Biden Gets China

choi

In outing Iran's missile capability (see my earlier posting), Russia may have an ulterior motive, that there is no need to erect a missile defense in Europe, in anticipation of Iran's missile attacks.

(1) Steve Clemons, Biden Gets China. The Atlantic, Jan 2, 2012.
http://www.theatlantic.com/inter ... -gets-china/250747/

My comment:
(a) Mr Biden, in his tenure as chairman of senate foreign committee, was known to be friendly toward China.
(b) The report states, "National Security Advisor Thomas Donilon has essentially been holding the China policy portfolio himself since September 2010 * * * For the most part, currency politics aside, Donilon's mission has succeeded -- and he has since preempted either Clinton's China hands, particularly Assistant Secretary of State Kurt Campbell, or Geithner's team from taking primacy over US-China policy."

Well, I did not know who was in charge of US policy; I thought it was President Obama. And I do not think US and China are in honeymoon. Think about Pres Obama's comments in this year's APEC and US marines' impending move into Australia.
(c) The report also says, "Biden also played a leading role -- along with Defense Secretary Bob Gates -- in the 'Russia reset.'" I do not know if one will say it is a success for US, because recently Russia's mood about US has turned dark, what with NATO missile defense being set up in Europe and accusations of election fraud in December.

(2) Edward Wong, China’s President Lashes Out at Western Culture. New York Times, Jan 4, 2012.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/0 ... amp;scp=1&sq=hu china truth&st=cse
("The essay, which was signed by Mr. Hu and based on a speech he gave in October, drew a sharp line between the cultures of the West and China and effectively said the two sides were engaged in an escalating war. It was published in Seeking Truth")

(3) Julian E Barnes, Nathan Hodge and Jeremy Page, China Takes Aim at US Naval Might. Wall Street Journal, Jan 4, 2011 (front page).

Quote:

(a) "Pentagon officials are reluctant to talk publicly about potential conflict with China. Unlike the Soviet Union during the Cold War, Beijing isn't an explicit enemy.

"Nevertheless, US military officials often talk about preparing for a conflict in the Pacific--wihout mentioning who they might be fighting. The situation resembles a Harry Potter novel in which the characters refuse to utter the name of their adversary, says Andrew Krepinevich, president of the Center for Strategic and Budgetary Assessments, a think tank with close ties to the Pentagon. 'You can't say China's a threat,' he says. 'You can't say China's a competitor.

(b) "China's beefed up military still is a long way from having the muscle to defeat the US Navy head-to-head. For now, US officials says, the Chinese strategy is to delay the arrival of US military forces long enough to take control of contested islands or waters.

"Publicly, Pentagon leaders * * * have said the US would like to cultivate closer military-to-military ties with China.

"Privately, China has been the focus of planning. In 2008, the US military held a series of war games, called Pacific Vision, which tested its ability to counter a 'near-peer competitor' in the Pacific. That phrase is widely understood within the military to be shorthand for China.

"'My whole impetus was to look at the whole western Pacific,' says retired Air force Gen Carroll 'Howie' Chandler, who helped conduct the war games. 'And it was no secret that the Chinese were making investments to overcome our advantages in the Pacific.'

My comment: There is no need to read the rest, for those of us who are familiar with current state of US-China relationship.