe to buy American weapons systems and locate”advisors” to help train, use and maintain the systems.

There’s a huge program to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative. Which of course includes generous propaganda efforts about “Uighur Muslims”, and efforts to create strife and war in that entire region.

And finally there are techniques (not so much in funding) to convince American companies leave the Chinese market. Such as telling McDonalds that it is more profitable to stop selling burgers in China, but instead sell them in Angola. Or telling Starbucks that the Chinese market isn’t going to grow and that they should invest in Iceland instead.

Liu says this type of ideological confrontation is really on the escalation, both [1] domestically in the U.S. (get American to hate China more), and that the U.S. is also trying to [2] persuade its allies to be against China (have the rest of the world hate China as well).

He said this act would hit China for a time being.

China relies very heavily on imports and exports, although it has the most self-sufficient industrial chains, and also is on its rapid transformation to be more self-reliant. As China plays a very important role in the international supply chain, this act will also hurt the world; particularly the U.S.

Now all this comes on top of the massive anti-efforts by Trump and his neocon friends from 2016 to present. What propaganda you might ask?

And that is undeniable.

The fact that Western public opinion on China is marching in lockstep with the State Department’s call for Cold War aggression reflects the convergence of state, military, and corporate media interests which monopolize our media ecosystem. Behind the State Department’s bluster and the military “Pivot to Asia” exists a quiet, well-oiled machine that is busy manufacturing consent for war on China. Too often, the hawkish policy stances it enshrines are taken as objective ‘truth’ rather than as pro-war propaganda working in the interests of weapons corporations and political elites.

We call it Sinophobia, Inc.—an information industrial complex where Western state funding, billion dollar weapons manufacturers, and right-wing think tanks coalesce and operate in sync to flood the media with messages that China is public enemy number one. Armed with state funding and weapons industry sponsors, this handful of influential think tanks are setting the terms of the New Cold War on China. The same media ecosystem that greased the wheels of perpetual war towards disastrous intervention in the Middle East is now busy manufacturing consent for conflict with China.

By saturating our news and newsfeeds with anti-China messages, this media machine is convincing average people that a New Cold War is in their interests. In reality, the hype of an imagined ‘China threat’ only serves the interests of the political elites and defense industry CEOs who stand to profit from this disastrous geopolitical escalation.

-Manufacturing consent for Sinophobia

The cynical hypocrisy of the world’s No1 propagandist: US pledges $300mn to fund massive global anti-China media machine

Here's an article by Tom Fowdy, who is a British writer and analyst of politics and international relations with a primary focus on East Asia. this was written on 26 Apr, 2021 15:2, and reprinted here with editing to fit this venue. Of course, all credit to the author.
Chinese- and Russian-funded journalism is ‘disinformation,’ but when Washington spends millions on ‘independent’ news outlets and buying journalists to get favorable coverage of its policies, it’s called ‘spreading information.’
.

The US Senate last week passed a bumper anti-China bill titled the “Strategic Competition Act”.

Backed by Chuck Schumer (Dem – New York) as one of his biggest priorities since becoming the Majority leader, the 270+ page document contains scores of recommendations and provisions on formalizing America’s “geopolitical competition” against Beijing.

This is a very comprehensive bill including in the fields of military, diplomacy, technology, trade and more.

There’s little question it will be passed into law, having already cleared the Senate and with the anti-Chinese sentiment in Washington being routinely bipartisan.

The bill also notably pledged hundreds of millions of dollars in various capacities for media focused initiatives against China.

This includes up to $300 million in an openly described effort to spread information on the “negative impact” of China’s $1 trillion-plus Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) in participating countries.

A complete network of “anti-Chinese influence” programs.

A scheme to “train journalists” with the goal of countering Beijing.

And of course, millions more in funding for Radio Free Asia. So that it can expand its coverage in the specified languages of Mandarin, Cantonese, Tibetan and Uighur.

In short, it’s a mammoth propaganda push.

Watch out!

All the time, we hear so much about “Chinese/Russian propaganda,” “disinformation,” etc, and often its impact is depicted in highly threatening or sensational ways.  Yet rarely, if ever, is it reported how the west actively and openly engages in psychological warfare with the goal of changing politics and governments in targeted countries. Of course, all the while playing the perpetual victim.

Here it is in the new US bill in black and white.

It is as clear as crystal.

Yet very few will balk or take notice at the explicitly ambitious effort to attempt to attack China…

…to destabilize various regions of China…

…to promote unrest and…

…ideally, to “balkanize” the country.

This, of course, is not new; it’s what America has always done.

Western political thought is built on the assumption that it owns a monopoly over what is conceived as ‘political truth,’

That it is the source of all enlightenment and, in wielding that ‘monopoly,’ has a divine mandate to evangelize that ‘truth’ to others.

This draws up a binary logical distinction that everything the west advocates is always motivated by good faith, as opposed to self-interest.

And of course, and that everyone who opposes this agenda is always motivated by bad faith and evil motivations.

This underlines the mentality of western journalism, that it is the only impartial and verifiable source of the ‘truth’.

And that everyone who questions it is advocating ‘propaganda’ – a term which usually only emotionally resonates with “enemy states.”

This mindset distorts the more nuanced reality that all states engage in such behavior.

…And that the staple assumption of ‘western truth’ is subsequently used to shape the global narrative against designated targets.

…And to justify aggressive, self-interest-driven policies under the guise of “moral concern”.

…And to make people unable to question them.

The US has a long history of such psychological warfare, both explicit and implicit.

One of the most famous instances is what was revealed as Operation Mockingbird.

This operation was where the CIA secretly infiltrated the mainstream media at home and abroad, collaborating with journalists to push US foreign-policy interests.

Many journalists – including Pulitzer Prize winners – joined the CIA’s payroll.

They ended up intentionally writing fake stories to disseminate the agency’s agitprop.

And many were given falsified or fabricated information in support of the CIA’s mission.

This was during the Cold War.

But the program has never been officially discontinued, and why would it stop today in the wake of a new Cold War with China?

A “global discourse”

The Strategic Competition bill clearly illustrates that Washington places primary importance on dominating the “global discourse” in accordance with its interests, and it is arguably very good at doing this through a multitude of methods.

In addition to its efforts with journalists, America also has an army of think tanks funded by various interests.

Usually defense industries, who are designated to create studies in order to legitimize and market Washington’s foreign-policy goals.

Then they coordinate with the press which gives them favorable coverage.

They are capable of feeding terms, ideas and concepts to shape coverage in their favor.

Such as creating “talking points” such as “wolf warrior diplomacy,” “economic coercion,” “Indo-Pacific” and so on.

All of which don’t make arguments as much as they create “assumptions” to shape public thinking accordingly.

Then, of course, there’s the actual state media.

Instruments like “Radio Free Asia” (RFA) are never earmarked by social media as “state affiliated media”.

When it should be.

