Presidential Debate on China, as seen thus far

U.S. presidential candidates'

state of debate on China

The topic of China arose in Tuesday night's

Republican candidates' debate. We review.

By John Patrick Kusumi

China presents policy implications for politicians, and this year we are hearing increasing amounts of debate about China-related issues in U.S. mainstream discussions. During this early U.S. presidential campaign, we have heard interesting statements from Hillary Clinton on the Democrat side, and in Tuesday night's debate for Republican candidates, Duncan Hunter fielded two questions about China. It is apt that those questions were directed to Hunter, who is an anti-communist with a strong stance on U.S.-China relations.

Would I enjoy telling you "three cheers for Hillary Clinton," and/or "three cheers for Duncan Hunter"? Yes, if they deserved the enthusiasm. At this point, I will at best say "one and a half cheers" for both of them. Let's review the state of U.S. mainstream China debate.

I must measure the U.S. presidential candidate statements against "the gold standard" of China pronouncements: An earlier article from this quarter, titled 'A Clear Head In The China Debate' (http://en.epochtimes.com/news/5-5-27/29094.html). The key paragraph bears repeating:

The China Support Network and I have long advocated a prohibitive “tyranny tariff,” and I have stood my ground on saying that “free trade is for the free world.” Global free trade is flawed in two respects. It encourages trade deficits, and it is tantamount to a vast largess of “welfare for tyrants.” I believe that all free world nations should tariff all tyranny nations with which they run trade deficits- and conversely, they should not tariff if they are running a surplus with, e.g., China.

If Hillary Clinton or Duncan Hunter found their way to similar positioning, then it would indeed be time to say "three cheers" for them. Unfortunately, that's not what they recently said. In addition to a prohibitive tyranny tariff, my article noted that there are two compensatory tariffs that are justified based on China's currency manipulation and slave labor. Hillary Clinton and Duncan Hunter get one and a half cheers, because they appear to be in favor of a tariff to compensate for China's currency manipulation.

On March 1 2007, Clinton appeared on CNBC and spoke of "the sorts of changes, from intellectual property protection to currency evaluation that we need to do." In remarks aimed at China, she said that she wants "the countries with whom we do business to have protections for intellectual property; I want them to have a rule of law that is enforceable; I want them to not manipulate their currency." I have not seen her explicitly say tariff China, but the currency corrective tariff is sponsored by Chuck Schumer, the senior New York Senator and Clinton's opposite number in that state's delegation to the Senate. I am sure that she has heard about that tariff proposal; and, tariffs are inevitably a part of fixing trade deficits. Clinton has also said that she wants to fix those. If she follows through, then the word "tariff" is inevitably in her future.

On Tuesday, May 15, in the presidential debate, Rep. Duncan Hunter (R-CA) fielded two China related questions:

FOX NEWS: Congressman Hunter, virtually all U.S. exporters want access to China's huge market. You have said that you would deal with the enormous trade deficit this country has with that country. Tell me how you'd do it and how fast.

Duncan Hunter: Very simple. China is cheating on trade. They devalue their currency by 40%. That undercuts American markets [and] wipes American products off the shelf not only here, but around the world. And the latest study I've seen shows that we've lost 1.8 million jobs in the United States --high paying manufacturing jobs-- to China; 27,000 jobs lost in South Carolina alone. I would enforce the law with China --the trade rules with China. And the other thing I would do is, I would zero the manufacturing tax on American manufacturers. Our guys are down right now. They've been buffeted by these unfair trade practices. Let's bring back the American industrial base. And that's important for national security as well. That means we'll be able to have --you know, I sent out my teams, a couple of years ago when our [troops] were getting hurt by road side bombs. We found only one company left in America that could still make high grade armor steel plate. The arsenal of democracy is leaving these shores; we need to bring it back; I'll do that.

