Something about a mirror
Near the end of an article where Bush says, "We may face no greater challenge from a single country than from Iran," (which I agree) there was this quote about China. "China's leaders must realize, however, that they cannot stay on this peaceful path while holding on to old ways of thinking and acting that exacerbate concerns throughout the region and the world," Bush wrote. He said these "old ways" include enlarging China's military in a non-transparent way, expanding trade, yet seeking to direct markets rather than opening them up, and supporting energy-rich nations without regard to their misrule or misbehavior at home or abroad. Which got me thinking. If you substituted "China" for "US" how would that list differ...
Enlarging US' military in a non-transparent way...check. No need to elaborate here.
Expanding trade, yet seeking to direct markets rather than opening them up...check. The US has repeatedly broken off multi-lateral free trade talks in favor of one-on-one trade talks with emerging markets so as to allow the US to keep its barriers up, while bringing theirs down.
Supporting energy-rich nations without regard to their misrule or misbehavior at home or abroad...check. I'm guessing holding hands with a Saudi dictator counts here.
Now for the inflametory part. Perhaps my biggest concern for this country is that more and more, by most any objective level, our peer group sucks. This is not just a Bush problem, it goes back before him, (Clinton jumps to mind) but he's on point now. Rather than rise above the other nations and act as a beacon, we're increasingly wallowing in the same mud. Its like we've lost our vision, drive and trust in the experiment that is America. The hypocracy is going to catch up with us, both internally and externally.
Posts
4 comments:
So what was the context in which Bush argued that China should be more tranparent in its military expansion?
Not being overly bright, I don't understand your question...
I'd like to know how the article explained what Bush meant by criticizing China on its less than transparent military. Seeing as you accepted the charge, I'm sure you understood what they meant.
My point is that the US does not develop its military in a transparant manner, so how can it "criticize" China for not doing the same. It was pot and kettle comment, as were the other two.
By the way, of all of Bush's point, if I understood them, this was the silliest. I don't expect ANY nation to build its military in a transparant manner, especially ours. To me it runs counter to the whole process.
Post a Comment