In the way the likes of CGTN and RT are described.

All this, despite the fact that RFA is a US government-funded tool directly spreading propaganda on behalf of Washington.

The bill’s text makes its purpose explicit: RFA will be utilized to promote unrest and resistance in Xinjiang, Tibet, Hong Kong and even within China itself, something which would be deemed a malign form of foreign interference if done towards the west.

Yet the shocking part about it is, this is not all for China itself.

The US wants to interfere and manipulate the politics (and minds) of the citizens of hundreds of countries against Beijing.

It is planning to do so by spreading deliberate “negative” information concerning the BRI, with, of course, no consideration of its upsides whatsoever.

This means the American propaganda effort will span Latin America, South-East and Central Asia, as well as Africa.

Yet many in the west are happy to pass this behavior off as normal or acceptable, because the west is deemed the source of “truth” and “enlightenment” with the responsibility to “save” the backwards non-west.

In this case, we definitely need to talk more about organized, American-led disinformation and pure, geopolitically motivated propaganda.
Notwithstanding the onslaught of daily negative coverage as it is, Beijing needs to be ready to combat this effort and desperately improve the efficiency and credibility of its own media, especially in pointing out this kind of agenda and helping people think more about what they are consuming.
So you all had best get ready…

10 ways to recognize war propaganda in western media

A Handy checklist

By Tom WinterThomas Römer in Anti-Spiegel. Reprinted as found and all credit to the author.
.

The ten rules of war propaganda were set forth by the historian Anne Morelli in her book The Principles of War Propaganda.

Well, let’s look at these rules.

In doing so, we will see that our mainstream media follow them exactly.

Anyone who follows the media reports in the West must realize that our Western  media, free, objective, and critical, are engaged in war propaganda.

There are 10 well-known rules of war propaganda that are easy to check.

Rule 1: We don’t want war

The West supposedly never wants wars.

Even so, the West wages more wars than all other nation states put together.

Germany is fighting in Mali to supply the French nuclear power plants with uranium (officially against terrorists, of course).

Germany fought in Afghanistan for 20 years, so long that most have already forgotten what it was all about.

Germany has been militarily active in Kosovo for over 20 years to build democracy, but the Albanian mafia still rules there under the protection of the Bundeswehr. And so on.

All of these – and also the other – wars of the US-dominated West in Iraq, Syria, Libya, and on, all have one thing in common: Of course, the West did not want them at all, but was forced to war by the evil rulers.

This is the official reading every time, and none of the “rulers” has ever attacked a country in the West.

It was always the other way around, the West attacked.

But: “We don’t want the war”

Rule 2: The opposing camp is solely responsible for the war

See point one. Assad is allegedly responsible for the war in Syria, although the media in the West consistently keep silent about the CIA operation “Timber Sycamore” with which the CIA started the war.

If this is new to you, it’s no wonder.

Der Spiegel, for example, has never reported on how you can find the term “Timber Sycamore” when you search the Spiegel archive.

The relevant documents of the CIA were published in Washington years ago. If this is new to you, check it out.

It is always done that way. So it was with Iraq, Libya and all other wars in which the West is fighting.

The blame was placed on the other side, concealing that the West started the wars itself.

Rule 3: The leader of the opposing camp has the face of the devil

This is the classic.

The choice of words is crucial.

Putin, Assad and whoever are “potentates”, “autocrats”, “dictators” who commit all the deadly sins of the world.

When a war is imminent, the media bring – in order to make the population ready for war – the inevitable formulations of the “Second Hitler”, from whom the world must be saved.

Of course, the enemies do not have “governments”, they are “regimes”.

With all these formulations the “enemy” is dehumanized, the public should feel hatred and be ready to overthrow such an evil person, even at the cost of thousands of lives.

This is what is called “hatespeech” in modern German and what the same media, that use this hate propaganda against unloved heads of government, always find very bad.

Rule 4: We defend a good cause and not special interests

Of course, the US wanted to bring human rights, democracy and prosperity to Iraq.

Of course, it wasn’t about the oil wells that US corporations have secured for themselves.

Not even in Libya, where France (one of the driving forces in the war) has secured many oil wells.

And Mali is about the fight against terrorism, not the uranium on which the French nuclear industry depends.

And of course Syria is not about oil or the only Russian naval base in the Mediterranean, it is only about democracy, human rights and prosperity.

Wherever a government is critical of the West and where there are also natural resources (or where one of the main enemies China and Russia can be harmed), the West finds democracy and human rights very important.

But if a government is pro-Western and allows the West access to natural resources, such as the absolutist Saudi dictatorship, then democracy and human rights are not so important.

Incidentally, this is the key to understanding why Russia, which was a political friend under Yeltsin, has become enemy number one again under Putin:

Under Yeltsin, Western corporations had secured control of Russian oil and gas.

Putin ended that by 2003, and suddenly he was the number one villain.

It doesn’t say that in the “quality media”, but it was actually so banal.

Rule 5: The enemy commits atrocities deliberately; on the other hand, when we cross the line, it is unintentional

We experience this one all the time.

If the US is undoubtedly bombing a hospital in Afghanistan, then that is “collateral damage” and it was an accident.

Nobody is punished, the “quality media” quickly forget it and do not ask for clarification.

On the other hand, it is enough if someone claims without evidence that Russia or Syria bombed a hospital and the media in the West are reporting not only for days, but also afterwards, so that the public does not forget who it must hate.

Rule 6: The enemy uses illegal weapons

That is also a classic.

We have all heard many times that Assad uses “barrel bombs”.

Nobody really knows what that actually is, but it sounds pretty nasty.

The USA constantly uses barrel bombs, except they are called “cluster bombs” and the “quality media” are almost always shyly silent about them.

Why? Well, because these weapons are internationally banned.

Whether Assad uses this weapon has not been proven at all, but as a precaution the media have come up with a separate word for it so that the readers don’t even get the idea that the West could also use such weapons.

“…But he does that all the time.”

Rule 7: We suffer only slight losses; the enemy’s losses are enormous

This rule only applies when the war has entered its critical phase.

Before the war it was the other way around.

Before the war it was reported that the enemy was aggressive and, for example, had killed so many of “our” soldiers again when violating a ceasefire.

This is to prepare the public for a war.

We have been seeing this in Ukraine for years.

The “quality media” always report when it gets “hotter” there that the rebels have killed so many Ukrainian soldiers.

In doing so, they keep silent about the fact that the mostly Ukrainian shelling of residential areas preceded them, in which civilians were killed.

But you don’t find out about that from the “quality media”, you have to read the reports of the OSCE.

The “quality media” did not consider the fact that the OSCE presented a report in November 2020 in which it stated that almost 75 percent of civilian casualties in Donbass were due to the Ukrainian armed forces.

Rule 8: The artists and intellectuals support our cause

Notice how often celebrities have their say in the media who think the Western wars are good for moral reasons.

