|
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
The Annual China Fairy Tale Report Lev Navrozov
On the title page of the Pentagon's Annual Report to Congress for 2006 we read:
Page 1 of the 58-page report is a one-page "Executive Summary," which begins as follows: "China's rapid rise as a regional political and economic power with global aspirations [what a pretty word!] is an important element of today's strategic environment – one that has significant implications for the region and the world. The United States welcomes the rise [what a fairy tale!] of a peaceful and prosperous China."
Not once does the Pentagon use the word "dictatorship" or "dictator," as though such monstrosities have never existed of late except in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq when the United States and its allies were preparing war against them. The Pentagon also invariably says, whenever the title of the report comes up, "People's Republic of China" (not just "China") as though Donald Rumsfeld and the authors of the report expect to become "members of the Chinese Communist Party" (not just Commies) and have to speak the party newspeak. The end of the Executive Summary is more realistic: "This lack of transparency prompts others to ask, as Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld did in June 2005: 'Why this growing [military] investment? Why these continuing large and expanding arms purchases? Why these continuing robust deployments?' Absent greater transparency, international reactions to China's military growth will understandably hedge against these unknowns."
Story Continues Below
Actually, Rumsfeld said on June 4, 2005: "Since no nation threatens China, one must wonder: Why this growing [military] investment? Why these continuing large and expanding arms purchases? Why these continuing robust deployments?"
The Pentagon (or its chief personally) dropped from the report the beginning of the above paragraph in Rumsfeld's statement of June 4, 2005, because in 2006 it was too clear that the United States, which had launched war against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan and Iraq, can be represented by China's propaganda as an aggressor, ready to launch war against China as well, if the latter is incredibly weak. Anyway, it is clear from the above quotation that China lacks "transparency" – the "outside world had little knowledge of Chinese [military] motivations." Only intelligence/espionage can supply valuable secret data on the subject. In my article of 1978, reprinted and outlined by over 500 periodicals and approved by Ronald Reagan, I demonstrated that Western intelligence/espionage existed – in Britain, for example, when Britain was a colonial power, and a British spy in India (a British colony) was extolled by Kipling under the name "Kim." The name was taken over by Philby ("Kim Philby"), but he was a Soviet spy in the British Intelligence Service, not its spy in Soviet Russia, which is not the same.
As for the CIA's reports on Soviet Russia and China in the 1970s, those had been the CIA's fantasies, based on Soviet and Chinese propaganda, passed by the CIA for intelligence/espionage data. Absent Western intelligence/espionage in China, what can the Pentagon do? It can read at least the non-secret press of China. Published in China without any secrecy several years ago was "Unrestricted Warfare" by Qiao Liang and Wang Xiangsui, two senior colonels of the People's Liberation Army. The book proclaims that war should have no rules or restrictions. The best war for China is to develop superweapons, as superior to the U.S. weapons as the U.S. "atom bombs" were superior in 1945 to all weapons that Japan had – so much so that the latter surrendered unconditionally. But the Report does not even mention "Unrestricted Warfare." Those "atom bombs" were superweapons in 1945. But science and technology have not been at a standstill since 1945, and new post-nuclear superweapons are being developed in the Chinese labs (hidden inside the mountains) to be able to shashou jian (incapacitate at a blow) the United States or the West as a whole. Note that China's armed forces are called the "People's LIBERATION Army." According to the founding fathers of the "People's Republic of China" – Marx, Lenin and Mao – mankind should be LIBERATED, to become a single Communist society. Its dictators will own all of its wealth and all of its humanity forever and ever and anon, without any danger of any Tiananmen movement or any invasion. On Oct. 3, 2001, the Chinese magazine (by no means secret!) of the Chinese Wuhan TV station (by no means secret either!) carried an article about how Program 863 was founded in 1986. What for? Before the first flight of an airplane in 1903, many (including the London Times) found the Wright brothers' idea insane: How could a structure made out of metal by two owners of a bicycle shop fly like a bird? To many in the Pentagon, Lt. Col. Bearden must seem many times insane, and all those superweapons he describes as having been developed in Soviet Russia and in China as ravings of a madman. The military and civilian importance of aviation in the century after the Wrights' airplane flight can hardly be overstated. But