As "engagement" strengthens in North America, is it weakening in Eurasia?

Throughout the first Cold War, the peoples and nations who were most adamant about ending Soviet Communism tended to be those who had the most experience in dealing with it. Soviet refugees, occupied nations, and badly disillusioned socialists formed the unexpected core of anti-Communism, and kept it going during its darkest hour (the 1970s). A generation earlier, it was Western Europe that all but begged the United States to lead the anti-Communist alliance that would become NATO. The situation with Communist China is, obviously, different, but today I saw echoes of the same pattern on the world stage.

First, the bad news: North America seems to have all but capitulated. Compounding the bad news from Canada, President Bush has decided to take Beijing's Korean colony off the list of terrorist sponsors (CNN, NRO - The Corner, Washington Post, Washington Times), despite the fact that the Stalinist North said nothing of substance about its uranium enrichment program (which started this whole thing back in 2002), and of course, there was no movement on the issue of Japanese and South Korean abductees (One Free Korea). Making matters worse, this is all based on information that Kim Jong-il sent not to the United States, but to Communist China (BBC and Washington Times). It is an appalling end to a weak policy from the President.

Not that the United States and Canada are alone on this - Taiwan has begun internalizing the Communists' Falun Gong War (Between Heaven and Earth) - but as the leader of the free world, the U.S. in particular should be immune to this sort of thing. In fact, the strength of ordinary Americans themselves was enough to stop the Communists' attempts at intimidation in New York City (Epoch Times); one can only shudder to think what might have happened had Mayor Bloomberg taken the Tainan approach.

Absent such strength on the global stage, the cadres are continuing their advance. They are now trying to apply revisionist history to Darfur (Washington Times), turning the Olympics into a weapon for "smashing the separatist plot of the Dalai Lama clique" (BBC and the Epoch Times).

Yet with all of this good news, the cadres may face trouble in their closest and most geopolitically profitable relationship - the one with Russia. After years of being Communist China's largest arms supplier, the Russian government is starting to wonder if it is "supplying weapons to an army that may turn against it tomorrow."

No military has been closer to Beijing than the one based in Moscow, yet now, as Communist China is starting to reverse engineer the weapons they have imported (and even export their version to other nations, like Pakistan), Moscow is getting skittish. Russia isn't alone either; several Asian neighbors of Communist China have responded to Beijing's charm offensive by demanding to know why the United States hasn't stopped it (Daniel Twining in the Weekly Standard):

Asian leaders broadly seek closer relations with Washington, scold their U.S. counterparts for neglecting the region, are deeply insecure about any hint of an American pullback, and increasingly identify democratic political values as the basis for closer cooperation with America and each other.

Once again, the closer one is to the Communist regime, the more one is worried.

The parallels to the first Cold War here, in particular the pre-NATO era, is striking. Once again, front-line nations looking eerily across the divide at a rising tyranny are looking to a somewhat indifferent United States for help. As for Russia, its journey will be much longer, and may never come to fruition, but if it does, it would deal a hammer-blow to the Communists' geopolitical objectives.

Either way, we are once again seeing that those with the most exposure to Communism (in this case, the Chinese version) are the most worried about it (that especially applies to the Chinese people themselves - Boycott 2008 and Washington Post - even as the outside world misses it - Newsweek). As with the Soviet Communists before them, the Chinese Communists may very well sow the seeds of their own destruction not by how they treat their enemies, but their friends and neighbors.

Why Zimbabwe matters

If there is one place that has ridden the Zeitgeist in the early 21st century, it is Africa. From the bleeding of Darfur to the crippling weight of debt burdens built by kleptocratic dictators, the continent's suffering has been a literal cause celebre for years. Yet now, at a time when one African nation in particular (Zimbabwe) needs it more than any other, there is a shocking and painful silence. I would humbly submit, however, that Zimbabwe is more important than Sudan, the Congo, or anywhere else on the African continent.

