Prepping Minds for War Against China 為對中國作戰做好思想准備
Jan 19, 2011 7:43 AM
by Shamus Cooke
為對中國作戰做好思想准備You'd think the U.S. was already at war with China, given the immense
amount of anti-China rhetoric spouting from the government and media.
But selling wars takes time. The average American hasn't bought in to
this false advertising yet. So the big lie will be repeated until its
roots are deeply sunk into the American psyche: China, says the U.S.
government, is a threat that needs to be "dealt with.”
從政府和傳媒噴出大量的反華言論來看, 你會以為美國已經在對中國開戰, 但是販賣戰爭需要時間, 普通美國老百姓還沒接受這种虛假的廣告, 因此, 巨大的謊言會一直在重复直到生根和深深地沉沒在美國人的心理上: 美國政府說中國是一個的必須"對付"的威脅。
This
propaganda assault is multi-faceted, taking aim from all directions. Any
China-related issue -- military, economic, and social -- is open for
attack. For example, the head of the U.S. Department of Defense, Robert
Gates, recently visited Asia and focused much of his trip talking about
China as a "military threat.”
這樣的宣傳襲擊是多面化的, 全方位瞄准, 任何有關中國的事情 : 軍事的, 經濟的
, 和社會的 , 都可以自由攻擊, 例如: 最近訪問亞洲和集中大部分旅程于中國的
美國國防部長羅伯特‧蓋茨就談到中國是個"軍事威脅。"
What is this threat? Gates
answers that China has shown a "rapid buildup of military capability,”
proven by its production of a "stealth fighter.” The U.S. media had a
field day with this news, intending to sow terror in the psyche of the
American public.
這個"軍事威脅"是什么東西? 蓋茨回答說中國可以生產隱形戰机, 顯示出一种"迅
速成長的軍事能力", 為了在美國公眾心理上播种恐怖, 美國媒体拿這個消息大做
文章。
A quick glance at the numbers reveals that Mr.
Gates and the unquestioning U.S. media are unabashed hypocrites: China
is nowhere near the U.S. when it comes to military expenditures: the
U.S., under Obama, will spend $725 billion in 2011(!), while China will
spend $80 billion.
匆匆一看數字可見蓋茨先生和不質疑的美國傳媒是多么不覺羞恥的偽君子: 中國軍
費跟美國比是沒得比的: 20年奧巴馬領導下的美國軍費是7250億美元, 中國才800億
而已。
When it comes to overseas military bases, China has zero; the U.S. has at least 737!
說到海外軍事基地, 中國是零, 美國最少有737個 !
While
Gates was traveling throughout Asia on his Chinese provocation tour,
Hillary Clinton joined the attack, targeting China's human rights record
in a lengthy, inflammatory speech, which included this slight:
當蓋茨在他的激怒中國人之旅穿梳整個亞洲時, 希大媽 (希拉莉克林頓的簡稱 
)
在一場冗長的, 充滿煽動性的演講針對中國的人權記錄參加了攻擊行動, 其中包括:
"...
when China lives up to its obligations of respecting and protecting
universal human rights, it will not only benefit more than one billion
people, it will also benefit the long-term peace, stability and
prosperity of China."
“...當中國名副其實的肩負尊重和保護普遍人權，這不僅將造福十几億人民的義務，
也有利于長期和平，穩定与繁榮的中國。“
Yes, China is a violator of human rights,
but in voicing her criticism Mrs. Clinton managed to raise the bar of
hypocrisy to new heights.
是的, 中國是違犯人權, 但是希大媽在發出批評聲音的同時, 美國的偽善指數也提
到新高。
Has Clinton forgotten that Guantanamo
Bay remains open, filled with tortured people who are charged with no
crimes? Has she forgotten that Bagram Air base in Afghanistan continues
to deny the International Red Cross access to its "black site" detention
center, since they would discover the torture chambers described by
ex-detainees? Need we mention Bradley Manning, who remains in solitary
confinement without any criminal charges, for allegedly informing the
American public about U.S. war crimes in Iraq and Afghanistan and all
kinds of secret machinations?