the Wrights (owners of a bicycle sales and repair shop) had been working on their own; no military organization or civilian firm or a university had been interested. Program 863 has existed since 1986 for the development of superweapons that are too new, impossible, "insane" to be developed by any "normal officialdom." It was only in 1908 that the Wrights concluded commercial and military agreements. The West received its civil and military aviation. Had there existed Program 863 in the United States at that time, the Wrights would have been able to pay less attention to their bicycle shop and more to the invention of their "insane" flying bicycle. The Western civil and military aviation could have started years earlier, and the country that secretly developed military aviation would have won World War I. On page 34 of the Pentagon's report, three paragraphs are devoted to Chinese radio frequency weapons, and one paragraph to Chinese laser weapons. The data are from "Chinese technical literature," not any secret source. No conclusions or generalizations concerning China's post-nuclear superweapons are in the report! Project 863, which has been functioning in China for 20 years, is not even mentioned. A dictatorship has tremendous military advantages over a democracy in peacetime: It can behave as in wartime. It can decide how many higher-school students will study what subjects. It can secretly allocate any of its funds to the development of any superweapons. The Chinese dictators are able to invite the best Western scientists and technologists in the respective fields by paying them as much as is necessary to attract them. The dictatorship can allocate any resources necessary for their research and experimentation. Indeed, since at least 1896, China has been at war with the West, except that this is a silent war, waged secretly in the Chinese labs, and its first non-secret result will be its ultimatum to the West: Surrender unconditionally or be annihilated by our superweapons. In the Pentagon's report, China is just another United States, but continues to give priority to economic reform (to catch up with the United States economically) over political liberalization (to become a free and democratic China). On page 8 of the report we read: "The Chinese Communist Party continues to give priority to economic reform over political liberalization." Ugh! Of course, the CCP is duty bound to pay as much attention to political liberalization as to economic reform, but the CCP continues to give priority to economic reform! On page 10 we learn that Lt. Gen. Liu Yazhou, "currently Deputy Political Commissar of the PLA Air Force" ("political commissars" were established by Lenin in "the Red Army" in 1918), said that "when a nation grows strong enough, it practices hegemony. The sole purpose of power is to pursue even greater power." This is the basic tenet of any sufficiently large dictatorship. Hitler wanted his power to expand over more and more territory, until he had overstretched himself. The Soviet dictators had been developing post-nuclear superweapons until the Soviet dictatorship collapsed in 1991. But the report says that this basic precept of dictatorship is not "necessarily reflecting the views of senior Chinese leaders." So the deputy political commissar of the PLA Air Force is not sufficiently senior to accept from him the basic tenet of any sufficiently large dictatorship. According to the report, the ABCs of development of China are economic reform and political liberalization, but oddly enough, the CCP continues to give priority to the former over the latter. What was the public reaction of the dictatorship of China to the Pentagon's report? Liu Jianchao, Foreign Ministry spokesman, declared that "China is a peace-loving nation and has adhered to a path of peaceful development." The report did not accept this self-evaluation as a sacred revelation to be repeated literally. Hence the report is condemned by Liu as a "China threat theory," a "cold war mentality," etc. It is worth recalling in conclusion what was said at the beginning of this review. The report came from the Office of the Secretary of Defense, whose resignation those retired generals have been publicly calling for. Indeed, under his leadership, the U.S. armed forces have been unable for three years to cope with Iraq, a technologically backward midget. How can a valuable report be expected from the Office of the Secretary of Defense about the giant of China with its Super-Industrial Revolution, leading to superweapons? There is an old humorous introduction of a Russian minister of defense. "Read and write office papers? He can. Unravel an enemy strategy? He cannot. In peacetime? Useless. In war? Dangerous to us." The war in China's secret labs against the West is on. The annual reports of 2002 to 2006, submitted to Congress by the U.S. Department of Defense (the Pentagon), headed by Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, have been dangerous to the West in this war and useless in peacetime.
You can e-mail me at navlev@cloud9.net
Editor's note:
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||
Print Page 
Forward Page 
|
| All Rights Reserved © 2008 NewsMax.Com |