Tags: U.S. | Experts: | China | Will | Never | Threat

U.S. Experts: China Will Never Be a Threat

Monday, 19 September 2005 12:00 AM

Let me first explain why I put the word "experts" in quotes. In the United States, experts on foreign countries, such as Kissinger (born in Germany in 1923) or Brzezinski (born in Poland in 1928), began to be mass-graduated by U.S. universities in the late 1940s as experts on Russia to meet the needs of "the Cold War" with Russia.

Their "expertise" was comical Philistine twaddle or medieval Scholasticism.

Just one example. When the Sino-Soviet alliance broke up by the 1960s, Brzezinski declared in his articles and books that there was no breakup; but should it have occurred, it would have been disastrous for the West because China was after a Marxist world revolution, while Russia was not any longer, and tied up China's hands within their alliance. But once the latter was gone, China would launch its Marxist world revolution and would lead all the Communist parties all over the world.

In 2004, it was thought that China is a threat because it was a dictatorship. Hence some U.S. "experts on China" assured us that China was transforming into a democracy, and the transformation would be complete in 2005.

Today the word "democracy" is one of the words that cannot be used in the media of China without the endorsement of the official censorship authorities. No one can say in the Chinese media that democracy is developing in China. The society of China is perfect without democracy, of which Marx, Lenin, and Mao spoke with great scorn.

Today some non-experts imagine that the threat is the size of China and its economic growth. The population of China exceeds that of the United States four times. Should its Gross Domestic Product exceed that of the United States four times, China will have armed forces four times as large as those of the United States, and possibly four times as powerful.

So today U.S. "experts" argue not that China is transforming into a democracy (and hence today's dictatorship of China will be no threat), but that China will be no threat even if it remains a dictatorship and its GDP exceeds four times that of the United States.

Predictably, the "experts" have received a forum in the People's Daily - for what institution can present a more objective, scholarly, and profound expertise on China than its main Communist newspaper? The experts gave interviews to the Chinese news agency Xinhua, and the People's Daily used them for its articles.

On Aug. 25, 2005, the People's Daily Online carried such an article, entitled, "Stronger China does Not Mean Security Threat: U.S. scholars."

"'A stronger China does not mean it becomes a threat to the United States, and the Asian country's rapid development is to the benefit of the whole world, including America,' a U.S. scholar says."

Michael Swaine, an expert on U.S.-China military and security policy at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a leading [!] think-tank in the United States, paid tribute to China's rapid growth.

"It is to the benefit of the world, to the benefit of Asia and to the benefit of the United States for China to be continuing to grow, to expand economically, to become more prosperous, to become, as a result, hopefully, more stable and more involved in the international community," Swaine told Xinhua in a recent interview.

The "expertise" goes on in the same spirit for another half a page: "On the U.S. objection to arms sales by some countries to China, Swaine criticized the U.S. blockade as ‘not logical.' ‘The United States does not have a good metric by which to measure what is or is not acceptable in terms of increased Chinese military capability,' he said."

No "good metric!" Well, the U.S. government would have a good metric if the experts explained that the most important Chinese military capability is post-nuclear superweaponry, such as molecular nano-weapons.

But since thousands of U.S. experts are charlatans with academic degrees, there is no good metric; and Swaine's expert advice is to make no restrictions on arms sales to China. Perhaps the United States should be commissioned by the dictators of China to produce those military goods and services with which they will annihilate the United States?

What about Taiwan? The Chinese dictators want to crush it because the absence of dictatorship in Taiwan is subversive to their mainland China. But the U.S. government still wants to defend it since Taiwan is the country where the U.S. ally – Kuomintang - escaped after Mao's victory with Stalin's help. The situation will either remain the same as it has been since 1949 or the U.S. government will betray its former ally. Swaine expertizes:

"If Sino-American relations are very bad, then the ability to maintain the stability of Taiwan could become much more difficult."

For Americans like Swaine, there can be no dictator's determination to preserve his absolute power, no dictator's preparations for the annihilation of the democratic West, no dictator's quest for world domination.

If Swaine had to analyze Hitler's declaration of war on the United States and Tojo's attack on Pearl Harbor, he would have said that the German-Japanese-American relations were so bad that the avoidance of WW2 became impossible.

The other U.S. "expert," Michael E. O'Hanlon, a senior fellow of the Brookings Institution, said that China "liberalizes and becomes more integrated into the world community, which is promising."

There is no doubt that Russia in the 1970s and 1980s was more "liberal" than in 1937, when people simply disappeared on the allegation that they had said something anti-Soviet. But the mortal Soviet threat to the West emerged in the 1970s and the 1980s when post-nuclear weapons were being developed, not under Stalin.

The People's Daily Online of Aug. 23, 2005, posted a two-part article entitled (oh, so provokingly!) "China: Is It a Threat or an Opportunity?" Arguing that it is an opportunity (of course!), not a threat (an insane idea!), are Prof. Joseph S. Nye, president of the Kennedy Government School of Harvard University; and Dr. David M. Finkelstein, Director of Project Asia, the Asian Security Studies Center.

I skip the Chinese participants in the discussion because they are state slaves, as I was a state slave in Soviet Russia, and to hear a state slave publicly discussing political issues is no more informative than to see a dog fetching a walking-stick for his master.

What is noteworthy is that the esteemed professor has forgotten that different countries have strikingly different forms of government. In the 1920s, a new big democratic republic in the territory of Imperial Germany did not arouse worries and misgivings among the existing big power. No one made a great fuss about the threat it allegedly posed.

In the 1930s and the 1940s, the dictatorship that originated on the site of the republic exterminated 12 million civilians for their alleged racial inferiority and launched a ruthless world war for racist world domination.

In the middle of the second millennium, China was a more powerful country than the whole of Europe. But it did not arouse worries and misgivings in Europe; indeed, it was barely noticed as an exotic back of the beyond.

The esteemed Dr. Finkelstein does not recognize the concept of dictatorship either.

Certainly, the prototype of Nazi Germany existed in the barbaric Germanic tribes and hence the Third Reich can be spoken of as the "revival of Germany." But what was accepted centuries or millennia ago is considered inhuman, savage, and criminal today.

In the second part of the discussion the esteemed Professor Nye says, "Ten years ago when I assumed office in the Pentagon, I invented such a remark: ‘if you treat China as an enemy, then you will guarantee you will get an enemy in the future.'"

In 1938 England treated Hitler's Germany not as an enemy, but as a friend. The result? To listen to Nye, England and Germany would have become friends in 1939 and thereafter instead of war enemies.

The esteemed Professor Nye, who worked in the Pentagon, cannot imagine the existence of ill will - of malice aforethought. According to my "Statistical Abstract of the United States 2004–2005" (p. 187), over 13 million crimes were committed in the United States in 1980.

Had it been assumed ever since that every crime was committed because the person in question had been mistreated as an enemy of society and had become one as a result, the population of the United States would have consisted in 2005 of criminals and victims of their crimes.

But there are such callous non-academics who have not received government posts for their wisdom of infinite love the esteemed Professor Nye has been propounding. They arrested and put on trial (can you imagine such detrimental ignorance?) those who committed crimes. Nay, they had watched suspects!

Given the wisdom of infinite love of the esteemed Professor Nye and other U.S. scholars in the People's Daily forum, it is wrong to take precautionary measures against (suicidal) terrorists, and thus treat them as enemies, as a result of which they do become such.

Now compare a criminal, acting either alone or in a gang of several dozen or several hundred members, and a dictatorship as a "state," which has hundreds of millions of "state slaves" at its disposal, and billions of dollars to develop post-nuclear superweapons by hiring the world's best specialists in the respective fields, in addition to its own scientists and technologists.

What does a criminal gain by planning and committing a crime "with malice aforethought"?

Suicidal hate criminals, including those called terrorists, realize their death-wish - the genetic inclination to suicide. In 1980, over 12 million crimes were "property crimes," such as over 1 million "thefts of motor vehicles."

Now, at stake in a dictatorship is the dictator's virtual ownership or loss of not an old car, but of the country's entire property. In 1990 Gorbachev virtually owned Soviet Russia, and in 1992 he was a pauper, living outside it (not the worst outcome either!).

It is officially forbidden in China to refer or allude in the media to the Tiananmen Square movement, inspired by the West (recall the replica of the Statue of Liberty on the Square). Obviously, the West will be subverting, by its very existence, the dictatorship of China unless and until the West has been annihilated by the dictatorship of China or turned into its docile colony.

It may be relevant to recall that Marx, Lenin, and Mao taught that the future of mankind is a single global Communist society, and Chinese military superiority may well be its midwife.

You can e-mail me at navlev@cloud9.net.

The link to my book online is www.levnavrozov.com.


© 2019 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

1Like our page
Let me first explain why I put the word "experts" in quotes. In the United States, experts on foreign countries, such as Kissinger (born in Germany in 1923) or Brzezinski (born in Poland in 1928), began to be mass-graduated by U.S. universities in the late 1940s as experts...
Monday, 19 September 2005 12:00 AM
Newsmax Media, Inc.

Newsmax, Moneynews, Newsmax Health, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, and Newsmax World are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

America's News Page
© Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved