Tag Archives: PRC

Cool it with the Twitter account, Mr. President-elect

twitter-logo-bird

I know that Donald J. Trump wouldn’t ever heed this bit of advice from little ol’ me, mainly because he likely won’t see what I’m about to say … but I’ll offer it anyway.

Cease and desist with the constant tweeting, Mr. President-elect. You’re the Big Man now and you ought to pick your battles with a lot more care and caution.

A story in the Washington Post illustrates just how much damage this fellow — Trump — can do to someone who objects to some of his policy pronouncements.

The story talks about how, when he was running for president, Trump responded to a woman who challenged whether he was fair to women. Trump tweeted that the woman was a “plant” and called her an “arrogant young woman.”

Good grief, man! She was a citizen, a potential constituent making a comment about things he had said.

Here’s the story:

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/this-is-what-happens-when-donald-trump-attacks-a-private-citizen-on-twitter/ar-AAljS3f?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartandhp

Since his election, Trump has used his Twitter account with amazing result.

He told the world about how he talked with the president of Taiwan — a nation with which we have no diplomatic ties — roiling relations with the People’s Republic of China and causing potentially devastating friction between the two great nation; he called for cancellation of an order for a new Air Force One jetliner to be developed by Boeing, causing the aircraft manufacturer’s stock value to plunge; he called a union leader a “liar” after the leader challenged Trump’s assertion that he had saved more than 1,000 jobs in Indiana.

Trump, of course, defends his use of this particular social medium, saying it’s the way people communicate these days.

Uh, Mr. President-elect, you ain’t like the rest of us. You are about to possess immense power to influence global events. You are going to be the Top Dog, the Big Magilla, the Main Man. You’ll inherit a Twitter account set up for the president of the United States.

How about using it wisely? Use it with discretion. Be circumspect and careful. How about traveling along the high road at all times?

The new president ought to leave the incessant tweeting and other cheap social media banter … to shlubs like me.

No equivalency between phone call and comments about Castro

ttd_chinataiwan_hate_thumb_oo

Mike Pence knows better than to attach a false equivalency to two events.

One of them involved comments from U.S. officials about the death of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro; the other involved a phone call from the leader of a nation — with which the United States has no diplomatic relations — to the president-elect.

The vice president-elect said this morning he cannot understand why the phone call is getting all the criticism while praise to Castro is overlooked.

Please, Mr. Vice President-elect.

Donald Trump’s 10-minute conversation this past week with the president of Taiwan has smacked decades of U.S. diplomatic protocol right in the face. The People’s Republic of China has filed a formal complaint, declaring that the “one-China policy” that the United States has followed has been compromised egregiously by Trump’s congratulatory phone call from Taiwanese president Tsai Ing-wen.

Meanwhile, according to Pence, the death of Castro has drawn some muted praise of the late Cuban dictator from Obama administration officials. Even the president himself has delivered remarks that some have interpreted as complimentary.

The Taiwan-China dustup, though, is far more serious.

Taiwan’s very creation came at the end of a bloody civil war in China that the communists won. The nationalists who once governed China fled to Taiwan in 1949 to set up a new government. The United States recognized the Taiwan version of China until 1979, when it declared it would recognize the PRC.

You want a complicated relationship? There you have it.

What if China decides to retaliate against the United States by launching, say, a trade war? What if the PRC decides to yank its ambassador out of Washington? What if the PRC goads Taiwan into declaring its independence from China, giving the Chinese a pretext to launch a military attack against the nation it considers to be a “renegade province”?

There can be no equivalence attached to saying some mildly nice things about a dictator and the serious breach of protocol that the president-elect has committed.

Phone call to Taiwan may signal huge rift

taiwan

Do you want yet another example of Donald J. Trump’s ignorance about geopolitics and the relationships between governments?

