Friday, September 28, 2007

I'd rather the gravy train passed me by so I can live

John Ivison of the National Post sees signs of the Harper government's new more pragmatic approached to China.
All the signs point to a more nuanced approach to China than the one initiated by Mr. Harper last year, when he promised he would not "sellout to the almighty dollar" by allowing concerns about human rights to be overshadowed by the prospect of improved trade.
(...)
When it comes to China, a new pragmatism has usurped the "principled" foreign policy the Conservatives advocated in opposition. As one official put it: "Harper caught so much criticism that he has calculated that whatever points he scored standing up to the Chinese, he lost more by risking the biggest gravy train going by." Tomorrow: Beijing's hosting of the 2008 Summer Olympics offers Canada and the world an opportunity to pressure China on its human rights record.
I hope for all our sakes and lives he is dead wrong, and if anything, the Canadian government will take a much harder line on the Chinese government as well as encouraging Canadian companies to diverse the hell out of China. Soft power diplomacy is utter bunk, and should be known henceforth as a bankrupt political philosophy.

There has yet to be a totalitarian government who has been pressured into making substantial human rights concessions because of diplomatic pressure brought by its trading partners. If soft power diplomacy is so effective; ask yourself why the international track record so abysmal, and why isn't Cuba one of the freest nations on the face of the planet? Concerned Cuba librarians are literally dying to know. Poisoned pet food, toothpaste, toys, food, cribs…the list of consumer goods and produce from China literally grows weekly with toxicity.

8 comments:

Balbulican said...

"If soft power diplomacy is so effective; ask yourself why the international track record so abysmal, and why isn't Cuba one of the freest nations on the face of the planet?"

Not quite sure what you mean here - you seem to be pointing at polar opposites. The US since Nixon has ENCOURAGED economic engagement with China, but trade with the US is completely embargoed.

I've been to Cuba and worked with Cubans in the Caribbean, and I've spoken to a lot of thoughtful Cubans, both socialist and otherwise. I personally think that if the US dropped its trade barriers with Cuba, American business would flood the island so quickly that Castro would be out of power before he could shave. One of the few things uniting Cuba...even those who despise Castro...is that they despise the US even more. It's been The Great Boogeyman since the Bay of Pigs, and successive US Administrations have inadvertently helped Castro to consolidate his position with their bellicose stance.

Balbulican said...

Sorry, para 2, last sentence, should read:

"he US since Nixon has ENCOURAGED economic engagement with China, but trade between US companies and Cuba is completely embargoed.

K. Shoshana said...

Please. Cuba is not an economic basket case because the US will not trade with them. The US is simply one country out of how many others in the world????….And literally everyone else does trade with Cuba.

Look, I have met a fair number of Cubans too. Unlike you, I can’t claim to have worked with any but I have yet to meet any anti-American Cubans. Though it does strike me as a tad odd, if Cubans are so rabidly anti-American as you suggest - why a goodly number still seem to think risking their lives is a small price to pay to walk as a free man in America. But then again, as you pointed out, you were working with bona fide regime members…what’s that term – thoughtful socialists? So tell me - do thoughtful socialists in Cuba ever give a thought to the sound of the song a Cuban Librarian sings when a battery is attached to their genitals?

Yes, thank heavens for Nixon encouraged China to open up economically. Where would Falun Fong members be without that economic freedom? I am sure they sing Nixon’s praises daily and thank the heavens to practice the freedom to practice their religion even if they are short a kidney. And what ever would the Granny patrols do all day if they weren’t enforcing China’s one child rule?

Balbulican said...

Dial it down, Amazon. Don't go all Canadian Sentinel on me. We're just chatting here.

"Please. Cuba is not an economic basket case because the US will not trade with them."

I think you're mistaken about that. Every other Caribbean country...even those politically associated with their original European colonist, like the Dutch Antilles... relies hugely on US imports, exports, and tourism. There is no other force in the hemisphere that even approximates that proximity and market clout.

"Look, I have met a fair number of Cubans too. Unlike you, I can’t claim to have worked with any but I have yet to meet any anti-American Cubans."