Celebs have spoken out against Assad, Gaddafi, and Saddam in recent years.

This is particularly evident in the American media.

In 2019 a prominent “benefit concert” for Venezuela took place in the Colombian border town of Cucuta.

Famous artists appeared in the middle of the jungle to sing against Maduro. Conveniently right next to the US military base there.

And for Navalny, for example, Western celebrities wrote an open letter to Putin in April 2021.

It did not contain any truths and probably hardly anyone has read it.

It was just important to be able to name the celebrities in the headlines of the media who are against Putin.

There are innumerable examples of this method of war propaganda.

But none of this has anything to do with politics, after all, what politician is interested in a singer’s opinion?

These reports only have the purpose of giving the public the feeling that the position of the West is morally correct.

And thus the fans of the stars are to be influenced accordingly and to follow their idol.

It’s all about emotions, not the actuality.

Rule 9: Our concern is something sacred

Of course, after all, it is supposedly about the “holy” values ​​of the West, that is to say about democracy and human rights.

You can also kill people for this.

This is probably the oldest means of war propaganda in world history.

In ancient Rome one had to bring civilization to the barbarians, of course it was not about the enrichment of the generals.

Caesar moved to Gaul as a practically bankrupt man and came back very rich.

Later the Spaniards had to bring the “savages” in America the right faith so that they would not burn in the hell to which the Spaniards sent them on the occasion.

It wasn’t about the gold, of course.

And the British Empire wanted to bring civilization back to the “backward” colonies, because the poor, backward people in the colonies couldn’t rule themselves.

What I am writing here so ironically is true.

You can read it in the documents from the corresponding periods.

There was always a “sacred” reason for urgently going to war.

And today the “holy” concerns are democracy, human rights, women’s rights and so on.

It’s still the same principle as in antiquity, only the “sacred” concern changes every now and then.

Rule 10: Anyone who questions our propaganda is a traitor

Today the word “traitor” is out of date.

Today you can choose to say “Putin understanders”, “Kremlin trolls”, “conspiracy theorists”, “Chicom”, “fifty center”, “anti-Americans” and whatever other names are currently circulating.

Anyone who disagrees is demonized and marginalized.

But all of these terms have one thing in common: They identify the named person as an opponent of “Western values” or democracy. Ergo: it’s a traitor.

It’s shocking, but the German media is actually doing war propaganda like in the darkest times in history.

And not just since yesterday, it happened in 1991 in the First Gulf War with the incubator lie and has not been less since then, on the contrary, it has become more, and the techniques have been refined more and more.

Do you think it is a coincidence that the media works exactly according to the propaganda textbook?

Who is Creating a New Chinese Boogey Man? (An Examination of Modern Psychological Warfare)

 By Matthew Ehret

Since many good people have found themselves susceptible to the narrative that China is the global supervillain…

…conspiring to overthrow western Christian values by any means necessary…

… I believe some lessons should be brought to bear.

      1. Anti-Nation state fanatic George Soros stated at the 2020 Davos Summit that China has become the greatest threat to his vision for Open Society (right behind Trump’s USA). This was echoed by Lord Malloch Brown’s 2020 Global Government Speeches.
      2. China’s deep alliance with Russia and the increased integration of the Eurasian Economic Union with the 135 nation strong Belt and Road Initiative form the basis of an alternative multipolar paradigm has kept imperialists up at night for the past several years.
      3. The prospect of a US-China-Russia alliance has been one of the greatest threats to empire which peeked in the weeks before COVID-19 arose onto the scene as the US-China Trade Pact successfully entered its first phase (and has since fallen into shambles) as well as Trump’s repeated calls for “good relations with Russia.”

Amidst the surge of anti-China media psy ops published across Five Eyes nations, countless patriots of a conservative bent have found themselves absorbed into a red-scare manic hysteria.

All the while forgetting that the actual causal hand of British Intelligence has been caught blatantly running the overthrow of nation states for decades (including the 2016-2020 to run regime change within the USA itself).

Understanding the nature of the current psy ops, and new red scare deflection underway…

… it is necessary to review some seriously underappreciated facts of recent history…

… and since former secretary of State Sir Henry Kissinger (a genuine Knight of the British Empire), figures prominently in this story, it is wise to start with his relationship with China.

Although he is celebrated for being an “enlightened” liberal politician who helped China open up to the west after the dark days of Mao’s Cultural Revolution by extending western markets to China…

… the truth is very different.

A devout proponent of world government and population control, Kissinger had been the tool selected during a particularly important period of human history to advance a new ordering of world affairs.

The Division of the World Into Producers and Consumers

Since the world was taken off the gold reserve system way back in 1971, a new age of “post-industrialism” was unleashed onto a globalized world.

Humanity was given a new type of system which presumed that both our nature and the cause of value itself were located in the act of consuming.

The old idea that our nature was creative, and that our wealth was tied to producing, was assumed to be an obsolete thing of the past… a relic of a dirty old industrial age.

Under the new post-1971 operating system, we were told that the world would now be divided among producers and consumers.

The “have-not producers” would provide the cheap labor which first world consumers would increasingly rely on for the creation of goods they used to make for themselves.

“First world” nations were told…

…that according to the new post-industrial rules of de-regulation and market economics…

… that they should export their heavy industry, machine tools and other productive sectors abroad…

…as they transitioned into “white collar” post-industrial consumer societies.

The longer this outsourcing of industries went on, the less western nations found themselves capable of sustaining their own citizenries…

… building their own infrastructure…

…or determining their own economic destinies.

In place of full spectrum economies that once saw over 40% of North America’s labor force employed in manufacturing, a new addiction to “buying cheap stuff” began, and a “service economies” took over like a cancer.

To make matters worse, the many newly independent nations struggling to liberate themselves from colonialism…

…were told that they would have to abandon their dreams of development…

…since those goals would render the formula of a producer-consumer stratified society impossible to create.

Those leaders resisting this edict would face assassination or CIA overthrow.

Those leaders who adapted to the new rules would become peons of the new age of “Economic Hitmen”.

China and the West: The Real Story

By the time Deng Xiaoping announced the “opening up” of China in 1978, Kissinger had already managed the economic paradigm shift of 1971…

… the artificial “oil shock therapy” of 1973…

…and authored his 1974 NSSM 200 Report …

…which transformed U.S. Foreign Policy from a pro-development orientation towards a new policy of depopulation.

One that ended up targeting the poor nations of the global south under the logic that the resources under their soil were the lawful possession of the USA.

The NSSM 200 (titled “Implications of Worldwide Population Growth for US Security and Overseas Interests”) outlined its objective “Assistance for population moderation should give emphasis to the largest and fastest growing developing countries where there is a special US and strategic interest”.

Kissinger, and the hives of Trilateral Commission/CFR operatives to which he was beholden…

…never looked on China as a true ally…

… but merely as a zone of abundant cheap labor.