希大媽忘記了關塔南摩監獄還沒關閉, 住滿了被折磨的人, 而這些人的罪名都是莫須有, 都沒得到審判? 她是否忘記了在阿富汗巴格拉姆空軍基地不斷的拒絕國際紅十字會進入它的"黑點"扣留中心", 害怕他們拿着曾經被拘留的人的描述而找到折磨密室 ? 要不要我們提到因為被指控向公眾泄漏有關美國在伊拉克和阿富汗的
戰爭罪行, 陰謀, 和各种秘密武器而沒有得任何刑事指控就被單獨監禁起來。
But before Clinton's speech became
yesterday’s news, Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner provided
anti-China reinforcements, this time blasting China's economy. The
Washington Post reports:
但是在希大媽的演講變成昨天的新聞前, 財長蓋特納為反華言論火上加油提供后援
, 這次是轟中國的經濟, 華盛頓郵報報導:
"China's unwillingness to allow its
currency to rise in value is hampering U.S. competitiveness in the
global marketplace and harming the Chinese economy, Treasury Secretary
Timothy F. Geithner said Wednesday... " (January 12, 2011).
“中國不愿意讓人民幣升值妨礙了美國在全球市場上的競爭力，
也損害了中國的經濟，財政部長蓋特納周三表示...“（2011年1月12日）。
Once
again, utter hypocrisy. No single government has caused more damage to
the global economy than the United States, whose corporations sparked
the global downturn by saturating the world with trillions of dollars in
fraudulent housing mortgages sold as top-rated investments.
再一次, 完全的偽善, 美國的大企業用數万億美元的詐騙性房貸當頂級投資傾銷全
世界走火触發全球經濟衰退, 世界上沒有一個政府比美國政府對全球經濟造成更大
的損害。
This
policy was encouraged by the U.S. government, which gave the
corporations cheap money with little oversight, a strategy that
continues to this day with the Federal Reserve printing dollars non-stop
that U.S. corporations are using to speculate on foreign currencies and
drive the prices up of oil and other raw materials worldwide.
這個政策受到美國政府鼓勵, 美國政府給這些大企業便宜的資本和最小的監督, 一
种政策沿用到今天, 邦儲局無限印鈔, 美國公司用這些鈔票在外匯市場進行投机活
動, 驅使世界油价和其他原材料价格暴升。
The
above-mentioned Obama administration officials have no problem peddling
their anti-China bias to the U.S. media, which stumble over themselves
to provide assistance whenever possible.
上述种种, 奧巴馬政府官員也沒有問題對美國的傳媒兜售他們的反華偏見，
這些傳媒無論何時也要傾力提供援助。
The New York Times recently
published an editorial entitled, The Real Problem With China:
紐約時報最近發表一篇社論主題為: 跟中國的真正問題。
"For the United States, the No.1 problem with China’s economy is probably intellectual property theft.” (January 12, 2011).
"對美國來說, 跟中國經濟的首要問題好可能是知識產權盜竊" ( 2011年1月12日)
In
reality, the real problem that the U.S. government has with China is
two-fold: China's growth is pushing aside U.S. influence/power all over
the world, which has negative influence on the profits of U.S.
corporations, which are losing contracts to Chinese companies.
現實中, 美國政府跟中國的真正問題一分為二: 中國的增長把美國在全世界的影響力置于一側, 這對跟中國公司競爭時喪失合約的美國大企業的利潤有負面的影響。
In
response, the U.S. is provoking China in the media and militarily,
encircling China by arming U.S. allies in the region, especially India,
Japan and South Korea. Hillary Clinton responded to this allegation by
denying it, while the Obama administration immediately contradicted her
by its actions. The New York Times published an article addressing the
issue while failing to connect the dots:
作為回應，美國在傳媒和軍事上對触怒中國, 給美國在地區內的盟國, 特別是印度,
日本, 韓國, 提供軍備以包圍中國, 希大媽對此指控的回應是加以否認, 而奧巴馬
政府立即以行動跟她的否認互相矛盾。針對這個問題紐約時報發表了一篇文章，与
此同時, 無法把這些圓點連接起來:
"The United States is
not bent on containing China, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton
said Friday, but the Obama administration is cultivating other allies
across Asia to help it manage Beijing’s increasingly bold projection of
military and economic power." (January 12, 2011).
"希大媽在星期五表示, 美國不是決心包圍中國, 但是奧巴馬班子卻在培植橫跨亞洲的其他盟國幫助處理北京大膽的軍事和經濟上日益增長和擴張。 "( 2011年1月12日)。
This policy of
encirclement and provocation can easily lead to war. As Obama continues
to tighten the noose while China struggles to squirm its neck free, the
odds grow that military "incidents" may happen, especially as the U.S.
throws additional military force in waters just off China's coast in the
South China Sea.
這种包圍和煽動的政策很容易引發戰爭, 當奧巴馬繼續拉緊套索, 中國的頸努力在爭扎蠕動走出套索, 軍事沖突問題出現的可能性越來越大, 特別是美國在中國海岸
不遠的南中國海域增派軍事部隊。
The Obama administration joins the right wing
in trying to blame both the recession and the startling U.S. inequality
in wealth on China. The real culprits are the corporate friendly
politicians in the Democratic and Republican parties, which have both
spent decades cutting taxes for the rich and corporations, while
encouraging the wealthy to flee the U.S. and its living wage jobs for
the third world, where slave wages equal larger profits.
奧巴馬班子加入右派試圖把經濟衰退和美國的貧富不均問題歸罪于中國, 那真正的
犯人是那些跟大公司友好的兩党政客, 兩党都化了好几十年為富人和大公司減稅,
同時鼓勵富有的帶著作他們的低工資工作逃离美國, 到那些奴隸式的工資相等于巨
大利潤的第三世界國家去。
The
best way for working people to deal with this situation is to ignore the
anti-China hype and focus their fire on the U.S. government and U.S.
corporations. Demanding jobs from the government NOW that are paid for
by taxing the rich is the best way to overcome the economic problems of
the U.S. Working people cannot be distracted by fake overseas threats,
whether they are alleged terrorists or foreign governments. The real
threat continues to be closer to home.
勞工階級處理這种問題的最好方法是無視這些夸張的反華宣傳, 聚焦于轟美國政府和大公司, 要求政府透過向富人征稅支付創造工作崗位, 這是克服美國經濟問題
的最好方法, 工人階級不能被一些偽造的海外威脅而分散注意, 那怕他們是被定義為恐怖分子還是外國政府, 真正的威脅仍然是离家較近的地方。
附 :
(1)
January 11, 2011
The Real Problem With China
WASHINGTON
When China’s president, Hu Jintao, visits here next week, the exchange
rate between Chinese and American currency will inevitably become a big
topic of conversation.
China has been holding down the value of its currency, the renminbi,
for years, making Chinese exports to the United States cheaper and
American exports to China more expensive. The renminbi’s recent rise has
been too modest to change the situation, and Mr. Hu’s state visit is
sure to highlight the real tensions between the countries.
Yet the focus on the currency has nonetheless become excessive. The
truth is that the exchange rate is not the main problem for American
companies hoping to sell more products in China and, in the process,
create more jobs in this country. The exchange rate does not need to be
the focus of next week’s meetings.
For the United States, the No. 1 problem with China’s economy is
probably intellectual property theft. Technology companies, for example,
continue to notice Chinese
government agencies downloading software updates for programs they have never bought, at least not legally.
No wonder China has become the world’s second-largest market for
computer hardware sales — but is only the eighth-largest for software
sales.
Next on the list, say people who work in China or do business there, is the myriad
protectionist barriers China has put up. These barriers make this country’s recent efforts at
“buy American” protectionism
look minor league. In some cases, Beijing has insisted that products
sold in China must not only be made there but be conceived and designed
there. The policy goes by the name “indigenous innovation.”