Try this one: The president-elect today called the president of Taiwan in what’s believed to the first head of state discussion between leaders of the nations since 1979. Big deal? It sure is. The United States does not have diplomatic relations with Taiwan.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2016/12/02/trump-call-taiwan-risk-china-rift.html?via=desktop&source=copyurl

I believe we have the makings of a potentially huge rift between the United States and the People’s Republic of China.

So, what’s the PRC’s stake in this?

Well, Taiwan was created after a bloody civil war in China after World War II. The Kuomintang nationalist government that used to rule China fled to Taiwan after being defeated by the communists led by Mao Tse-Tung. The commies have been saying since 1949 that Taiwan is a “renegade province” and have vowed to take it back — with brute force, if need be.

The United States recognized the Taiwan government until 1979, when we decided to recognize the PRC. Given the communists’ “one-China policy,” the United States had to sever its ties with Taiwan; U.S. policy could not accommodate a second “China.”

Therein lies the crux of the issue here. Trump might not understand fully the highly complicated PRC-Taiwan relationship and how that plays into U.S. policy regarding the PRC and Taiwan.

“The Chinese leadership will see this as a highly provocative action, of historic proportions,” said Evan Medeiros, former Asia director at the White House national security council.

I don’t profess to be an expert on this relationship, but I have made five visits to Taiwan over many years. The first visit was in 1989; I returned in 1994, 1999, 2007 and 2010.

Taiwan has evolved into a modern, sophisticated, technically advanced country in the 66 years since the Kuomintang fled the mainland. It is virtually “independent” as it is, but the government dare not declare its independence openly out of concern that the PRC would retaliate with an armed invasion of the island nation.

Doesn’t the U.S. president-elect understand the ramifications of a simple phone call to Taiwan’s president, Tsai Ying-wen?

Sure, Trump savaged the Chinese during his campaign over the jobs it has taken from American workers. Therefore, the PRC leadership might feel threatened by the prospect of a Trump presidency.

This phone call, though, to the leader of a nation with which the United States has zero diplomatic relationship ratchets up concerns on the Asia mainland about whether the new U.S. president understands the meaning of diplomatic protocol.

Believe this, Mr. President-elect, geopolitical protocol matters … a lot!

Allow this dissent on ‘most qualified’ candidate for POTUS

HOUSTON, TX - DECEMBER 01: President George H.W. Bush waits on the field prior to the start of the game between the New England Patriots and the Houston Texans at Reliant Stadium on December 1, 2013 in Houston, Texas. (Photo by Scott Halleran/Getty Images)

“I can say with confidence there has never been a man or woman — not me, not Bill, nobody — more qualified than Hillary Clinton to serve as president of the United States of America.”

So said the current president, Barack H. Obama, this past week at the Democratic National Convention that nominated Clinton to run for the presidency.

I am going to quibble with the president on this one.

Hillary Clinton probably is more “qualified” on paper than either Obama or her husband to become president. Obama served in the Illinois Senate and then briefly in the U.S. Senate before being elected president in 2008. Bill Clinton served as Arkansas attorney general and as governor of his home state before being elected president in 1992.

Clinton’s wife served in the U.S. Senate and as secretary of state after serving as first lady — while taking an active role in policy decisions made during her husband’s administration.

But is Hillary Clinton the most qualified person ever to seek the office?

For my money, the honor of most qualified candidate — in my lifetime, at least — goes to a Republican.

I give you George Herbert Walker Bush.

You are welcome to argue the point with me if you wish.

But G.H.W. Bush’s pre-presidency credentials are damn impressive.

He flew combat missions in World War II as the Navy’s youngest fighter pilot. Bush then came home, moved to Texas and started an oil company. Then he served in Congress, where he represented the Houston area for a couple of terms before losing a Senate bid to Democrat Lloyd Bentsen.

That wasn’t nearly the end of his public service.

He would later be appointed to serve as head of the CIA, as special envoy to the People’s Republic of China, as chairman of the Republican National Committee, as ambassador to the United Nations — and then he served as two vice president for two terms during Ronald Reagan’s administration.