Cheap labor which would feed cheap goods to the now post-industrial west under their new dystopic producer-consumer world order.

It was in that same year that Kissinger’s fellow Trilateral Commission cohort Paul Volcker announced a “controlled disintegration of western society”…

… which was begun in full with the Federal Reserve’s interest rate hikes to 20% …

…that ensured a vast destruction of small and medium businesses across the board.

Believing China (then still largely an impoverished third world country) to be desperate enough to accept money and short-term salvation…

…after years of trauma induced by the Cultural Revolution.

Under Kissinger’s logic, China would receive just enough money to sustain a static existence but would never be able to stand on its own two feet.

Unbeknownst to Kissinger, China’s leaders under the direction of Zhou Enlai, and his disciple Deng Xiaoping had a much longer-term strategic perspective than their western partners ever imagined.

While receiving much needed revenue from foreign exports, China began to slowly create the foundations for a genuine renaissance which would be made possible by…

…slowly learning the skills…

… leapfrogging technologies…

…and acquiring means of production which the west had once pioneered.

Zhou Enlai had first enunciated this visionary program as early as 1963 under his Four Modernizations mandate (Industrial, agricultural, national defense and science and technology).

And then restated this program in January 1976 weeks before his death.

This program manifested itself in the July 6, 1978 State Council Forum on the “Principles to Guide the Four Modernizations”.

Informed by the findings of international exploratory missions conducted by economist Gu Mu’s delegations around various advanced world economies (Japan, Hong Kong, Western Europe).

The findings of Gu Mu’s reports laid out the concrete pathways for full spectrum economic sovereignty.

A sovereignty with a focus on cultivating the cognitive creative powers of a new generation of scientists.

Scientists that would drive the non linear breakthroughs needed for China to ultimately break free of the rules of closed-system economics which technocrats like Kissinger wished the world adhere to.

Deng Xiaoping broke from the radical Marxism prevalent among the intelligentsia by redefining “labor” from purely material constraints and elevating the concept rightfully to the higher domain of mind saying:

“We should select several thousand of our most qualified personnel within the scientific and technological establishment and create conditions that will allow them to devote their undivided attention to research. 

Those who have financial difficulties should be given allowances and subsidies… 

We must create within the party an atmosphere of respect for knowledge and respect for trained personnel. 

The erroneous attitude of not respecting intellectuals must be opposed. All work. Be it mental or manual, is labor.”

Over the course of the coming decades, China learned, and like any student, copied, reverse engineered and reconstructed western techniques as it slowly generated capacities that ultimately allowed them press on the limits of human knowledge outpacing all western models.

Scientific and technological progress became the driving force of its entire economy and by 1986, the “863 Project for Research and Development” was announced.

Project 863 focused on areas of space, lasers, energy, biotechnology, new materials, automation and information technology.

This project became the driver for creative innovation guided by the National Science Foundation and was upgraded to the 973 Basic Research Program in 2009 to: “1).

Project 973 supported [1] multidisciplinary and fundamental research of relevance to national development; [2] Promote frontline basic research; [3] Support the cultivation of scientific talent capable of original research; and [4] Build high-quality interdisciplinary research centers.”

The fruits of these long term programs was beginning to be felt and by 1996, discussion for a New Silk Road reviving the ancient trade routes connecting China to Europe and Africa through the Middle East and Caucasus was beginning with conferences hosted by Beijing under President Jiang Zemin.

One of the few western participants at these Chinese events was the Schiller Institute, whose founders delivered a full day seminar in 1997 describing the program that would finally come back to life in 2013 when Xi Jinping made it the focus of China’s foreign policy outlook under the Belt and Road Initiative.

Why did this program wait until 2013 to blossom onto the world stage when obvious momentum was already in motion in 1997?

George Soros and the Attack on the Asian Markets

From May 1997, George Soros’ targeting of the Southeast Asian “Tigers economies” of Myanmar, Thailand, Indonesia, Philippines, Laos, and Malaysia with…

…speculative short sales of their local currencies…

…and which resulted in months of vast anarchy across all of Asia and the world more broadly.

Currencies collapsed from 10-80% over the next 8 months and took many years to begin to recover.

Malaysia’s Mahathir Mohammed was brave enough to call out Soros’ economic warfare.

He did much to help his nation weather the storm by imposing capital controls to maintain some semblance of stability.

He ended up calling out the speculator saying:

“as much as people who produce and distribute drugs are criminals, because they destroy nations, the people who undermine the economies of poor nations are too.”

Chinese President Jiang Zemin followed suit calling Soros “a financial sniper” and stated he would not let the speculator enter Chinese markets.

As analyst Michael Billington astutely wrote in his August 1997 EIR report:

“The ultimate target is China. 

The British are particularly worried about the increasingly close collaboration between China and the ASEAN nations, which are being integrated into the massive regional and continental development projects initiated by China under the umbrella of the Eurasian Continental Land-Bridge program. 

Such real development policies offer the alternative to the cheap-labor, colonial-style export industries of the “globalization” model

- the model that has led to the financial bubbles now bursting worldwide.”

The Tumultuous Years of 1997-2013

With the advent of the collapse of Long-Term Capital Management…

 (whose meltdown nearly took down the world economy in 1999 if not bailed out by central banks),

…followed by the Y2K/tech bubble explosion of 2000, the world markets nearly collapsed on several occasions.

9-11 unleashed a new era of warfare which deflected attention from the rot of the financial system while derivatives were deregulated.

And ‘Too Big To Fail’ banking formed in short order growing far beyond the powers of any nation state to rein in.

Under this period of destabilization, wars, terrorism and easy money speculation, China and its Eurasian allies moved slower to rebuild the physical basis of their existence…

…with the creation of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization…

… long term planning…

… and a slow but steady focus on real (vs speculative) economic activity.

The fact that China was among the only nations of the world to keep national controls over their central bank and maintain Glass-Steagall bank separation were not lost on the enemies of humanity…

…all of whom are still yearning for a world-wide bankers’ dictatorship.

This process continued until it became evident that the western unipolar agenda would stop at nothing…

…including nuclear war…

…in order to assure the total subservience of all nation states.

With Obama unveiling his Asia Pivot (air-sea battle) plans against China along with the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) economic attack on China.

The veil was now lifted to the true ugly face behind the liberal fascist smiles and it became clear that the full spectrum dominance military encirclement of Russia’s perimeter was being fully extended to China’s perimeter as well.

The Revival of the New Silk Road

It was in the face of this existential threat that Xi Jinping emerged as the new leader of China.

And a historic crackdown of party corruption on all levels Federal, Provincial and Municipal was begun in force.

While Xi’s 2013 announcement of the Belt and Road Initiative in Kazakhstan revived the New Silk Road/Eurasian land bridge policy of 15 years earlier.

