Asia

CNN recently interviewed Premier Jiabao and no topic was considered too taboo.  And while they probably wouldn’t call themselves libertarians, Wen Jiabao and Hu Jintao are arguably much more level-headed and diplomatic than many Western politicians like Obama, McCain or much of the G7 leadership.

In particular, Wen discusses a nuclear Iran and supports a peaceful, non-military approach, one with dialogue and not the threat of annihilation.

In addition, he does not view China as a superpower and believes the PRC leadership should continue focusing on setting its own house in order before trying to take on any global enforcement role.

It should be noted that following the reforms of Deng Xiaoping, the PLA was sliced in half and the military itself has not participated in any offensive military operations for 30 years; with Vietnam. They are now large trading partners and are even constructing a joint-highway. Similarly, despite the best efforts of the Western elite to demonize the PRC, links between Taiwan and the mainland continue to warm.

See also: The Peaceful Rise of China
China and the New Cold War
Tibet, the ‘great game’ and the CIA

A frenzy over the 500th U.S. servicemember to die in Afghanistan developed in the media this week. According to the Associated Press, the U.S. death toll in Afghanistan surpassed 500 GIs recently, or perhaps it will reach that milestone soon…or…did we actually cross that line long ago? While the AP admits that accurate casualty figures are hard to come by thanks to lags in Defense Department reports and the difficulty of independent confirmation in the region, the situation gets a little more complicated than that. Operation Enduring Freedom, often referred to as the Afghan War, actually spans several nations. The South Asian country is simply the main focal point of this “war on terror” that was formulated in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks.

The AP specifically counted deaths in Afghanistan, Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Qatar and the United Arab Emirates. Elsewhere, the New York Times came up with a slightly different set of numbers themselves, but their handy chart quickly reveals just how spread out the operation really is. U.S. servicemembers were also killed in countries as far from Afghanistan as are the Philippines, Mali, and even Cuba, so while the AP admirably tallied the deaths in and around Afghanistan, the worldwide U.S. toll for this military excursion is almost 15% higher. Perhaps AP cherry-picked these particular numbers because 500 is more of a “newsworthy milestone” than 562 deaths (Pentagon figures) or 569 deaths (Icasualties.org), but whatever the reason behind it, keeping the deadliness of the “Afghan War” in the headlines is of utmost importance, especially during this campaign season.

A round of applause to the AWC researchers that copiously scour the internet looking for stories.

One of the gems on the frontpage involves a recent timeline of economic relations between China and Taiwan since the election of Ma.  Notice how it is almost the exact opposite of what the current US administration has towards Iran.

There is an old parable attributed to Frederic Bastiat which states that when goods and services do not cross borders, armies will.

One of the underlying reasons for why this observation typically holds true is that businesses and patrons have personal wealth at stake and can pressure the political class and military brass to be more diplomatic in negotiating with foreign states.

After all, in order to remain solvent, businesses do not want their employees, enterprises, buildings or customers to be blown up.

As a consequence to warming relations, in 2007 alone, cross-strait trade between China and Tawain grew 16% to more than $100 billion.

In contrast, for nearly three decades, the US federal government has levied both sanctions and penalties on firms that conduct business with Iranians.  And HR 362 will amplify this imperial boycott to the extreme, with a naval blockade.

See also: 1 2 3

In New York, you cannot ride a subway without being bombarded with posters about Darfur and now, Tibet. Of course I have sympathy for those killed and displaced in Darfur, though the numbers have been overblown and other specifics of the situation have been exaggerated. And I am a sucker for all plainly legitimate secessionist movements, as in Tibet. But I am quite sick of being guilted into protest and “action” with the purpose of fixing problems my government is in no way (currently) responsible for.

The Tibet march poster I saw yesterday mentioned the “atrocities” perpetrated by the Chinese government. How about the atrocities carried out, abetted, enabled, and inspired by the US Government in Iraq? The death toll in Iraq beats last month’s entire cluster of clashes in Tibet practically every hour. Why, outside of a few stickers on newspaper boxes around town, is no significant mention made of what’s going on non-stop in Iraq? Are mainstream liberals just so cowed by the see-through rhetoric of the now completely debunked War Party that they still refuse to criticize a war their military is currently prosecuting?