I get that President Obama wants to cast his party’s nominee in the best possible light. Given that she’s running against someone — Donald J. Trump — who is likely the least qualified candidate for president in U.S. history, the president perhaps can be excused for a bit of embellishment.

But a great man is still with us.

Sure, President Bush lost his bid for re-election to Bill Clinton. That, though, must not diminish the myriad contributions he made in service to our beloved country.

Note to Kim Jong Un: Study up on ‘MAD’ doctrine

getty_2012_04_13_kimjongun_lede_

I have used this blog on occasion to question North Korea’s fruitcake/dictator’s sanity on judgment, but not — necessarily — his intelligence.

Still, someone in Pyongyang needs to take the young man aside and explain the MAD doctrine to him.

The letters “MAD” comprise an acronym, meaning “mutually assured destruction.”

The United States and the Soviet Union understood its implications.

If one country were to launch a nuclear strike against the other — or its allies — then all hell would break loose. Both sides would be destroyed. Gone! Obliterated.

Now, though, Kim Jong Un says he won’t use nukes unless his country’s sovereignty is threatened.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news-other-foreign-policy/279172-kim-jong-un-north-korea-ready-to-improve

Even that caveat makes any thought using nukes, well, rather MAD … don’t you think?

It’s important to note that he is the lone leader of a nuclear state that keeps referencing the potential use of nukes. Does the People’s Republic of China say anything about it? How about the United States? Or Russia?

Oh, wait! I almost forgot! Presumed GOP presidential nominee Donald J. Trump has said he wouldn’t oppose Japan or South Korea developing nuclear arsenals as a hedge against North Korea.

That, too, is MAD.

It’s simply in Kim Jong Un’s best interest — really and truly — to consider the implications of what MAD means.

 

Paranoia strikes deep in North Korea

north-korea-to-kick-off-nuclear-armageddon-probably-not-1414440285

Kim Jong Un must be clinically paranoid.

One of the North Korean strongman/boy’s top hands has declared that if the United States stops its military exercises with South Korea that the North Koreans will end their nuclear tests.

The commies are afraid of a first strike by the South Koreans or, perhaps, by the United States.

A little history should be offered up here. So, I will.

In 1950, the communists started the Korean War by invading South Korea. The United Nations responded with a military counterattack. The UN force was led by Americans. They drove the communists out of South Korea, and then had to face troops from the People’s Republic of China who came to Pyongyang’s rescue.

The fighting stopped in 1953. The combatants signed a cease-fire. There is no peace treaty.

The two nations — South and North Korea — are technically still at war.

The U.S.-South Korean exercises have been undertaken for decades as a defensive measure against North Korea’s demonstrated willingness to start a war.

And to think that the North Koreans view their nuclear program as a deterrent.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/277403-north-korean-official-well-stop-nuclear-tests-if-us-halts-military

I don’t know whether to laugh, scream or laugh some more.

I get that it’s not funny, except that Kim Jong Un has assumed a ridiculous posture if the believes South Korea or the United States is going to launch a first strike against this tinhorn dictator.

 

About those human rights abuses …

BBqKETv

U.S. foreign policy abounds with hypocrisy.

We support some nations while opposing others, citing issues in those nations we oppose that are commonplace in the nations with which we are friendly.

I bring to you … Cuba.

President Barack Obama is visiting the island nation, becoming the first U.S. president to set foot in Cuba since Calvin Coolidge.

His foes back home keep yammering about the human rights abuses that the communists in Havana are guilty of committing. Why, we can’t allow Americans to travel freely there; we can’t commence trade with Cuba; we can’t let our guard down.

What’s the deal, then, with other nations with which we have reasonably healthy relationships?

The People’s Republic of China? Saudi Arabia? Egypt? Vietnam?

Sure, we have differences with many nations around he world, including those I’ve just mentioned.

