China Attacks the USA on All Fronts.
Try to see it from the hegemon’s point of view: While Russia confronts the USA head-on, China is attacking on almost every other front, simultaneously. China’s attacks look like neutral, ‘commonsense’ or ‘competitive’ moves. All nice and friendly:
- Like Shanghai’s new gold exchange. Shanghai forbids naked shorting; all sales are for physical delivery. Perfectly sensible, right? Well, it drives a wedge between the price of ‘paper’ (naked short) gold on US’ Comex and physical gold. This thwarts the world’s biggest paper gold shorter, the US Treasury, which has been using trillions in naked shorts to rig the market since the US failed to deliver gold that Germany had lodged with it for safe keeping.
- China’s offering Turkey financing and IP with their antimissile defense system. Turkey will be half out of NATO if it goes through with the deal – as it is threatening to do. Turkey is NATO’s Eastern wing.
- Then there’s the renminbi, which is internationalizing 10 times faster than anyone predicted. China’s controlling the world’s desire to diversify their reserves by bulking up on renminbi.
- If the past 50 years are a guide, the next financial crisis is due within 36 months.
You’ve got to feel sympathy for the hegemon, don’t you? I certainly do. My income is entirely tied to the $US. Maybe it’s time we thought of cooperating with the Chinese government, instead of treating it as an enemy. Maybe it’s too late.
Never be afraid to negotiate
Never be afraid to retreat
Never be afraid to attack
–Mao Tse Tung
The thrifty Chinese have never liked to waste money on anything, especially their military. They built the Great Wall to keep people out. They have always preferred to stay inside their wall and avoid foreign adventures: too risky, too expensive.
So it comes as no surprise that China’s military is both defensive and cheap: China spends about the same on defense as France, or one sixth of the US military budget.
Yet China’s thrifty defense planners get a lot of bang for their buck. Some examples of thrift:
=&0=&: China modified an existing intermediate-range ballistic missile to destroy ships up to 2,000 km from shore–which happens to be the operational range of the US Pacific Fleet. The range of the modified Dong Feng 21 missile (pictured) is significant in that it covers the areas that are likely hot zones for future confrontations between U.S. and Chinese surface forces. The missile carries a warhead big enough to sink or cripple a large vessel, providing the Chinese the capability of destroying a supercarrier in one strike. Because the missile employs a complex guidance system, low radar signature and a maneuverability that makes its flight path unpredictable, the odds that it can evade tracking systems to reach its target are increased. It is estimated that the missile can travel at mach 10 and reach its maximum range of 2000km in less than 12 minutes. Ships currently have no defense against a ballistic missile attack. [US Naval Institute. There’s more…]
- ICBMs: Rather than engaging in a ruinous–and futile–arms race with the USA, China has elected to field only few Inter-Continental Ballistic Missiles. But these are mobile: truck-drawn on land, and submarine-based at sea.
- Cruise Missiles: It also fields a pair of formidable supersonic cruise missiles–the C602 Long-range Anti-ship Cruise Missile and the CJ-10 ground launched cruise missile –with ranges up to 2,000 km.
- Invisible Submarines: China has a fleet of Song-class diesel submarines that are invisible to American sub-detection methods. A ship of this class surfaced in the midst of a US carrier battle group off the coast of China, causing what one NATO officer described “as big a shock as the Russians launching Sputnik”.
Behind Dalai Lama’s Holy Cloak
Good intentions, questionable outcomes. If you want to know about the Dalai Lama, follow the money…
Melbourne Age. Michael Backman. May 23, 2007. Photo: AFP
The Dalai Lama has been an American agent for decades. Michael Blackman investigated his finances for the Melbourne Age newspaper:
Rarely do journalists challenge the Dalai Lama.
Partly it is because he is so charming and engaging. Most published accounts of him breeze on as airily as the subject, for whom a good giggle and a quaint parable are substitutes for hard answers. But this is the man who advocates greater autonomy for millions of people who are currently Chinese citizens, presumably with him as head of their government. So, why not hold him accountable as a political figure?