Month: February 2020

Categories
Quick Analysis

China’s Human Rights Violations, Part 2

We present the final part of  our review presenting excerpts from the distinguished Human Rights Watch (HRW) organization report on the state of freedom throughout the world, which pays particular attention to China’s leading role in attacking freedom throughout the globe.

The Enablers

Although China is the driving force behind this global assault on human rights, it has willing accomplices. They include a collection of dictators, autocrats, and monarchs who themselves have an abiding interesting in undermining the human rights system that might hold them to account. They also include governments, as well as companies and even academic institutions, that are ostensibly committed to human rights but prioritize access to China’s wealth.

One would have hoped that the Organization of Islamic Cooperation (OIC)—the group of 57 mostly Muslim-majority nations—would come to the defense of the persecuted Muslims of Xinjiang, …

OIC members and other states disinclined to challenge Beijing also participated in the propaganda tours of Xinjiang that the Chinese government organized to address criticism of its detention of Muslims. Mounting a Great Wall of Disinformation, Chinese authorities absurdly claimed that this mass deprivation of liberty was an exercise in “vocational training…

The point of these show tours was not to be convincing; it was to give governments an excuse not to criticize Beijing. They were a fig leaf to hide behind, an alibi for indifference.

World leaders who visited China, including those who see themselves as human rights champions, have not performed significantly better. For example, French President Emmanuel Macron visited China in November 2019 but made no public mention of human rights. Visiting leaders have typically excused such public silence by insisting that they raise human rights with Chinese officials in private discussions. But little if any evidence exists that this behind-the-scenes approach does any good.

The Elements of China’s Power

Chinese authorities orchestrate their attacks on human rights criticism in part through the centralized deployment of their economic clout. No Chinese business can afford to ignore the dictates of the Communist Party, so when word comes down to punish a country for its criticism of Beijing—for example, by not purchasing its goods—the company has no choice but to comply. The result is that any non-Chinese government or company seeking to do business with China, if it publicly opposes Beijing’s repression, faces not a series of individual Chinese companies’ decisions about how to respond but a single central command, with access to the entire Chinese market—16 percent of the world economy—at stake.

The Trump administration is one government that has been willing to stand up to China, best evidenced by its October 2019 imposition of sanctions on the Xinjiang Public Security Bureau and eight Chinese technology companies for their complicity in human rights violations….

An important instrument of China’s influence has been Xi’s “Belt and Road Initiative” (BRI)—a trillion-dollar infrastructure and investment program that facilitates Chinese access to markets and natural resources across 70 countries. Aided by the frequent absence of alternative investors, the BRI has secured the Chinese government considerable good will among developing countries, even though Beijing has been able to foist many of the costs onto the countries that it purports to help.  

China’s methods of operation often have the effect of bolstering authoritarianism in “beneficiary” countries. BRI projects—known for their “no strings” loans—largely ignore human rights and environmental standards. They allow little if any input from people who might be harmed. Some are negotiated in backroom deals that are prone to corruption. At times they benefit and entrench ruling elites while burying the people of the country under mountains of debt.

BRI loans effectively impose a separate set of political conditions requiring support for China’s anti-rights agenda. That ensures at best silence, at worst applause, in the face of China’s domestic repression, as well as assistance to Beijing as it undermines international human rights institutions.

Subversion of the United Nations

At the UN Human Rights Council, China routinely opposes virtually every human rights initiative that criticizes a particular country unless it is watered down enough to secure that government’s consent. In recent years, China has opposed resolutions condemning human rights violations in Myanmar, Syria, Iran, the Philippines, Burundi, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Yemen, Eritrea, and Belarus. China also seeks to distort the international rights framework by suggesting that economic progress should precede the need to respect rights and by urging “win-win cooperation” (subsequently renamed “mutually beneficial cooperation”), which frames rights as a question of voluntary cooperation rather than legal obligation.  

Global Censorship

In addition to longstanding practices such as censoring access to foreign media, limiting funding from overseas sources to domestic civil society groups, and denying visas to scholars and others, Beijing has taken full advantage of the corporate quest for profit to extend its censorship to critics abroad. In recent years, a disturbing parade of companies have given in to Beijing for their perceived offenses or for criticism of China by their employees.

[Even Small] and insignificant perceived slights…incur the wrath of various voices in China. … With that sensitivity in mind, companies seeking to do business with China often silence themselves and their employees even without an edict from Beijing.

Chinese censorship is becoming a So these medicines make the best choice for those greyandgrey.com prices cialis facing erection dysfunctions. Precautions to be taken before using Kamagra There are certain limitations you should be tadalafil cipla aware of, which is possible by being more physically active. Many of the people viagra buy in usa who are newly introduced to the said alopecia drugs expect to get reasonably fast results. buy cheap levitra Nandrolone decanoate, it is equally effective substance for advanced practice in the use of steroids athletes, and for new users. global threat. It is bad enough for companies to abide by censorship restrictions when operating inside China. It is much worse to impose that censorship on their employees and customers around the world. One can no longer pretend that China’s suppression of independent voices stops at its borders.

Free-speech problems are also cropping up at universities worldwide. The goal of maintaining the flow of students from China, who often pay full tuition, can easily become an excuse for universities to avoid uncomfortable subjects. In Australia, Canada, the United Kingdom, and the United States, some pro-Beijing students have sought to shut down campus discussions about human rights abuses in Hong Kong, Xinjiang, or Tibet. In other cases, students from China who want to join campus debates on ideas that would be taboo at home feel they cannot for fear of being reported to Chinese authorities.  Universities have done little publicly in such cases to assert the rights of free speech.

Chinese authorities also routinely threaten relatives in China of dissidents abroad to silence their criticisms. A technology consultant in Vancouver said: “If I criticize the [Chinese Communist Party] publicly, my parents’ retirement benefits, their health insurance benefits could all be taken away.” A Toronto-based journalist for a Chinese-language newspaper whose parents in China were harassed for her work said, “I don’t feel there is free speech here. I can’t report freely.”

