Proper Use of the Military – Killing Pirates April 24, 2009

Pirates Abay!

I may have written about this before, but I find myself struck dumb with this whole pirate situation. In discussions with an elder very close to me, I came to realize that we are just simply misusing our military to the Nth degree.

The United States spends like 700 billion U.S. dollars on defense. Most nations on this planet don’t have budgets that large. Yet, we spend that much on defense. We have fleets of nuclear submarines with stealth technology. We have planes that fly at break neck speeds, and can’t be picked up by the most sophisticated radar systems. We have the best special forces troops in the world. We have intelligence agents scattered in places that one couldn’t imagine. One could say there is no where anyone can hide from the U.S. military force. Yet, unsophisticated pirates with pansy-archaic weaponry (by comparison) can hijack supertankers and in no time receive 25 million U.S. dollars in ransom money for the safe return of crew, and maybe cargo. What’s wrong with this picture?

Is it possible to direct some that 700 billion towards eradicating piracy? Instead of using unmanned CIA drones to bomb Afghan villages during weddings, how about using them to bomb the hell out of the pirate enclaves in Somalia.

I’m no military genius, or defense budget guru, but when I hear/read Katie Couric questioning Secretary of Defense Robert Gates about how the Chinese may have “acquired” sensitive information regarding the F-35 joint strike fighter jet, I ask myself, “Are the Chinese hijacking boats in the Indian Ocean….Why are we building F-35s when we should be killing pirates?” I’m not saying we shouldn’t be concerned by the Chinese hacking U.S. military computers, but we should be killing pirates!

So to sum up: Good uses of military might – killing pirates. Bad use of military might – building useless, and very very very expensive, F-35 strike fighters.

F35 Joint Strike Fighter by Lockheed Martin

Peace

Buy American Clause Not So Bad March 8, 2009

So as I’ve been following the recent downturn in the world economy, and paying a special note to the blame being given to the United States for being the cause of this bleak situation. I guess turnabout is fair play. I mean, U.S. leaders try to dictate to the rest of the world how it should act, and we often play the blame game, so I guess it’s our turn. We took some stupid risks, and now everything is messed up…Sorry. I would like to hear more concrete solutions than blame, but what do you expect it’s human nature, right?

Within this time of note, I’ve been paying particular attention to how this new administration is going about things. President Obama and his team seem to be trying to get the U.S. back in shape, not only for the short term, but for the long term. This brings me to the subject of this post.

In the new stimulus package, that was recently signed into law, there is this little clause headed, “Buy American – Sec. 1605. Use of American Iron, Steel, and Manufactured Goods.” This little clause seems to be getting all the attention, as it apparently rings of protectionism towards U.S. industries. Interestingly enough, since this whole global downturn started many countries seem to implementing “protectionist” policies. From Sarkosy looking to help French automakers by floating them money to Russia raising tariffs on imported cars to India restricting certain ‘made in China’ products from entering its nation, the protectionist swing is going on, and it seems to be the hippest move.

Okay, back to the ‘Buy American’ clause. I don’t know what the problem is? If you read the whole thing, it’s really not that bad. Check it out:

BUY AMERICAN
SEC. 1605. USE OF AMERICAN IRON, STEEL, AND MANUFACTURED
GOODS.
(a) None of the funds appropriated or otherwise made
available by this Act may be used for a project for the construction,
alteration, maintenance, or repair of a public building or public
work unless all of the iron, steel, and manufactured goods used
in the project are produced in the United States.
(b) Subsection
(a) shall not apply in any case or category
of cases in which the head of the Federal department or agency
involved finds that—
(1) applying subsection
(a) would be inconsistent with the
public interest;
(2) iron, steel, and the relevant manufactured goods are
not produced in the United States in sufficient and reasonably
available quantities and of a satisfactory quality; or
(3) inclusion of iron, steel, and manufactured goods produced
in the United States will increase the cost of the overall
project by more than 25 percent.
(c) If the head of a Federal department or agency determines
that it is necessary to waive the application of subsection (a) based
on a finding under subsection (b), the head of the department
or agency shall publish in the Federal Register a detailed written
justification as to why the provision is being waived.
(d) This section shall be applied in a manner consistent with
United States obligations under international agreements.

The heading is all tough and protectionista like, but the actual body of the clause sings a different (at least in my opinion). First of all, this clause is referring to PUBLIC BUILDINGS OR PUBLIC WORKS. The private sector can do whatever it wants, and if a project is found to be INCONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC INTEREST things can change. Not convinced that this leaves the door open for foreign competition, well how about if the manufactured product you want is in short supply, too expensive, or just downright sucks? You can opt for an alternative. Oh, and to top this all off this clause states that it SHALL BE APPLIED IN A MANNER CONSISTENT WITH UNITED STATES OBLIGATIONS UNDER INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS.