For those unaware, this has come to a head last month because, for the first time since a constitutional referendum eight years ago, Zimbabwe dictator Robert Mugabe lost control of the election process, and his party was actually defeated in Parliament. It is widely believed that he finished second in the presidential election as well, although it's in dispute whether a run-off is required. At first, it appeared Mugabe might actually step aside. Now, it's becoming clearer he is playing for time (BBC) as he arrests journalists (Committee to Protect Journalists), ransacks the offices of the opposition Movement for Democratic Change (Guardian, UK), and hoping that the world will become exhausted and relent before he does.

So why does this matter? Why is Zimbabwe so important? Why must Robert Mugabe go?

Mugabe does not survive because of the support of his people. He has already stolen two elections this decade, and clearly has his eye on a third. The force that keeps him in power is his foreign ally - the only true friend he has - Communist China.

I've explained before what Zimbabwe means to the Communists, but suffice to say, Robert Mugabe is Exhibit No. 1 to terrorists and tyrants everywhere of just what Communist China can do for them. Beijing has helped Mugabe build up his military, block opposition radio transmissions, and take advantage of oceans of "investment" money. In exchange, the Communists get two things: the best of the Zimbabwean economy, and an enthusiastic salesman for them around the world (all is discussed in detail in the above link).

Should Mugabe survive, he will remain a symbol to all other tyrants that the West can be resisted, especially with the aid of the Chinese Communist Party. All other anti-American thugs - including many of the enemies we face in the War on Terror (or as I call it, the Wahhabist-Ba'athist-Khomeinist War) - will take notice, and be drawn even further into Communist China's orbit. This holds especially true of the Khomeinist mullahs who imprison the Iranian people and Kim Jong-il.

From the narrow perspective of the War on Terror (WBK War), Zimbabwe is peripheral. From the broader perspective - one that recognizes we are in fact in a nearly two-decade long cold war with Communist China - Zimbabwe is a central battleground. We must give it the importance it deserves.

Does that require military action? I don't believe so, at least not yet. However, we must make clear a few things. First of all, that we will honor the true election results - meaning that if Mugabe succeeds in stealing another election, we will recognize only Morgan Tsvingirai as the true leader of Zimbabwe. Second, we should also make clear to the rest of Africa that we expect them to follow suit (support for Tsvingirai and the MDC could be an excellent condition for the debt relief that so many of these nations want and need). Finally, if the MDC needs help, we should come to its aid as we came to the aid of Solidarity in the 1980s and the Serbian opposition to Slobodan Milosevic in the 1990s.

If we do this, can we also send a message of our own - a message to every other tyrant who relies on Communist China to survive: namely, that we will do whatever we can to help their own people take their country back. However, we must not only do this for Communist China's allies and satellites; we must do it for China itself. Without the CCP, tyranny around the world would suffer a crushing blow, one from which several tyrants - including Mugabe, if he still lives, or his successor, if he doesn't - would not recover.

Victory in the War on Terror, and the larger Cold War of which it is a part, cannot be achieved in Harare, or Tehran, or Baghdad, or Kandahar, or even in the mountains of western Pakistan. Victory will come - and can only come - in Beijing. America and her allies will never be secure until China is free - and that day will be much closer if we can help the people of Zimbabwe free themselves from their Communist-supported tyrant.

Eight years on . . .

On April 5, 2000, I sent an email with all of the news from Communist China that I could find on the internet. Twelve people received that message. If memory serves, it rose to about 20 by the time the next Update would be sent a week later.

It's been a dramatic eight years, for me, for my country, and for this cause. Yet somehow, I am still here, drawn to the cause of the Chinese people and their struggle for freedom.

I could give several reasons why: the horrifying treatment of the Chinese people by their Communist rulers, the arms deals with terrorist regimes, the anti-American ambitions of Beijing, the gutsy resistance of the Taiwanese people (now joined, and perhaps replaced, by the people of southern Korea). In the end, however, they all wrap into one -because the fate of the planet is in the hands of the Chinese people.

The day will come when the Communist regime falls, and once China enters the free world, its resources and its resourceful people all but ensure it will lead that free world within one or two generations. The question is this: how will it happen? Germany and Japan, after all, went from irridentist tyrannies to democratic models in six decades - but would anyone want a repeat of those sixty years? By constrast, Eastern Europe was liberated with only two shots fired (into the heads of the Ceaucescus).

If we can help the Chinese people liberate themselves, it can be done without bloodshed, and China can be the model for every tyranny left on earth whose people yearn to be free. If it takes a war, it will likely be the bloodiest the world has ever seen.

It is that war and carnage that those of us who support the Chinese democracy movement from outside are desperate to prevent. Thus, we are not only trying to help the Chinese people, but all the world's peoples. As Joshua Lawrence Chamberlain (or Michael Shaara) put it: "in the end, we're fighting for each other."

So I will go on fighting - through the Olympics, through the anniversaries (Tibet's 50th, East Turkestan's 60th, and Tiananmen's 20th are next year), through the various change in deck chair on the Zhongnanhai Titanic - and I will not rest - in fact, I cannot rest - until China is free.

"Almost all enemies of the United States are China's friends"

For years, I have tried to explain why Communist China has armed, funded, or otherwise supported nearly every anti-American terrorist regime on Earth (Iran, al Qaeda, Saddam Hussein, the Taliban, Stalinist North Korea, etc.). Sadly, too many are still willing to ignore reality, or explain it away as some business deal that has nothing to do with geopolitics.

They might want to look at Yuan Peng, of the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, said to the Communist-run media (Worldwide Standard):

"'Almost all enemies' of U.S. 'are China's friends'" says the report from East-Asia-Intel.com:

An official of the Chinese government last week confirmed that Beijing is supporting U.S. enemies around the world.

Yuan Peng, director of the Institute of American Studies, part of the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, said that "in the world, almost all enemies of the United States are China's friends."

The rare admission confirms the view of some critics who say China's arms sales to
rogue states like Iran, Syria and North Korea are based on a deliberate strategy of indirectly confronting the United States.

Peng's institute, the CICIR, is an entity of the Ministry of State Security, China's main intelligence service. His remarks were included in a state-run media report.

Peng said long-term strategic stability between the U.S. and China "still remain[s] doubtful."

Let this be a reminder to all - America will never be secure until China is free.

Ignorant Comment of the Day: What was Stanley Kurtz thinking?

Stanley Kurtz's latest column on Stalinist North Korea (National Review Online) is quite unique; in the column, he managed to be dazzlingly brilliant and shockingly ignorant at the same time and with the same words. That's hard to do.

First, I'll dispatch with the brilliant part: Kurtz is one of the very few pundits who has never really signed on to the six-party nuclear talks, and now that Stalinist North Korea's nuclear dalliance with Syria is an open secret, he aims squarely - and correctly - at the Bush Administration for its weakness:

President Bush did in fact adopt the Democrats’ North Korea policy. And now, within a year, that Democratic policy has failed. Almost immediately after North Korea’s nuclear test on October 9, 2006, President Bush warned that “the transfer of nuclear weapons or material by North Korea to states or non-state entities would be considered a grave threat to the United States and we would hold North Korea fully accountable.” Having deployed the stick, at the behest of conservative hawks, the president then offered the carrot of economic aid and promises of security in return for disarmament . . . The problem is that a combination of carrots and sticks has not stopped Kim Jong Il from handing Syria extensive nuclear technology, and perhaps even fissile material.

Indeed, it hasn't, just like many of us said it wouldn't.

Kurtz then goes on to detail just how damaging to American deterrence this is, how both the Administration and its critics are trying to downplay the SNK-Syria connection in the hope it goes away, and then ends with an ominous (but not necessarily inaccurate) prediction: "Based on current trends, in the decade ahead, a nuclear attack on the United States seems at least as likely as not." The piece is brilliantly and cogently written for its limited scope. However, it is exactly the limitation in scope that also makes the piece completely useless.

Why do I say that? Simple, in all of Kurtz's 2,200+ words on Stalinist North Korea, the number of times he mentioned Communist China was - exactly - zero. Not one reference to the regime that has propped up North Korea for almost sixty years; no mention of the Communist-run Bank of China's possible role in helping the Stalinists launder money for its nuclear program or Communist regime's sale of plutonium making, uranium enriching tributyl phosphate; and no discussion of Communist China's history of running interference for its Stalinist ally during the six-party talks.

Kurtz's glaring omission become all the more shocking when one finds his comments about the similarities between SNK today and Cuba of 1962:

The answer, says Allison, is a direct and unambiguous warning to Kim Jong Il modeled on President Kennedy’s statements during the Cuban Missile Crisis. As Kennedy warned Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev that any nuclear missile launched from Cuba would be regarded as an attack by the Soviet Union, President Bush needs to unambiguously promise retaliation for any nuclear explosion of North Korean origin on American soil. According to Allison, America will only be safe if Kim feels “in his gut” that North Korea will be held directly responsible for nuclear terror — even if the blast results from material passed through a chain of rogue states and only eventually into terrorist hands. On the other hand, if Kim feels as though he can escape detection as the ultimate source of a terrorist nuclear weapon, or if Kim believes that he will not be held directly responsible for his place in a long and complex chain of nuclear proliferation, the path is open to likely nuclear terror on American soil within the next decade.

The ignorance is jaw-dropping.

Contrary to Kurtz's assertion (I know he quotes Harvard professor Graham Allison here, but it's pretty clear he agrees with him), Kim Jong-il has never been in the Krushchev role during this crisis; he's in the Castro role. Kim is not acting on his own, he is acting in concert with his de facto colonial masters. Any threat against him is utterly useless for this reason.

It is not Kim Jong-il who must face the threat of annihilation by counter-strike, it's the Communist Chinese regime that props him up. They are in the Krushchev role, not Kim; they are the source of America's proliferation worries. In fact, it is Communist China, not its Stalinist puppet, that killed off non-proliferation. So long as learned men like Stanley Kurtz continue to ignore this fundamental fact, they will miss the forest for the trees, and not only will nuclear proliferation not be stopped, it will likely be accelerated, due to the simple fact that the true culprit continues to act unnoticed, let alone unchecked.

Stanley Kurtz is a brilliant writer and thinker, one of the very few outside of the anti-Communist community that I respect. Therefore, I can only ask (in the hope he responds): what was he thinking?

Cross-posted to the right-wing liberal

A shortage of a crucial military asset, the F-22

There's an urgent issue I've been following for some time, and since there is mainly silence on this problem, I've decided to take up the cause myself.

America may not have enough modern fighter planes to ensure its defense during the coming years unless smart people make their voices heard soon. The Air Force believes we need 381 F-22 Raptor stealth fighters to provide air dominance for defending America and enabling its military forces. So far, the Pentagon and Congress have only approved funding for 183 Raptors--less than half of the number requested.

If no additional acquisitions are approved before the F-22 assembly line shuts down, the U.S. will be gambling with its ability to control the skies, trading a more secure future for a big question mark. It's that simple. Meanwhile, China continues to make substantial gains in air and space capabilities, building up for a future showdown. Weakening the U.S. force makes that showdown all the more likely. USAF Chief of Staff Moseley characterizes China's growing air power as "very, very capable." China's new J-10 fighter is just one piece of the modern PLA air force.

I've started a blog and information site about saving the F-22. The action items include a petition for more Raptors as well as a contact form to request critical Air Force funding. I hope you'll join me in this endeavor and help keep the free world strong.

China 'arms surge' supports terrorists in Iraq and Afghanistan

by Curry Kenworthy

Insurgents fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan will be happy to know that more help is on the way--as part of its 'Cold War II' strategy against the U.S. and its allies, China's Communist government is apparently working with Iran to arm terrorists.

According to a June 15 report by Bill Gertz in the Washington Times, intelligence indicates that China is selling large quantities of small arms and weapons to Iran for use in the Iraq insurgency as well as for the Taliban in Afghanistan. Not only that, but China is even helping to deliver the weapons to ensure that they reach their destinations successfully.

Need a better gun? Parts for an IED? An anti-aircraft missile, perhaps? Not to worry, Uncle Hu's got it all covered. Best of all, that includes delivery.

The Gertz report mentioned small arms, ammunition, sniper rifles, RPGs, and components for roadside bombs, as well as previously-reported HN-5 missiles. Gertz also states that the U.S. administration has been trying to hush or downplay this intelligence to maintain the image of China's government as a partner.

Too bad America is listening to the engagement crowd. Communist China is 'engaging' U.S. forces right now through the insurgents in Iraq and Afghanistan, and it has plans to 'engage' the U.S. much more directly in future conflict, as we will continue to show at the China e-Lobby.

News of the (longer than anticipated) Weekend (May 18-21)

"The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is undergoing its worst crisis of confidence since the Tiananmen Square crackdown 18 years ago": Those were the words of Willy Lam (China Brief via Uyghur American Association), in describing the situation faced by the regime and its leader, Hu Jintao, who has rejected every call for political reform in favor of "Maoist-era ideological campaigns to revive the party's fortunes." Lam is not impressed, and neither are several cadres themselves (who have been rebuked by Hu for their efforts to take up Zhao Ziyang's torch). Meanwhile, another party member quits in disgust (Sound of Hope Radio via Epoch Times).

Enlightened Comment of the Day: James Mann didn't use the term Cold War II, but he described it pretty well in the Washington Post. Hugo Restall (Far Eastern Economic Review via Taiwan Security Research) gets an honorable mention for his piece focusing on the East Asia theatre.

Hong Kong's Communist lackeys become Tiananmen deniers: Ma Lik, leader of Hong Kong's pro-Communist political party, channeled his inner Bobby Fletcher, opining that "The crackdown on the pro-democracy movement in Tiananmen Square was not a massacre and Hong Kong is not ready for universal suffrage because many people are not patriotic enough and do not love the Communist Party" (Asia News). The Tiananmen Mothers group had some harsh words for Ma (Asia News). Meanwhile, the Legislative Council, which is only partially elected and is dominated by lackeys like Ma, shot down an effort to condemn the bloody actions of June 4, 1989 (Asia News). One country, one-and-a-half systems rolls on.

Arrests: Zhou Li, who offered legal help to land seizure victims, was jailed about a week ago (Epoch Times); attorney Guo Feixiong, who has been jailed for weeks, was indicted on Tuesday (Epoch Times); Hao Wenzhong, an appellant (petitioner) who has been jailed 200 times was sent to a labor camp (Epoch Times); Hu Jia and his wife are under house arrest for "endangering national security" (Washington Post).

Organ harvesting news: Toronto doctor Gerry Koffman calls Communist China's organ harvesting policy "a Holocaust" (Epoch Times, see also Between Heaven and Earth); a Taiwanese physician says the Communist "regulations" on transplants are less than meets the eye (Epoch Times).

Communist corruption reaches into racing: The cadres' Formula One track chief and two assistants are bounced for thievery (BBC).

Bird flu is back: The cadres are admitting to an outbreak in Yiyang, Hunan (BBC); obviously, we have no idea what other areas are suffering in Communist-imposed silence.

Even Li Ka-Shing thinks the Communist stock market is in trouble, and when the leading pro-Communist tycoon says to be worried, don't walk - run, and take your money with you (Taiwan Central News Agency via Epoch Times).

Communist China to launch moon orbiter this year: The cadres' announcement is part of their plan to put a taikonaut on the moon in fifteen years (Washington Times).

Communists impose blackout on construction disaster: The Beijing site has seen "many ambulances, fire trucks and more than ten police vehicles" (Epoch Times), but no one from the press is allowed to see it.

Yet another land seizure: This one takes place in Hangzhou, Zhejiang (Epoch Times).

On the state of the workers in the workers' state: Heide B. Malhotra (Epoch Times) examines the plight of migrant workers.

East Turkestan news: As leading Uighurs meet in The Hague (UAA), Communist China prepares its military to crush any move to restoring independence in the occupied nation (China Brief via UAA).

Communist China not reacting well to Olympic critics: Communist Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi insisted the efforts of a "handful of people" (BBC) to organize a boycott of the Games "will fall," but that isn't stopping us from trying (Boycott 2008, Epoch Times, and Washington Times).

Now Communist poison has tainted toothpaste: The same poison that turned cough medicine into a deadly killer has been found in Communist exports of toothpaste, leading Small Dead Animals to make a blunt yet necessary request - "Close the borders to this stuff. Now, please." Of course, the foodstuff poisons are still reverberating (International Herald Tribune, Steve Janke, and Washington Post via UAA).

Japan's effort to bolster its defense blocked by pro-"engagement" Americans: Japan has requested fifty F-22 jet fighter-bombers from the United States, however, the arms sales is being blocked by "Pro-China officials in the White House and Pentagon" (Bill Gertz, Washington Times). The lead obstacle is none other than Dennis Wilder, who has a history of making moves in favor of "engagement" and hoping no one notices.

Communists plan missiles "to hit US warships in Asia": The cadres want "an infrared detection system for its medium-range Dongfeng-21 missiles so they can pinpoint warships" (Agence France Presse via TSR) - in particular America carrier.

More on Communist China and the United States: Paul Heer, a "China specialist" (Washington Times) at the CIA, move up to the National Intelligence Council (United Press Int'l via Washington Times) - given the CIA record on Communist China, the jury is certainly out on Mr. Heer. Meanwhile, American union leaders visit Beijing's "union" cadres (BBC); Coca-Cola sees no evil (BBC); and Communist China nudges its currency as American negotiators arrive (BBC and Washington Post via MSNBC).

The Canada file: Protesters in Queen's Park call for an end to Communist rule in China (Toronto Sun); Paul Jackosn (Calgary Sun) approves of Foreign Minister Peter MacKay's support for Taiwan; Vancouver's battle with a Falun Gong demonstration continues (Epoch Times); and Cyril Doll (Western Standard) sounds the alarm on Communist China's attempted infiltration into Saskatchewan's rare-earth metal stash (full disclosure: yours truly is quoted in the piece).

More on Communist China and the rest of the world: Taiwan accuses Communist China of buying off Senegal (AFP via TSR); Communist China and Kazakhstan's efforts at rapprochement get all wet, literally (China Brief via UAA); the Communist regime buys a 10% stake in Blackstone (BBC); concern over Rupert Murdoch, Communist China, and the Wall Street Journal grows (Boycott 2008); a Communist container conducts a naval hit-and-run with a South Korean ship (Radio Free Asia via Epoch Times); and the cadres squeeze their Stalinist North Korean allies to cut out the drug trade - in Communist China (Daily NK).

Beijing surrender news: California Congressman Ed Royce rips the "deal" (Washington Times); One Free Korea notes and approves (of Royce). U.S. envoy Christopher Hill may soon visit Stalinist North Korea again (Washington Times); South Korea is, well, South Korea (Daily NK and UPI via Washington Times).

News of the Day (May 16)

Duncan Hunter sounds the alarm on Communist threat: He who must be President spoke on the subject during last night's Republican presidential debate (Bloggers for Hunter).

Enlightened Comment of the Day: Ellen Bork of the American Enterprise Institute explains and then completely demolishes the "engagement" rationale (Front Page Mag).

Wall Street Journal's Beijing office opposes Murdoch takeover bid: The newsroom "had written a letter to the Dow Jones board expressing fear that under Mr Murdoch's leadership writers would be pressured to soften their reporting on China" (London Telegraph). They join a growing number of critics concerned over the fate of the Journal's coverage on the Communist regime should Murdoch gain control.

Communist China calls its foray into Africa "for the benefit of the African people": Communist Premier Wen Jiabao made this statement during a meeting of the African Development Bank, which just happened to take place in Shanghai (BBC). Among the banks advisers is none other than former Canadian Prime Minister and leading "engagement" supporter Paul Martin (Globe and Mail).

Other Canadian news: A group of Falun Gong practitioners in Ottawa protested outside the Russian Embassy in reaction to the Putinist regime's deportation of Gao Chunman (Epoch Times).

More on Communist China and the rest of the world: Australia's Deputy Prime Minister calls on the Communist regime to curb its greenhouse gas emissions (AAP via Epoch Times), while the country's opposition leader plans a meeting with the Dalai Lama (AAP via Epoch Times). A meeting of European activist groups discusses Communist China's human rights abuses as the 2008 Olympics approach (Epoch Times). Alfred Tella discusses the damage done by Communist China's counterfeit exports (Washington Times).

Beijing surrender news: The United States is making clear no aid will come to the Stalinists unless they make good on their vague promises in the February "agreement" (United Press International via Washington Times); sadly, dovish South Korea has no such concerns (UPI via Washington Times).

More news from "another China province": Richard Halloran (Washington Times) details the decay of the Stalinist regime (don't be confused by the title; there is actually little discussion of SNK "dissent").

News of the Day (March 23)

Communist China's control of information includes foreign press and jailing dissidents: In the face of what the Washington Post called "radical economic and social changes over the past two decades," the Communists have kept their iron grip on power in place in no small part through their control of information. The Post has the details on the regime-run television "news." Zhou Huiying (Central News Agency via Epoch Times) notes that it such control extends to media as well, "Only certain media agencies were invited, and all questions had to be submitted and given permission." Of course, anyone who tries to write about the truth, such as Zhang Jianhong, is sent to prison (Epoch Times).

More on human rights abuses in Communist China: Falun Gong practitioners are sent to labor camps (Between Heaven and Earth). Zhang Fengchun was forced to escape Communist China after offending his local Communist boss; he tells his story to the second convention of the China Social Democratic Party (Epoch Times).

Top U.S. military commander visits Beijing: General Peter Pace, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for a "more transparent" (BBC) Communist military, hears a Communist proposal for closer military ties (National Review Online - The Tank), and disappoints Michael Goldfarb (Worldwide Standard).

India gets more attention: Both the United States (Washington Times) and Canada (Epoch Times) are finding the largest democracy on earth to be quite appealing when compared to Communist China.

Beijing surrender news: U.S. envoy Christopher Hill opines that Stalinist North Korea will return to talks once it "received the funds it is demanding" (BBC); South Korea is back in full dovish mode (BBC); and Daily NK ponders the effect of all this on the upcoming South Korean elections (hint: it's not good).

More (and more germane) comment on Afghanistan

When I originally posted on Afghanistan two days ago, it was for two purposes: to highlight how the inability of many to see the threat from Communist China was coloring opinions of the war, and to explain why I thought a Democratic president will end that war prematurely. Unfortunately, it wasn't until after I posted it that I realized how long the post was, and more importantly, the post's imbalance between the two purposes. I stand by what I wrote, but I'm not sure it is as germane to this blog as to the others I am posting. Additionally, I thought I should also go into further detail as to the effect of the Afghanistan battle on Cold War II (similar to my earlier posts on Iraq, Iran, Syria, and North Korea). So here goes.

I have written extensively on Communist China's ties to terrorist states (see the links in the paragraph above), and I have commented on Communist China's ties to al Qaeda and the Taliban (the most extensive link is here). However, few seem to notice, let alone hold Communist China to account, even today. This has led to major errors in examining the situation in Afghanistan - and those errors are certainly bipartisan.

The biggest mistake that has evolved from the "engagement" mentality on Communist China is the prevailing view of Pakistan. Nearly every analysis I have seen of Pakistan's recent coziness with the Taliban (and the subsequent boost to al Qaeda) has ignored Pakistan's nearly six-decade alliance with Communist China. For anyone who thinks the Communists were not interested in using Pakistan to thwart our objectives, take a look at this link again); the Communists all but ordered Pakistan not to allow American troops on its soil. Had Pakistan listened, it would have been almost impossible to bring American troops into Afghanistan.

Communist China also made abundantly clear, numerous times, that it had no desire to see either American troops or a pro-American government in Afghanistan (Willy Lam, CNN). That its longtime ally (and Afghanistan's neighbor) would see the Taliban in a very different light then we do should surprise no one.

The second, and equally dangerous, mistake the powers that be have made is to separate the Afghanistan war from the geopolitics of the region. I have seen innumerable media reports on Afghanistan, which have included several references to Pakistan, but I can count the references to India in these pieces on one hand. This geopolitical myopia comes despite the fact that India did more to aid anti-Taliban forces than anyone else in the world prior to September 11. Thus, those who do (or would) support a withdrawal from Afghanistan would do incalculable damage to U.S.-India ties. Alienating the largest and most economically dynamic democracy on earth is never a good idea, yet hardly anyone seems to take this into account.

The last, but hardly least, mistake from all this is to assume that Communist China is either neutral or friendly in the War on Terror (or as I prefer, the Wahhabist-Ba'athist-Khomeinist War). It is not. In fact, whether it's Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Lebanon, or Afghanistan, the "theatres" in the WBK War have become a part of Cold War II. Thus, if we were to abandon the Afghan people, it would be as much a victory for Communist China as it would be for the terrorists.

If more Americans understood this, support for the liberation of Afghanistan would be far higher than the 56% it has now. As for my earlier assumptions about the Democrats, there is simply no decent anti-Communist Democrat running for President right now. If the Democratic field included Sherrod Brown, Robert Andrews, or Robert Wexler (for example), my previous post would have looked very different (title included).

My analysis of American politics aside, the fact is this: the defeat of the Taliban and al Qaeda is as central to victory in the Second Cold War as it is in the WBK War. If more Americans understood this, it would lead to some more clear-eyed views on Pakistan's real allegiance and India's importance. As it is, the tunnel vision of our leaders (from both parties) is making this battle much harder to win.

Communist China, exempt from Kyoto, will be the biggest carbon emitter by the end of the year

Whatever one may think of the Kyoto agreement, the fact that is exempts Communist China has long been a chief argument of its critics against the deal. Proponents have argued that while Communist China's emission levels wouldn't challenge America's for years to come.

Well, that line of argument has passed its best-by date, literally. New figures from the Communists themselves (of all people) have revealed that the United States will fall behind Communist China in carbon-dioxide emissions as early as this year. In fact, emissions from Communist China have nearly doubled since 2001 (San Francisco Chronicle, see graph here). Or, to put it another way, "China's greenhouse gas emissions have recently been growing by a total amount much greater than that of all industrialized nations put together" (emphasis added).

Even those who fervently believe in man-made global warming must now agree that Kyoto is useless without including what will soon be the largest carbon emitter on the planet. All it will do is allow the Communists to continue to rapidly overdevelop, destroy its ecology, build up its military, and arm or otherwise aid terrorists without any qualms while the free world geopolitically handicaps itself.

Again, this post is not meant to raise an argument about "climate change" (that's for my other blogs), but it should make clear that Kyoto implementation must be opposed by anti-Communists or all political stripes.