Although China is often accused of intellectual theft, the reality is that it has begun to clearly outpace western nations becoming a pioneer on every level of science and technology.

China now registers more patents than the USA, has become the cutting edge leader of high speed rail engineering.

With over 30 000 km, bridge building, tunneling.

As well as water management, quantum computing, AI, 5G telecommunications, and even space science.

China is becoming the first nation to ever land on the far side of the moon with an intent to mine Helium 3 and develop permanent bases on the Moon in the coming decade.

All of these cutting edge fields of science and engineering are being organized by the ever-growing Belt and Road Initiative.

Which has taken on global proportions.

And integrated itself into a deep alliance with Russia, Iran and over 135 nations.

Nations who have signed onto the BRI Framework stretching from Latin America, Africa, the Middle East, Central Asia, Asia, and Europe.

This is the system which the USA and other western nations could have joined on multiple occasions.

But they did not.

Instead it has been targeted as a global threat to western hegemony.

According to the logic of those western utopians who refuse to let go of their old outdated 1971 script for a new world order…

… China’s New Silk Road must be subverted at all costs…

… since it is very well understood that it would become the basis for a new world system…

…as the old globalized paradigm comes crashing down faster than the Hindenburg.

The Real Perpetrators Laugh as a New Cold War Hysteria is Orchestrated

It is perhaps an irony that those figures who have been caught time and again attempting to destroy the foundations of both the USA, China and Russia have deflected attention from their own actions by promoting the idea that China is the USA’s natural enemy.

The reality is China is currently not only reviving the ancient silk road paradigm that focused on a harmony of interests and mutual self interest through economic and cultural exchange…

…but they have also revived the spirit of President Sun Yat-sen’s International Development of China program in full.

In this 1920 document China’s first President outlined the superiority of the American system of political economy which he studied deeply beginning in his early student days in the USA.

And upon which he explicitly modelled his new republican China and his three Principles of the People (premised on Lincoln’s principle of a nation for, by and of the people).

Sun Yat-sen (a Christian Confucian revolutionary) is not only the beloved founding father of the republic of China celebrated to this day, but stated his views pro-American views in the following terms

“The world has been greatly benefited by the development of America as an industrial and a commercial Nation. 

So a developed China with her four hundred millions of population, will be another New World in the economic sense. 

The nations which will take part in this development will reap immense advantages. 

Furthermore, international cooperation of this kind cannot but help to strengthen the Brotherhood of Man.”

Both mainstream and alternative media outlets that tend to be sympathetic to conservative values have bit the bait…

…and are now blind to the fact that those oligarchical social engineers managing the World Economic Forum…

…and drooling over a new era of World Government…

… population reduction and technocratic feudalism…

…are laughing at all of those fish in their nets whose ignorance to history and other cultures are leading them to their own self-destruction.

…

Upon this backdrop we have this little interesting take  on events…

U.S. Four Star Generals Ask DNI To Stop Lying

These folks have had it with the constant stream of baseless propaganda U.S. intelligence is spilling over the world:

Dear Director of National Intelligence,we, the the 4-star Generals leading U.S. regional commands all over the world, are increasingly concerned with about the lack of evidence for claims you make about our opponents.

We, as true believers, do not doubt whatever judgment you make about the harmful activities of Russia, Iran and China. However - our allies and partners do not yet subscribe to the bliss of ignorance. They keep asking us for facts that support those judgments

Unfortunately, we have none that we could provide.

You say that Russia thought to manipulate Trump allies and to smear Biden, that Russia and Iran aimed to sway the 2020 election through covert campaigns and that China runs covert operations to influence members of Congress.

Media reports have appeared in which 'intelligence sources' claim that Russia, China and Iran are all paying bounties to the Taliban for killing U.S. soldiers. Fortunately no soldier got hurt by those rumors.

Our allies and partners read those and other reports and ask us for evidence. They want to know how exactly Russia, Iran and China are doing these things. 

They, of course, hope to learn from our experience to protect their own countries.

Currently we are not able to provide them with such information. Your people keep telling our that all of it is SECRET.

We therefore ask you to declassify the facts that support your judgments.*

Sincerely

The Generals

----
PS: *Either that or shut the fuck up.

The above may well have been a draft for the letter behind this report:

America’s top spies say they are looking for ways to declassify and release more intelligence about adversaries’ bad behavior, after a group of four-star military commanders sent a rare and urgent plea asking for help in the information war against Russia and China.The internal memo from nine regional military commanders last year, which was reviewed by POLITICO and not made public, implored spy agencies to provide more evidence to combat "pernicious conduct."

Only by "waging the truth in the public domain against America’s 21st century challengers” can Washington shore up support from American allies, they said. But efforts to compete in the battle of ideas, they added, are hamstrung by overly stringent secrecy practices.

“We request this help to better enable the US, and by extension its allies and partners, to win without fighting, to fight now in so-called gray zones, and to supply ammunition in the ongoing war of narratives," the commanders who oversee U.S. military forces in Asia, Europe, Africa, Latin America, as well as special operations troops, wrote to then-acting Director of National Intelligence Joseph Maguire last January.

“Unfortunately, we continue to miss opportunities to clarify truth, counter distortions, puncture false narratives, and influence events in time to make a difference," they added.

The generals must have been seriously miffed to write such a letter.

There have been a number of published intelligence judgments where the NSA had expressed low confidence in conclusions made mainly by the CIA.

The NSA is part of the military.

Between two bureaucracies such an accusing letter or internal memo is the equivalent of a declaration of war.

It is doubtful that the intelligence folks would win that fight.

That gives some hope that the Office of the DNI and the agencies below it will now lessen their production of nonsensical claims.

….

The CIA/FBI/17+ known/unknown agencies are clearly a security apparatus that’s gone out of control when even the USA’s “nine regional [four-star general] military commanders” are out of the loop and pleading to be better informed.

Worryingly, though, they ask for “ammunition in the ongoing war of narratives,” which they apparently are ready to go right along with.

Western news media, of course, has become but a compliant weaponized appendage of that security apparatus, and democracy, which depends on informed voters, is nowhere in control of any of this.

Down this slippery slope, lies fascism.

US needs a correct mindset to compete with China: Global Times editorial

It must be emphasized that it's the sacred right of all 1.4 billion Chinese people to have a better living standard through the country's development. The US elites fear and try to contain China's development, and turn the normal competition between the two countries into a zero-sum game. This is immoral and runs counter to human rights that they trumpet. Washington cannot say one thing but do another. Blocking the economic and technological progress of developing countries is the biggest sin of the 21st century. They need to bear in mind that it's not the privilege of the Americans and Westerners to live a decent life.

Around and around the water goes down the drain. Those in the water are desperately trying to throw out anchors and shoot flare into the night skies above. But no one is aware.

The warning alarms are ringing loudly

While the United States might believe that it represents the entirety of the “free world” and thus ALL nations that “matter”. This is a complete falsehood. The rest of the world is really, seriously getting fed up, and angry.