Can I get some relief, and some calm? Of course any project manager that wants to waive this clause so he/she is not in violation of U.S. law, will need to put everything in writing (small price to pay…okay more paperwork – say it…Bigger Government!).

Maybe what the Obama administration is trying to do is motivate U.S. industries to raise their product quality, while making sure things remain fiscally sound. Again, this is pertaining to public projects, so maybe Obama is trying to make the Federal Government fiscally sound?

Personally I think the central government should use homemade products. I would take it as a source of great pride to know that my tax dollars when to the construction of a building that uses quality American goods, produced by my fellow citizenry.

So this doesn’t pertain to fuel, cars (unless built for government use), homes, cotton, food, etc (at least that’s how I interpret it). If China can spend billions upgrading it’s physical infrastructure, and encourage its population to buy Chinese made goods, why can’t we do the same?

In any case, I hope the global community doesn’t get in too much of a huff (I might be too late on that one) over the ‘Buy American’ clause. It’s not as tough as people have been making it out to be.

Peace

Government Catches Up To Business June 12, 2008

So it seems that government diplomacy is following behind business diplomacy. According to The New York Times Online article “Taiwan and China Hold Formal Talks, by Edward Wong, and Alan Cowell reporting from Paris,

Representatives of China and Taiwan agreed in a meeting here on Thursday to establish permanent offices in each other’s capital to help coordinate discussions about closer relations. The agreement came on the first day of negotiations over how to strengthen the economic relationship between China and Taiwan…

About time, as according to the same NYTimes Online article, “Taiwan is the biggest investor in China and many Taiwanese businesspeople live on the mainland.” Businesses always seem to a few steps ahead of official government diplomacy. Thankfully, in this situation government policy seems to be really trying to follow businesses lead.

A catch-22 to this whole story is that China still considers Taiwan a “renegade nation,” and has ballistic missiles pointed at them. Still, business finds a way around all that. Another funny catch-22 to this courting relationship is that these two neighbors are just beginning to work out a currency situation that will allow normalization of currency usage in each nation. Taiwan is opening its doors to the Chinese Renminbi for the first time. Imagine the United States and Canada saying, today, “Hey guys maybe we should normalize our currency policies so we can use each others’ currency instead of always having to change money into Euros or Swiss Francs or Japanese Yen.” And still, business finds a way of dealing with these little financial hang-ups. Business is obviously tuned in to something, and are now hampered by a lack of government unity between these two major Asian economies.

I always believed it quite strange that China and Taiwan could never get along, as having an unruly neighbor these days is quite strenuous. If one neighbor is upset they aren’t just going to leave last night’s trash on your doorstep. But if they did, last night’s garbage isn’t the same old ramen noodles it used to be in the 1950’s. These days last night’s trash contains ballistic missiles with a topping of depleted uranium to make things extra nice and ripe when it smacks on your doorstep. Ramen noodles never tasted so good. Not to mention Taiwan has its own big neighbor that although has to stretch some distance can hit with alarming impact. So, who wants all that tension around the neighborhood? Isn’t it easier to just exchange wok recipes and call it a night?

I’m not oblivious to the history of these two nations, nor do I make underplay the inter-cultural tensions and ideologies of these two nations, but something has to be done as human casualties can be at stake. Taiwan and China have an interconnected history, as this tiny island was the main fleeing point for Chiang Kai-shek and his Nationalist ruling party the Kuomintang, which now heads the Taiwanese government, after defeat at the hands of Mao Zedong and his Communist Party at the end of the Chinese Civil War. Since those days in 1950 China has tried to bring Taiwan back under the delicate fist of “One China Unity.” I believe, if Taiwan had not transformed itself into a prosperous economic power we might not hear so much chest thumping from China about “One China” (a strong connection to the United States and other Western powers probably has something to do with the chest thumping as well). And if China had not taken off on its economic rise Taiwanese business people might not be pushing to normalize relations with the Mainland folk who chased them away. Still though, they are interconnected and no one can deny that. Separated by a stones-throw these two state entities are eternal neighbors, and what affects one will affect the other. They must get along. At least that’s what the business people believe, and are proving. Hopefully the governments follow suit.

Peace

If I Were President of China April 10, 2008

This week’s rant is up and ready. Taking aim at China is always fun. While I support the common Chinese person, and his or her right to make a living, I take great issue with how the Chinese government handles disputes of any kind. With over 5,000 years of history and culture you’d think they would have figured out a better way to deal with sensitive matters both domestically and internationally. I’d love to have Hu Baby’s job. That said, here’s The Weekly Rant (click).

A China For Me and You and Them? September 12, 2007

Check out this link to the New York Times online series about “Choking on China.” http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/26/world/asia/26china.html?ex=1189742400&en=92e93b2a3b6f53b5&ei=5070

Again I wonder what kind of message are we sending by holding the Olympics in China? Not only that but what are we saying to the Chinese people who are suffering and dying that we condone such environmental neglect thus promoting humanitarian neglect. A very messy situation both figuratively and literally.

