Just what is our foreign policy in Asia? Inquiring minds would
like to know. If it is to establish hegemony in the region, I'd like to know
when Americans had a chance to vote on that policy.
Secretary of State Colin Powell said we would continue spy flights to
"protect our national-security interests. And frankly to protect the
national security interests of our friends in the region."
(There is no such thing as friendship between governments. George Washington
knew that. How come modern politicians can't get that simple fact through their
heads?)
Does Powell mean we are prepared to go to war to protect the independence of
Korea? Of Japan? Of Taiwan? If he does, when were the American people ever asked
if they wanted their sons or grandchildren to die 12,000 miles away to protect
somebody else's country?
Now that the crew of our spy plane will be freed, we need to address the issue
of just what our policy is in regard to China.
The answer to all these questions is that Americans are handed a foreign policy
without so much as a by-your-leave. We are supposed, sheep-like, to accept the
wisdom of the elders of the foreign-policy establishment and do nothing but
obey.
To get down to the nut, I've no desire at all to see my children or
grandchildren die in an Asian war for any reason whatsoever. It is not in the
least bit necessary for the United States to establish hegemony in that region
in order for our country to remain free and prosperous. The only war Americans
should ever fight is in defense of this country and no other.
Unless somebody in Washington knows that China is planning a surprise attack on
the United States, I see no justification whatsoever for spying in such an
intrusive way. Collecting radio and microwave transmissions is going to give you
data, 99 percent of which is routine. Why do it? Would we like Chinese
surveillance aircraft flying off our coasts?
For some reason, people in Washington cannot get rid of their war mentality.
That's probably because we have too many generals and admirals trying to justify
their jobs.
Gen. Douglas MacArthur warned Americans never to get involved in an Asian land
war (if you want to know why, check the population figures). We disregarded that
advice when John F. Kennedy and Lyndon Johnson bogged us down in the Vietnam
War. It was not a happy outcome.
Neither was the Korean War, when we discovered that if we were unwilling to use
nukes, we couldn't win a war against Chinese troops. In that case, the old
Confederate joke was true: We ran out of bullets before we ran out of Chinese.
Now there are even more Chinese, and the Chinese have enough nukes of their own
to guarantee that we won't use ours in any future difficulty. As one of the
Chinese generals said, he wasn't worried about American defense of Taiwan.
"They think more of L.A. than they do of Taipei."
On the other hand, we have nothing to worry about with China. There aren't
enough boats and planes in the whole world to ferry a Chinese army to America.
Furthermore, the Chinese government has all it can do to keep control of its own
country.
Therefore, it seems to me that the bottom line is our relationship with China
boils down to trade and nothing else. If that is the case, then we should not
allow the military to make foreign policy and play Cold War games when there is
no Cold War and no imminent hot war. We need to force those in Washington to get
rid of their imperial mind-sets and tend to our business instead of trying to
run the world.
Nobody in history has succeeded in maintaining an empire, and we certainly
won't. For all of our billions of defense dollars, I wouldn't want to throw our
volunteer army into a land war with Chinese or North Korean infantry. I don't
think we'd like the results. It wouldn't be the same as mugging a little country
that doesn't have a pig's chance of surviving a barbecue.
If the American people want peace, they had better let the nabobs in Washington
know it. Members of Congress, for example, have a bad habit of slapping
sanctions on any country whose government does something they don't like -- or
at least claim they don't like.
Where in the Constitution does it state that Congress has jurisdiction over the
internal affairs of foreign countries? Who appointed these characters the
world's moral and political policemen?
With the collapse of the Soviet Union, we had an opportunity to build a peace
that might last for generations, but the politicians in Washington are doing
everything in their power to mess it up. We should have disbanded the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization; instead, we expanded it. We should have cemented
relations with Russia; instead, we have undermined those Russians who were
pro-West and strengthened those who are anti-West.
Reach Charley Reese at 407-420-5315 or [email protected]