From the global times...

Since Joe Biden took over the White House on January 20, the US has been pushing for what it calls an allied approach against China on trade and other issues. So far, that approach appears to be gaining some traction, as the US and some of its allies, including the EU and Japan, are reportedly mulling harsher trading rules targeting China.

Chinese officials have repeatedly registered their displeasure with such an approach of forming small circles or clans among so-called democratic economies to harm other countries’ interests.

However, China’s legitimate concerns have been largely overshadowed by what appears to be a coordinated smearing campaign against China by the West and their media. Not many countries, including developing economies that may also be targeted by the West’s “tougher” rules against China, spoke up. Even if some did, their voices are often ignored.

But at the EU’s trade policy day this week, where EU officials repeated long-standing grievances against China’s industrial policies and the state-owned companies, the new head of the WTO offered a very powerful and pragmatic repudiation of the group’s approach to gang up on China.

“I’ll just be very open,” said Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, who made history in March when she became the first woman and first African to head the WTO, as she warned against targeting China. “When China feels it’s being targeted and it’s only about China, then you get a lot of resistance.”

In the speech, Okonjo-Iweala went further to warn countries not to “use the WTO or trade as kind of a weapon to solve” political issues. She did not name names, but that is a reference to the plan pushed by the US, the EU and Japan to try to “weaponize the WTO” and international trading rules to serve their ill-willed, selfish political interests in containing China’s economic rise.

The WTO chief was eloquent and understandably diplomatic in issuing a dire warning against such a dangerous trend in global multilateral trading system. But in case some in the West might need a more straightforward reminder, here is the bottom line: The era when a small group of powers can decide others’ fate is long gone. The global multilateral system is no longer a tool that they can deploy at will.

Moreover, today’s China is no longer the same country that was easily invaded by the so-called Eight-Nation Alliance over a century ago. It is now the world’s second-largest economy, the world’s largest trading nation, and the biggest contributor to global economic growth. China will not be intimidated and pushed around by a few so-called advanced countries.

To put the WTO chief’s warning into more blunt terms, China will not sit idle and allow the US and its allies to use the WTO as a weapon against itself. Any such attempt should and will be met with forceful resistance.

And that resistance won’t just come from China.

The US and its allies might being targeting China directly, but whatever reform plans they push forward at the WTO will also hit other developing countries, which have similar economic policies and development plans as China. In fact, while the US and its allies may have put China on the spotlight, their true intention is to pull the WTO and global trading rules further into their favor and away from the developing economies.

The WTO, whose operations and authority have been seriously undermined by the US, is in dire need of reform. But any reform plan should be discussed and decided by all of its 150 or so members, not just by the US and its allies. The reforms should make the WTO more balanced to serve not only advanced economies – as it is in many cases – but also developing economies – which make up two-thirds of its membership.

Conclusion

Ok, so it’s really clear. Billions of dollars are pouring out of the United States towards the demonization of China, and towards instigation of internal strife and NGO-backed revolutions.

This will not happen quietly.

American readers will get the brunt of the propaganda. Most Americans, Brits, and Australians (as well as other member of the “Western Alliance”) will start seeing their news feeds clogged up with very healthy does of anti-China “news”.

  • Some of it will be subtle; existing real news with injections of anti-China phrases and content interspersed.
  • Some of it will be direct, in your face. It might consist of lies, or half-truths. All will be distortions.
  • Some of it will be directed at any nations that support China. If Cambodia does something in favor of the BRI, you can well expect a healthy dose of anti-Cambodia articles to start appearing as well.

But that’s not all.

The new funding is specifically directed at fomenting military operations inside of China itself.

  • There will be more attempts at “color revolutions”, “pro-democracy” actions, and covert insurgency operations.
  • There will be an increase in Social Justice Warrior interruptions; all designed to tear apart the strong Chinese social and familial value system.
  • There will be training to these ends, and clandestine efforts to stop China at all casts so that it collapses from the outer edges, and internally from the middle.

Every time you read an anti-China “news” article, realize that it is part of a triad of articles across different platforms all sending the same messages, and with that they interlock with your reading habits to interject, at key points, other anti-China screeds. All with the ultimate desire to have you (the reader) “foaming at the mouth” ready for war with China.

Here’s what they want the sheeple to turn into… (from my inbox)

Filthy Scumbag Communist Traitors are constantly trying to convince you that it’s normal to go through life living off handouts and dependent on the government for survival. 

Communists want you to believe you are a victim and that others are to blame for your circumstances. 

Communists employ censorship and violence to force their beliefs on you because they are incapable of forming valid arguments. Because there is no valid argument to convince you to accept that your prosperity must depend on the degree of your worship of the state. 

You can not be convinced by logic or reason that you’re better off poor and powerless than rich and in control of your destiny. 

Real Americans believe in and practice self-reliance. Real Americans accept responsibility for their circumstances and make the necessary sacrifices of their time and attention to improve the quality of their lives. 

Real Americans Are Entrepreneurs. Real Americans create opportunity and prosperity. Real Americans are not victims because Real Americans Are Champions.

My Fellow Americans Please Help To Make America Greater Than We Already Are And To Help Keep America Great By Starting Your Own Business Or Expanding Your Existing Business.

Capital Funding And Comprehensive Training And Mentoring Are Available to All American Patriots Regardless Of Your Current Credit Score Or Current Or Past Circumstances.

This comes from a reader who admitted that they never visited China, never obtained a passport, but knows what China is because…

…well they said it’s “obvious”.

Sheeple. The United States Congress has decided to militarize the sheeple to ready them for war.

Last Minute additions

Video: US President Biden administration will provide US$300 million per year to promote fake news against China. 美國總統拜登政府將每年提供3億美元，以宣傳針對中國的虛假新聞.

Expect more hate crimes targeting Asian American in the coming months and years. 預計在未來數年內，將有更多針對亞裔美國人的仇恨犯罪。

https://vimeo.com/543780163
https://youtu.be/uqiJxSuPXmM
https://www.facebook.com/100036400039778/posts/483830136173650/?d=n

Do you want more?

I have more posts in my China Trade Wars Index here…

War with China

.

Articles & Links

Master Index

.

You’ll not find any big banners or popups here talking about cookies and privacy notices. There are no ads on this site (aside from the hosting ads – a necessary evil). Functionally and fundamentally, I just don’t make money off of this blog. It is NOT monetized. Finally, I don’t track you because I just don’t care to.

  • You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
  • You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
  • You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE to find out how to go about this.
  • You can find out more about the author HERE.
  • If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
  • If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.

 

.

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

.

China and Taiwan are being linked together by high speed train and the American Military Empire is having a fit!

