Category Archives: foreign policy

Rewriting History

Posted on by
Reply

Here is an example of the level of integrity of the men reigning over the People’s Republic of China.

Thirty years ago, a man stood in front of a column of tanks, halting their hulking passage from Tiananmen Square a day after the bloodshed of June 4.
…
“Tank man” images are ruthlessly excised from Chinese social media, according to monitoring services.
…
Now the Chinese government is seeking to exert the same sort of control over how China’s history is seen in the rest of the world.

President Xi Jinping and his henchmen are increasingly restricting access by foreigners to PRC—even academic—databases of the nation’s history (such as it’s allowed to exist) along with actively purging them to control domestic consumption.

Nor is just this relatively passive censorship.  Here’s Glenn Tiffert, a visiting fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution:

The way to think about the PRC on the 30th anniversary of Tiananmen is that it isn’t just trying to bury a set of inconvenient truths and facts, but is trying to construct a new narrative.

Xi and his men aren’t lying about their nation in a fit of self-delusion, nor is this an attempt simply to keep such knowledge from circling back to the citizenry from outside; Xi and his men are lying in a conscious effort to delude us.

Such men cannot be trusted in any venue.

Bad Policy

Posted on by
Reply

Recall that President Donald Trump has threatened a sequence of rising tariffs on all Mexican goods in an effort to get Mexico to take seriously its broad contribution to the crisis we have on our border with that nation.

Republican lawmakers are gearing up for a vote to potentially override President Trump’s planned tariff on Mexico this month….

These lawmakers are concerned that the tariffs could jeopardize passage of the USMCA, and they’re worried that they will hurt Americans.  These folks have lost sight of some important facts.

One is that, after the announcement of the upcoming tariffs, the Mexican government said it intended to move ahead with ratification of the USMCA. The only ones in the way of its final acceptance are Congress’ Progressive-Democrats, who generally don’t like the deal in any event, and these Republicans.

Another is that international trade, including tools of international trade like tariffs, have nothing to do with economics and everything to do with foreign policy.

A third is the nature of conflict.  These Republicans need to understand that no conflict is bloodless for either side.   They need to stop worrying so much about their own stubbed toes and consider the effect these particular tariffs would have on Mexico and whether they just might have the intended effect.

Any attempt by Congress to get in the way can only undermine Trump’s foreign policy move to push Mexico to get serious about those whom Mexico is allowing illegally to cross its own southern border and the resulting flow of these illegal aliens north to illegally enter our country.

Senate Majority Whip John Thune (R, SD):

Congress is going to want to probably be heard from.

If Congress wants to be heard from, it should get serious about immigration, beginning with immigration legislation, that beginning with something akin to Trump’s offer of a year or so ago that offered a path to legalization for DACA beneficiaries plus a million more who were similarly situated.  Along with the means to better physically secure our own southern border.

Trump Commentary

Posted on by
Reply

There is much commentary, generally negative, over President Donald Trump’s statements, among others, that he likes the idea of Boris Johnson succeeding outgoing British Prime Minister Theresa May.  It’s unbecoming. It’s unpresidential. Mostly, though, it’s simply not supposed to be done for one foreign dignitary to comment on the doings of another nation’s political debate.

I’ll ignore the foolishness of “unbecoming” and “unpresidential;” those objecting on these grounds routinely shy away from saying what they mean by “unbecoming” or “unpresidential.”  We’re simply supposed to accept their august pronouncements without question.

There’re a couple of larger issues in play here, though.

Why shouldn’t Trump weigh in on this or that British political debate?  After all, the Brits, including Sadiq Khan and Jeremy Corbin among several, routinely weigh in on American political debates.

More important than the triviality of such tit-for-tat, though, objecting to his speaking up—or to Khan’s/Corbin’s speaking up—insults the citizens of both countries: those objecting are saying that the citizens are so droolingly stupid that they’ll actually be swayed by what a foreign leader says about their own leadership or what that foreign leader says about any other domestic matter.

Venezuela is not Grenada

Posted on by
Reply

That, there, is a true fact. The University of Georgia’s Emeritus Professor (of Agricultural and Applied Economics) Glenn Ames used that as an argument for why the US ought not invade Venezuela in his Letter to the Editor of The Wall Street Journal.  After all, he wrote,

Venezuela is a large, complex country politically, not a tiny island in the Caribbean.

Also a true fact.  But then he went astray, here and on a couple of other points.  For one, our military is not the disjointed, uncoordinated collection of disparate forces that went into Grenada; it’s much better integrated, and it has demonstrated that improvement many times since.

The Venezuelan military is indebted to President Nicolás Maduro for their perks and subsidies. They are not going to give them up easily.

This badly overstates the case. The Venezuelan military leadership is indebted to Maduro.  The field-grade officers and especially the junior officers and soldiers have no such “loyalty;” they are not going to fight seriously in support of that “leadership”—which steals from their paychecks as much as they do from the civilian citizens of Venezuela.

Cubans and others are embedded in Venezuela’s security apparatus.

As Cubans were in Grenada, and they folded rapidly in the face even of that confused operation.

That Venezuela is not Grenada also is an irrelevant fact.

“Normalize Relations”

Posted on by
Reply

Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif travelled to the People’s Republic of China in an effort to get its help in saving the nuclear weapons deal with Iran that the US walked away from and that Great Britain, Germany, and France, along with Russia and the PRC, remain in.  Zarif insisted that

the world must normalize economic relations with Tehran and take “practical steps” to save the nuclear accord….

No, we don’t.  There’s nothing to save: all the accord did and does is create a brief delay in Iran’s drive to obtain nuclear weapons so it can use them against Israel and, through its proxies and affiliates, others.

Aside from that, though, again: no, we don’t.  Not until Iran normalizes relations with the other nations in the Middle East and then with the nations of the world at large.

Full stop.