Sunday, November 09, 2008
China hand
Thomas P.M. Barnett's most recent column explains what George W. Bush "got right" on China policy. The answer is pretty much everything, so much so that Barnett concludes with this startling claim:
Indeed, history will likely judge this success as greater than the Bush administration's failures in Iraq.
Read the whole thing, and argue it out in the comments.
7 Comments:
By 
, at
Sun Nov 09, 08:18:00 PM:
Just as a point of trivia, there were too many operational peculiarities to that P3 episode to catalog. It will be fascinatinig to find out what was really going on there (if we ever do).
By , at
Sun Nov 09, 08:35:00 PM:
So let me get this straight, Bush/Cheney will be remembered for showing 'restraint' with China? And all the ICBM/nuke warhead technology they have stolen from us is just to be used in a confrontation in the Formosa Strait? Silly me. I guess the saber rattling about nuking LA a few years ago was just in my imagination. As for it being good that industrialized nations have disarmed themselves in a 'defacto moratorium'.... well, the jury is still out on that, but I would not bet that being defenseless is a good thing.
By , at
Sun Nov 09, 10:05:00 PM:
whose neocons came into power clearly itching for confrontation with China
Written with such adroit drollness one could take this line at face value. But then, I'm quite sure not a few people will.
By 
Andrew X, at
Sun Nov 09, 10:48:00 PM:
They were just itching for a confrontation with China, but just got so busy, they never got around to it. Also, they never got around to cancelling the 2002, 2004, and 2008 elections. They didn't even get to building that pipeline through Afghanistan that the entire 9/11 scam was about.
Actually, you'd have to say that the biggest problem with the neocons was apparently laziness.
By LGD, at
Sun Nov 09, 11:29:00 PM:
"In the grand sweep of history, this is arguably George W. Bush's greatest legacy: the encouragement of China to become a legitimate stakeholder in global security."
This is why the US made naval arms limitations treaties with Japan in the 1920s.
This is why Britain made a naval treaty with Germany in the 30s that gave them U-boats again.
This is why FDR insisted on the USSR having a permanent seat on the Security Council and Nixon gave China's seat to Beijing.
How many times must the West fail at expecting dictatorships to help us keep the peace before we learn not to?
By LGD, at
Sun Nov 09, 11:33:00 PM:
Now had he mentioned Bush's brilliant enlistment of India as a blue-water counterweight to Red China, then he'd have said something worth reading.
By JPMcT, at
Mon Nov 10, 06:55:00 AM:
Maybe I'm being picayune...but we haven't failed in Iraq...YET...