One the most profound realizations that one MUST arrive at is that the American (and Western) “news” is a massive propaganda organ. It’s not that they twist and distort the news. Oh, I wish it was that simple. No. Rather, they lie, and make up fanciful stories towards manipulation. That’s it, and nothing more can be said.
.
Now, of course, you can categorize the the lies.
.
You can say that the lies fall under categories. And of these, purposes for the manipulation of large groups of people.
.
I really don’t think that this is all that difficult to understand.
.
All these different organizations are vying for your mind. They want you to think certain ways, and in doing so it gives them advantage. Depending on who is involved, you can then map out the funding, and the then compare with the depth and breadth of the articles that the media bombards you with.
.
I’ve posted a lot of articles about the anti-China narrative, and discussed the people behind this screed. Pretty much it’s a mix of religious fundamentalists, neocons, and hard-Right players. And when Donald Trump became President in 2016, the opened the funding floodgates, as well as staffed his administration with neocons, and the result was a “firehose” of anti-China disinformation.
They all are looking forward to getting involved in a hot war with “juicy and wealthy” China. They just want an EXCUSE.
.
If you want to read more about this go HERE.
.
You will find these articles all over the internet. Such as this one (below) that I pulled off of Free Republic right now…
.
China's military is poised to outgun the West after HUGE growth
3/15/2021, 9:34:39 AM · by RomanSoldier19 · 12 replies
Daily Mail via msn ^ | 3/14/2021 | Marco Giannangeli

It follows an ominous warning last week by the commander of US forces in the Indo-Pacific that China may launch a military operation against Taiwan "in the next six years". This would likely lead to military reprisals from the US Navy and allies including Britain, which is sending its new carrier, HMS Queen Elizabeth, to lead a multinational strike force to the Far East in May. China commands the world's largest military, with 2.18 million soldiers, sailors and aviators on active duty. And after a recent 6.8 percent rise it will command a £200billion military budget this year. But it...
Oh, Ah.
.
Read the text, of “ominous warning” and “military reprisals”. War in that far-away land is being jinned up, don’t you think? Any day now, some proud American Rambo’s are gonna “kick some slant eyed butt”, don’t you know.
.
Not gonna happen.
.
Why?
.
Well, in the first case the American and UK military excursion into the South China Sea in late Summer 2020 was a disaster, and the seven aircraft carriers steamed back to American (and the UK) with their “tail between their legs”. Trump incensed that his orders were not carried out, fired his military brass as soon as then returned. It was a “Waterloo moment“, and scared the living shit out of the military brass.
.
Read about it HERE.
.
And in the Second Case, please just keep in mind that Taiwan is part of China. No matter how much this is omitted in the neocon publications and articles. No matter how many times the American “news” talks about the USA “doing something”, nothing is going to happen. You can yell, scream and stamp your feet but that will not change the fact that Taiwan agreed to become part of China, and this union is recognized by the United Nations.
.
Taiwan stopped being an independent nation, and became a Chinese client state in 1972 by [1] The Shanghai Communiqué and the 1982 [2] Joint Communiqué and [3] the August 17 Communiqué. It's the 23rd province of China.

All of this his was codified and made permanent on October 1971, when the United Nations General Assembly passed Resolution 2758, which recognized the government of the People’s Republic of China as the only legitimate representative of China at the United Nations and established the One-China Principle.
You can read more about this HERE.
.
American “news” is a big lie, and people are following it because just about everything in America has been corrupted beyond recognition. No one trusts the government, yet somehow they believe the media. They turn to alternative media in the belief that they have not been corrupted.
.
Ah. But they have.
.
But anyways,
.
Aside from all that “noise” out of the “news”, China is moving on. It is on all fronts. So the USA doesn’t want to partner with China on anything. OK. No problem. But watch out. As I have said before; China does not play.
.
Meanwhile check out what is going on with China and Taiwan right now…

China’s railway operator echoes netizens’ call for a high-speed rail route to Taiwan

By Global Times Published: Mar 14, 2021 03:03 PM
Reprinted as found. All credit to the author, and edited to fit this venue.
An aerial photo shows the Pingtan Strait Road-rail Bridge in East China’s Fujian Province. The first of its kind in China, the bridge opened on Saturday, shortening travel time between the provincial capital of Fuzhou with the island county of Pingtan to 35 minutes from around two hours. The bridge will make it more convenient for compatriots in the island of Taiwan to travel to the Chinese mainland. Photo: cnsphoto

China’s top railway operator said on Sunday that it has “taken seriously the building of a railway to the island of Taiwan,” echoing Chinese netizens’ calls as well as the Russian Ambassador to China’s wish to visit the island by train.

China Railways, the country’s top railway construction company, discussed the technical issues and routes of building the high-speed railway from East China’s Fujian Province to the island of Taiwan in an article published in its official WeChat account on Sunday.

No wonder Donald Trump wanted to ban WeChat, you cannot have the anti-China narrative polluted by facts.

In the article, it mentioned China’s National Comprehensive Transportation Network Plan, which was rolled out in late February and set the construction goals from 2021 to 2035 with a long-term plan extended. A route from Fuzhou to Taipei, in the island of Taiwan, was also listed in the plan.

China’s HST (High Speed Train) rail network as of 2020.

The plan soon drew heated discussions on Chinese social media platforms. Netizens also expressed a strong wish to “visit Taiwan by train.”

Russian Ambassador to China Andrey Denisov also voiced confidence in China’s capability to build a high-speed railway between the Chinese mainland and Taiwan, and stressed that both sides across the Taiwan Straits belong to China.

Close up showing the HST bridge between the Chinese mainland and Taiwan.

Denisov said he is looking forward to taking a high-speed train to visit the island some day in an interview with Hong Kong-based Phoenix TV in early March. “If I could have a chance to visit Taiwan Province, of course I prefer to do it by train.”

Responding to such calls, the railway operator giant noted, “The dream that countless Chinese people have dreamt is finally drawing closer,” as the Beijing-Taipei high-speed rail has only “the last part” between the Straits left to be completed.

It further went on to explain that with the completion of the Fuzhou-Pingtan railway last December, all of the construction work on the Beijing-Taipei high-speed rail has been completed except for the last section, which will link the mainland across the Straits, referring to “the last part” from Pingtan to Taipei.

The Fuzhou-Pingtan railway, the nearest one on the mainland from Taiwan, was put into operation on December 26. Pingtan is only 68 nautical miles away from Taiwan’s Hsinchu, the closest point across the straits.

The Pingtan Strait Road-Rail Bridge, a key project of the Fuzhou-Pingtan railway, has a total length of 16.34 kilometers. It is the world’s longest cross-sea road-rail bridge and the first road-rail bridge in China.

Is this even possible, or is this a “pipe dream”?