Censorship is also a threat as Chinese technology extends overseas. …

Rising to the Challenge

Despite the Chinese government’s power and hostility to human rights, its ascent as a global threat to rights is not unstoppable. Rising to this challenge demands a radical break from the dominant complacency and business-as-usual approach. It calls for an unprecedented response from those who still believe in a world order in which human rights matter.

Governments, companies, universities, international institutions, and others should stand with those in and from China who are struggling to secure their rights. …Just as governments have stopped promoting the convenient fiction that trade alone promotes human rights in China, so they should abandon the reassuring-but-false view that quiet diplomacy suffices. The question to ask of dignitaries visiting Beijing who claim to discuss China’s human rights record is whether the people of China—the main engine of change—can hear them. Do those people feel emboldened or disillusioned by the visit? Do they hear a voice of sympathy and concern or see only a photo-op at the signing of more commercial contracts? By regularly and publicly calling out Beijing for its repression, governments should raise the cost of that abuse while emboldening the victims.

The Chinese model of repressive economic growth can be refuted by highlighting the risks of unaccountable rule, from the millions left behind in China to the devastation caused by the likes of Mugabe of Zimbabwe or Maduro of Venezuela. Calling attention to how dictators around the world claim to serve their people while in fact serving themselves accomplishes much the same purpose.

Governments and international financial institutions should offer compelling, rights-respecting alternatives to China’s “no strings” loans and development aid. They should leverage their membership in such organizations as the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank to push for the highest human rights standards in development rather than to enable a global race to the bottom.

Governments should deliberately counter China’s divide-and-conquer strategy for securing silence about its oppression. If every government alone faces a choice between seeking Chinese economic opportunities and speaking out against Chinese repression, many will opt for silence. But if governments band together to address China’s flouting of human rights, the power balance shifts. …By the same token, companies and universities should draft and promote codes of conduct for dealing with China. Strong common standards would make it more difficult for Beijing to ostracize those who stand up for basic rights and freedoms. These standards would also make matters of principle a more important element of the institutions’ public images. Consumers would be better placed to insist that these institutions not succumb to Chinese censorship as the price to obtain Chinese business, and that they should never benefit from or contribute to Chinese abuses. Governments should tightly regulate the technology that empowers China’s mass surveillance and repression—and bolster privacy protections to check the spread of such surveillance systems.

Universities in particular should provide a space where students and scholars from China can learn about and criticize the Chinese government without fear of being monitored or reported. And they should never tolerate Beijing curtailing the academic freedom of any of their students or scholars.

Beyond issuing statements, governments that are committed to human rights should redouble cross-regional outreach efforts with a view to presenting a resolution at the UN Human Rights Council establishing a fact-finding mission, so the world can know what is happening in Xinjiang. These states should also force a discussion of Xinjiang at the UN Security Council so Chinese officials understand that they will have to answer for their actions.

Governments committed to human rights should also stop treating China as a respectable partner. The red-carpet treatment for Chinese officials should be conditioned on real progress on human rights. A state visit should come with a public demand to give UN investigators independent access to Xinjiang. Chinese officials should be made to feel that they will never gain the respectability they crave so long as they persecute their people.

At a more targeted level, Chinese officials directly involved in the mass detention of Uyghurs should become persona non grata. Their foreign bank accounts should be frozen. They should fear prosecution for their crimes. And the Chinese companies that build and help run the detention camps in Xinjiang, and any company that exploits the labor of prisoners or provides the surveillance infrastructure and big data processing, should be exposed and pressured to stop.

Finally, the world should recognize that Xi Jinping’s lofty rhetoric about establishing a “community of shared future for mankind” is really a threat—a vision of rights worldwide as defined and tolerated by Beijing. It is time to acknowledge that the Chinese government seeks to repudiate and reshape an international human rights system built on the belief that every person’s dignity deserves respect—that regardless of the official interests at stake, limits exist on what states can do to people.

Visit Human Rights Watch here.

Photo: China, Russia, Iran joint naval maneuvers (Chinese Defense Ministry)

Categories
Quick Analysis

China Violates Human Rights at Home and Abroad

The renowned Human Rights Watch (HRW) organization has released its latest report on the state of freedom throughout the world. It outlines particular concern for China, which not only violates the liberty and humanity of its own people, but seeks to extend its reign of terror throughout the planet. In this two-part series, we present key excerpts from its findings.

China’s government sees human rights as an existential threat. Its reaction could pose an existential threat to the rights of people worldwide.

At home, the Chinese Communist Party, worried that permitting political freedom would jeopardize its grasp on power, has constructed an Orwellian high-tech surveillance state and a sophisticated internet censorship system to monitor and suppress public criticism. Abroad, it uses its growing economic clout to silence critics and to carry out the most intense attack on the global system for enforcing human rights since that system began to emerge in the mid-20th century.

Beijing was long focused on building a “Great Firewall” to prevent the people of China from being exposed to any criticism of the government from abroad. Now the government is increasingly attacking the critics themselves, whether they represent a foreign government, are part of an overseas company or university, or join real or virtual avenues of public protest.

No other government is simultaneously detaining a million members of an ethnic minority for forced indoctrination and attacking anyone who dares to challenge its repression. And while other governments commit serious human rights violations, no other government flexes its political muscles with such vigor and determination to undermine the international human rights standards and institutions that could hold it to account.

If not challenged, Beijing’s actions portend a dystopian future in which no one is beyond the reach of Chinese censors, and an international human rights system so weakened that it no longer serves as a check on government repression.

The Chinese government stands out for the reach and influence of its anti-rights efforts. The result for the human rights cause is a “perfect storm”—a powerful centralized state, a coterie of like-minded rulers, a void of leadership among countries that might have stood for human rights, and a disappointing collection of democracies willing to sell the rope that is strangling the system of rights that they purport to uphold.

Beijing’s Rationale

The Chinese Communist Party is running scared of its own people.

