SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: stockman_scott who wrote (62760)12/22/2002 12:05:09 PM
From: Karen Lawrence  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 281500
 
The Big Story Everyone Missed
People who were whipped into a frenzy about the ‘Chinese peril’ must wonder what happened. But Washington’s shift in attitude is a return to sanity

NEWSWEEK

Jan. 6 issue — This year has been the first year of the post-9-11 world. So as 2002 winds up, it’s a good time to look back and ask, “Who are the winners and losers of the new international order?”

THE LOSERS ARE obvious—Saddam Hussein, Saudi Arabia, Hosni Mubarak, Yasir Arafat and, of course, Al Qaeda, which may not be dead but is on the run. The winners are Israel, India and Russia. Their struggles with their opponents (the Palestinians, the Kashmiris and the Chechens, respectively) have been cast in a more favorable light. Russia, in particular, has shrewdly used the war on terror to further its integration into the West.
But in many ways the country that has benefited most from 9-11 is China. The attacks on New York and Washington had an enormous, positive effect for it. They moved the country off Washington’s enemies list.
Since the end of the cold war, a segment of the American right has been searching for a foe. China, a rapidly growing power ruled by a communist party, fit the bill nicely. For much of the 1990s, neoconservative commentators and Christian-right politicians railed against China, arguing against granting it most-favored-nation status, against allowing it into the World Trade Organization, against Clinton’s presidential visit. They warned that the Hong Kong takeover was likely to mark the end of that free-market marvel, that China was likely to invade Taiwan and that passivity toward this threat was either a product of weakness or treason. Remember Wen Ho Lee?
Then with 9-11 along came a real enemy, and China was instantly forgotten. There are surely people in America who, having been whipped into a frenzy about the Chinese peril, are wondering what happened. But that was Wen and this is now. Gone is the talk of China as a “strategic competitor.” The country is now an ally in the war against terror. Washington supported its entry into the WTO, its bid for the 2008 Olympics and even accepted Beijing’s argument that its Xinjiang region harbors Islamic terrorists.
China has taken advantage of the new climate in Washington to stay focused on its paramount goal—economic growth. With the exception of Taiwan, China has usually supported American foreign policy because it wants, more than anything else, time to develop. In the last year it has had a political transition (of sorts; Jiang Zemin remains quite powerful) whose chief effect has been to solidify the ruling consensus in favor of market reforms.
The results over the last two decades have been staggering. Even if you assume its growth numbers are exaggerated, it has moved hundreds of millions of people from poverty into middle-income status. Jeffrey Sachs, the economist who has advised dozens of developing countries, puts it simply: “China is the most successful development story in world history.”
Its economic policies have borne remarkable fruit over the last few years. China has become the most important manufacturing nation in the world. The economic map of Asia is being redrawn, with China at the center. This is the big story of the year that got drowned out by the war on terror.

Consider the following: in 1985, exports from foreign companies in China were composed of only 1 percent of the country’s total exports, amounting to $300 million. In 2001 they composed 50 percent of its exports, totaling $133 billion. China is now the largest provider of Japanese imports. And these goods are not all cheap plastic toys. Nobuyuki Idei has privately revealed that in two years his company, Sony, Japan’s flagship corporation, will be manufacturing more goods in China than in its home country. Last August Singapore’s prime minister, Goh Chok Tong, called China’s continuing growth “scary,” and urged his countrymen “to secure a niche for ourselves as China swamps the world with her higher-quality, but cheaper, products.”
But Singapore is not doomed. In the long run, having a rich China could prove to be a boon to its neighbors. After all, China exports, but it also imports. It is, for example, the largest importer of goods from Taiwan, absorbing a quarter of all Taiwan’s exports. That’s double what it bought only 10 years ago. And Japan and China could prove to be highly complementary economies. But a happy scenario rests on politics—on how China is integrated into the world. And that depends on Beijing, but more crucially on Washington.
Washington’s shift in attitude toward China marks a return of sanity. The United States cannot stop China’s rise, nor should it. To set itself up against China, before that country has shown itself to be a foe, is to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, ensuring a contest between the world’s leading power and its fastest-rising one. This is the stuff of world wars. And we already have one going.



To: stockman_scott who wrote (62760)12/22/2002 12:14:10 PM
From: Karen Lawrence  Respond to of 281500
 
Iraq said on Sunday it would have no objection to the CIA (news - web sites) sending agents to Iraq to point out to U.N. weapons inspectors sites the United States suspects of developing weapons of mass destruction.