Well, I suggest you visit Cuba, or spend a bit of time in the Caribbean or Central American countries that have trading or educational links.

"Though it does strike me as a tad odd, if Cubans are so rabidly anti-American as you suggest - why a goodly number still seem to think risking their lives is a small price to pay to walk as a free man in America."

"Rabidly anti-American"? Not quite. Most of the educated Cubans I've met or worked with saw the US as a country that supported a fairly rotten dictator, tried to invade their country, still represents the largest single military threat to their nation, and is trying to strangle them economically. Those are all pretty accurate perceptions.

"But then again, as you pointed out, you were working with bona fide regime members…what’s that term – thoughtful socialists?"

I guess so. Like me. Is that contempt I smell? And do you think that expats are somehow more representative of the "real" Cuba?

"So tell me - do thoughtful socialists in Cuba ever give a thought to the sound of the song a Cuban Librarian sings when a battery is attached to their genitals?"

Dramatic rhetoric aside...They sure do. Which is why I suggest that if the US dropped its boycott and alternative economic power surged through the island, communism would last for about half an hour.

"Yes, thank heavens for Nixon encouraged China to open up economically. Where would Falun Fong members be without that economic freedom? I am sure they sing Nixon’s praises daily and thank the heavens to practice the freedom to practice their religion even if they are short a kidney. And what ever would the Granny patrols do all day if they weren’t enforcing China’s one child rule?"

Shrug. I was there in 85. It's better now, and it will get better still. The market is actually working...what was once the last bastion of a bizarre form of "communism" is changing as (literally) millions of Chinese are exposed to western concepts of democracy and human rights. Is there a realistic approach that would have worked better than Nixon/Kissinger's "constructive engagement?" If so, please describe it.

K. Shoshana said...

I have a tremendous headache so I am going to be very short. I don't believe in deals with the devil.

Well, I suggest you visit Cuba, or spend a bit of time in the Caribbean or Central American countries that have trading or educational links.

Please. I am a Jamaican citizen as well as a Canadian. I have a home in Jamaica. Jamaica flies into Cuba a couple times a day. Enough with the patronese.

Balbulican said...

"I don't believe in deals with the devil."

Shrug. That's nice. Unfortunately the folks working to make real change happen work in the reality zone have to deal with the devil all the time.

Decades of civil war didn't end in Ireland until the Irish Devils and the British Devils sat down and dealt with each other.

But that's fine. As one who doesn't believe in deals with the devil:
- do you think the human rights situation, health situation and economy have improved or declined since Nixon ended China's virtual isolation and initiated his constructive engagement policy?
- what would have worked better?


"Please. I am a Jamaican citizen as well as a Canadian. I have a home in Jamaica. Jamaica flies into Cuba a couple times a day. Enough with the patronese."

Sure. I'll lose the patronese if you lose the mocking comments about thoughtful socialists.

And you've never met an anti-American Cuban? My goodness. Well, I suggest once again you visit the island and chat with folks.

K. Shoshana said...

I wasn’t kidding about the headache. Anyhoo - Spend all my capitalist ill-begotten dollars to enable the evil Castro regime to continue to exist? No, thank-you, I’ll pass and take Castro’s daughter advice and visit when it’s crumbled. And yes, a regime that locks up librarians and internet users is evil and that is not something which happened in the deep dark annals of the early days of the Castro regime – but right in the new millennium – after decades of your dialogue and working for change. Besides, I have little Cuba in my home already. My youngest son’s best friend is from Cuba and it seems we have been adopted by the local Cuban community in Toronto.

"Decades of civil war didn't end in Ireland until the Irish Devils and the British Devils sat down and dealt with each other."

Ah, another group of murdering socialist bastards - just like FARC. Let’s be frank. The IRA didn’t come to the table because the British will finally willingly to sit down to take tea and chat with them.

The IRA leadership came to the table because they were losing relevancy in the real world. 9/11 was their death knell internationally and it changed everything and their leadership knew it.

No more could they expect support from their “American” cousins - couple that with their support among the locals drying up on both sides of the border.

