|
 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.
|
 |
Before 2000, books about “the China threat” kept proliferating. Conservative Republicans wanted to show that the Democrats in power were traitors, betraying the United States to China — the “liberals” were willfully blind to “the China threat.”
After 2000, the spate of books on “the China threat” dried up. China disappeared from the mainstream media, including the press, except as a friendly country to exchange greetings and compliments at the highest level or extol it as a tourist paradise with its heavenly Beijing duck.
The key enemies of mankind now were Saddam Hussein's Iraq, Iran, and North Korea, which (please do not mention this horror in front of children or before your night's sleep!) had or wanted to have — nuclear weapons! Apart from less destructive weapons of mass destruction Hussein was declared to have!
True, China tested its first nuclear weapons in 1964, and soon its missile nuclear arsenal matched that of the United States and Soviet Russia. But what adult will say that the naked Emperor is naked?
Still “the public opinion” that the naked Emperor is wearing luxurious clothes cannot last forever in its original version as a universal public conformity. Even if no child shouts that the naked Emperor is naked, there are bound to appear opinions that while the naked Emperor is NOT naked (the idea!), His Naked Majesty's clothes are not as luxurious as they are generally described.
So here is an article in “Newsweek” of May 9 by Fareed Zakaria, editor of “Newsweek International.” The article was kindly e-mailed to me by Ram Narayanan (an outstanding Internet columnist and a generous reader of mine). The article does not say that the Western means of nuclear retaliation or deterrence, and hence the West itself will be reduced to atoms by molecular nano or other post-nuclear superweapons of China or will become a Chinese colony (the idea!). But the very title of the six-page article is a thunderbolt: “Does the Future Belong to China?”
Can you imagine such a headline in the mainstream media in 2001, 2002, 2003, or even 2004?
All the data Zakaria cites can be found in any statistical almanac, sold in stationery stores, but after the four years of the universal belief or pretense of the Western political establishment and of mainstream media that Beijing duck for Western tourists is what China is all about, Zakariah's stationery-store almanac data are thunderbolts!
“China is now the world's largest producer of coal, steel, and cement.” A thunderbolt! Like 2x2=4 in a country where no one can count, and there is distinction only between “one” and “many.”
“China's exports to the United States have grown 1,600 percent over the past 15 years.” Another thunderbolt!
China “manufactures two-thirds of the world's copiers, microwave ovens, DVD players. . . .” (!!!)
Last year 65,000 high-school students participated in a U.S. Science and Engineering “Fair” (competition!). “In China the number was 6 million.” (!!!)
“China has grown around 9 percent a year for more than 25 years, the fastest growth rate for a major country in recorded history.” (!!!)
So? If such is the known advance of China in general, its secret advance in post-nuclear superweapons, which began to be developed in seven fields by Project 863, founded by the Chinese dictators in 1986, must be even more striking!
The trouble is that there may be a culture in which no one knows that 2x2=4. Zakaria, “Newsweek,” the mainstream media, and the political establishment of the West today have possibly never heard of Project 863, and Zakaria never calls the dictators of China dictators and does not understand what dictatorship is. Thus he claims that China is militarily “spending a fraction of what America does, at most ten percent of the Pentagon's annual bill.” How does he know? Well, the Chinese leaders (no, not dictators!) publish statistics (no, not propaganda!) on the subject.
Zakaria does not even understand that the dictators of China can spend any sums on any purpose in total secrecy, while their “open statistics” are part of their propaganda. Besides, they can hire for the same sum of money (I do not mention Chinese slave labor) 100 or 200 times more workers than can the Pentagon at the lowest pay rate in the United States. At the same time, the dictators of China can pay unique West European, American, Russian, and Japanese military technologists more than the latter could receive in their own countries.
Zakaria complains that some (unnamed) Americans “have been sounding the alarms about the Chinese threat. And they speak of it largely in military terms, usually wildly [!] exaggerating Chinese capabilities.” Well, where can such Americans be at least read, if heard or seen in the electronic media? In the Congressional Record? But how many Americans read it?
Anyway, Zakaria rebuts these inaudible, invisible, and virtually unread Americans. He declares that “the facts simply do not support their case.” What facts? The Chinese dictators' propaganda, including “open military spending statistics.” Surely the dictators of China make public the facts, all facts, and nothing but the facts!
The Chinese dictators' peacefulness, as reflected by their “military spending statistics,” “emerges from the oldest strategic thinker, Sun Tzu , who argued that 'every battle is won or lost before it is ever fought'.”
Sun Tzu was right. Hitler lost WW2 before he fought it. On the other hand, if he had concentrated on the development of nuclear weapons, instead of invading the rump of Czechoslovakia, Poland, France, and Russia, the entire world would have become his colony. He would have won a world war before he fought it.
As a geostrategist, Hitler was a nonentity, compared with Sun Tzu, and the Chinese dictators do follow Sun Tzu's advice, and not Hitler's example. They avoid war with the United States as of today if as of today it will not be won. They concentrate on the development of post-nuclear superweapons. They will strike only when the war will be won before it is fought.
The last paragraph of Zakaria's article sums up his optimism, a word that Voltaire coined and ridiculed. This is how the paragraph begins: “A world war is highly unlikely. Nuclear deterrence economic interdependence, globalization all mitigate against it.”
As regards economic interdependence and globalization, these will remain if the West surrenders unconditionally. The Chinese global colony will work for, and will depend on, the dictators of China, and certainly their power will be global. As for nuclear deterrence, Zakaria does not even know or understand that the post-nuclear superweapons, being developed in China, in alliance with Putin's Russia, such as molecular nano superweapons, are to destroy the Western means of nuclear deterrence. Zakaria and his “Newsweek” are living in 1945, while now it is 2005.
I used to say years ago that the Western political establishment and mainstream media are in a state of functional insanity, leading to the suicide of the West. What does the word “functional” mean in the context?
A born and bred American I spoke with was anything but insane or suicidal in the personal clinical sense. On the contrary, he was greatly concerned with his own personal survival. He was tirelessly looking for the most effective medical treatments, and he paid extreme attention to his personal enrichment, for money is a vital part in the United States of longevity. He agreed with me when I said that unless the West wakes up, China would annihilate the West or the latter surrenders unconditionally. So?
He said that everyone was mortal, and hence there was not much of a difference whether he would die on his own or as part of a civilization he had been living in.
You see? He was worried about his own personal death versus his own personal survival. But about the death of his civilization he was “philosophical.” He was not insane about his own self. But he was functionally insane, that is, insane with respect to his civilization.
The public silence in the past four years about the danger of China to the West was functional insanity. In 2005 Zakaria contributes an ever more dangerous functional insanity. He is not silent about the “China threat.” But he argues that the threat is part of life. “America and China will be friends one day, rivals another, cooperate in one area, compete in another. Welcome to the 21st century!” End of the article. Hip, hip, hooray!
For functionally insane, or abysmally ignorant and mentally retarded, like the editor of “Newsweek International,” there will always be an occasion for “optimism” until the Chinese dictators strike with post-nuclear weapons (as the United States struck Japan with nuclear weapons) because they will know, before they will strike that they will win. As per Sun Tzu.
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.