Peace ya’ll

“Divine Intervention or Chinese Law?” September 11, 2007

So, there you are, a kid ready to be deemed the reincarnation of the Dalai Lama, the supreme spiritual leader of Tibetan Buddhist Monks, and in walks a Chinese public office worker saying, “Sorry but this reincarnation is illegal as this person has not been approved by the Chinese Central Government. Please fill out these forms and do the proper due diligence before performing a reincarnation, in the future. Thank you.”

Okay, what up with that? Last time I checked on Tibetan Buddhist culture the whole reincarnation is supposed to be left up to the religious elders within Tibet. It is not subject to Beijing approval. If this is religious freedom within China then I have a bridge that can cross the Pacific Ocean to sell you. Regardless of the millions of people China “allow” to visit Lhasa as a pilgrimage religious freedom doesn’t exist in China, unless you 100% obey the Central Authority.

I’ve walked with Tibetan Monks, while visiting the home in exile of the 14th Dalai Lama – Dharamsala, but I just missed the 14th Dalai Lama (he was in Japan at the time). What is the Central Chinese government getting up in a tizzy about? I think if they just relaxed on the religious crackdowns and maybe fostered some kind of true freedom, transparency, and brotherhood between people they would go a long way in maintaining this One China Policy they so proudly preach. The people I met were very political and very boisterous, and really nice. The Monks spent the day in “arguments/debates” where they challenged their own religion as well as other topics. It was enlightening that people could challenge each other without violence. Religion challenging itself with the outcome being greater enlightenment – things that most religions speak about but rarely live up to.

China has bigger problems to deal with than revolting Monks in Tibet (or independent minded Taiwanese). The big bad Chinese government needs to get a handle on the environmental destruction taking place in the country, the loosely regulated manufacturing industry, and the ridiculous amount of secrecy/lack of transparency within the government. Oh, not to mention the 2008 Summer Olympics are coming to town (which I disagree with).

I don’t want to be anti-Chinese because I believe the Chinese people are like anyone else in this World – they want success and a comfortable life. I’m criticizing the management of China, and the way the Chinese Central Government oversteps its boundaries and sticks its hands into realms of life they should stay out of. If you want to check an article about this issue see – http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/6944750.stm

Peace ya’ll

Beijin Olympics 2008 – Why? September 4, 2007

So, I was just watching the IAAF World Championships in Osaka, Japan (I live in Akita City, Japan), and I have to say that it was great to see such a world athletic event in a nation like Japan. From what I saw everything was well run, and from what I know about Japan I’m sure the athletes and other competitors were well taken care of. For the most part people can do what they want, say what they want, and not have to worry about the government taking action against individuals. Also, you can walk outside in Japan and not lose a lung – even in Osaka. This brings me to the issue of the day…the Beijin Olympics of 2008.

I have nothing against Chinese people, and wish them all the success that the statistics show their country is having. That being said, I hope one day more stringent requirements are actually enforced regarding a host city for the Olympics. This is not some small time event. This is the preminent athletic event in history – bar none. I will not go back and judge history and listen to, “Well, Berlin was host to this event while Hitler was in power.” Done with, gotta move on from that. I will say that we should learn from that. Why is Beijing a host city making China a host country when so much is “wrong” with China? Okay, I get that China is a world manufacturing power and is home to great amounts of investment from multinational corporations. I’m cutting to the mustard here because other stuff is nonsense to me, like the U.S. going into Iraq for weapons of mass destruction and liberating a people – ridiculous – the oil was the mission.

China has a lot of work to do regarding basic freedoms, manufacturing oversight, environmental concerns, the list goes on. The Olympics are supposed to be a celebration of openness, cultural enlightenment, cross cultural interaction and competition. China gets a nod on competition, but fall away from the rest. Certain people don’t enjoy basic freedoms in China. I’m not talking about people on people oppression. I’m talking about government instituted oppression. Say something negative against the government and you might find yourself having a very difficult day. God knows (no punn intended) that the people of Tibet are not enjoying religious freedom, and economic prosperity. The environment in China is in dissaray and needs to be addressed. Economic success is great but when I can see sand on my wifes car that comes from China, I have to wonder what is going on over there. This is where the Olympics are going to be.

I guess it’s nutty for me to judge China because there are worse places for the Olympics to be. I just want a higher standard. If this means that the Olympics are held in Antarctica every year then so be it. Build a biodome and let them happen. I wonder if the athletes will spend as much money in China knowing that the goods could be contaminated or something? I guess it should be okay because China exports the contaminated stuff to other countries.

All countries have their upsides and downsides. I guess in China’s case I think the downsides outweigh the upsides. My inner optimist says, I hope China will turn a new leaf and push forward a platform of openness, true basic human freedoms, and environmental reform as a result from this Olympic effort being put forth.

Peace ya’ll