Why are they demurely and cowardly “supporting the troops” in Iraq while wasting their rage on bullsh*t like a police crackdown against rioters in Tibet? This goes all the way up to top liberals in the country — the disgusting Nancy Pelosi tells the President he should boycott the Olympics opening ceremony in Beijing. Who is George Bush to express moral indignation about anything? France’s Sarkozy is just as ridiculous — he rubs his face in Bush’s crack as the Decider bends over to destroy another piece of Iraq, but is contemplating a boycott of the Olympics opening ceremonies over a few scuffles in Lhasa?

Sick.

How about some priorities reevaluation?

Last weekend was quietly marked by the 50th anniversary of the modern-day peace symbol. While it continues to remain a cultural icon, its history and imagery is relatively unknown.

As seen in the picture, the design incorporated symbols from the flag-signaling alphabet. The N + D were placed “within a circle symbolising Earth” where the N stood for nuclear and D stood for disarmament. Thus its creators used it to promote peace through global nuclear disarmament.

Last Saturday, half way around the world, another important political event took place in Taiwan. The sometimes-hawkish independence movement led by the DPP was defeated in the national election versus the trade-friendly KMT. One of the promises president-elect Ma has promoted is closer, peaceful trade with mainland China.

As Frederic Bastiat, Lew Rockwell and others have noted, when goods and services do not cross borders, armies will. And with $100 billion in cross-straits trade in 2007 alone, many residents felt that war with the PRC would be needlessly destructive to their enterprises and employees.

The DPP-led initiative for UN recognition also failed at the ballot box. And as the DPP stronghold is located here in Kaohsiung, an hour ago I walked down to the corner of Boai and Jhihsheng and watched workers dismantle the local “UN for Taiwan” building. And if the surrounding commercial hustle and bustle is any guide, perhaps a productive flea market will take its place in the near future.

This story comes full circle as the US Air Force was recently discovered to have accidentally sent 4 nuclear detonators to Taiwan. While this is itself a curiously negligent faux pas, the triggers are nearly 50 years old… designed for Mark-12 nuclear weapons which were decommissioned in 1962.

The state and its imperial class is the only group that gains in the event of war, nuclear or otherwise. And as cooler heads have recently prevailed, perhaps the Year of the Rat will be one of wealth and prosperity and not war and atrocities. Or maybe as Doug Bandow suggests, the crisis has only been postponed.

See also:
Taiwan: do as we say, not as we do
The Vatican still recognizes them, right?
5 Reasons Why the PRC will not Invade Taiwan shortly after the Olympics

Today is a national holiday here in Taiwan. It is Peace Memorial Day which reflects upon a bloody suppression instigated by the KMT more than 60 years ago.

And while you can hear the occasional loud speaker commemorating it in the background, most of the political class is focused on the diplomatic snub a Taiwanese delegation experienced yesterday.

After being sent to Seoul to observe the inaugural ceremony for the new Korean president, the Taiwanese representatives were asked not to attend due to pressure from the Chinese delegation which threatened to boycott the event.

As I mentioned earlier this month, despite the harsh rhetoric and diplomatic threats expounded on by either party, any military confrontation between the PRC and RoC seems unlikely for the near-future. And while it is improbable that the South Korean State department will ever change its stance, this May they too will have a chance to reflect upon the anniversary of a government-sanctioned violent repression.

In the spirit of the day and towards a peaceful coexistence you may be interested in: How to Deal with a Threatening Island. It stands in stark contrast to contemporary anti-trade agitprop like this.

I know that if at first you don’t succeed, you’re supposed to try, try again. But I think that phrase needs an exception: do not keep trying the same thing over and over again, especially after you fail 100 times in as many years.

British Foreign Secretary David Miliband should take this to heart, given his country’s embarrassing failure in exporting democracy through colonization and occupation — not to mention the planned starvation of sanctions and the mass murder of war. But no, he stands defiant in the face of reality, insisting that the debacle in Afghanistan and the horror show in Iraq is just another flawless intervention that just went a little wrong because of a few “mistakes.”

He makes a case for endless interventions around the globe for various foreign offenses — and then unwittingly shows himself up by bringing up the miracle of China. Commerce brought wealth and power to the masses of China, not “humanitarian intervention.” The state has done nothing but fight, tooth and nail, the advances of peaceful humanity on every front. The 20th Century was its last great push. It is finally losing, and the tide of prosperity and cooperation is shifting to overtake misery, poverty, and war. If the power-hungry, bloodthirsty, warmongering — or if you prefer, downright stupid — likes of Miliband would just step aside and allow people to decide for themselves what they want, we’d get there a lot faster.