Still no China strategy in Iraq-obsessed Washington

---

See the Sol Sanders Archive By Sol Sanders SPECIAL TO WORLD TRIBUNE.COM

Washington is said to be a notoriously one-issue town. Speculation about ÒIraqÓ now dominates the media, politics, and, presumably, the working hours of the bureaucracy.

But there is another complex of issues out there screaming for attention: ÒChinaÓ.

Word comes via the bamboo telegraph from Beijing that for the moment at least the issue is unresolved of whether Jiang Ze-min, 76-year-old maximum leader of the 1.2 billion Chinese, is going to get an extension of his mandate. ÒThe mantle of heavenÓ does not descend easily on the shoulders of Chinese Communists as history shows. And a superfluity of vested interests ø from Western investors who have put in huge sums yet to pay off to the worldÕs diplomats who always hope for the best to traditional Chinese secrecyø camouflage a bitter succession struggle.

The U.S. has a dog in this fight. It is not a case that American hopes for peace and stability in East Asia ride on JiangÕs continuing in office past the 70 year rule laid down earlier. The supposedly anointed successor ø how many times has that kind of nomination gone awry among ChinaÕs Communists! Ñ Hu Jintao is certainly not seen as AmericaÕs candidate. Truth is that the butcher of Tibet has always avoided American contacts and his first trip to the U.S. earlier this year didnÕt open any taps of vast new understanding.

The issue is that the leadership of Communist China is in play. And that does not contribute to any kind of stability in the U.S.-China relationship. It does not now seem likely that either the Party Congress, apparently postponed until later in the fall, and the proposed visit of Jiang to Crawford, Texas, to talk to our No. 1 is going to put that right.

Unhappily, this question mark over the Chinese leadership reflects a similar policy vacuum ø or rather a plethora of policies Ñ in Washington. The contradictions are striking. The Pentagon, after long delay and apparently bloodletting in the corridors, .released a study of the Chinese military which, among other things, says Beijing has

1] upped its military budget for the tenth consecutive year with some estimates more than $100 billion,
2] gone hell for broke for Ònew conceptÓ weapons ø lasers, microwave technologies and antisatellite devices ø aimed at U.S. vulnerabilities,
3] developed new intercontinental ballistic missiles so that by 2010 they could have 140 aimed at the U.S.,
4] been Òpreparing for a potential conflict in the Taiwan Strait [which] is the primary driver for ChinaÕs military modernizationÓ,
5] been buying $1 billion a year in the most advanced weapons from the Russians, and
6] threatened by implication the balance of power in East Asia.

So what is the American response? A Pentagon official makes a special trip to Beijing in an effort ø apparently successful ø to reiisntate the military to military exchanges between China and the U.S.. These exchanges were under attack by many U.S. observers for their nonreciprocal openness on the U.S. side, their offers to the Chinese to improve everything from basic logistics to advanced defense science.

While there has been some wringing of hands inside and outside the Administration, there appears to be no coordinated effort to reassemble the elaborate controls on military hardware and dual use exports that existed during the Cold War against both the Soviet Bloc and the Chinese Communists. So our massive trade deficit is funding a scientific as well as a military buildup.

There is still no overall resolution to the problem of counterintelligence against a massive Chinese espionage effort Ñ particularly deficient in the scientific field where the disassembly of a Defense Department operation has permitted an inconclusive drift back to the various services.

Nor is there yet a policy in place on how to deal with the complicated structure of Chinese intelligence which has the U.S. trying to cope with a combination of formal intelligence, ÒglobalizationÓ relationships, and the personal ambition of Chinese Red Capitalists. Example: Li Ka-shing, the Hong Kong billionaire with the closest connections to PeopleÕs Liberation Army corporations, is poised to take over control on a bargain basis of the Global Crossing network which carries data worldwide for U.S. companies operating closely with the U.S. military. Even more incredible, Li Ka-shing is part of a combine bidding for the $28 million ø much more to come ø which Congress has voted for new inspection procedures to control terrorist attempts to use the massive container freight traffic into U.S. ports. Li Ka-shingÕs company already is proprietor of cargo handling facilities ø again purchased at bargain prices through bribery of local officials ø at both ends of the Panama Canal.

Alarmist? Perhaps. But that grinding of gears that comes through all the buzz about Iraq is a China strategy that is moving in several speeds at the same time.