The south was/is booming economically and NI was being left behind due to the troubles. The locals were a bit fed up with the antics of the IRA which was impeding their walk into prosperity.

The IRA had no choice but to come to deal if they didn’t want to risk their sorry necks to a long term life on the run and/or lengthy terms of imprisonment. Their future was incredibly bleak. They only came to deal to save their scrawny worthless necks before they were once again lost in the annals of history. Remember in 1968 the graffiti in Catholic neighborhoods read IRA = I Ran Away. This way, their leadership could save their sorry asses and the Brits enabled them. The mistake per say is that the Brits came to the table. They lost a perfect chance to kill off the IRA beast once and for all.

I hope the irony of choosing to defend Nixon’s foreign policy is not lost on you.

Let’s pretend Nixon never went to China. What future would communism have had in China? It would have crumbled by the end of the nineties internally from the weight of its own economic failures. In my mind, a far better future awaited them - if only we let them sink. Instead, we have enabled them to create a toxic environment that is not only killing them but us as well. What benefits have we reaped from our “dialogue” with China other than a few cheap trinkets (which we would have been better off making ourselves), toxic food, and lead painted cribs/toys which kill – both in the production and in the finished product? Our own economies are suffering by the influx of cheap stuff which kills us. And then the dark underside of the Communist regime is still there and just as evil as it is lethal as it ever was. It has never gone away. All we have done is enabled them and made ourselves sick in the process.

I’ll even go one step further and make a prediction in less than 15 year we will see a major war with China. It cannot continue as it is. They are running out of water, fertile growing land and women. China will start looking covetously and lustfully at the resources of their neighbors and will not be able to resist the temptation of steamrolling into those lands. And here’s another thing. What about the Taiwanese? Should we allow China to stream roll millions of people, freedom and a decent economy?

Look - its like American foreign policy in the last 40 years which seems to operate on two basic principles – they might be murdering bastards but they are our murdering bastards so we will enable these regimes to continue because we can make a few cheap bucks out of them. It’s a morally bankrupt position.

I am not saying never talk to an evil regime but hold out until it crumbles under the weight of its innate corruption and then help in the rebuilding process. Don’t help, prop up or enable evil regimes to continue in the hopes dialogue and trade will make evil regimes change their human rights positions – only very painful consequences do. I realize Bal, you’re a decent sort and only want to ease the suffering but its short term gain for long term pain.

Now I am going back to nursing my bottle of aspirin and codeine.

Balbulican said...

"I wasn’t kidding about the headache."

I just read your lead article about your weekend bout of whatever. Surprised you're writing at all. Take a break!

"...after decades of your dialogue and working for change."

I guess I am not making myself clear. In my view, it is the US's ongoing isolation of Cuba that is enabling Castro to maintain power. They are not "dialoguing" or "working for change".

Regarding the IRA, despite your impressive cascade of dismissive adjectives, neither the PIRA NOR the British could achieve their goals through military means, and both realized it. So even as the British Government was proclaiming their intention NOT to "deal with the devil", they were doing precisely that. And guess what? It worked. Of course, they could have refused, and the slaughter could have dragged on, and everyone could have congratulated themselves on not dealing with devils. Now all they've got is peace. Darn, eh?

'The mistake per say is that the Brits came to the table. They lost a perfect chance to kill off the IRA beast once and for all."

Nope. Rest assured that had the Brits had the capacity, they would have done precisely that.

"I hope the irony of choosing to defend Nixon’s foreign policy is not lost on you."

It's only "ironic" if you believe that all socialists are too stupid to recognize intelligent policy decisions where they see it. YOu may in fact believe that: you are mistaken.

Your speculation about what China would have become without constructive engagement is just that...speculation. So I'll return to what we actually do know. The country's economy IS improving. With that wealth comes higher levels of education, greater exchange of information, and a vast increase in the number of Chinese travelling, studyhing and working overseas. I personally have quite a bit of faith in the merits of democracy and mixed economy, and in its potential to transform societies.

As for war - I assure you that a hermetically sealed China, in the psychotic late and post-Mao years, was infinitely more likely to declare war than a China linked to the world economy.

Hope you're feeling better.