|
 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.
|
 |
The Conference was held in Bratislava, Slovakia, on Feb. 24, and next day Barry Farber invited me to speak about it to his radio audience. What did I say?
I asked what is by far the most important geostrategic life-or-death fact about Putin's Russia for the survival (you've heard it — survival) of the democratic West, including the United States?
Putin's Russia has been the world's biggest seller of weapons to China. President Bush had spoken — three days before the Conference — against the intention of France and Germany to begin to sell weapons to China. You see, their sale of weapons to China will endanger . . . Taiwan. Not the United States or the West as a whole! No! Just Taiwan! But touching as this concern for Taiwan is, President Bush did not say in Bratislava a word to Putin about his world's biggest sales of weapons to China. Putin's weapons cannot hurt Taiwan!
Whenever the Pentagon discusses China's military “modernization,” the Pentagon describes China's conventional arms, including nuclear weapons. Unfortunately, the “supreme leaders” of China are not fools the U.S. government, including the Pentagon, most members of the U.S. Congress, and the mainstream media take them for. Between 1964 and the mid-1980s, China had almost annual nuclear tests and developed into a nuclear superpower. What next?
Nuclear weapons cannot be used for the annihilation of a nuclear country because of Mutual Assured Destruction. Even if the nuclear weapons of China destroyed all the residential areas of the United States, no nuclear weapons can destroy hidden enemy means of nuclear retaliation — submarines deep under water with nuclear missiles aboard, bombers on duty high in the air with nuclear bombs aboard, and nuclear missiles deep underground. Hence China began in 1986 the development in seven fields of post-nuclear superweapons, capable of destroying the enemy means of nuclear retaliation.
The Pentagon and the entire U.S. military-political establishment may be, in 2005, living in 1945. But the “supreme leaders” of China understand that now it is the year 2005, not 1945. That is, we are living geostrategically in the era of post-nuclear weapons, not nuclear weapons, which destroyed in 1945 two Japanese cities without any Japanese retaliation, but, on the contrary, with Japanese unconditional surrender to follow.
The Chinese use the word, translated by the medieval English word “mace,” a club that killed an enemy knight by breaking through his armor. Ironically, in the United States “Mace” became in 1968 a trademark denoting a spray that disables an opponent by making him unconscious.
How does Putin's Russia contribute to China's creation of the mace?
Before Dec. 13, 2004, China and Putin's Russia had been “strategic partners.” On Dec. 13 they became allies, contemplating joint maneuvers this year. The gravest danger is not Putin's sales of weapons to China, but the Chinese-Russian cooperation in the development of post-nuclear superweapons. Russia is (in population) a small country compared with China. But she has been more scientifically and technologically advanced in some new post-nuclear fields than any country of the West, including the United States.
True, one of my U.S. readers e-mailed to me that “Asian countries,” such as Russia, Japan, or China, have been and will always be scientifically and technologically backward compared with “us, Americans.” But this is nationalism, “patriotism,” or racism, inherent to some members of any nation or tribe. Many Germans could not believe that Soviet Russia, where most villages had no running water, could build in 1942 more and better tanks than did Germany.
Here Barry asked me a very good question. “If China is so dangerous, why is Putin not afraid to maximize her military might?”
Hitler despised the science and technology of Soviet Russia. But he needed her raw materials, and Stalin supplied them under the Soviet-German pact. Why was not Stalin afraid to maximize Hitler's military might?
A document indicates that Stalin did not believe that Hitler would invade Russia even when Hitler's invasion had begun. Stalin's Foreign Minister, Vyacheslav Molotov, said sadly and bitterly to the German ambassador who “declared war”: “What have we done to deserve it?”
Stalin believed that Hitler and he were allies and they would divide the world amicably — half of Europe and the United States would go to Hitler, and half to Stalin.
When China forces Putin's Russia to surrender or be destroyed by that same “mace” — post-nuclear weapons — Putin has helped to develop, Putin will possibly have a breakdown as did Stalin, unable even “to address the Soviet people” by radio for more than a week after the fatal night of June 22, 1941.
Now, what did Bush and Putin discuss?
The New York Times predicted through Reuters in its e-mail to me and other e-readers: “In the meeting Bush is to press Putin on democracy in Russia. President Bush's advisers are concerned about moves by the Russian president which seem as backsliding on democracy.”
Well, the prediction was wrong. In its e-mail the next day, the New York Times report (C. J. Chivers) stated: “Bush and Putin mute differences, latching onto the affirmative. At least in public, the presidents mutual Western concerns about the decline in the development of democracy in Russia.”
Let us suppose that Putin will become the dictator or Russia. How will this change the mortal danger of China to the West? The dictator Stalin enhanced as much as he could the German dictator's might. Why cannot the dictator Putin enhance as much as he can the Chinese dictator's might?
Besides, Putin's Russia is not yet a dictatorship like post-1949 China. At the Bush-Putin news conference the Russian “Commersant Daily” correspondent said that as far as democracy is concerned, in neither Russia, nor the United States, are at the level of the Netherlands. A Chinese correspondent could attack in this way the United States, but not China!
Many Americans believe that there are only two clear-cut kinds of countries in the world: “democracies” and “tyrannies.” Saddam Hussein's Iraq was a tyranny, and now it is to be a democracy. The trouble is that it is likely to be a fundamentalist Shia theocracy, that is, a worse tyranny than was Saddam Hussein's Sunni oligarchy, oppressing Shia (and Kurds).
The political world map is far more complex than the democracy vs. tyranny dichotomy. Nationally or internationally audible under French absolutism were thinkers who are venerated even today — 200-odd and 300 years later. On the other hand, even Louis XIV, eulogized by Voltaire, did not pose as a thinker. Now, in the United States today, the only thinker, audible almost daily nationally and internationally, is the U.S. president, mostly repeating his speechwriters and advisers like Karl Rove.
Another spurious bone of contention at the Conference was Iran — Russia is building there a nuclear power plant, and President Bush considers this dangerous since Iran can use the waste products of the plant to facilitate Iran's development of nuclear weapons. China tested its nuclear weapons for the first time in 1964, tested them almost annually until the mid-1980s, and then went over to the deveopment of pst-nuclear superweapons. But few Americans have even heard of it! But Iran. . . .
Indeed, “weapons of mass destruction” were ascribed to Hussein's Iraq, and hence it was invaded to replace the “tyranny” with a “democracy.” Only scientifically and technologically backward countries evoke indignation demanding an immediate invasion (especially if they are rich in oil), while China, a giant dictatorship, developing post-nuclear superweapons in seven fields since 1986 — today with Russia's help — was not even mentioned at the Bush-Putin News Conference in Bratislava. Iran, not China, endangers the world!
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.
* * * * *