But the communists who run governments in China and Vietnam treat their citizens badly whenever they speak out against their leaders. The Saudis refuse to grant full rights of citizenship to roughly half of their citizenry; I refer, of course, to women. What’s more, the Saudis are known to execute criminals in public.

My point is simply this: Let’s stop the griping about Cuba’s human rights record, suggesting that it’s a disqualifier for U.S.-Cuba relations. Yes, let’s keep the pressure on Cuba to do better.

We can bring the change we want there by engaging them fully.

 

Complicated relationship may get really testy

460x

The world is full of complicated bilateral relationships: Greece and Turkey, India and Pakistan, Israel and Egypt.

A pair of nations, though, may have witnessed an event that makes their stunningly complex relationship even more so.

Taiwan has just elected its first female president, Tsai Ing-wen. It’s not her gender that complicates matters. It’s her longstanding support for something that sends government officials in the People’s Republic of China into orbit: Taiwanese independence.

Tsai leads the Democratic Peoples Party, which long has advocated that Taiwan declare its independence from the PRC.

However, there’s this tiny problem (actually, it’s huge). China considers Taiwan to be a “renegade province” that belongs to the mainland government, the communists who took over the country in a bloody civil war right after World War II.

The Kuomintang, which governed China, fled to Taiwan in 1949 and set up a new government.

For more than six decades, China has declared it wanted Taiwan back. Meanwhile, Taiwan grew into a powerhouse nation all on its own, independent of China.

Tsai’s victory isn’t likely to produce a declaration of independence in the next week, month or perhaps even a year from now.

However, it strains to the max a relationship that had been showing signs of thawing in recent years.

Allow me a bit of personal privilege here.

I’ve visited Taiwan five times as a journalist, dating back to 1989. I returned in 1994, 1999, 2007 and 2010. I have seen a country that has grown tremendously just since my first visit.

Taiwan had functioned under martial law until 1989. The ruling party felt it necessary to impose strict curfews and restrictions on its citizens, given the tremendous threat of violence posed by the giant neighbor on the other side of the Taiwan Strait.

The island has functioned famously since martial law was lifted.

But the threat of military action persists. The Taiwanese officials I have visited over many years have told me they take those threats seriously and have built a muscular military apparatus quite capable of inflicting damage on any nation in the world. The Taiwanese also have a defense pact with another significant nation: the United States of America, which has pledged to come to Taiwan’s defense in the event of war with, um, the PRC.

President-elect Tsai isn’t likely to do anything rash. At least that’s my hope.

Taiwan already is shut out of virtually all international associations: the United Nations evicted Taiwan in 1971 when it admitted the PRC; the United States severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan when it recognized the PRC; the World Health Organization bans Taiwan’s participation.

The international community follows what’s called a “one-China policy,” meaning that the only “China” it recognizes is the big one, the PRC.

That’s all fine, except that Taiwan is, well, Taiwan. Most of its 24 million residents were born on the island and they have diminishing links with the mainland.

Yes, Taiwanese still speak Chinese. Their names look and sound Chinese. However, the country has developed into an entity that — for all intents — is independent already from China.

The problem remains, though, that it cannot declare officially its independence as long as those big, bad commies on the mainland keep threatening military action.

As China has shown over many years, it doesn’t like being lectured by other nations about how to conduct its affairs.

You want complicated? This Taiwan-China thing goes beyond my understanding of the word.

Gov. Abbott sheds the dogma … and heads to Cuba

cuba

Texas Gov. Greg Abbott is using his office the right way while steering away from some of the dogma we’ve been hearing from those in his party about a particular issue.

Abbott is going to Cuba next week on a mission to promote Texas-Cuba trade.

Abbott is a proud Republican. But unlike some of his GOP brethren, he is putting common sense and what I call “enlightened self-interest” ahead of posturing.

Some prominent Republican politicians — namely Texan Ted Cruz and Floridian Marco Rubio, who are running for president — have called the re-establishment of relations with Cuba virtually a pact with Satan himself. These two Cuban-Americans still seem to fear the island nation that is governed by dedicated communists.

Why, how can President Obama grant those commies any favors while they still have one of the world’s worst human-rights records? That’s part of the mantra we’ve heard from some on the far right about this sensible diplomatic initiative.

Gov. Abbott often has joined some on the far right on a whole host of topics with which to criticize the president.

Not this time. Good for him. Better still, good for the state he governs.

The Texas Tribune’s Aman Batheja reports: “Texas was once a leading exporter to Cuba in a quiet partnership that helped produce hundreds of jobs and millions in revenue for the Lone Star State. Even following the implementation of the U.S. trade embargo more than 50 years ago, the relationship continued to thrive for decades.”

That stopped in the early 1960s when the United States ended all relations with Cuba in the wake of Fidel Castro’s takeover of the island nation’s government. The deep freeze in U.S.-Cuba relations lasted through eight American presidencies; meanwhile, Fidel Castro and his brother, Raul, have remained in power.

President Obama made the right call to restore relations. The Cold War is over. Cuba presents no threat to the United States. It’s still dirt poor. Yes, it’s still run by communists, but Cuba is far less of a threat to U.S. interests than, say, the People’s Republic of China, a nation with which we’ve had relations since 1978.

Texas has a lot of goods and commodities it can sell to Cuban interests. Let me think … what can we sell them from, oh, this part of the state? Oh, how about some beef, or maybe cotton for starters?

Travel safely, governor.

 

While we looked the other way, two enemies meet

the-leaders-of-china-and-taiwan-just-had-their-first-meeting-since-1949

The world has been fixated on hot spots such as the Middle East, Africa and, to a lesser degree, Europe.

But while most of us were looking the other way, the leaders of two countries met, shook hands and talked to each other like neighbors rather than bitter political enemies.

China’s president, Xi Jinping, met with Taiwan’s president, Ma Ying-jeou. Why is this a big deal? It’s the first meeting between the nation’s heads of state since 1949, when Taiwan broke away from “Red China” and formed a new nation on an island just a few miles off the Chinese coast.

China doesn’t recognize Taiwan as an independent nation. It still considers the thriving island nation as a renegade province and has, over the decades, vowed to retake Taiwan.

Good luck with that.

Leaders meet for first time

I’ll stipulate here that I’ve visited Taiwan five times dating back to 1989. I’ve heard the Taiwanese side of the 65-year-old dispute. I haven’t heard the People’s Republic of China’s side of it.

The PRC launched a civil war after World War II. It sought to overthrow the government of Chiang kai-Shek. It succeeded in 1949. Chiang set up shop in Taiwan and proceeded to build a thriving nation that for decades operated under martial law; Taiwan lifted martial law in 1989 and it has become a bastion of freedom and democratic rule.

A lot has happened in Taiwan, as much has taken place in China.

At this moment, the vast majority of Taiwanese are natives of the island, with little direct tie to the mainland. The nation has operated as a de facto independent state, but without the perks that accompany sovereignty, such as membership in world organizations such as the United Nations or the World Health Organization.

“Today marks a new chapter in the cross-strait relationship,” Xi told journalists. “The separation of families on both sides of the Taiwan strait has caused deep pain and regrets to countless families.”

Ma, though, faces opposition in Taiwan to the meeting. He has sought to build closer ties with China. Opposition parties, such as the Democratic Progressive Party, want to declare formal independence.

The PRC is unlikely, so many years later, to reacquire Taiwan. For its part, Taiwan is likely to continue to thrive independently of the PRC. It’s a curious and deeply complicated relationship that the two nations are beginning to form.

My hope is that they keep talking. It is better to talk to your adversaries than to fight with them. Given the stakes involved in the event of all-out war — and the fact that the United States of America maintains a defense pact with Taiwan — the nations’ leaders need to keep the lines of communication wide open.

The meeting the other day is a start.