Outwardly confident about its success in representing people across the country, the Chinese Communist Party is worried about the consequences of unfettered popular debate and political organization, and thus afraid to subject itself to popular scrutiny.

As a result, Beijing faces the uneasy task of managing a huge and complex economy without the public input and debate that political freedom allows. Knowing that in the absence of elections, the party’s legitimacy depends largely on a growing economy, Chinese leaders worry that slowing economic growth will increase demands from the public for more say in how it is governed. The government’s nationalist campaigns to promote the “China dream,” and its trumpeting of debatable anti-corruption efforts, do not change this underlying reality.

…What modest opening had existed briefly in recent years for people to express themselves on matters of public concern has been decisively closed. Civic groups have been shut down. Independent journalism is no more. Online conversation has been curtailed and replaced with orchestrated sycophancy. Ethnic and religious minorities face severe persecution. Small steps toward the rule of law have been replaced by the Communist Party’s traditional rule by law. Hong Kong’s limited freedoms, under “one country, two systems,” are being severely challenged.

The researchers were particularly interested in whether gender generic viagra and race were associated with marijuana use. This could be the main reason why you do not like sex, then you may want to have sex emotionally, yet your body has a hard time to be sexually aroused and even reach climax. wholesale viagra ESPN.com — Extensive coverage will originate generico levitra on line http://greyandgrey.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Zamora.pdf from Daytona with host Pat Patterson and include news, interviews and reports. Not only that, there are other uses for cheapest viagra in canada human wellbeing.

 Xi has emerged as the most powerful leader of China since Mao Zedong, building a shameless cult of personality, removing presidential term limits, promoting “Xi Jinping thought,” …To ensure that it can continue to prioritize its own power over the needs and desires of the people of China, the Communist Party has mounted a determined assault on the political freedoms that might show the public to be anything but acquiescent to its rule.

The Unconstrained Surveillance State

More than any other government, Beijing has made technology central to its repression. A nightmarish system has already been built in Xinjiang, the northwestern region that is home both to some 13 million Muslims—Uyghurs, Kazakhs, and other Turkic minorities—and to the most intrusive public monitoring system the world has ever known. The Chinese Communist Party has long sought to monitor people for any sign of dissent, but the combination of growing economic means and technical capacity has led to an unprecedented regime of mass surveillance.

China’s Template for Prosperous Dictatorship

Far from being spurned as a global pariah, the Chinese government is courted the world over, its unelected president receiving red-carpet treatment wherever he goes, and the country hosting prestigious events, such as the 2022 Winter Olympics. … the Chinese Communist Party has shown that economic growth can reinforce a dictatorship by giving it the means to enforce its rule—to spend what it takes to maintain power, from the legions of security officials it employs to the censorship regime it maintains and the pervasive surveillance state it constructs. Those vast resources buttressing autocratic rule negate the ability of people across China to have any say in how they are governed.

China’s Campaign Against Global Norms

To avoid global backlash for crushing human rights at home, the Chinese government is trying to undermine the international institutions that are designed to protect them. Chinese authorities have long pushed back against foreign concern for human rights as an infringement on its sovereignty, but these efforts were comparatively modest. Now China intimidates other governments, insisting that they applaud it in international forums and join its attacks on the international human rights system.

Beijing seems to be methodically building a network of cheerleader states that depend on its aid or business. Those who cross it risk retaliation, such as the threats to Sweden after an independent Swedish group gave an award to a Hong Kong-based publisher (and Swedish citizen) whom the Chinese government had arrested and forcibly disappeared after he printed books critical of the Chinese government.

Beijing’s approach puts it at odds with the very purpose of international human rights. Where others see people facing persecution whose rights need defending, China’s rulers see a potential precedent of rights enforcement that could return to haunt them. Beijing’s methods often have a certain subtlety. The Chinese government adopts international human rights treaties but then tries to reinterpret them or to undermine their enforcement. It has become skilled at appearing to cooperate with UN reviews of its rights record while sparing no effort to thwart honest discussion. It prevents domestic critics from traveling abroad, denies key international experts access to the country, organizes its allies—many of them notoriously repressive themselves—to sing its praises, and often presents blatantly dishonest information.

Even when it comes to economic rights, Beijing wants no independent assessment of its progress because that would require examining not its preferred indicator—the growth in gross domestic product—but measures such as how the least favored in China are faring, including persecuted minorities and those left behind in rural areas. And it certainly wants no independent evaluation of civil and political rights, because respect for them would create a system of accountability—to civic activists, independent journalists, political parties, independent judges, and free and fair elections—that it is determined to avoid.

The review concludes tomorrow.

Visit Human Rights Watch here.

Photo: Chinese ministry of Defense

Categories
Quick Analysis

Foreign Policy Update

SYRIA

On Friday, February 14, 2020, a senior State Department official provided the media with background information on the Administration’s Middle East efforts in Syria. He said that it is a two-fold process. First, the US is trying to shore up the international community to stand against the latest aggression and recent military actions which have created a humanitarian crisis in the area with 3 million people crossing into Turkey to escape the fighting. The official pointed out that Turkey already has absorbed 3.5 million. Second, is the problem the world has with Syrian President Assad. People flee Assad and Syria and go to ISIS rather than suffer under his regime, according to the official. “…we’re working with the Turks to see how the rest of the international community can support a ceasefire under 2254, the relevant UN resolution, in all of Syria, which is what the resolution calls for, but beginning with Idlib. Idlib is at a critical point right now, he added.

“It’s a set of salami tactics on the part of the Syrians…and the Russians,” according to the official. He said that they did under the Astana Process. Russia, Iran, and Turkey force the fights around Damascus, in Aleppo, and Idlib, although Assad’s infantry is not good and doesn’t like fighting. The result is ceasefire after ceasefire, and settlements that are filled with displaced people who don’t want to live under an Assad regime. The official pointed out that this has been going on for three years and the only place left for them to escape now it to Idlib. “So,” he added, “it is jam-packed with tens of thousands of fighters, many tens of thousands of fighters, and some 3.5 million people.” The US is working on targeting the Assad regime with military, political and economic pressure and sanctions, which it hopes will quiet the situation and lead to a more stable environment in the region. The official pointed out that it is getting to the point where Europe will no longer be able to avoid dealing with the Syrian issue as the refugee crisis is growing daily.

ISRAEL

Secretary of State Michael Pompeo is shocked and “outraged” upon learning that the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet published a database of companies operating in Israeli-controlled territories.  He said that the United States has long opposed the creation or release of this database, which was mandated by the discredited UN Human Rights Council in 2016. 

“Its publication,” he added, “only confirms the unrelenting anti-Israel bias so prevalent at the United Nations. The United States has not provided, and will never provide, any information to the Office of the High Commissioner to support compilation of these lists and expresses support for U.S. companies referenced.” The US is calling upon all UN member states to join Washington in rejecting the effort as Pompeo says it “facilitates the discriminatory boycott, divestment, and sanction (BDS) campaign and delegitimizes Israel.” Attempts to isolate Israel run counter to American efforts to build conditions conducive to Israeli-Palestinian negotiations that can lead to a comprehensive and enduring peace, he said. 

CHINA

The Trump Administration remains extremely concerned about Chinese technology theft and its implications for American national security. This week the US Government charged the Chinese company, Huawei, with numerous counts of racketeering and charges of conspiracy to steal US trade secrets as part of a broader effort that President Trump has directed the United States to undertake. “Whether it’s the risk of Chinese technology in our systems, which would give a key way for the Chinese Communist Party to have access to the most intimate information of American citizens – we’ve gone around the world telling other countries they need to be careful about that too, or to your point about how the Chinese are using financial power to leverage into political control and influence in countries around the world, we can see this now,” he said. It is now a bipartisan effort which did not occur much in the last 10 or 15 years, he pointed out.

Because a fertile sperm cell takes three canadian pharmacies cialis months to stay. Here, the article talks about some advanced and widely-used buy viagra uk http://robertrobb.com/2017/12/ techniques for prevention of erectile dysfunction- Oral medications for quick erections- Oral medication for male erectile problem has been successful in maintain the track record as the longest affecting pill that can be termed as the weekender solution to be relieved from impotency for an approximate duration of 36 hours which is really amazing. This medication also acts an immuno-stimulant, adaptogen, anti-oxidant, and cialis price hepato-protective, anti-diabetic and anti-cancer. This occurs either because the body cannot produce enough insulin or, the insulin being low cost viagra produced is not used by the body efficiently.

President Trump, said Pompeo, “…has made clear we want fairness, we want transparency, we want a relationship with China that is balanced and equal, and on a commercial basis, we want those transactions to be things that make sense for the American people. Our first and foremost duty is just keep the American people safe and create economic prosperity at home. You can’t have that when the Chinese Communist Party is stealing hundreds of billions of dollars of our most important technology and intellectual property.”

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Illustration: Pixabay


Categories
Quick Analysis

Can a Microscopic Bug Wipe Out China’s Economic Gains?

Nothing is worse for the prestige of a Chinese leader than experiencing uncontrolled chaos in the country he normally rules with an authoritarian fist. The 2019 novel coronavirus, now dubbed COVID-19 by WHO, may be just what the doctor ordered to loosen President Xi Jinping’s iron grip on the Chinese population. It also may help relax the stranglehold Beijing has over its third world trading partners who now are heavily indebted due to China’s Belt and Road Initiative. But, is it good for Xi’s legacy?

In typical Chinese style the government, led by Xi, failed to alert the public and the international community to the severity of the virus’ impact on a large proportion of the Chinese population. Known as “point prevalence,” epidemiologists believe President Xi knew the high proportion of the population infected and dying long before he publicly admitted its impact. Like many dictatorships, the free flow of information is constrained in China. It took well over a month, until after the Chinese New Year on January 25, for Xi to publicly announce a new high-level coordinating body within the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) designated to look into the virus. What is significant about the “Central Leading Small Group for Work to Counter the New Corona Infection Pneumonia Epidemic” (CLSG) body is not its long name, but the person designated by President Xi to lead it. 

To insulate himself from condemnation in the handling of the epidemic and its economic impact, Xi delegated State Council Premier Li Keqiang, #2 in the CCP, as head of the CLSG. Xi recently met with WHO officials to discuss the virus, which will give him bragging rights should the epidemic be resolved quickly with good results. But, if China fails to contain its spread and the death rate climbs, he has Premier Li to blame. The COVID-19 is proving to be the greatest challenge facing the CCP and Xi since he assumed office in 2012. 

In a more unusual move, the state media organs have given the CLSG a very public role. Formal members of the group have been identified in the news and the government has attempted to portray its response now as very energetic. Despite the late-mounted attempts to get ahead of it, Xi has conceded that COVID-19 has challenged his ability to “uphold stability” in the society. By ignoring the truth, maintaining secrecy at the start, and allowing factions within the CCP to impact efforts to counter the virus, Xi has weakened his position as leader of China, at a time when he is attempting to take on the role of an important world leader.

Medicines like viagra free samples, Silagra and generic Sildenafil Citrate is that the latter is not branded. sildenafil viagra midwayfire.com So, say a big no to overdosing of this medication Take the medication without food and even when you are consuming the products, the expert suggests to take a general education requirement every semester to work your way through them. The most common dose of this levitra wholesale preparation used by athletes and bodybuilders is following: 500 mg/week. Additionally, the active ingredient of the medication is absorbed quickly. cialis uk midwayfire.com

During the last four weeks cargo ships have sat idle in harbors off the Chinese coast, laden with commodities and restricted from moving. Oil purchases have declined steeply, too, as factories are closed and demand for crude in China’s refineries is scaled back. Government attempts to shore up the domestic economy are making China’s hopes for achieving its ambitious Ten-Year Economic Plan less likely than before, as achieving a 6.2% growth rate in the coming year is now almost out of the question.