FOX NEWS: Congressman Hunter, many people feel the billions of dollars in American debt that China holds is a problem. If the Chinese decide to convert those dollars to euros, the value of the dollar drops. Do you see that as a security threat, and what would you do about it?

Duncan Hunter: If we don't do anything about it, it will be a security threat; and the other thing that will be a security threat is the fact that China is buying ships and planes and military equipment with hundreds of billions of American trade dollars coming their way. They've bought the Soveremenny class missile destroyers from the Russians, that were designed to do one thing: kill American aircraft carriers. So there is a security threat as we move --as we allow China to continue to cheat on trade. They are arming with American trade dollars. And they're lending our money back to us, and some people say, "Well, they'll treat us right if we get in a crunch." And I say "yeah, just like they treated that guy in front of the tank at Tiananmen Square." It's time for us to enforce trade rules with China: create a two way street, not a one way street, and that will give us much less exposure on the economic side that you're talking about, and the security side.

Duncan Hunter seems similar to Hillary Clinton in this one respect: The word "tariff" did not escape his lips in the remarks reported here. However, he is bound by the same laws of arithmetic that should bind Hillary Clinton, and indeed all presidential candidates. So again, tariffs are inevitably a part of fixing trade deficits. Hunter has said that he wants to fix those. If he follows through, then the word "tariff" is inevitably in his future.

I might have answered Hunter's second question differently. The worry is about the prospect of China selling off its dollar denominated holdings in the financial markets. American politicians should not feel "frightened into submission" to China on this account. In a free market, things sold are also bought at the other end of the transaction. In the "feared" eventuality, the U.S. debt instruments would change hands. Instead of feeling in debt to China, we would then be in debt to Japan and Europe -- our friends, rather than China. Would the shift depress the value of the dollar? In the short term, yes, somewhat. But the dollar has another reason for its decline in value -- the persistence (indeed the growth) of the U.S. trade deficit with China. In the midst of a shift (a rift?) in U.S. China relations, a falling trade deficit would relieve downward pressure on the dollar.

Let's imagine a spat with Communist China. The U.S. says to China, "Screw your exports. Stop sending us toxic food and defective products that need a recall anyway." This is a trade deficit reduction move and points the dollar upward. In reply, China says to the U.S., "Screw your debt instruments. We're selling them." This is a financial market event, and points the dollar downward. --Perhaps the reader can see my point, that this is like two chapters that cancel each other out. One adds lift to the dollar, and the other pressures it downwards. The two forces at least partially offset each other.

The value of the dollar is thereby balanced so that it is not the big worry in this scenario. More worrisome is the value of the bonds, yields, and interest rates. However, this concern would no longer have anything to do with China. As a financial market event, it can be left for Wall Street and the Fed to sort out. Big boys are supposed to be able to pull up their own socks, and tie their own shoes. Meanwhile on Main Street, trade deficit reduction actually eases inflation pressure, allows jobs to return, employment to rise, and wage growth to occur -- economics would remind us of the pre-Bill Clinton days, and Americans would no longer compete with Chinese slaves. Americans would have to value Americans more highly. A sense of community and nationhood could return as we emerge from recent dark years of profound betrayal by our own government.

THE WAGGING FINGER OF THE CHINA SUPPORT NETWORK

The entire U.S. establishment -- officials, candidates, media, and Wall Street -- deserves correction from the China Support Network in the following way. They have complained bitterly and given great attention to the matter of China's currency manipulation, which indeed needs correction. When the value of the Yuan / Renminbi is held down, it is tantamount to an export subsidy. The overall logic says that China is practicing economic dirty pool and is tilting or rigging the playing field for its exporters. --By the same overall logic, the application of slave labor is economic dirty pool, and it tilts or rigs the playing field in favor of its exporters. Indeed, the United States removed the economic implications of slave labor in the 1800s by adopting the Emancipation Proclamation. After that, the U.S. had a domestic market that was free of the influence and implications of slavery -- until more recently. The embrace of Communist China as a trading partner abrogates the Emancipation Proclamation in its economic dimension and spirit. This matter is just as foul, economically, as currency manipulation.

--So, why the double standard? As we see above, two presidential candidates have currency manipulation as matters with top of mind awareness. China's practice of applying slave labor is another violation of free market economics, equally hurtful to America, and deserves equally as much to have top of mind billing.

In my view, the U.S. establishment reveals a dark heart on this issue. Currency manipulation is an economic issue. Slave labor is an economic issue, but it is also a human rights violation. Those who are mean-spirited in the U.S. establishment too often COVER UP human rights violations, perhaps thinking that "hey -- if it lowers costs, it adds to the bottom line, right?" There are K-Street lobbyists and news executives who will snarl derisively at any mention of labor issues or human rights issues. When there is deprivation and human suffering, it seems to be to the merriment of such K-Street lobbyists and news executives -- are they taking pleasure at the expense of others, while they write, promote, and pass trade deals that give short shrift to these issues? They perhaps assume that history is written by the winners -- hence, as long as their side wins, "Who cares about underlying truths, or outcomes on the ground?" That suggests a false sense of impunity. For them to continue to "look good" in light of their actions, it requires their assumption to be correct.

The U.S. establishment has a double standard. Currency manipulation is an economic issue, and it has become popular for politicos to decry. Slave labor is an economic issue, and it has languished in the basement where the establishment keeps the issues it won't address. (We should admit that the China Support Network writes from that basement, "under the rug" of the establishment. The basement is shared with the likes of Ralph Nader, consumer safety, America's spine with communism, national security, and of course those like us, who want "a level playing field" as a matter of practice, not platitude.) They are two economic issues, both pertinent to a level playing field; and, they have achieved different levels of popularity and response from the decision makers.

Hillary Clinton and Duncan Hunter, while they get credit for raising some China issues, cannot receive "three cheers" from the China Support Network until they raise and address the issue of slave labor as employed by Communist China. (There is another double standard of the establishment: The administration opposes trade with Communist Cuba, because it "helps the regime." If it is bad with Cuba, then why does the establishment pretend like it is good with Communist China? The China Support Network can see right through the kabuki dances that U.S. politicians employ with the China issue.)

As was noted in my earlier article, 'A Clear Head In The China Debate,' to correctly handle the currency issue requires a corrective tariff, and to correctly handle the slave labor issue requires another corrective tariff, which is additive or cumulative, over and above the first corrective tariff. Better still would be to throw the whole WTO out the window and begin anew with writing trade policy. Tariffs are a step in the right direction, to the best interests of America and its people. As a cheerleader for tariffs, I should pick up a bullhorn and say, "Give me a 'T'!...." :-)

---

Published May 19, 2007 by the China Support Network (CSN). Begun as the American response group in 1989, CSN represents Americans who are "on the side" of the students in Tiananmen Square -- standing for democratic reform, human rights, and freedom in China. For dissident news; to support a stronger China policy; or get more information, see http://www.chinasupport.net/.

China Support Network announces "Egg Mao" interactive exhibit

March 13, 2007 (CSN) -- The China Support Network (CSN) on Tuesday announced an interactive online exhibit allowing web site visitors to throw eggs and ink at a portrait of Chairman Mao. The "Egg Mao" exhibit is based on a demonstration by Lu Decheng, Yu Zhijian, and Yu Dongyue in May 1989. The three men splattered Mao Zedong's portrait at Tiananmen Square in protest against China's government. In 2006 Lu Decheng, a refugee after many years in Chinese prison, was honored for his actions by Chinese dissident leaders in Washington, D.C.

"We celebrate the artistic protest of Lu Decheng and his companions," said CSN executive director Curry Kenworthy, "and we invite all to symbolically join in that protest by visiting this exhibit." Kenworthy started the project due to his admiration for the protest and its potential to inspire continued action and support for the democracy cause. "At first I imagined demonstrations where passersby could lob real eggs at a Mao portrait--and I hope that will be a feature at a future rally--but eventually settled on a virtual protest to allow anyone, anywhere, to get involved in the experience."

Flash artist Randall Bender brought the concept to life with expressive, energetic design as an application that runs in web browsers. No download is required. Visitors point and click to aim egg graphics at Mao's image, which hangs overhead. Sounds accompany the animation of eggs hitting the portrait, and cheers sometimes break out in response. A button is provided to clear away the ink and start over.

CSN's Taiwan director Paul Risenhoover commented, "Finally a fun and worthy e-game!" Founder John Patrick Kusumi also expressed his "kudos" for the exhibit.

Mao Zedong, China's first Communist dictator, has been recognized by the Guinness Book of World Records as the top mass murderer of all time, having caused the deaths of tens of millions of Chinese citizens as well as the suffering of countless more from hardships, starvation, lack of freedoms and life choices, public humiliation, broken families, campaigns turning citizens against each other, imprisonment, slave labor, violence, cruelty, and torture. His reforms also attacked Chinese culture, arts, education, science, and intellect.

The Egg Mao exhibit is available with introduction and directions in English and Chinese at these web addresses:

http://chinasupport.net/eggmao/

http://chinasupport.net/eggmao/chinese.htm

An animated banner is available for other web sites to use in linking to the exhibit.

World Bank adopts works from CSN bird flu art project

by Desirae Clodfelter


Image: One of Gerardo Bravo's H5N1 art works

February 26, 2007 (CSN) -- The World Bank is now utilizing art produced by Gerardo Bravo while volunteering for the China Support Network (CSN) to raise awareness about the H5N1 virus, more commonly known as "Bird Flu." Bravo, an artist of Mexican heritage, used a combination of ancient and modern styles to create works of oil paint on gold leaf canvases. These depictions concentrate on prevention of risky behaviors that can lead to contraction of the disease and the threat of a global pandemic.

Bravo's work became a part of the World Bank Art Program after he contacted them about his avian flu series and offered to donate a piece to the Bank. Marina Galvani, the art Curator for the World Bank Art Program, says the works were chosen because of "the visual and emotional impact that Mr. Bravo's work has on staff is remarkable." She thinks they will have a positive impact on the people who view them and announced an installation of his entire series in the next few months. Galvani also said the World Bank Art Program believes "the use of artworks to talk about complex topics has been very successful in the past and we hope we will be able to educate people on a more pro-active preventive behavior on avian flu with the presentation of Mr. Bravo's series."

The project originated when CSN executive director Curry Kenworthy requested works from volunteer artists aimed at Bird Flu awareness and prevention. Kenworthy described Bravo as a "champion of the cause" who has produced numerous paintings. In response to the World Bank's adoption of Bravo's art, Kenworthy states that "I feel it is appropriate that his work is getting this kind of prominent attention."

The H5N1 virus has already left its imprint on Asia where millions of birds have been slaughtered and people continue to die by the dozens each year. It has spread across the world and has infected fowl in the Middle East, Eastern and Western Europe, and Africa. While the disease is easily transmitted among fowls, it has not adapted enough to transmit among humans as well. But many specialists think it is only a matter of time before a case comes along that would trigger a global pandemic.

To delay or prevent that scenario, CSN's bird flu project has fostered awareness through non-traditional methods, such as paintings. CSN has also drawn attention to lack of government transparency in China and other countries as an H5N1 risk factor.

For more information about Bravo's bird flu art works or for permission to use the works in avian influenza prevention campaigns, contact the World Bank. For more information about Gerardo Bravo and his other works, see his home page.


Image: example of Ken Keegan's bird flu art set

The CSN bird flu project also offers a set of art works from Ken Keegan (example shown above) to be used in noncommercial bird flu prevention materials. For high-resolution images, contact CSN or Ken Keegan. Keegan requires attribution and an image of the resulting use for his records.
_____
Desirae Clodfelter is a CSN news writer and a freshman at Furman University politically active in social justice issues.

China NFL game will kick off Olympic countdown

by Demetrius Klitou

Last year, it was announced that a NFL exhibition game between the New England Patriots and the Seattle Seahawks will occur in Beijing on August 8, 2007. This year a reminder came during the global television broadcast of Super Bowl XVI.

The deal was struck between the NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, Patriots Chairman and CEO Robert Kraft, NBC Universal Sports & Olympics Chairman Dick Ebersol and the Communist government of China.

At the press conference announcement on September 24, 2006, the parties illustrated their enthusiasm for the huge and unprecedented event. Everything was all very exciting. It will be the first NFL game in China; it will be played at the Worker’s Stadium; and it will occur exactly one year before the opening of the 2008 Summer Olympic Games.

But, the parties did not veil their intentions. It was all business. NBC and its parent company, General Electric, were furthering their business partnership with China. The National Football League, a limited liability company, was setting the groundwork for a successful expansion into China. Robert Kraft, the founder, owner, chairman and CEO of The Kraft Group, a holding company with interests concentrated in paper & packaging, manufacturing, sports & entertainment, and real estate development, was representing his long-standing business relationship with China.

The NFL has already made the necessary business moves by creating www.nflchina.com, opening an office in Shanghai and finalizing a deal that will allow CCTV to broadcast Sunday Night Football live in a partnership with NBC starting this season.

China stands to gain publicity for the 2008 Summer Olympic Games by trumpeting the Olympics countdown and showing off one of their communist venues, the "Worker’s Stadium." The China Bowl serves as yet another layer of international legitimacy and support for the atrocities and human rights violations the Chinese Communist government commits everyday.

According to Kraft, "over the next two to three decades, they're (Chinese) just looking for things American."[1] However, the Communist Party will see to it that this not include democracy and human rights.

The game will broadcast live on NBC, August 8 at 8:30 a.m. (EST). I appeal to Americans to boycott this game and voice their concerns to the beneficiaries.

[1] <http://www.patriots.com/mediacenter/index.cfm?ac=VideoNewsdetail&amp;amp;pid=21335&pcid=141&searchstring=>

Demetrius Klitou is a member of the China Support Network board of directors.

Democracy or war?

by Curry Kenworthy

Since the publication of the Nine Commentaries, we've been watching the struggle between two mighty forces in China.

On the one hand, the newly-refurbished democracy movement has surged. The Nine Commentaries and the Epoch Times have made an unprecedented sweep throughout the world and even through China's mainland, while the Communist Party withdrawal movement has racked up millions of signatures. New Tang Dynasty Television broadcasts real news into Chinese homes. Protests within China have continued to grow. This is a good time for the movement.

However, China's Communist leaders still exercise their complete power and control over the population. Moreover, the tyrants enjoy almost universal support from the world's governments for the Party's policies and politics. They are wined and dined by the gullible leaders of free nations, who speak in favor of the One China Policy and praise China's progress. They have a growing arsenal of weaponry enriched with foreign technology. With the help of Western corporations, they are able to keep the lid on information and free speech on the internet, while censorship and control in media and daily life continues. The Western media presents a softened view of China's government that is quite positive when compared to the real thing. Finally, the enormous global trade continually pours money into the CCP's pockets. These bad boys are not hard up for cash.

In the democracy movement and among those who support it, I believe the latter advantages of the regime may be underestimated and overlooked as we celebrate the triumphs of the dissidents. We continually hear rhetoric about the imminent fall of the Communist Party. We say "goodbye" to the totalitarian government and hear it described as a weakened structure that will crumble at any moment. We cheer on the events and milestones in our movement and confidently expect a new flag to fly over China soon.

