|
|
|
|
|
GOLDSEA |
ASIAMS.NET |
ASIAN AMERICAN ISSUES
ANTAGONIZING CHINA OVER NMD
(New 6/20/01.)
lobal peace and prosperity depends to a remarkable degree on robust exchanges between the world's richest nation and the world's most populous. Considering that fact, the leaders in Washinton D.C. and Beijing have been either tragically star-crossed or remarkably cavalier about provoking confrontation.
In 1996 Beijing fired a pair of ballistic missiles across the Taiwan Strait under the pretext of "military exercises", prompting the U.S. to send a carrier battle group in response. In 1999 the U.S. bombed the Chinese embassy in Kosovo and ascribed it to an intelligence error.
In mid 2000 the two nations seemed about to put the bad blood behind them when President Clinton struck a deal for U.S. approval of China's entry into the World Trade Organization (WTO). Then George Bush vowed to commit untold billions to building a space-based national missile defense (NMD) system to detect and destroy ballistic missiles that might threaten the U.S. A clear effort at upsetting the global balance of power, charged Beijing, vowing to commit whatever resources necessary to counter NMD. Its predictably harsh and intransigent stance toward a crippled U.S. spy plane forced to land on Hainan Island produced another standoff which, for several tense days, seemed capable of triggering a shooting war.
What American wouldn't want a shield from foreign ballistic missiles? But the NMD is hardly a sure thing. It's premised on technology that won't exist for a decade or more. It will end up costing well over $100 billion dollars. Meanwhile its mere existence on drawing boards sours relations with China, Russia and other nations. At present all it guarantees is another arms race. The only way it makes strategic sense is as a means to bankrupt a nascent geopolitical rival by forcing it into an arms race it can't afford. Look at what the nuclear arms race did to Russia.
Does the U.S. stand to gain or lose by using the NMD to threaten and alienate China?
This interactive article is closed to new input.
Discussions posted during the past year remain available for browsing.
CONTACT US
|
ADVERTISING INFO
© 1996-2013 Asian Media Group Inc
No part of the contents of this site may be reproduced without prior written permission.
|
|
|
|
WHAT YOU SAY
[This page is closed to new input. --Ed.]
ka
I also agree with you in every way that India and particularily Hindus in India since it is a Hindu nation by far should resort to a diplomatic solution to the conflict. I agree that it is wrong to assess who started it (my emotions sometimes takeover especially after 9/11). THEY MUST de-escalate. I also have to say the greater nuclear threat emanates from Pakistan since it's conventional forces would be wiped out within a week if not days. I think India should come out the once who presents the peace. BUT, Pakistan has to STOP the extremism and it's own military dictatorship. Who are they to tell India to conduct a vote when Pakistan itself is not a democracy? India has 600 million voters, that's 6 times the amount the U.S. has. For those you who don't know, India has affirmative action for Muslims just like they do for blacks and Hispanics here. Pertake this example...there millions of Mexicans in California and Texas, what if tommorow, they decided they want to join Mexico...why?...just because they are a Mexican majority we'll let them go?...What about South Carolina?...1860 it seceded...what stopped the U.S. from conducting a war to bring the Confederacy back into the Union and change laws therefore ending slavery??? These are REAL scenarios that I present to you...but now going on to your NATO question...Arabs and Jews maybe both "white" but then so are Indo-Aryans right?...I mean...we all look the same...if you gave blond hair and blue eyes and fair skin on my physical appearence I would be white. Jews are white, Arabs are not...cause' then there would be no racial profiling. NO...the bottom line...Russia moving closer to NATO and the U.S. is trying to get the Eastern Bloc of European countries to join...these are poor countries...why would these rich whites want them to join except for the fact that they want to create a white alliance? The USSR no longer exists, and Russia's potentials scientifically, space, etc, etc, and OIL...would let the U.S. take off from Arab Oil...South Africa is one of most racist places on earth though it's black ran (I might have been wrong about South Africa)...but what about Israel...the USA gives Israel $15 billion a year...that's $3300 per Israel citizen...that's almost 7 times more than India's per capita real GDP!!!...among many other poor nations in Asia, Africa, etc. India nor China are poor though...only because it seems that way...BUT...what else is NATO then a white alliance after Russia has practically been inducted in even as a junior partner? What if tommorow I said we're gonna establish a Asian Pact...China, India, Pakistan, Japan, Koreas, ASEAN )I'm assuming your're Asian, are you?) all of us of Asian continent (at least the major powers) decided whomever attacks one of us...we'll take it as an attack on all of us...how in the hell do you think the NATO would react?