"We do not even have any objections if the CIA send somebody with the inspectors to show them the suspected sites," presidential adviser Amir al-Saadi told a news conference.
Could they be any MORE cooperative. It's not humanly possible.



To: stockman_scott who wrote (62760)12/22/2002 12:21:11 PM
From: Karen Lawrence  Respond to of 281500
 
The name of the game is assassination

The Pentagon has learned from Israel's policy of 'targeted killings'

Tony Geraghty and David Leigh
Thursday December 19, 2002
The Guardian

Israeli hardliners had the pleasure this week of seeing their controversial tactic of "targeted killing" of their enemies vindicated by being imitated. For it has emerged that their close allies in the US administration have now drawn up a target list for a systematic policy of assassination against those they call terrorists.
Considering the closeness of the Israeli right and the hawks at the Pentagon, this development should come as no surprise. The US has borrowed not just their policy, but their techniques too. It was Israel that pioneered the use of the Hellfire missile for summary executions such as the US carried out last month in Yemen.

Developed as a tankbuster during the cold war, Hellfire hits its target at 950mph. On November 3, a Landcruiser with an alleged al-Qaida leader and five other men was stalked from the air by a pilotless Predator controlled by a US team in Djibouti, 150 miles away. The Hellfire it carried enabled them to kill their prey from the comfort of an office chair.

A decade earlier, another terrorist, Sheik Abbas Moussawi, leader of Lebanon's fundamentalist Hizbollah group, was stalked from the air in this way. On February 16 1992, he was vaporised by an Israeli helicopter armed with Hellfire.

In biblical times, David made do with just one missile to cut down Goliath. But since Moussawi's Mercedes was in a guarded convoy, he got five. His wife Siham and their son Hussein, aged five, were killed with him.

Israel's defence minister, Moshe Arens, rejoiced over "a message to all terrorist organisations... whoever opens an account with us, we will close the account with them".

Three years later, Israel assassinated another Hizbollah leader, Rida Yassin, in a similar way as he drove along a road east of Tyre. Two Cobra helicopter gunships fired the radar-guided missiles, again believed to be Hellfires. One reportedly exploded inside the vehicle, burning Yassin and an aide alive. The other set fire to trees and bushes, hindering rescue workers.

The US's recent technical contribution has been to marry Israel's novel use of Hellfire with unmanned drones. The Predator was conceived in 1994 as a spy plane, operated from a safe position by a member of the "joystick generation" - and three others managing cameras and communications.

Airforce chiefs then transformed it into a tankbuster. The first successful test was in Nevada on February 21 2001. Air combat command moved on to try satellite links against the harder challenge of a moving target.

Al-Qaida's attack on the twin towers soon afterwards dramatically changed it targets - to "take out" not tanks, but individuals.

In this, it seems clear the Pentagon drank at the well of Israel's experience as a "laboratory for fighting terror". This May, Douglas Feith, the Pentagon's hawkish undersecretary for policy, went to Tel Aviv to talk to Ariel Sharon and his defence minister, Binyamin Ben Eliezer. The Israeli paper Ha'aretz said they discussed "war games, intelligence sharing and other cooperation".

Feith is such an enthusiast for the Israeli right that the reactionary Zionist Organisation of America describes him approvingly as "the noted pro-Israel activist".

Four weeks later, Israel's top two security chiefs went to Washington to propose a new US-Israeli office specifically to combat terrorism. Brigadier General David Tzur and Uzi Landau, minister of interior security, met Feith on June 27.

The joint office, to be based in Washington, would involve a communications link between the proposed US department of homeland defence and the Israeli government, it was explained. Visa policies, terrorist profiles and other internal security data - except classified intelligence - would be swapped by computer, fax and telephone. The topic of the US-Israeli meeting was confirmed as "homeland security". Mr Landau said: "Israel is a laboratory for fighting terror."

It was only a matter of days after those talks that defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld drafted a secret directive. It is reported he ordered Air force General Charles Holland on July 22 "to develop a plan to find and deal with members of terrorist organisations".

"The objective is to capture terrorists for interrogation or if necessary to kill them, not simply to arrest them in a law-enforcement exercise," he wrote.

Following the Yemen attack - what the Pentagon apparently hopes was the first of many successful operations - the third of the Pentagon's trio of hawks, deputy secretary Paul Wolfowitz, told CNN the killing was regarded as "a very successful tactical operation".

That opinion seems likely to be cheered to the echo in an embattled Israel. But others will regard with profound alarm this latest systematisation of murder.

cheiron@onetel.net.uk, david.leigh@guardian.co.uk