World Tribune.com


What is China doing with its $162 billion trade surplus with the U.S.?


See the Lev Navrozov Archive

By Lev Navrozov
SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM

Lev Navrozov emigrated from the Soviet Union in 1972 He settled in New York City where he quickly learned that there was no market for his eloquent and powerful English language attacks on the Soviet Union. To this day, he writes without fear or favor or the conventions of polite society. He chaired the "Alternative to the New York Times Committee" in 1980, challenged the editors of the New York Times to a debate (which they declined) and became a columnist for the New York City Tribune. His columns are today read in both English and Russian.
Lev Navrozov

February 21, 2005

Why did the United States, and not Germany, Russia, or Britain, produce “the atom bomb” during WW2? The answer is: the United States had enough money for a project of development of it and, having received Einstein's letter, warning that Germany may develop “the atom bomb” ahead of the United States, Roosevelt finally decided in 1942 to finance the project in all earnest, after Germany, at war with the United States, had reached in Russia the Volga in the summer of 1942, and the defeat of Russia augured ill for the United States.

Germany, Russia, and Britain used all of their resources for the conventional life-or-death war and could not spare enough for the development of nuclear weapons. Please note that Hitler used to say that the advent of nuclear weapons would be as important as the advent of firearms in the age of bows and arrows; Stalin was excellently informed about nuclear weapons through Pyotr Kapitsa, a Russian pupil of Rutherford, the British “father of nuclear physics”; and certainly Churchill understood the geostrategic value of nuclear weapons.

The importance of émigré nuclear scientists in the United States? Yes, they were important. But why did they emigrate to the United States in the first place? From Einstein's letters we learn that as soon as the Nazi government announced in 1933 that Jews cannot hold high posts in science, their first impulse was to rush to Britain. Alas, even in peacetime, Britain did not have enough money to give them salaries commensurate with their salaries in pre-Nazi Germany, where the Jew Einstein had held the highest scientific posts way back in 1913 when few Americans heard his name — about a decade before he received a Nobel Prize.

Let me give you the opposite example. As I stressed it in many of my columns, Eric Drexler, a born and bred America (not a German Jew), is the Newton-Einstein of nanotechnology, whose Chapter 11 in his seminal study of 1986 is entitled “Engines of Destruction,” that is, molecular nano weapons. I have been stating that he is the only person who can save the West if the Foresight Institute he co-founded is financed to convert it into a nano Manhattan Projcct. But his associate told me that he “has no salary.” Like Einstein, if he had stayed in Germany after 1933. But where can Drexler emigrate to have a “decent salary”? To China, where he has been worshiped by Chinese nanotechnologists and those who are looking forward to the nano annihilation of the United States and the democratic West in general unless it surrenders unconditionally and becomes a Chinese colony.

On a Voice of America program in which I participated, an American technologist who visited China last year said that Shanghai (population 14 million) is more innovative and beautiful than New York. An American or British scientist's work in Stalin's Russia or hitler's Germany was scandalous. There is nothing scandalous about an American, European, Japanese, or Israeli scientist working in Shanghai, more innovative and beautiful than New York. All the dictators of Chins need is the money for generous salaries and social benefits, for excellent apartments or mansions, and second-to-none laboratories, with the latest equipment, sold, if necessary, by American, European, Japanese, or Israeli corporations.

The “supreme leaders” of China can arrange the transfer from the West to China of corporations producing geostrategically unique goods. Two birds are thereby killed with one stone. The “supreme leaders” of China thus acquire geostrategically unique corporations, and the West loses them. Besides, the “supreme leaders” of China can promise through government-controlled Chinese corporations the purchase of the geostrategically unique goods the corporations produce.

In short: money, money, money.

Isak Baldwin, manager of our not-for-profit Center for the Survival of Western Democracies, Inc., has sent me a BBC News web site report of February 10, 2005. Hold on to your chairs!

China's annual surplus in Sino-American trade reached in 2004 an astronomical sum: $162 billion, “the largest ever recorded with a single country.”

Note that “the supreme leaders” of China do not need the approval of any legislature to lump all of the $162 billion into the development in 2005 of of molecular nano weapons, predicted by Drexler in Chapter 11 of his book of 1986, or of other post-nuclear superweapons, or of all of them, to see which of them is able to deliver the fatal blow to the West by destroying its means of (nuclear) retaliation, thus circumventing Mutual Assured Destruction, and making the West defenseless.

In 2003 China's surplus in Sino-American trade was $123 billion. Now it is $162 billion. A more than 30 percent increase within one year! So what will it be in 2005? Over $200 billion? On trillion dollars in five years!

Late in 2003, the U.S. media announced in triumph: President Bush had signed the 21st-century “Nanotechnology Research and Development Act which had passed both chambers of Congress and authorized $3.7 billion in spending on nanotechnology over the next four years. That is, $925 million, less than 1 billion a year.

However, on the development of molecular nano weapons the U.S. congress has not allocated a cent. What for? What country will develop molecular nano weapons? Certainly not China! It is the biggest dictatorship in world history, but the Western political establishment has fallen in love with it. Why develop post-nuclear superweapons if there is no enemy that will develop them? True, the Chinese press itself reported the founding in 1986 of Project 863 to develop post-nuclear superweapons in seven fields. But do not believe the Chinese press reports. Believe the Western political establishment.

As for the rogue countries Iran and North Korea, they are Third World countries that can barely develop nuclear weapons that Soviet Russia began to test in 1949 and China in 1964. Both built powerful nuclear missile arsenals, and are now allies. Certainly no post-nuclear superweapon could be expected in Hussein's Iraq or can be expected in the midst of the Iraqi guerrillas.

You see? Those countries that are able to produce post-nuclear superweapons are too good to do so, and those that are roguish enough to develop them, are too technologically underdeveloped and too poor to finance seven Manhattan projects to develop post-nuclear superweapons in seven fields.

So the key target, to ensure security, is to defeat those roguish Sunni guerrillas in Iraq, then to conquer the roguish Shia Iran, and convince the rogue North Korea (with the help of our dear good peaceful friend China) to stop producing those roguish nuclear weapons. As for the West, it reminds me of a lady from Niger who fell in love with a tiger and decided to ride him.

    A lady from Niger
    Loved and rode a tiger.
    She ended up inside him,
    And with a smile on his lips.

* * * * *

For more information about Drexler's Foresight Institute and its lobbying in Congress, see www.foresight.org

To learn more about the Chris Phoenix report, suggesting a “nano Manhattan Project,” go to crnano.org.

For information about the Center for the Survival of Western Democracies, Inc., including how you can help, please e-mail me at navlev@cloud9.net.

The link to my book online is www.levnavrozov.com. You can also request our webmaster@levnavrozov.com to send you by e-mail my outline of my book.

It is my pleasant duty to express gratitude to the Rev. Alan Freed, a Lutheran pastor by occupation before his retirement and a thinker by vocation, for his help in the writing of this column.

Lev Navrozov's (navlev@cloud9.net] new book is available on-line at www.levnavrozov.com. To request an outline of the book, send an e-mail to webmaster@levnavrozov.com.

February 21, 2005

Print this Article Print this Article Email this article Email this article Subscribe to this Feature Free Headline Alerts


See current edition of

Return to World Tribune.com Front Cover
Your window on the world

Contact World Tribune.com at world@worldtribune.com