bringittogether
Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 20:38:51 (PDT)
bringittogether:
From the economic viewpoint the US is afraid of the Chinese, Koreans and East Asians...not the South Asians...we dabble with fundamentalism, dont treat our women properly and have a lot of economic problems. Economically US has nothing to fear from the Middle East either..they are pretty ignorant, suicide bombers or otherwise, and still believe in the ninteenth century adage that land=prosperity and not the twenty first century adage that technological advancement=prosperity. East Asians are different...especially those with a Buddhist or Christian backround. They are the nearest to being the challengers of American (perhaps should I say white) "supremacy". Why? They treat their women better than most in the world. Their women get an education, are smart and challenge the white women while we keep our women at home (with the exception of twenty million Indian women who have a degree in high tech and compete for the best jobs world over).
If semitic Israel is "white" then do arabs count as "white" too?"
According to US classification Arabs and Iranians are white. In fact a number of Arab women and Iranian women look and act white. Rudi Bhaktiar of the CNN is the whitest of them all. She is white inside and out for all practical purposes. So much so, she attracts white men who would who would only date or marry white women. You should take a look at her when she anchors CNN. She is even whiter than Natalie Allen, her colleague (who is tanned!).
""India being the world leader in IT technology, space sciences, and in representative democracy, should pave the way to peace by not invoking on radical Hindu nationalism anytime the main political parties are losing support."
A good fundamentalist of any stripe, creed or color, whether it comes in the form of a burqah, halloween masks and bedsheets (KKK), profess to know Jesus Christ, and I mean profess, not that they actually know(Ian Paisley and IRA in Northern Ireland), trident (RSS, Bajrang Dal and other Hindu fanatics), JVP in Sri Lanka (which proposes to establish a Marxist-Buddhist society (contradiction)), is an imprisoned or caged fundamentalist.
South Asian
Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 11:29:05 (PDT)
AC... U.S. already trades with Russia.
You fail to point out that Russia feels that either the econmic cooperation or common desire to protect themselves from Islamic insurgents(read Chechnya) has made Russia accept U.S. withdrawal of the anti-ballistic missile treaty. In other words, Russia no longer feels very threatened by the U.S. And furthermore Russia is still not a member of NATO. As a matter of fact NATO is struggling to figure out it's new role now that Soviet Union is no more--which is why we see a horde of former communist Eastern European countries joining NATO.
Of course, China was never a signatory of the ABM treaty as China did not have enough nuclear weapons or the technology to create ABM defence.
I agree with you that there are certain "evil" vested interested that want to pork barrel for these outrageous military projects, but even a myth is often founded upon a truth. I think it's unfair to merely blame everything on "evil industrial-military complex" without analyzing the paranoias that abound within the U.S.
ka
Wednesday, June 05, 2002 at 10:57:58 (PDT)
Bringittogether--
I agree with you wholeheartedly people in the US shouldn't call others "civillized" or not, that's pretty dumb. But you said Nato is just a white coalition against the world. Hmm.. the last time I checked, NATO was established to fight against that great white bogeyman, Soviet Union. If semitic Israel is "white" then do arabs count as "white" too? Both Jew and Arab regard their ancestor to be Abraham, and that they are both brother ethnic groups. (despite the present scuffle) Also South Africa is predominantly black, and is in fact headed by a black majority government.
Going back to the issue of Pakistan and India, you implied that Pakistan "started" the escalation. I have to agree that the greater instability comes from Pakistan. But I think it's fruitless to discuss who "started" this war. Pakistanis and Indians were next door neighbors and in fact was the same country, as you probably know better than I. India being the world leader in IT technology, space sciences, and in representative democracy, should pave the way to peace by not invoking on radical Hindu nationalism anytime the main political parties are losing support. Pakistan on the otherhand is unfortunately neighbors with unstable Afghanistan, lives under military government, and is not a leader in technology. The greater burden of peace must be carried forth by Hindus. Afterall, isn't this more realistic? Yes pakistanis must stop Kashimiri separaitist instigations. But I think that Hindu India can come with a creative solution; afterall Ghandi came up with a creative method to overthrow British colonizers. It would be nice if Pakistanis could come up with a creative solution other than annexing Kashmir.
ka
Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 13:43:27 (PDT)
Who is the USA to say that China or the former USSR's communism is not "civilized"? The tables could be easily turned...if USSR became the sole superpower at the end of the Cold War. NATO is just a white coatlition against the world and bring Russia which is white closer to NATO is just another white thing...next up...Israel, South Africa, and Austrailia.
bringittogether
Tuesday, June 04, 2002 at 08:58:27 (PDT)
NEWEST COMMENTS |
EARLIER COMMENTS
|