China’s Tango: America to Dance

I have highlighted China’s involvement in Latin America previously, paying special attention to China’s international natural resource “treasure hunt” — but nickel, oil, copper, and iron-ore are not the only resources passing from Latin America to China.  According to the Financial Times, drug cartels are “laundering cash in China”:

The US on Wednesday expressed concern that ever more sophisticated drug-trafficking cartels were using China’s inadequately controlled financial system to launder their proceeds, possibly even getting tax breaks in the process.

[Guy Dinmore, Financial Times]

Recycled as foreign investment, illegal drug proceeds may be entering China through Hong Kong specifically; and, the companies dealing in that “foreign investment” may receive tax breaks because of the subterfuge.

---

Meanwhile, an article at the Guardian reports on a redistribution of U.S. diplomats from the EU to Asia and Latin America:

The US will send an extra 15 diplomats to China, 15 to Latin America and 12 to India as part of a major rethink of its foreign policy for the next few decades.

US embassies in Europe will lose 38 diplomats, including one in Britain, a reflection that the economic, political and religious frontlines have moved elsewhere.

[Ewen MacAskill, diplomatic editor for The Guardian.]

The old distribution of diplomats reflected Cold War concerns; the new, future globalization:

The state department list shows that the biggest reduction worldwide will be in Russia, where the US embassy will cut 10 posts. Germany will lose seven, and countries such as Belgium, Poland, Italy and Spain will lose two or three each.

The increase in diplomats in China is an acknowledgement by Washington not only of its importance but its possible military threat to US interests in the Pacific Rim countries and elsewhere in Asia, and the danger posed by unresolved territorial issues such as Taiwan. [ibid.]

India will also be a focus for U.S. diplomatic efforts.  Demographics play a roll in the realignment of diplomatic force — “the combined populations of North America and Europe would constitute no more than 10% of the world population by the middle of the century” — as well as a [belated] sense that the U.S. is losing ground in its relations with its neighbors to the south. Both Bolivia and Venezuela, as well as Nicaragua, will see an increase in diplomats from the U.S.  Indonesia, with its 240mil population (primarily Muslim) will also receive an extra five diplomats.

The revelation of these plans for a revision of the U.S.’s diplomatic efforts follows January’s announcement by Condoleezza Rice that Asia, the Middle East, and Africa would see an increased diplomatic presence — but the Guardian does not address increases in the Middle Eastern or African presence, focusing on Asia and Latin America.

---

Xinhua, China’s online news resource, has a slim report of a recent reception in Beijing of Latin American diplomats, held in celebration of the China-Latin America Friendship Association, by the Chinese People’s Association for Friendship with Foreign Countries (CPAFFC) .   Roll call? About 50 diplomats.  Li Xiaolin, Vice President of the  CPAFFC, was enthusiastic about the efforts of the CPAFFC in 2005, which included 362 guests in 22 delegations from Latin America and the Caribbean.

Another slim report, this time published in Venezuela’s The Daily Journal, addresses the two-day conference of the East Asia-Latin America Cooperation Forum recently held in Bogota. Security concerns, from terrorism to drug trafficking, topped the agenda. The forum is five years old.  32 nations were represented at the conference, including:

Argentina, Australia, Bolivia, Brazil, Brunei, Cambodia, Colombia, South Korea, Costa Rica, Cuba, Chile, China, Ecuador, El Salvador, the Philippines, Gua-temala, Indonesia, Japan, Laos, Malaysia, Mexico, Myanmar, Nica-ragua, New Zealand, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Singapore, Thailand, Uruguay, Venezuela and Vietnam.