Oh yes. It is absolutely possible. Consider that all of the neighboring nations are enthusiastically participating with China in establishing communication and trade routes and upgrading their infrastructure. And consider the a fore mentioned “Pingtan Strait Road-Rail Bridge” which was just completed last year. Which followed the HK – Macao – Zhuhai bridge effort (outside my front door)…

As discussed in this article…

China opens Fuzhou-Pingtan railway to boost cross-strait travel

Updated 14:45, 27-Dec-2020
By Hong Yaobin
The Fuzhou-Pingtan railway in east China’s Fujian Province went into operation Saturday morning after seven years of construction, allowing visitors from the Chinese mainland and China’s Taiwan to travel more conveniently across the Taiwan Straits.

The Fuzhou-Pingtan railway in east China’s Fujian Province went into operation Saturday morning after seven years of construction, allowing visitors from the Chinese mainland and China’s Taiwan to travel more conveniently across the Taiwan Straits.

The 88-kilometer railway, designed to support high-speed trains running at a speed of up to 200 km per hour, connects the provincial capital of Fuzhou with the largest island in the province, which is the nearest place in the Chinese mainland to Taiwan Island, only 68 nautical miles (about 126 km) away from Hsinchu City.

The 88-kilometer railway, designed to support high-speed trains running at a speed of up to 200 km per hour, connects the provincial capital of Fuzhou with the largest island in the province.

Noting that they have been taking the “Strait” ship to travel between Pingtan and Taiwan, Yang Binghao, who is from Taiwan and runs a cultural and creative center in Pingtan, said that with the Fuzhou-Pingtan railway, “Taiwan compatriots can now transfer via railway after arriving in Pingtan by sea, and then we can easily travel to Beijing, Shanghai and other parts of the mainland.”

Yang believes that the railway will further promote the opening-up and development of Pingtan and facilitate cross-strait travel and communication, benefiting local residents and people from both sides.

Thanks to bullet trains running on the Pingtan Strait Road-Rail Bridge, it now only takes around half an hour for residents and visitors to commute between both places.

Thanks to bullet trains running on the Pingtan Strait Road-Rail Bridge, it now only takes around half an hour for residents and visitors to commute between both places. The 16.3-kilometer-long bridge, with a six-lane highway on top and a high-speed railway at bottom, is China’s first and the world’s longest cross-sea road-rail bridge.

The 16.3-km-long Pingtan Strait Road-Rail Bridge is China’s first and the world’s longest cross-sea road-rail bridge. /CFP

The new railway will link the island county with major cities like Beijing, Shanghai and Shenzhen through the transportation hub in Fuzhou, according to Li Fei, an official with the China Railway Nanchang Group Co., Ltd.

In 2009, the Pingtan Comprehensive Pilot Zone was launched in the county to facilitate cross-strait exchange and cooperation, aiming to become a “common home for compatriots on both sides of the Taiwan Straits,” which currently houses more than 1,000 Taiwan-invested enterprises.

A young child ride the HST on the way to Taiwan.

Comprised of 126 islands, Pingtan is home to marvelous natural wonders and a number of tourist attractions such as Haitan Island, Tannan Bay, Pingtan Island National Forest Park, and Haitan Ancient City, and has become increasingly popular among visitors from home and abroad in recent years.

From January 20, up to 17 sets of bullet trains will run on the line every day, up from 9.5 sets plying currently, further boosting the development of local tourism.

So what is China doing to quench the anti-unification efforts?

Sure all this is fine and good. China is building bridges, and tunnels and aiding in economic development. However the United States is funding the Taiwan separatist movement. (As well as funding NGO’s such as the NED, and NID for insurgency efforts.) But what is China doing to quench those who want to fight a “hot war” for “American Democracy”?

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang on Thursday stressed the importance of the one-China principle and 1992 Consensus in addressing the development of cross-strait relations.

The premier made the remarks during a virtual press conference at the Great Hall of the People in Beijing after the closing of the fourth session of the 13th National People's Congress, China's top legislature.
The Chinese mainland welcomes dialogue with different parties regarding cross-strait relations to achieve the unification of China, Li said, before stressing opposition to any form of separatist activities or foreign interference in cross-strait affairs.

The central government will continue to enable Taiwan compatriots to share in opportunities on the mainland, he added.

So yeah. Who, as you well know, already have Chinese passports, is still able to buy property and set up businesses but will now be granted easy loans and smooth sailing in new businesses and ventures.  China is “pulling out all the stops” to help integrate the Taiwanese with the mainland Chinese.

Some thoughts

When I was a young boy, the “news” was all about the “War in Vietnam”. Every day were reports on how our “brave young men were saving the world from communism”. And the media was all over it. From Walter Cronkite on television to magazines such as “Popular Mechanics (illustrated)” and “Vanity Fair”. In those days we were all afraid of “The Red Menace”, and the “Domino Effect”, and were terrified of  the “loss of our freedoms”.

Domino theory, also called Domino Effect, theory in U.S. foreign policy after World War II stating that the “fall” of a noncommunist state to communism would precipitate the fall of noncommunist governments in neighbouring states. The theory was first proposed by President Harry S.Truman.

domino theory | international relations | Britannica.com

In those days, as a young boy, I would watch Hollywood movies glorify war.  I would envision myself flying in The B-24 Liberator bombing the shit out the of the evil Nazi’s (12 O’Clock High), or fighting on the front lines with John Wayne in the movie The Green Berets (1968).

John Wayne in the movie The Green Berets (1968).

.

It wasn’t until I was much older that I realized that were I to follow my boyhood dreams, I would probably have been shipped off to die in some distant land. I would have died a virgin, and forgotten by the rest of the world. But no one else realizes this, and America is still playing the same old games that ended up killing thousands of Americans, and millions of civilians over the last fifty years.

This is just a typical example of how absolutely “off the wall” American media is when it comes to reporting what is going on in China.

  • It omits facts.
  • it omits history.
  • It omits contemporaneous news.
  • It fabricates news.
  • It distorts events.
  • It produces emotion laden articles full of fear.

It is, after all, a reflection of what America stands for.

I will generate more articles along these lines in the future. For now they will all fall under the heading… “America is having a hissy fit.”

Do you want more?

Well go here…

China

.

Articles & Links

You’ll not find any big banners or popups here talking about cookies and privacy notices. There are no ads on this site (aside from the hosting ads – a necessary evil). Functionally and fundamentally, I just don’t make money off of this blog. It is NOT monetized. Finally, I don’t track you because I just don’t care to.

To go to the MAIN Index;

Master Index

.

  • You can start reading the articles by going HERE.
  • You can visit the Index Page HERE to explore by article subject.
  • You can also ask the author some questions. You can go HERE .
  • You can find out more about the author HERE.
  • If you have concerns or complaints, you can go HERE.
  • If you want to make a donation, you can go HERE.

Please kindly help me out in this effort. There is a lot of effort that goes into this disclosure. I could use all the financial support that anyone could provide. Thank you very much.

 

Metallicman Donation
Other Amount:
Please kindly enter any notes that you would like to attach to the donation here: