I was a US diplomat in Beijing in 1979 when the US normalized relations with China and have been involved in China affairs ever since. I therefore take issue with "China Lends a Hand," an article published in the Washington Post by my former boss, Richard Holbrooke.
Holbrooke said China "lent a hand" in North Korea, Sudan and Myanmar. In reality, it was more like "China bites a hand."
On Korea: The Feb. 13 Beijing "joint statement" on North Korean denuclearization said nothing about Pyongyang currency counterfeiting or US sanctions.
Yet China demanded the US unfreeze US$24 million in North Korea's Macau bank accounts or the Beijing government would go public that US inflexibility -- not North Korea's criminal activity -- was the cause of Pyongyang's refusal to comply with the "statement."
On Sudan: The international outcry against China's support for Sudan's genocidal regime did prompt Beijing to dispatch Chinese Ambassador Zhai Jun (
When Zhai was asked specifically about the Sudanese government helicopter gunships that had supported the Janjaweed as they razed villages and massacred villagers in Darfur, he said: "I don't know anything about helicopter gunships."
When National Public Radio correspondent Mary Kay Magistad asked whether he believed the Sudanese government was not supporting the Janjaweed, he said: "I didn't say anything about support -- I haven't asked them anything about this, and if they were supporting them, they wouldn't tell me."
Just a few days earlier, Chinese Defense Minister Cao Gangchuan (
What does China really say about Darfur?
On the same day as Zhai's press conference, the China Daily wrote: "Harsh demands have been made of Sudan but little respect has been shown for the country -- one of the largest on the African continent. As a sovereign nation, Sudan, which learned bitter lessons during the colonial years, aspires to territorial integrity, national unity, ethnic reconciliation and regional peace and stability."
And that was it.
On Myanmar: Little comfort should be taken from US diplomats' talks with Burmese officials in Beijing about the nearly two-decade incarceration of Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi.
Last year, the US Department of State told Congress that when Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) visited Yangon, "he emphasized the need for Burma to have a more inclusive political process." That would have been nice if it were true. In reality, China praised Myanmar for "continu[ing] to advance the process of national reconciliation." That was all.
Last year, then deputy secretary of state Robert Zoellick also told a congressional panel that "some of you might have seen there was a report by the new foreign minister of Hamas [Mahmoud al-Zahar] for the Palestinian government sort of saying he was going to go to China. I raised this with the Chinese promptly. Within two days, the Chinese said `we didn't invite him.'"
Zoellick portrayed Beijing's quick response and "non-invitation" of al-Zahar as the "foundations of the type of discussion with China about the types of mutual interest that we can have and work together."
Of course, the Chinese lied to him. China indeed had invited al-Zahar. A senior Israeli "involved in Chinese affairs," who spoke on condition of anonymity, told me that because Chinese President Hu Jintao (
Al-Zahar had a wonderful time in Beijing, by the way.
"On a bilateral relationship, yes, it was successful," al-Zahar said. "I met the minister of foreign affairs [Li Zhaoxing,
That was June 2 last year.
As I write this, on June 29 last year, Hamas kidnapped an Israeli soldier on the Gaza border, sparking an Israeli retaliation attack. Chinese-made weapons have also been used by militants against armies in the Middle East, including Israel's.
What does this prove? That most US government officials and "opinion elites" -- like Holbrooke -- are wont to engage in wishful thinking when it comes to China. The least little gesture by China is seized upon as evidence of "China lending a hand" when the reality invariably is "China biting a hand."
John Tkacik is a senior research fellow at the Heritage Foundation.
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump is systematically dismantling the network of multilateral institutions, organizations and agreements that have helped prevent a third world war for more than 70 years. Yet many governments are twisting themselves into knots trying to downplay his actions, insisting that things are not as they seem and that even if they are, confronting the menace in the White House simply is not an option. Disagreement must be carefully disguised to avoid provoking his wrath. For the British political establishment, the convenient excuse is the need to preserve the UK’s “special relationship” with the US. Following their White House
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means