---

Are you familiar with BRIC? The acronym may become commonplace in the future:

Brazil - Russia - India -China

I stumbled onto information about the organization about a year ago, but because the economic pact countries involved in the formation of BRIC were so often discussed separately in the news, without mention of BRIC, I dismissed news of the pact.  Check out a website (of several) devoted to news concerning BRIC nations: Americas and Caribbean: BRIC Alliance. Some of the reports are positively laden with a “conspiracy theory” slant sure to motivate professional conspiracy theorists; for instance, links from the site lead to actual reports such as the following:

Brazilian Military Team Attends Russian Space Launch

Moscow (AFP) Mar 02, 2005
Military experts from Brazil visited the Russian launch site at Baikonur on Wednesday and witnessed the launch of a space cargo rocket as part of plans by the two countries to develop cooperation in the manufacture and launch of space vehicles, ITAR-TASS news agency reported.

The Brazilian delegation was led by Colonel-General Carlos Augusto Leal Veloso, the director of the foreign relations department within the Brazilian defense ministry, who was invited to inspect the Baikonur site, located in Kazakhstan, by the Russian space agency Roskosmos, the agency said.

But these links are at least a year old, some as old as two years.  According to Wikipedia, no formal agreement has been made between these countries to form an actual BRIC alliance.  At least, no paperwork has been made public about the formation of such an alliance, although many bilateral and multilateral trade agreements exist between these nations which form the bare bones of an informal but structured cooperation pact.   In fact, the term “BRIC” was originally coined by  the Goldman Sachs investment bank in the “BRIC thesis” in 2003:

The four countries whose economic potential is such that they may become among the four most dominant economies by the year 2050. The thesis was proposed by Jim O’Neil, global economist at Goldman Sachs. The coalition would encompass over forty percent of the world’s population and hold a combined GDP [PPP] of 12.14 trillion dollars. On almost every scale, it would be the largest entity on the global stage. These four countries are not a political alliance (such as the European Union) or any formal trading association, like ASEAN. Nevertheless, these countries signed a trade and cooperation agreement in 2002.

[Wikipedia article]

Rather than a political term, the term has become a common reference used by financial and market analysts.  For instance, in recent news,

• “BRIC Countries Present the Most Exciting Opportunity for Pharmaceutical Companies” — Genetic Engineering News (GEN), 2-17-06


• “The Last Building BRIC” — Tire Review Online, 3-1-06


• “Five BRIC Strength Stocks” — Forbes.com, 2-16-06


• “BRIC: New word in Israeli investment” — International Herald Tribune, 2-7-06

An excellent article and analysis of BRIC, which takes more into account than the preceding articles, can be found on the Energy Bulletin: Running into a ‘BRIC wall’ with Eurasia? It is easy to see that mutual economic concerns may easily translate into mutual security concerns.  China and Russia have engaged in joint military exercises — and have been less than helpful in negotiations with Iran over Iran’s nuclear ambitions.  China’s demand for natural resources may motivate China to add to its “Latin American Tango” agreements with Russia, Iran, and India to secure resources — especially oil — in Latin America and the ME oil corridor:

At year-end, Russia signed a deal with Brazil. Gazprom will build an LNG plant in Brazil. Petrobras will jointly explore for oil and gas in Brazil with two Russian companies. Another $3 billion deal includes Russia building an oil refinery in Brazil.

Early in 2004 India invited Brazil President Lula to New Delhi where they spoke of a South-South ‘new trade geometry.’ Preferential tariffs were agreed between India and Mercosur. Brazil will export biofuel to India and sugar as well as oil.

India also this month signed a $40 billion joint deal with Russia and Iran for long-term energy. It includes a 25-year import of Iran natural gas to India and development of Iran oilfields. India will get a 20% stake in Iran’s largest oilfield, Yadavaran and Jufeir that yields 300,000 barrels a day. China’s CNPC is the main operator of Yadavaran. Now India has 20%, Iran 30% and China 50% of that giant field. Iran is clearly seeking powerful allies against US pressures.

India is also bidding to buy part of Russian oil giant, Yukos. Last October in Delhi China’s ambassador proposed joint energy cooperation of the two former Cold War rivals, India and China, something not anticipated in Washington. India’s Petroleum Minister M.S. Aiyar was in Moscow in October talking about a ‘strategic alliance’. This month India, under Aiyar also hosted the first roundtable of Asian energy ministers, including from the Persian Gulf and China. He proposed a common regional petroleum market, and an Asian benchmark crude, a potential blow to the US British oil giants and their control via NYMEX and Brent. Iran proposed an Asian Bank for Energy Finance to fund the projects.

[F. William Engdahl, Energy Bulletin]

Although “BRIC” may be an emergent meme in business circles, such memes have a way of solidifying into real material dynamics, with all the attendant realities falling into line, especially when natural resources management forms the basis of national securities.

Epitomizing Hypocrisy

网页    图片    资讯    更多 »   高级搜索   使用偏好     搜索： 网页所有中文网页 简体中文网页中国的网页

网页

建议： 可直接输入拼音， Google会自动提示最符合的中文关键词 [细节]

找不到和您的查询 “Freedom” 相符的网页。

建议：

• 请检查输入字词有无错误。
• 请换用另外的查询字词。
• 请改用较常见的字词。

---

Translation:

Your search - Freedom - did not match any documents.

Suggestions:

• Make sure all words are spelled correctly.
• Try different keywords.
• Try more general keywords.

See also: Google Accepts Mephistopheles’ Proposal

The World’s Wal-Mart

Think China is gearing up to threaten the U.S.? Chinese car company Geely Automobile Co. is gearing up to release a cheap family sedan sometime in 2008:

[AP]

It is expected to sell for under $10K; however, many motorists not constrained by living near the poverty level in America might not jump on the chance to buy a Geely:

“The United States has higher demands than the Chinese market. The basic demands are safety, emissions and service networks,” said Li. “What will determine when we start exporting is whether we can meet those demands or not.”

These considerations might not allow the sell of a car for under $10K, once the little details have been worked out.

Geely plans to offer the Beauty Leopard for consumers whose tastes require a classier model of vehicle. [“Yeah, Bob; I just bought a Beauty Leopard!” Um, ok.]

Story: China Daily.

Snakeoil or Chimera

bilious young fogey doubts the rise of China:

BYF does not buy into the whole “rise of China” snakeoil. China has entranced westerners for hundreds of years - perhaps because it and India presented the only serious (and metaphysically and culturally coherent) challenges to western civilisation for a long time…

Along with an exaggerated economic forecast —

BYF was somewhat surprised to learn at a talk at the US Consulate by Bates Gill that Microsoft, Yahoo! et al were yet to make a dollar of real profit from China.

— and an overblown sense of its own military might —

China has only ever been a regional power, relying on its vast population, and its ability to sustain wastefully high casualties, to bully tiny states like Vietnam and Korea. It has never been militarily competent, as numerous wars, stretching from the Tibetan wars of the 900s to the Sino-Japanese War of 1895 to the 1979 war with Vietnam show.

— perhaps China has relied on the West’s perpetual enchantment with all things East. I am inclined to believe, as BYF believes, that the West’s enchantment with China centers on an understanding that the Chinese model — socialist though it be — represents a societal solidarity which the West does not quite understand.

The West has managed to infiltrate large swaths of the world, which has in turn assured the West of its cultural relevance; but China, though not immune to Western influences, continues to offer a model substantially different from that offered by the West. One can only look at the disastrous results of the Soviet Union to realize that China’s experiment with socialism offers something not quite Leninist or Stalinist — perhaps owing to the long traditions of Confucianism and Taoism. China’s large population, its supposed ability to move quickly without being bogged down by a pure democratic process, its growing role as the industrial center of the world, and its obvious intentions for greater global relevance, are not easily understood by Western eyes. In fact, one might suppose that the West’s international and intranational bickerings leave many Westerners at a loss to explain China’s continued national solidarity and growing global relevance: so many people holding together, yet no strong democratic process. This, in turn, no doubt leads many Westerners to question their own system.

But one can only look at the frictions within China to get a sense that “solidarity” is only contingent. The central authority of China must contend with: outlying local governments, environmental and industrial follies, and a populace growing accustomed to its own relevance within the system. What keeps the whole thing from falling apart?

China’s rulers know these problems exist and are working on solving them; BYF is not alone. China may indeed be a chimera secreting snakeoil, but at least two other heads are working: the lion and the goat. What these represent, we will have to wait and see. I am not as doubtful as BYF on the rise of China; I believe that indications of China’s demise are grossly exaggerated. In fact, China has been underestimated before. However, the CCP no doubt has many problems to solve before they can rest in luxury. Or in peace.

Friends in Big Places II

I had written of Iran’s ties to Russia and China almost a year ago: the two powerhouses of Asia represent a bulwark against efforts by the U.S. and the EU to curb Iran’s growing nuclear capability.

Now, Asia Time Online features an article by Ephraim P Gundzik — president of Condor Advisors, Inc., a California-based firm which provides investment risk analysis for investors on the global market — detailing the Eastern bulwark against Western interference in Iran:

In a very strong show of support for Tehran, Moscow agreed to sell Iran an air-defense system known as the Tor-M1. Arguably the most advanced system of its kind, the Tor-M1 uses a mobile launcher to track and destroy multiple targets, which can include incoming missiles, aircraft and helicopters.

Moscow’s deal with Tehran, which was signed early last month, calls for the delivery of 30 Tor-M1 systems in 2006 and is worth more than $1 billion. According to Russian sources, it is the largest weapons deal between Moscow and Tehran in the past five years.

China also clearly supports Iran. Chinese Foreign Minister Li Zhaoxing told EU-3 representatives that placing Iran’s nuclear dossier before the Security Council “could encourage Iran to take extreme measures”. While Russia has strong commercial ties with Iran in the nuclear and military fields, China has strong ties to Iran’s petroleum sector. Given China’s growing thirst for oil, it is unlikely that Beijing would abandon Tehran in favor of the US and EU. [Asia Times Online]

Given Tehran’s recent announcement that Iran would continue its research into nuclear fuel, and given threats of a military strike against Iran by Israel or the U.S. or both, the news that Russia plans to provide Tehran with a means for combating such a strike should not be taken lightly.

Meanwhile, ties between Iran and India continue to grow, centering around a deal between the two nations to build a gas pipeline through Pakistan. The three nations involved in these negotiations plan to work around U.S. sanctions by building the pipeline individually within their nations:

According to the roadmap finalised during bilateral talks between India-Pakistan, India-Iran and Iran-Pakistan this month, the three countries are ready to merge the talks to trilateral level with official level meeting in February to be hosted by Tehran.

To overcome the threat of US sanctions, Hosseinian said one of the options (mooted by India) was that each of the three countries implements the pipeline in its own territory.

“If we choose this option there will be no sanctions,” he said. The Iranian minister, however, pointed out that despite the threat of sanctions, several American companies have continued to invest and work in Iran. [The Times of India]

Earlier this week, Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad met with India’s ambassador to Iran, Manbir Singh, to discuss ties between the two nations. The state-controlled Islamic Republic News Agency has reported that the Indian ambassador has expressed a commitment to increasing mutually beneficial economic ties between the nations:

India is determined to implement the project on construction of gas pipeline from Iran, [Singh] said adding, “the Islamic Republic of Iran is considered as among our most important trade partners and New Delhi welcomes expansion of cooperation in steel, auto making and pharmaceutical field.” [IRNA]

President Ahmadinejad has stressed the importance of Iran-India relations in combating “the hegemonic policies of certain big powers”:

Independence and authority are among outstanding characteristics of Iran and India, [Ahmadinejad] said adding that the current situation has increased the expectations of the Iranian and Indian nations as well as other nations from both countries.

Resisting the hegemonic policies of certain big powers at regional and international fora is vital, he said adding, “Today, we need more than ever before the aspirations of the Non-Allied Movement and this prompts us to further broaden our relations.” Highlighting the two sides’ historical and deeply-rooted ties, he called for expansion of economic, industrial and academic cooperation between the two countries. [ibid.]

India’s resistance to a decoupling of its civilian-use nuclear program from its military program and from its space program can only serve to encourage Iran, although it must be noted here that India never signed the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty but Iran did. The recent leniency of the U.S. in regard to India’s efforts to further develop its nuclear program is at odds with the American stance on Iran’s nuclear ambitions — at least, with Iran’s stated ambitions.

Both China and Russia have already welcomed India and Iran as observers in the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and China intends to foster the cooperative exploration and development of space via the Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization (APSCO), of which Iran is a member (but not India.) Currently, troubles brewing between India and Bangladesh and between India and Pakistan, may thwart greater regional cooperation as India struggles with a plethora of unstable neighbors and increasing terrorist activity on the subcontinent; this in combination with economic practices which do not foster growth and increased cooperation with the U.S. may mean that India is not a Friend upon which Iran can depend. China and Russia, on the other hand, have thus far managed their inter- and intra-national crises and stand to offer Iran whatever Iran desires as long as ties with Tehran do not threaten their own growth. In fact, economic growth seems to be in competition with security concerns in shaping the connectivity of Iran, Russia, China, and India: a factor most obvious when one considers India’s plan to share a gas pipeline not only with Iran but also with its troublesome neighbor Pakistan.

In contrast, the U.S. appears to be more concerned with security issues than with economic issues in the region.

The People, Pt. 2

Among other things, a recent article on China at Asia Times Online considers the friction which exists between China’s central government and outlying local governments:

In China, there is a distinct possibility that if local politicians are popularly elected, regions will stop following the dictates of the party and central government, and will no longer pass on tax revenues to the state. If China becomes more democratic, territorial and clan loyalties and separatist movements will likely grow stronger, central rule might be endangered, internal order may deteriorate and conflict between regions will probably increase.

If this happens, then the belief that China should democratize might simply be an armchair theory or even worse, an invitation for disaster, similar to the Bush administration’s attempt to “democratize the Middle East”. Perhaps the Chinese Communist Party’s intense monopolization on power is as “necessary” as Saddam’s and the Saud and Assad families’ dictatorial rule in Saudi Arabia and Syria, respectively. The Plan for Democratization states that “if the Communist Party does not exist, neither can democracy.”

The article goes on to give an example, with a twist: the city of Shenzhen, which led in China’s move toward a capitalist system, has apparently rejected the central government’s plan to use the city as a test case for the direct election of legislative officials. Economics may be behind the decision, along with the corruption which comes with an increase in economic mobility without corresponding changes in political organization. This is reminiscent of Thomas Barnett’s theory on the divergence of economic rule sets from political rule sets:

[As globalization advances] we constantly run into situations where economic rule sets get ahead of political ones, and technological rule sets leap-frog security rule sets.

In the case of Shenzhen, we might consider how power consolidates around those who control economic channels. The article at Asia Times suggests that the conflict between Shenzhen and China’s central government centers around Shenzhen’s wish for economic centrality in opposition to the central government’s new 5-year plan to spread the wealth to outlying areas. Approximately “1 billion of the country’s 1.3 billion population” live in rural areas that have not experienced the new wealth brought to China by China’s efforts at economic globalization. And, as long as coastal cities are the places of economic opportunity for citizens wishing to improve their condition, the leaders of those cities have large sway over how the nation develops. The central government fears destabilization which can come from the economic disparity between large cities and rural areas, has begun to focus on developing those rural areas; but local officials in large cities may recognize how their own power will be weakened as the rest of the nation is developed.

Recent reports of unrest in China highlight this leap-frogging of rule sets. The news that, last year, 74,000 protests — involving at least 100 citizens each — occurred within China, has led some to speculate on the eventual collapse of China’s central government. The central government, however, has also speculated on such an event and has been taking steps to counter it. The new 5-year plan for the economic advancement of rural areas is only one example of efforts to combat the unrest. A heightened sense of environmental concerns which have resulted from greater industrialization also motivates the central government: witness China’s acknowledgement of the pollution of the Songhua River after the massive benzene industrial spill, the central government’s promise to punish the officials responsible for the spill, and Premier Wen Jiabao’s declaration that the health of “the people” is of the greatest importance:

“We are a people’s government. We should show a high degree of responsibility to the people,” Wen told local and provincial leaders, according to the state television national news. “We cannot allow even a single person not to have water.”

Wen promised to “conscientiously investigate the reasons and responsibility for the accident,” the report said. [AP, via ABC News]

Although not specifically addressed by the Asia Times article, this is an example of a strategy that has been addressed by that article. Why is the world aware of the 74,000 protests that occurred in China last year? Simple: the central government has not only been tracking the protests, it has publicized the protests. This serves two purposes:

• First, an acknowledgement of the unrest — which results primarily from anger over local corruption, economic disparity, and environmental concerns — lays the groundwork for major popular support for the new 5-year plan. Via the plan, the central government can be seen as the savior of the people.
• Second, publicizing the unrest helps to focus the people’s awareness on the corruption of local officials. In essence, the central government of China has solicited the people’s anger for an ally in its war with local government officials who resent the threat that a central government poses to their own (largely unelected) economic and political power.

We might look at this strategy from a different angle. In America, Libertarians and even many Conservatives distrust a strong central government, preferring to spread the power among state and local governments as an antidote to potential tyranny. In China, on the other hand, the central government — which has hitherto followed a “get rich first” scheme in which those who could would increase their wealth via capitalism while everyone else was left behind — is hoping to turn the people’s resentment of corrupt local officials into a desire for a stronger regulation of local governments by a centralized government. China’s leaders want to show how uninhibited self-interest leads to local corruption and how this can be prevented via a strong central government: Hu Jintao is Wyatt Earp riding into the chaotic (but booming) Dodge to restore order. [Premier Wen Jiabao appears to fill the role of Doc Holliday…]

Many critics of China’s new “democratization plan,” including the author of the Asia Times article, are right to question the central government’s seriousness about democratization. Hu Jintao appears to distrust local officials just enough to promote local elections for legislative representatives as an antidote to the growing power nodes along China’s coasts, but is unlikely to wish for an analogous opposition which would spring to power by too great a local, democratic process. However, the recent focus on economic integration of China’s populace, in collusion with the ever present awareness of local unrest, seems like a very Barnettian strategy which may eventually lead to greater democratic processes in China. I.e., Hu appears to be aware of the problem of leap-frogging rule sets and is unlikely to allow economic prosperity and the power that comes from economic prosperity to organize around any individuals — whether elected or not — until greater economic integration of China’s populace is achieved. So the democratization process is tied to the speed of the economic integration.

Ah-nuld as Ambassador to China

I was skimming over my new China News page, when I saw this link from People’s Daily Online:

Schwarzenegger says US will benefit from China’s progress

So, naturally, I clicked it.

Gov. Schwarzenegger seems to have the same opinion Bill Clinton has of China:

“I often read that China’s economy is likely to become the largest in the world over the next 50 years,” Schwarzenegger said [in an address at Tsinghua University in Beijing], noting that this is terrific.

Some in his country fear that China’s development will overtake the United States’ development, he said. “But I believe the United States and the world will benefit from China’s scientific and technological advances,” he noted, saying the US-China economic relations will become even closer in the years ahead.

“We should welcome China’s investment in US firms.”

That would show that China has faith in the United States, he said.

Ah-nuld also took the time to present to Chinese students the American Dream:

The Austrian-born actor-turned-politician, who is very familiar to Chinese audiences as a movie hero, also educated Tsinghua students on the importance of seizing dreams. He used his own experiences, from bodybuilding to movie star to governor of one of the most important US states, to tell Chinese youth to make unswerving efforts to achieve their dreams.

This is how to connect.