Hyde Calls Out The EUnuchs
There's not much I can add to this.
The European Union's (EU) resumption of arms sales to China "is a dangerous development that runs counter to the advance of liberty and threatens U.S. security interests, as well as those of Japan and Taiwan," charges Representative Henry Hyde, R-IL.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Thursday, Hyde, Chairman of the House International Relations Committee disputed the EU's contention that the arms embargo against China is no longer warranted on human-rights grounds.
Hyde scoffed at the claim, noting, "The many Chinese citizens who remain in prison 15 years later for activities related to Tiananmen might feel differently."
"The Communist Party remains firmly in power and permits few choices about what can be said publicly in exercise of personal liberty," Hyde added.
"The major European countries have resumed arms sales to China at an alarming pace and plan to terminate altogether the arms embargo imposed by the EU following the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre," Hyde wrote.
"This is part of a 'strategic partnership' that the EU proclaimed at its summit meeting with China last December ... The new EU policy will provide the Chinese leadership with a significant propaganda coup and strike a blow to the pro-democracy movement in China," the lawmaker noted.
Representative Hyde wrote further that he found it even more disturbing that EU security policy toward China "is on a collision course with America's extensive security interests in Asia. The U.S. security posture in Asia has been the decisive factor in ensuring regional stability and prosperity since the end of World War II.
"Today, however, U.S. military planners and commanders are confronting a substantial Chinese military buildup, which includes deployment of approximately 500 short-range ballistic missiles across the Taiwan Strait and intercontinental missiles that can reach U.S. shores."
In the face of this threat, Hyde wrote, "European arms technology will only enhance the complexity, reliability and lethality of China's growing arsenal. They will also increase the likelihood that Beijing will acquire growing confidence in resolving the status of Taiwan and countering America's security posture in Asia elsewhere with the threat or use of force."
Noting that European arms sales to China doubled in a one-year period to the tune of half a billion dollars, Hyde argued, "Under the planned EU policy, weapons technology and know-how will flow to China at increasing levels and with increasing speed, much of it unlicensed or subject to 'open' licenses which go mainly unreported."
Hyde concluded, "This is a moment when the voices of thoughtful Europeans need to be heard above those who are easily seduced by lucrative Chinese contracts. The choice for Europe could not be clearer: it is between policies that promote the development of democracy in China or those that support China's military buildup and threaten U.S. security interests. This choice calls to mind the words of William Gladstone: 'Nothing that is morally wrong can be politically right.'"
I don't think there is anywhere close to the will, either in Europe or the United States, to even privately acknowledge the burgeoning threat to the world posed by Red China. After half a century of tense Cold War struggle containing one communist superpower, and now the "long twilight struggle" against Islamist fanaticism (which Europe won't even acknowledge, much less take seriously), the spiritual exhaustion of Beijing's perceived foes will be palpable. And from the Euros' perspective of ingrained appeasenikism and anti-Americanism, if the ChiComms can be bought off with arms and then diverted to make trouble for the U.S. in the Far East, well, so much the better for them, because surely it will never come back to bite them, right?
But in such an event - say, a grab for Taiwan - would the United States really intervene militarily? Or, still not recovered from the reckless Clinton defense slashes of the '90s and heavily committed in the Middle East, would we acquiesce, rationalizing that "we do, after all, have a 'one China' policy," and "the ChiComms haven't killed the Hong Kong golden goose yet, have they?"
Others would go still further, arguing that it was part of the PRC's global strategy to divert the US in the Middle East, and use North Korea's nuclear sabre-rattling, to keep their own imperialist designs in the dark and cultivate the already active desire on the part of the West to curry their favor diplomatically as a "partner" and even "ally." In this view the Butchers of Beijing, influenced both by their communist ideology and incipient cultural leanings, think in the very long term, are limitlessly patient, and will wait as long as necessary for the right moment and conditions and correlation of forces, and then make a direct move for global domination, rather than tipping their hand and creating unwanted complications and obstacles for themselves.
For my part, I still harken back to an essay written for Time magazine by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn almost a quarter of a century ago. The theme was American retreat in the Cold War under Jimmy Carter, but this paragraph concerning Red China is still relevant today:
In expectation of World War III the West again seeks cover, and finds Communist China as an ally! This is another betrayal, not only of Taiwan, but of the entire oppressed Chinese people. Moreover, it is a mad, suicidal policy. Having supplied billion-strong China with American arms, the West will defeat the USSR, but thereafter no force on Earth will restrain Communist China from world conquest.
Twenty-five years later, there isn't even the excuse of Cold War triangulation to paper over the EUnuchs' resumption of this arms trade. Like their treacherous "commerce" with Saddam Hussein, it is driven by nothing more than greed and a "mouse that roared" frustration with no longer being relevant players on the world stage.
Europe is turning on America, the latter is focused on the Middle East, and meanwhile, the People's Liberation Army keeps growing and growing and growing, with the former's obsequious assistance.
If there is a ChiComm master plan, it sounds like it's humming along right on schedule.
The European Union's (EU) resumption of arms sales to China "is a dangerous development that runs counter to the advance of liberty and threatens U.S. security interests, as well as those of Japan and Taiwan," charges Representative Henry Hyde, R-IL.
Writing in the Wall Street Journal, Thursday, Hyde, Chairman of the House International Relations Committee disputed the EU's contention that the arms embargo against China is no longer warranted on human-rights grounds.
Hyde scoffed at the claim, noting, "The many Chinese citizens who remain in prison 15 years later for activities related to Tiananmen might feel differently."
"The Communist Party remains firmly in power and permits few choices about what can be said publicly in exercise of personal liberty," Hyde added.
"The major European countries have resumed arms sales to China at an alarming pace and plan to terminate altogether the arms embargo imposed by the EU following the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre," Hyde wrote.
"This is part of a 'strategic partnership' that the EU proclaimed at its summit meeting with China last December ... The new EU policy will provide the Chinese leadership with a significant propaganda coup and strike a blow to the pro-democracy movement in China," the lawmaker noted.
Representative Hyde wrote further that he found it even more disturbing that EU security policy toward China "is on a collision course with America's extensive security interests in Asia. The U.S. security posture in Asia has been the decisive factor in ensuring regional stability and prosperity since the end of World War II.
"Today, however, U.S. military planners and commanders are confronting a substantial Chinese military buildup, which includes deployment of approximately 500 short-range ballistic missiles across the Taiwan Strait and intercontinental missiles that can reach U.S. shores."
In the face of this threat, Hyde wrote, "European arms technology will only enhance the complexity, reliability and lethality of China's growing arsenal. They will also increase the likelihood that Beijing will acquire growing confidence in resolving the status of Taiwan and countering America's security posture in Asia elsewhere with the threat or use of force."
Noting that European arms sales to China doubled in a one-year period to the tune of half a billion dollars, Hyde argued, "Under the planned EU policy, weapons technology and know-how will flow to China at increasing levels and with increasing speed, much of it unlicensed or subject to 'open' licenses which go mainly unreported."
Hyde concluded, "This is a moment when the voices of thoughtful Europeans need to be heard above those who are easily seduced by lucrative Chinese contracts. The choice for Europe could not be clearer: it is between policies that promote the development of democracy in China or those that support China's military buildup and threaten U.S. security interests. This choice calls to mind the words of William Gladstone: 'Nothing that is morally wrong can be politically right.'"
I don't think there is anywhere close to the will, either in Europe or the United States, to even privately acknowledge the burgeoning threat to the world posed by Red China. After half a century of tense Cold War struggle containing one communist superpower, and now the "long twilight struggle" against Islamist fanaticism (which Europe won't even acknowledge, much less take seriously), the spiritual exhaustion of Beijing's perceived foes will be palpable. And from the Euros' perspective of ingrained appeasenikism and anti-Americanism, if the ChiComms can be bought off with arms and then diverted to make trouble for the U.S. in the Far East, well, so much the better for them, because surely it will never come back to bite them, right?
But in such an event - say, a grab for Taiwan - would the United States really intervene militarily? Or, still not recovered from the reckless Clinton defense slashes of the '90s and heavily committed in the Middle East, would we acquiesce, rationalizing that "we do, after all, have a 'one China' policy," and "the ChiComms haven't killed the Hong Kong golden goose yet, have they?"
Others would go still further, arguing that it was part of the PRC's global strategy to divert the US in the Middle East, and use North Korea's nuclear sabre-rattling, to keep their own imperialist designs in the dark and cultivate the already active desire on the part of the West to curry their favor diplomatically as a "partner" and even "ally." In this view the Butchers of Beijing, influenced both by their communist ideology and incipient cultural leanings, think in the very long term, are limitlessly patient, and will wait as long as necessary for the right moment and conditions and correlation of forces, and then make a direct move for global domination, rather than tipping their hand and creating unwanted complications and obstacles for themselves.
For my part, I still harken back to an essay written for Time magazine by Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn almost a quarter of a century ago. The theme was American retreat in the Cold War under Jimmy Carter, but this paragraph concerning Red China is still relevant today:
In expectation of World War III the West again seeks cover, and finds Communist China as an ally! This is another betrayal, not only of Taiwan, but of the entire oppressed Chinese people. Moreover, it is a mad, suicidal policy. Having supplied billion-strong China with American arms, the West will defeat the USSR, but thereafter no force on Earth will restrain Communist China from world conquest.
Twenty-five years later, there isn't even the excuse of Cold War triangulation to paper over the EUnuchs' resumption of this arms trade. Like their treacherous "commerce" with Saddam Hussein, it is driven by nothing more than greed and a "mouse that roared" frustration with no longer being relevant players on the world stage.
Europe is turning on America, the latter is focused on the Middle East, and meanwhile, the People's Liberation Army keeps growing and growing and growing, with the former's obsequious assistance.
If there is a ChiComm master plan, it sounds like it's humming along right on schedule.
posted by JASmius at 7:55 PM
<<< Home