It's only natural to cheer our cause and look forward expectantly to victory. But are we still careful in taking the best approach? Could we be celebrating our victory too soon? Are we covering all the bases and continuing to assess all the needs that must be met and considerations that must be taken into account in order to ensure the outcome of this mission?

In fact, looking objectively at the two sides, I would be forced to admit that the CCP has about as many things in its favor as it has stacked against it. Global political support, continued firm control over the population, ever-increasing military abilities, economic growth with a huge infusion of cash, space excursions aided by Western investors--none of these are trifling matters to be ignored. While the recent achievements of the democracy movement have been outstanding and we have great reason for hope, there is still the other side of the scale to be considered, and the weight on that other side is significant.

As you know, the Communist Party has at least one more card up its sleeve. That is war, which helps to divert the attention of the population to outside enemies rather than the oppression at home. The Party has invested enormous effort and expense into preparing for war. It has created legislation justifying an invasion of Taiwan. It has focused on asymmetrical tactics and technology upgrades in order to face off with America's military might, so that Assassin's Mace and Unrestricted War are now part of our vocabulary. Even leaked documents, if genuine, confirm that war is important for maintaining power and that serious war plans are currently underway. Chinese officials have repeatedly made threatening statements about Taiwan and the U.S., and China's media have also carefully maintained a high level of anti-Japanese hostility in the population.

From all indications, war is a very real possibility. It seems that if the CCP continues in power, one could reasonably suppose that conflict is just a matter of time, depending on the Communist Party's sense of need and readiness. If we accept this assumption, then ultimately we are faced with the question of democracy or war. Which will happen first? That's the million-dollar question.

There are a number of possible scenarios for a war between China, Taiwan, and the United States. Some are worse than others. But in any case, whether conflict is more limited or more widespread, it's beyond doubt that such a war would be very costly. The Communist Party is prepared to sacrifice many more lives to reach its objectives than the level of casualties which Western powers would deem acceptable. China's military will choose the time and place of conflict. And it has recently acquired technologies and tactics which may prove challenging for an opposing force. Perhaps the Chinese leaders overestimate their own abilities, and perhaps not. Either way, if they undertake a war it will not end without a great loss of life and expense, or a great loss for freedom, or both.

Added to the very high cost of the military action itself are the future consequences for the Chinese people if war succeeds in strengthening and prolonging Party rule, as the Communists hope. Of course it's a gamble, but tyrants are willing to take risks because the stakes are high--they have everything to gain and nothing to lose, since democratization could expose them to criminal charges and take away their wealth and power. If they succeed, how many more decades will China's people live without freedom? What impact will this have on the rest of the world? Will tyranny diminish in this century, or will it grow? Such possibilities don't bear thinking about, and we tend to shrink away from even considering them, but we must keep them in mind, because they are real dangers.

To the democracy movement and to the people of China who desire freedom, I pose this unhappy truth: China must have democracy, or we will bear the cost and uncertain outcome of war. Which will prevail? I urge this movement and the Chinese people to redouble their efforts for the peaceful liberation of the world's most populous nation. We must not become complacent and trust that our current efforts and strategies are sufficient and that victory is assured. That could be a fatal mistake. I hope to see new, innovative, and far-reaching strategies and efforts as people realize the extreme urgency of the times. The struggle for freedom must rise to an even higher level if it is to succeed.

To struggle for success implies a negative possibility, but let me say it clearly and explicitly: we could fail. The efforts for freedom, as spectacular as they are, could fall short, and tyranny could continue in China while a war is waged with terrible consequences. No one can afford to blindly believe that winning is assured. We must face the reality that this current situation could still lead to a tragic outcome if intervention is not sufficient, and we can't allow that to happen. It will require the utmost efforts within our ability to ensure the success of this cause. Nothing less will suffice. All those who support freedom in China should renew the struggle with every bit of ingenuity and strength they can muster.

Curry Kenworthy is executive director of the China Support Network.

Originally published at AFAR.