With the fall of the Soviet Union, and America's ascension to the mantle of "only remaining superpower," there is a natural tendency to look for enemies, countries that could pose a threat to America's sole possession of "first place." Or, at least, a replacement for the Soviet menace that made it so easy for Congress to allocate trillions to defense, and rally around the flag (and against Communism) for political purpose. It seems that conservatives and liberals alike can rejoice that the People's Republic of China fits the mold -- at least close enough for their purposes.
Big bad Red China has everyone scared, frustrated, and agitated: rightists scared of the Chinese military, leftists frustrated at China's blissful ignorance of human rights standards, and seemingly everyone agitated that the Clinton Administration wants to "engage" (in other words, cooperate with) the "yellow peril." New York Times columnist William Safire leads the conservative charge against Clinton and China. In fact, he leads with his left -- charging that there is a "illegal pouring of millions of dollars into our campaigns from Chinese banks" in order to affect US policy -- only to deliver his knockout punch with his right -- that the changes in US policy include sales of sophisticated weapons technology that could one day be used against the United States.
How much of Safire's accusations are true? Is China attempting to purchase policy? Do these attempts affect US policy decisions regarding the sale of military hardware and technology to China? Did Chinese influence affect the decision to lease a portion of a former naval base in Long Beach, California to the mysterious China Ocean Shipping Company? And how does this all fit in with the Clinton Administration's renewed push toward a ballistic missile defense capable of shooting missiles out of the sky before they strike?
How much of America's paranoia toward China is justifiable, and how much is an irrational, and perhaps racist, search for a new enemy to replace the Soviet Union? This three-part series will summarize the anti-Chinese cases being made, largely with information drawn from conservative and right-wing sources (leftist complaints of human rights violations, however horrible, do not threaten American national security). The article will also attempt to examine the veracity and logic of these positions, as well as their implications for American foreign policy toward China.
Today's article ("Chinese Money, American Politics") will tackle the question of Chinese money in American politics. Part two ("Military Fire Sales") will deal with sales of military technology to China, from missile guidance systems to missiles to rental of US territory. Part three ("Going Ballistic") will deal with the question of Clinton's proposed anti-ballistic missile system, and what effect it will have on US-China relations, as well as providing a synthesis for dealing with China in the future.
| Here's the follow-up discussion on this article: | View all related messages |
For a complete listing of article comments, questions, and other discussions related to Jason Gottlieb's East Asian Politics topic, please visit the Discussions page.