The renminbi certainly matters, too. It affects the price of every
American product sold there and every Chinese product sold here. But
discussion of
the renminbi typically ends up exaggerating the problem somewhat by relying on an imperfect measure.
The most relevant comparison of two currencies is one that is adjusted
for inflation in the two countries. When inflation is higher in one
country, as in China today, it means that country’s products are
becoming more expensive — and imports into the country become relatively
cheaper. In effect, the real price of Chinese-made goods is rising
faster than the exchange rate suggests.
Without taking inflation into account, the renminbi has risen 3 percent against
the dollar
since last summer, when China began letting it rise. Once inflation is
accounted for, the real increase has been about 5 percent. At that pace,
the renminbi could erase its artificial undervaluation — as some
economists estimate it — in less than two years.
Of course, one reason for the rise is the political pressure from the
United States and other countries. As much as China’s Communist Party
leaders may claim otherwise, they really do respond to international
lobbying sometimes.
The obvious question now is how the Obama administration can apply
similar pressure on intellectual property theft and trade barriers.
Arthur Kroeber, a Beijing-based consultant and editor of the China
Economic Quarterly, goes so far as to call the currency discussion a
distraction. “What exactly there is to be gained by quibbling over a
point or two in the annual appreciation rate,” Mr. Kroeber says, “is
beyond me.”
The best hope for getting another country’s leaders to do anything is to
persuade them that it’s in their interest. That task is not so easy
with trade barriers, because every time an American company is kept from
making a sale in China, a Chinese company presumably benefits. It makes
the sale instead or, in the case of piracy, it saves money that it
would have spent on the authentic product.
Still, China’s leaders have reason to be nervous about all the
barriers they have built. China’s elite, in government and business, are
deeply concerned that their companies remain unable to create truly innovative products. The obsession with the fact that no Chinese citizen
has won a scientific Nobel Prize stems partly from this worry.
Opening up your economy to more competition may bring some short-term
pain, but it also forces companies to become stronger and more creative
— or to wither. Competition breeds innovation.
This self-interest argument is the one that Mr. Obama and his advisers
are most comfortable making. They worry that outright pressure on China
will put it on the defensive and ultimately backfire. Sometimes, they
may worry too much. Pressure clearly can work, as the last few months
have demonstrated.
The United States should be able to round up some allies on these
issues, just as it has with recent military matters relating to China.
BASF and Siemens, two big German companies, have
already complained
about Chinese protectionism, as have some European leaders. Other
countries also have reason to be frustrated with the exchange rate:
relative to many currencies other than the dollar, the renminbi has
actually lost value in recent months.
But even by itself, the United States is big enough — and important
enough to Chinese companies — to exert some pressure. That is why the
recent “buy American” provisions in a couple of bills, small as they may
be, are useful. The same goes for continued discussion of Congressional
bills that would penalize China.
If anything, the Republican takeover of the House offers a new chance to
hold hearings on those bills. Representative Dave Camp, the Michigan
Republican who will become chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, has
been a
vocal critic of China’s protectionism.
Finally, both Republicans and Democrats can use Mr. Hu’s coming visit
to emphasize — to him and to the many Chinese citizens who will be
following — just how frustrated many Americans are with the economy’s
woes. As the scholar Zhang Guoqing
wrote
in a Chinese newspaper recently, “A high unemployment rate and the
trouble in stimulating the economy” are helping to create “enormous
hidden dangers” in the United States.
One of those dangers is the possibility that American politicians will
eventually decide that tough talk isn’t enough to satisfy voters’ anger.
If that day comes, the United States and China could end up in a trade
war that only worsens the situation for both countries.
(2)
Geithner: China must speed currency reform, address intellectual property issues
By Brady Dennis
Washington Post Staff Writer
Wednesday, January 12, 2011;
11:11 PM
China's unwillingness to allow its currency to rise in value is
hampering U.S. competitiveness in the global marketplace and harming the
Chinese economy, Treasury Secretary Timothy F. Geithner said Wednesday,
ahead of next week's highly anticipated visit by Chinese President Hu
Jintao.
Beijing's currency policies remain the most contentious
economic issue
between China and Washington. By keeping the value of its currency low,
China gives its exporters an advantage by making their goods cheaper on
the international market.
The undervaluation of the renminbi, also known as the yuan, "is not a
tenable policy for China or for the world economy," Geithner said
in a morning speech at the Johns Hopkins School of Advanced International Studies.
Although China has allowed the yuan to appreciate slightly against the
dollar over the past year, Geithner urged Chinese leaders to accelerate
that process. Failure to do so could cause a jump in inflation for China
and a damaging rise in asset prices, "both of which will threaten
future growth," he said.
"We believe it is in China's interest to allow the currency to
appreciate more rapidly in response to market forces. And we believe
China will do so because the alternative will be too costly - both for
China and for China's relations with the rest of the world."
In addition to more aggressively raising the value of their currency,
the Chinese should take action to curb intellectual property theft,
Geithner said.
"We are willing to make progress on these issues, but our ability to do
so will depend, of course, on how much progress we see from China," he
said.
Despite the firm words on China's currency policies, Geithner offered a
largely diplomatic assessment of economic relations between the two
countries. He mentioned the debate that is unfolding within China about
the pace of economic reforms, and he said that despite American concerns
over currency issues, China's explosive economy creates enormous
opportunities for the United States.
The
economic relationship between China and the United States
offers "tremendous benefits" to both countries, he said, adding that
"our economic strengths are largely complementary. . . . We have a great
deal invested in each other's success."
President Obama and Hu will have plenty of topics to wrestle with next
week, including military tension on the Korean Peninsula, human rights
and international trade. But the economic divisions between the two
nations will figure prominently on their agenda.
The currency issue prompted the U.S. House to pass a special tax last
year to offset what congressional leaders deemed China's "currency
manipulation," though the Senate did not take a similar vote.
Geithner said that Hu's state visit comes "at a time of important
transition for the world economy," noting that while many major national
economies are still reeling from the financial crisis, emerging ones
such as China are in the early stages of "a long period of very rapid
economic growth."
The United States, he said, lies at the crossroads of those divergent
paths: Its economy is likely to grow at only half the rate of major
emerging economies, but twice as rapidly as Japan's and Europe's.
"These growth dynamics will fundamentally change the balance in the
world economy, forcing changes in the architecture of the trade and
financial systems," Geithner said.
Although China will play a significant role in that changing
architecture, and although its economic policies undoubtedly will affect
the fortunes of the United States, Geithner said, America's economic
fate ultimately rests largely in its own hands.
"The prosperity of Americans depends overwhelmingly on the economic
policies we pursue to strengthen American competitiveness," he said. "We
need to understand that our strength as a nation will depend not on
choices made by China's leaders, but on choices we make here at home."
A key part of that challenge will be restoring fiscal responsibility,
Geithner said, foreshadowing a policy debate that is certain to take
center stage in Washington in coming months. He said the government must
find ways to spend less, and in time must devise a simpler, more
equitable tax system.
Geithner said those key challenges, as well as others such as investing
in research and development, educational reforms, and public
infrastructure, are fundamental to the country's success.
"They are not just an economic imperative, they are a national security
imperative," Geithner said. "Our strength as a nation depends on the
ability of our political system to move quickly enough to put in place
solutions to our long-term problems."
View all comments that have been posted about this article
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ wp-dyn/content/article/2011/ 01/12/AR2011011201439.html
(3)
January 14, 2011
U.S. Is Not Trying to Contain China, Clinton Says
WASHINGTON — The United States is not bent on containing
China, Secretary of State
Hillary Rodham Clinton
said Friday, but the Obama administration is cultivating other allies
across Asia to help it manage Beijing’s increasingly bold projection of
military and economic power.
In a closely watched address delivered four days before President
Hu Jintao’s
scheduled state visit to Washington, Mrs. Clinton sought to balance
tensions over China’s military buildup and disagreements over North
Korea with the administration’s desire to work with Beijing on issues
like
climate change.
“Distrust lingers on both sides,” she said in her speech at the State Department.
Mrs. Clinton said that while the United States-China relationship was
critically important, “there is no such thing as a G-2,” the phrase
popularized by analysts who argue that Washington and Beijing, widely
seen as the economic superpowers of today and tomorrow, should steer the
world.
She also delivered a polite criticism of China’s human rights record
that was more detailed than she had previously offered as secretary of
state, citing the persecution of the pro-democracy group Charter 08 and
the imprisonment of
Liu Xiaobo,
the political activist who was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize but whose
family was blocked from attending the prize ceremony in Norway last
month.
“The longer China represses freedoms,” she said, “the longer that
Nobel Prize winners’ empty chairs in Oslo will remain a symbol of a great nation’s unrealized potential and unfulfilled promise.”
Mrs. Clinton’s speech — on the heels of an economic address by
Treasury Secretary
Timothy F. Geithner and a visit to Beijing by Defense Secretary
Robert M. Gates
— sets the stage for what some analysts say is the most important visit
by a Chinese leader to the United States in years.
While Mr. Geithner and Mr. Gates tackled two clear irritants in the
relationship — China’s undervalued currency and the increasingly defiant
People’s Liberation Army — Mrs. Clinton confronted a broader set of
strategic tensions, including China’s testy relations with its neighbors
and its reluctance to bear down on a belligerent North Korea.
“Some in the region and some here at home see China’s growth as a threat
that will lead either to cold war-style conflict or American decline,”
she said. “And some in China worry that the United States is bent on
containing their rise and constraining their growth — a view that is
stoking a new streak of assertive Chinese nationalism. We reject those
views.”
Nevertheless, Mrs. Clinton spoke at length about the administration’s
work to reinforce ties with cold war allies like Japan and South Korea,
to restore long-neglected relationships with countries in Southeast Asia
and to court emerging powers like India.
Last July, Mrs. Clinton infuriated Chinese officials when she thrust the
United States into a long-running dispute between China and its
neighbors over control of some small, strategically important islands in
the South China Sea. The United States, analysts said, put a spotlight
on China’s bullying behavior.
“We are working to firmly embed our relationship with China within a
broader regional framework, because it is inseparable from the
Asia-Pacific’s web of security alliances,” she said.
To experts on China in the audience, the message was unmistakable.
“She’s saying, ‘We’re still trying to have a reciprocal relationship, but if it doesn’t work, we’re he
dging our bets,’ ” said
Orville Schell, who heads the Center on U.S.-China Relations at the
Asia Society.
Mrs. Clinton said that China had cooperated in imposing international
sanctions against Iran over its nuclear program. And she said China was
finally starting to help the United States try to restrain North Korea’s
behavior after the torpedoing of a South Korean warship and a deadly
artillery raid.
“We fear, and have discussed this in depth with our Chinese friends,
that failure to respond clearly to the sinking of a South Korea military
vessel would embolden North Korea to continue on a dangerous course,”
she said.
Mrs. Clinton also reinforced points made by Mr. Geithner and Mr. Gates.
She said that China needed to let its currency rise more rapidly to ease
the trade imbalance with the United States. And she contended that the
Chinese military should be open to more extensive ties with the Pentagon
to ease American concerns about its motives.
For all that, Mrs. Clinton was clearly not trying to provoke China. She
spoke of global challenges, like climate change and development, in
which Beijing and Washington should work together.
Mrs. Clinton’s speech inaugurated a lecture series dedicated to
Richard C. Holbrooke,
the hard-charging diplomat who died last month. Early in his career, he
served as assistant secretary of state for East Asian and Pacific
affairs, the youngest holder of that post to date.
Noting that Mr. Holbrooke had played a role in the normalization of
diplomatic relations with China in 1979, Mrs. Clinton said that the
relationship between the two nations had “arrived at a critical
juncture.”
“It is clear that we cannot paper over the difference between our
countries; nor should we try to do so,” she said. “But the future of our
relationship can be strong if we each meet our responsibilities as
great nations.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/ 01/15/world/asia/15diplo.html? _r=1&hp
