slider, gotta say the Gafney piece seems to me like retread Cold War hysteria, economically & militarily skewed. Listen to the comicbook adverbs: <<The sheer brazenness of the CNOOC play for a U.S. oil company at a moment when energy is much on Americans’ minds, however, may translate into a case of strategic overreach by China>>
Even poor old Sun Tzu gets dragged out for a bow: <<In keeping with the admonitions of the ancient Chinese strategist, Sun Tsu, the PRC appears confident that by doing the first two decisively, it can accomplish the third without having to fire a shot. Just in case, Beijing is also feverishly giving its armed forces the capability to fight us should push come to shove. >>
A few quick points: China is looking for energy sources, and so is everyone else. Washington invaded Iraq partly to kill Chinese oil contracts--that was us grabbing the loot, not the Chinese. Of course they're looking for replacements now--what else *can* they do? China's military budgets are small change compared w/ US mega-splurging on weapons and golf courses for admirals, so what's the "feverishly" arming lingo worth?
If China gets materials for strategic magnets from the CNOOC deal (a company partly owned by Shell, I believe), it's hardly news. A few years ago some glad-handed US patriot sold China a company that makes unique strategic magnets--sold the whole thing. Ie, American honchos, as Sinclair and the Daily Reckoning folks keep screaming, are bleeding the country w/ their imperial policies. China has been remarkably tame so far, IMO. Gafney's cartoons scapegoat the Chinese and wink at self-indulgent shennanigans in Washington and on Wall St. On most of your other mkt analyses, btw, d'accord. |
