That article looks like it was written by Michael Moore’s alter ego.
Clinton engaged in a lot of political and economic efforts to “improve” Sino-American relations. As were many other people, regardless of political affiliation during that time, and continue to do so. Obviously some people who disagree with this policy and Clinton, took the opportunity to try to spin it.
I personally disagree with what Clinton did in Sino-American cooperation, although not in this specific instance. I believe in unrestricted trade, and recognize that an economic is ultimately more detrimental in a globalist society. Obviously environmental and security concerns needs to place reasonable restraints on economic prosperity. In the case of port sales I do not Clinton actions were a long term violation of either of those, despite the inferences from some that Clinton is somehow a Manchurian Candidate.
I do take issue with the concept that ends outweigh the means, or variations of that. In the case of China I think that is what has been happing with some issues. We don’t say things about Tibet or human rights, change our foreign policy with Taiwan and provide them with economic favors. In return we are “bringing them into the fold” of the global economy and really placating the forces that might cause a war with us of Taiwan. Except I don’t think that threat really exists, or ever did. China has a lot of rhetoric, and one of those is Anti-Imperialism and Taiwan is part of China (One China). This propaganda is a 1984 situation where they want both issues to be a constant fear to the people, but don’t want to actually resolve them. They rely on the fear to provide them with popular support from the people. Now with any rhetoric there is a danger of it being acted out. Nazism and the Jews, it didn’t start out with the intent on extermination, just getting rid of them. The powers that be forgot why they said what they said and actually started to believe it. In China’s case though they couldn’t they either weren’t technologically advanced enough to take out Taiwan, or later couldn’t because of the United States.
With the fall of the Soviet Union and the Cold War China recognized the changing world order and the opportunity to take their place as a super power. But they needed the other economics powers to help, enter the United States. While beating the drums of war with Taiwan, as they had been for some time now, they started to open their economy and let go of their state controlled economy (China is more capitalist than we are in a lot of ways). I don’t know who initiated this line of discussion between out countries, but it seems to have ended with The United States attempting to placate them provided them with economic incentives. Really China, the nation of Sun Tzu, played the United States for a bunch of chumps. If politics were a football we just lost about 700-3 (field goal). We had the real power, the key their economic survival, and in the long term the economy determine the survival of any political power base. Instead we may have created the situation we wanted to prevent, China-Taiwan war.
Our two nations have an ever increasing economic dependency on each other. The United States entered the War of 1812 because we were trading more with France than Britain, and the fall of France would have hurt us. Now we trade with China more, and Taiwan is left in between, no longer important to the United States, and in a place where Chinese rhetoric could carry them away. We could have used our leverage to get them to change their rhetoric, they went inside a week from telling everyone about the Soviet Union was the father of Communism and the most revolutionary country on Earth to the Soviet Union being the most evil imperialist usurpers and threat to China ever. A lot of long hours in that week.
But it wasn’t just Clinton, as I understand it this is was mostly the Republicans idea. Who knows now, we have our own rhetoric though, and a lot of people (Lockheed Martin, Boeing, Northrop Grumman) need China to remain the enemy to get contracts. Presumably we are all on the road to nowhere, where most rhetoric winds up. But if certain political elements in our nations (PNAC) get their way we could be in a rhetoric, war with China hopefully they won’t ever believe that. I think the real threat to national security isn’t Clinton or Bush or anybody allowing a foreign company to buy a port. It is people like newsmax, who infer that China is an evil empire across the sea.
In short, if we used out economic and cultural clout more effectively we could have been real winners in Sino-American relations.
P.S. In case it isn't obvious, I am politically biased against PNAC and people who say China is a threat. I think they say that because they are misinformed or because they can make money by saying that. I don't feel China poses a real threat to the United States.