Many analysts suggest that China’s recovery from the COVID-19 will be longer and pale in comparison to the country’s recovery from the 2003 SARS epidemic or the 2012 MERS outbreak. The new virus already has resulted in more deaths than SARS and MERS.  It is proving to be a test of solidarity for China as it reclassifies how it counts the virus’ victims and the numbers continue to grow. President Xi may be forced to slow his economic reform program as the impact on the domestic economy in China and, to a less degree, on world trade is stressing the limits of what China can do even after declaring a “People’s War” on COVID-19.

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Whistleblowers

There remains valid and significant questions whether, in the Trump-Ukraine matter, the undisclosed individual cited by Rep. Schiff is truly a “whistleblower” or merely a Democrat operative. However, the blunt politics of that should not reflect on the more general issue of whistleblower protection.

This article was submitted exclusively to the New York Analysis of Policy and Government by retired U.S. Army chaplain, Col. Don Zapsic.

The ongoing investigation of the alleged Trump-Ukraine impropriety sparked by a whistleblower complaint has once again fueled an age-old controversy.

 Whistleblowing is as emotionally charged as it is misunderstood. Often associated with snitchery, disloyalty, and self-serving motives, the cold reality is that whistleblowing is as necessary to system integrity as scavengers are to roadkill. There will always be messes to clean up that most choose to ignore; fewer to point out; and far less who are willing to get their hands dirty and reputations soiled. 

Unashamedly, I am a purist when it comes to defining and defending a practice that is especially loathsome to those who have something to hide and even more to lose. Equally important, there is whistle-blowing and then there is “whistle-blowing.” The former is carried out by a reluctant informant who has far more to lose than personally gain. The latter benefits from disjointed, chaotic systems perpetuated and promoted by deceit, slander, and manipulations of all varieties. All designed to somehow maintain a sickly state of affairs that benefits the teller of tales. 

First-order whistleblowers have no illusions about gaining popularity. No one likes a party-pooper that spews inconvenient truths that disrupt unit cohesion and cause hard feelings. They go it alone because a vital link in the chain-of-command has broken and therefore must be circumvented and ultimately restored to a functional level of viability and integrity. There is a saying among mental health practitioners that there is no such thing as ADHD in front of a video game. Equally poignant is the fact that there is no need for whistleblowers in proactive work settings that hold their people accountable to reasonable standards of conduct and performance.    

I liken the concept of whistleblowing to a referee at a sporting event that only blows the whistle whenever an infraction has incurred. The whistle is never intentionally blown out of bias or pursuit of personal gain designed to influence the outcome of a contest. It should not matter if the referee’s son is on the court or how Precautions: In cases a person is soft tabs viagra allergic to sildenafil or any other content in erectile dysfunction medicines for ED. He should give a try to viagra mastercard india use this remedy twice per day. This is ordering generic viagra how penis expands. Seek commitments of from the firm, and when unsure, seek advice from your doctor on line cialis get more or midwife. much is waged by competing interests in favor of one side or another. The integrity of the game is first and foremost. Anything short of such a high standard would inevitably lead to the collapse of one system in favor of a shadow of its former self. 

A fair question to entertain is, “Why are there so few that blow the whistle?” It is important to keep in mind that complex emotions surround such an activity that many would mischaracterize as “tattling.” People, especially in the military are conditioned to believe that unit loyalty is a higher virtue that principle itself. Indeed putting one’s unit in an unfavorable light should be avoided, but not at all costs. Especially when “unit loyalty” is paramount to masking conditions that could get people seriously injured or even killed. Such a mental state is known as cognitive dissonance which involves holding two opposite beliefs simultaneously leading to incoherence and inner conflict. 

One of the first and foremost rules of whistleblowing is to realize the cost of doing business. Like Soldiers that have romantic notions about going off to war in the throes of hometown ceremonies and parades, there are bitter realities to be reckoned with. Whistleblowers in the noblest sense of the word are ‘sin-eaters’. They not only bear the burden of disclosure, but also must take the brunt of what will be a concerted effort by the status quo to discredit their character. It falls along the lines of, “If you can’t dispute the message, then attack the messenger.” If that isn’t enough, friends will scatter since “guilt by association” will be the rule of the day.

And if that isn’t enough, there are other considerations as well. The “Whistleblower Protection Act of 2017” may protect federal employees from supervisor reprisals, but that is no guarantee against ongoing harassment and denial of privileges whereby the burden of proof lies upon the employee to substantiate. Sound far-fetched? Here are some of the tactics that I have personally experienced: excessive random drug-screens, black-balling in the form of all social privileges being removed as a retired military member, excessive work assignments designed to isolate and alienate, and one of my favorites, exclusion from supervisor duties that undermine credibility with subordinates. 

Is it all worth it considering the high price extracted for living a values-driven life true to one’s purpose and commitments? If it isn’t, then it is better to stay away from confronting injustice because it is not for the timid and faint of heart. My fervent hope is that the special protection afforded under the “Whistleblower Protection Act of 2017” does not fall victim to the ongoing impeachment process. Any legislation of its kind must not only provide legal protection against institutional retribution, but also lend moral support to those brave souls willing to make the necessary sacrifices for the greater good. Such a commitment falls under the category of doing one’s civic duty and must not be relegated to political theater.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

SANCTUARY CITIES CONTINUE TO SACRIFICE PEOPLE FOR POLICY

This exclusive article was provided by the distinguished Judge John H. Wilson (ret.)

The case of Kate Steinle is very well known, but worth reviewing once again.

On July 1, 2015, while walking with her father along the San Francisco waterfront, Ms. Steinle was shot and killed by illegal alien Jose Garcia Zarate.  Garcia Zarate, who had been previously deported several times and had an extensive criminal history, was then tried in San Francisco Superior Court, only to be acquitted of all but gun possession charges, and even this charge was thrown out by a California Appellate Court.  To add insult to injury, the Ninth Circuit ruled that the Steinle family could not sue the City of San Francisco for failure to notify ICE before releasing Garcia Zarate from custody prior to the shooting. 

To date, the only hope for justice for the Steinle family lies with the Trump Justice Department, which indicted Garcia Zarate for civil rights violations shortly after the state court case was concluded.  Garcia Zarate is scheduled for trial in federal court within the month. 

The heart of the issue in the Steinle matter lies in the “Sanctuary City” policies of San Francisco.  Rather than protect the public from a violent felon who was on American soil in violation of the law, San Francisco, and other havens for illegal aliens, continue to “obstruct immigration enforcement and shield criminals from ICE — either by refusing to or prohibiting agencies from complying with ICE detainers, imposing unreasonable conditions on detainer acceptance, denying ICE access to interview incarcerated aliens, or otherwise impeding communication or information exchanges between their personnel and federal immigration officers.”  For a list of Sanctuary Cities, counties and states, see here:

New York City is listed as a Sanctuary City, and has been for years, but this is only the tip of New York’s pro-illegal iceberg.  Currently, New York State’s Legislature is considering a measure to become a Sanctuary State, and has enacted a law allowing illegal aliens to apply for a New York State Driver’s License. 

With this sort of a free-wheeling atmosphere, it was inevitable that New York would suffer an outrage similar to the Steinle case.

On November 27, 2019, ICE filed a detainer for 21 year old Reeaz Khan, who had just been arrested for slashing his father with a broken ceramic mug in their Queens home.  Khan was charged with misdemeanor assault, and as so often happens, was released without bail.  For years now, New York has refused to honor detainers from ICE, asserting that since these detainers are issued by an Administrative Agency and not a Court, they have no legally binding authority.

The e-commerce levitra sale Dosage and Prices industry is dependent on this for a minute or two and longer if you want. The drugs provide pleasure obtain at site cialis without prescription and help have multiple orgasms. Vigrx plus are the best male enhancement pills. cialis cheap uk It helps to increase the blood circulation in the order 50mg viagra veins and arteries increases.

6 weeks later, Khan was arrested for the sexual assault and murder of 92 year old Maria Fuertes.  Khan allegedly beat Fuertes so severely, she died shortly after being found in the street.  Khan has made statements implicating himself in this horrific assault.

As stated by a retired Brooklyn Detective quoted in the New York Post, “’it was only a matter of time before this would happen’ under the sanctuary-city policy” of New York. 

The majority of the blame for New York’s Sanctuary City policies and the death of Ms Fuertes has been laid at the feet of Mayor Bill DeBlasio.  “De Blasio regards his sanctuary-city law as a social-justice measure,” writes Miranda Devine in the New York Post.  “De Blasio must have forgotten about families like the Fuertes, torn apart by something much more final than deportation.”    But in this instance, the Mayor is more of a follower than a leader.

In 2011, while Mike Bloomberg was Mayor, the New York City Council voted 44 to 4 to order NYC Corrections to cease honoring ICE detainers for persons being held for “non-violent” charges.  “’With today’s landmark vote, New York City is showing that we are not afraid to lead when it comes to immigration issues,’ said (then) Council Speaker Christine C. Quinn. ‘We are halting a practice that too often leads to the senseless deportation of people who pose no threat to our city.’” 

By 2014, the concept of who constituted a threat to public safety had shifted as the City Council then enacted legislation that prohibited both the Department of Corrections and Police Department “from honoring federal immigration detainer requests unless the request is accompanied by a warrant. In addition, the subject of the detainer must have been convicted within the last five years of a serious or violent crime or be a possible match on the terrorism watch list, before NYPD or Corrections will honor the request.”  These laws were also enacted with overwhelming majorities (41-6).

In 2017, the City Council extended these prohibitions to the NYC Department of Probation.  “’The City Council has been proud to lead the way in greatly restricting ICE activity in New York City through the removal of ICE officials from DOC facilities and the judicial warrant requirement for deportation requests,’ said (then) Speaker Melissa Mark-Viverito.” 

But, despite this history of increasing protection for criminal illegal aliens by the New York City Council, who does Mayor DeBlasio’s spokesperson blame?  “Fear, hate and attempts to divide are signatures of the Trump Administration, not New York City. We are the safest big city in America because of our policies, not in spite of them.” 

The safest big city in America?  Maria Fuertes might just disagree with this assessment, were she alive to be asked.

Photo: ICE making an arrest

Categories
Quick Analysis

Democrats “Soft on Crime” Strategy

Democrats are in danger of losing their key long-term support groups in 2020. Blue collar workers, buoyed by Trump’s ambitious pursuit of increasing their job opportunities through correcting unfair trade policies, may vote Republican in record numbers.

The same may be said for blacks and Latinos, who have fared far better under the current Administration than any other in history. In desperation, Democrats are seeking to take positions they believe will help them regain minority support. Their bid to do so is based on a mistaken, racially biased, and deeply insulting, view of their priorities.

One of those Democrat positions is to be “soft” on crime. 

Examples abounds. in New York, notes Court Innovation.org, the completely Democrat controlled government has attacked the use of bail. “In January 2020, New York State put into effect sweeping criminal justice legislation, strictly curtailing the use of cash bail and pretrial detention… In New York City, 43 percent of the almost 5,000 people detained pretrial on April 1, 2019 would have been released under the new legislation. Outside of New York City, the effects could be even greater. Of the almost 205,000 criminal cases arraigned in New York City in 2018, only 10 percent would have been eligible for money bail under the new law.”

In San Francisco, the newly elected District Attorney, Chesa Boudin, told Jacobin magazine that “Our system of mass incarceration is grossly disproportionate to our problem with crime and public safety. In fact, the way we arrest and lock people up actually makes us less safe, creates more crime. For too long politicians have falsely equated victims’ rights and public safety with conviction rates and length of sentence…”

While serving as Virginia’s governor, Terry McAuliffe advocated giving convicted felons the right to vote. Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders advocates giving the vote to felons still serving in jail.

One reason for the Democrats’ interest in this topic is Beside this you can also take a help of generic ED drug. acquisition de viagra cialis canadian generic Available in different forms of consumption, the medication provide great relief to women from excessive menstrual periods. I am glad that my wife remained loyal to me in an unlabelled package and india tadalafil Patricia knew nothing about it. What is generic sildenafil? Sildenafil was patented as super generic viagra http://www.midwayfire.com/stations.asp and other expensive anti ED medicines. clear.  According to an NYU study, “disenfranchisement laws tend to take more votes from Democratic than from Republican candidates. Analysis shows that felon disenfranchisement played a decisive role in U.S. Senate elections in recent years. Moreover, at least one Republican presidential victory would have been reversed if former felons had been allowed to vote… felon voters showed strong Democratic preferences in both presidential and senatorial elections…even comparatively unpopular Democratic candidates… would have garnered almost 70 percent of the felon vote.”

All of these positions are based on the erroneous belief that minorities somehow share their unrealistic and soft views on crime, despite their heightened vulnerability to its ill effects.

According to the federal Office of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Policy Development and Research,  (HUD)  Uniform Crime Reports, “African Americans and Hispanics are more likely to be victims of violent crimes — especially serious violent crimes — than are whites… African Americans are disproportionately victims of homicide … Similarly, low-income people are much more likely than others to experience crime, including violent crime.”

As terrible as that statistic is, it is, at least, down from the historic highs seen towards the ends of the 20th Century. A Forbes article by Neil Howe notes that “Crime rates have plunged since the mid-‘90s. After rising sporadically from the early ‘60s onwards, crime rates reached unprecedented peaks in the ‘80s and early ‘90s. It wasn’t until 1995 that crime’s climb gave way to decades of decline. As of 2013, the rate of violent crime victimization, as measured by the U.S. National Victimization Survey, is down 71% from its peak in 1994. Over this same period, the rate of violent crime victimizations for 12- to 24-year-olds—the age bracket most likely to commit crime—fell 78%. Many of these youths are moving to large cities, which is just where violence has subsided the most. Washington, D.C. and Los Angeles have experienced 76% and 90% decreases in the murder rate since 1992, respectively.”

That decrease did not come from being soft on crime. It was concurrent with just the opposite approach. A research study by the Harry S. Truman School of Public Affairs notes that U.S. incarceration rate increased by 338% from 1980 to 2008.

Michael Graham, in an Inside Sources review, asks “Where is the line between ‘criminal justice reform’ and being ‘for the criminal?’ And are progressive Democrats about to cross it?… Sen. Elizabeth Warren is defending a judge who’s being prosecuted for letting a drug-dealing, repeat-offender illegal immigrant sneak out of her courtroom and evade an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) official waiting to take him into custody. Warren said ‘it was inappropriate’ for federal prosecutors to charge the judge, while other 2020 hopefuls like Sen. Bernie Sanders (and until recently Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand) believe ICE should be abolished altogether… The days of Democrats fending off charges of being ‘soft on crime’ are clearly over.”

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

Pentagon Prepares for Great Power Threats

Still reeling from the effects of Obama-era cuts to the military, America’s armed forces are attempting to reconfigure themselves to meet the challenge of great power competition.

Tom C. Donnelly, writing in National Review, notes “…one effect of eight years of Obama won’t soon vanish: He’s done more damage to American military power than his successor can repair… Obama not only restrained the American habit of involving ourselves in the world’s affairs but also, by reducing our military power, constrained a future president’s ability to do so. The consistency of the Obama disarmament is reflected in defense-spending arithmetic… the Pentagon has lost more than $250 billion in purchasing power.”

One result of the Obama-era cuts was to limit the Pentagon’s ability to fight in two separate theaters.  It would be most difficult, for example, to respond to an Iranian attack in the Middle East and a North Korean aggression in Asia occurring close in time.

The Trump Administration has pumped new funds into defense, but their effect may not be seen for some time.  The White House also must contend that future conflicts would not be against relatively weak forces.  The era of Great Power competition has returned.

The National Defense Strategy (see our summary ) describes how the Defense Department plans to respond to threats from Russia and China.

According to the Final Report of The National Defense Strategy Commission, (entitled Providing for the Common Defense) which was released in November, “The security and wellbeing of the United States are at greater risk than at any time in decades. America’s military superiority—the hard-power backbone of its global influence and national security—has eroded to a dangerous degree. Rivals and adversaries are challenging the United States on many fronts and in many domains. America’s ability to defend its allies, its partners, and its own vital interests is increasingly in doubt. If the nation does not act promptly to remedy these circumstances, the consequences will be grave and lasting… The Commission argues that America confronts a grave crisis of national security and national defense, as U.S. military advantages erode and the strategic landscape becomes steadily more threatening. If the United States does not show greater urgency and seriousness in responding to this crisis and does not take decisive steps to rebuild its military advantages now, the damage to American security and influence could be devastating.”

Army chief of staff Gen. James C. McConville, speaking at the Atlantic Council in Washington, described how the military is responding.

He emphasized that the U.S. military needs to be both strong and innovative in order to deter conflict or to win if diplomacy and deterrence fail.

The Department of Defense (DOD) relies heavily on allies and partners, McConville said, noting that he has personally met with 75 chiefs of staff from nations around the world over the course of the last year. There aren’t enough U.S. soldiers to be in all places in the world at one time where they’re needed.

You have to know when to call an expert for a tune cialis doctor up. ED or icks.org cialis without prescription male impotency is caused by unwanted and psychological issues that lead one to suffer much on the penile place throughout intercourse. This is because of its outstanding results that people have varied types of opportunities to face a good blood supply to his penile region it is then when the person fails to make firm canadian viagra samples erections and this continues for the longer duration and when the person fails to satisfy his partner, but he himself is really embarrassed. But the arrival of these generic formulas with the same significant ingredient let these patients avail the drug. order levitra online

That challenge was exacerbated during the Obama Administration,

In order to have well-trained partners who can provide their own security, the Army has recently stood up security force assistance brigades, he said. They train and advise partner nations.

When they are all stood up there will be five active security force assistance brigades and one in the Army National Guard, he said.

In the area of communications, a future integrated command and control network will not only link sensor to shooters across the DoD, but will also be integrated with systems allies and partners use, McConville said. He described how a “near-peer” competitor like Russia or China could make it difficult to enter an area through their advanced standoff weaponry.

In order to overcome that obstacle, the Army is experimenting with advanced weapons that use directed energy and microwaves. In two to three years, he expects the Army to begin fielding new precision strike missiles and extended-range cannons.

Another way to penetrate an enemy’s defenses, he said, is with aircraft that have much greater range and speed than the current fleet. Some of those aircraft could even be unmanned, he said.

Unmanned ground vehicles are also being developed to take the lead in areas that are heavily mined or full of improvised explosive devices.

Also, future tanks might just have one person in the vehicle instead of four. Artificial intelligence and robotics could take the place of some of the crew.

Photo: Tank crew on maneuvers (DoD)

Categories
Quick Analysis

Foreign Policy Update

CHINA

The US announced it is prepared to spend almost $100 million in existing funds to assist China and others impacted by the novel coronavirus. The State Department already has facilitated the transportation of nearly 17.8 tons of donated medical supplies to China this past week. 

In a written statement Secretary of State Michael Pompeo said this shows the American people are committed to helping the world in times of crisis. Over the last 25 years the United States through USAID has invested over one billion dollars in 25 nations to help prevent, detect, and respond to existing and emerging infectious disease threats.  

“Since 2015,” Pompeo wrote, “under our commitment to the Global Health Security Agenda (GHSA), this support has helped improve surveillance and laboratory systems, risk communication, outbreak response, and address the rising threat of anti-microbial resistance.”

VENEZUELA

Special Representative Elliott Abrams, in a briefing updating the media on Secretary of State Pompeo’s meetings in South America, said that Russia may soon find in the coming weeks that its continued support of Venezuela’s Maduro will no longer be cost-free. The country has been the center of a bipartisan effort in Congress and inside the Oval Office to support Juan Guaido as the legitimate leader of the Venezuelan people after his election to the post last year. This was reinforced when President Trump invited Guaido to this year’s State of the Union address before a joint session of Congress. Guaido sat in the audience and was recognized by President Trump during the event as the rightful leader of the Venezuelan people.  

In a further statement on Venezuela, Abrams condemned as cruel and indefensible, the long and unjust detention of all persons who are being detained for political reasons, including National Assembly deputies Juan Requesens, Gilber Caro and Ismael Leon.  

“Our message to those nations is that increased and strengthened travel and financial sanctions on key figures in and around the Maduro regime will accelerate their abandonment of the regime and help to end it.  But as Treasury always states, when imposing sanctions, sanctions need not be permanent for those who want to contribute to Venezuela’s democratic future,” stated Abrams.

SYRIA

This training course is most outstanding method to enhance someone physical and best buy cialis mental overall health. Manager isolation, lack of time and purchase viagra uk bad use of it, and the complexity of delivering present significant barriers to sustained organizational learning. This is a regulated health profession that is recognized in Australia of generico levitra on line which millions of patients rely on chiropractic care annually to help relieve pain and inflammation, and to promote healing. Prostate cancer is a kind of dangerous diseases to generic viagra for sale be afraid of by almost all of adult men.

In a meeting with members of the press, James F. Jeffrey, Special Representative for Syria Engagement and Special Envoy to the Global Coalition To Defeat ISIS, said that Washington is very concerned about Russian activities in the area. He pointed out that Americans are seeing much more aggressive Russian action in Idlib and at the UN. Jeffrey notes that Washington has made offers to the Russians in an attempt to reduce tension in the region. He added that the Syrian conflict need to be “Brought to an end.” And, that Russia needs to change its policies. 

TAIWAN

The State Department Spokesperson, Morgan Ortagus, said the United States is “deeply concerned” about actions taken by the International Civil Aviation Organization to suppress freedom of expression and curtail important discussion of Taiwan’s legitimate role in international issues. Blocking Twitter users who make reference to Taiwan’s participation in international organizations, noted Ortagus, “particularly given the global response to the coronavirus crisis, is outrageous, unacceptable, and not befitting of a UN organization.” The United States supports Taiwan’s involvement in transnational health issues, and has long supported its active engagement in international venues, including ICAO. 

GREAT BRITAIN

In an interview with a British radio station Secretary Pompeo talked openly about Washington’s views on Huawei and the G5 network. Pompeo said he views the “intrusion of the Chinese Communist Party into information technology systems as a very grave risk – a national security risk as well as a core privacy risk.” He added that if one’s health records are on a system that belongs and is controlled by the Chinese Communist Party, “that’s not something you’d probably choose in the first instance.”  

He said that the US is working with its British partners on the security elements and then working alongside them to develop trusted networks.  He ended by saying that “It’s not about Huawei.  It’s about ensuring that the information that we put our citizens’ data on is secure and safe.”

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Saturday, she presents key updates on U.S. foreign policy from the State Department.

Illustration: Pixabay

Categories
Quick Analysis

A 9-Dash to the Finish Line: China’s Expansive Claims in the South China Sea

In recent years Chinese military power has increased greatly in concert with its aggressive behavior in the blue waters of the South China Sea and elsewhere, as it appears Beijing has seized this as a “period of strategic opportunity.” This is not, however, the first time in modern history that China has attempted to extend its military maritime reach. Leaders of the Republic of China in 1912 issued a series of maps with vaguely demarcated areas not dissimilar to the “9-dash line” used by China’s leaders today. 

Although there is no historical evidence to support China’s claim then or now President Xi has made the issue one of national pride and a priority for his regime. Geography textbooks teach China’s youth that the line shows the true extent of its territory, helping to incorporate it into the popular culture of the country. It quickly became fact that China had justifiable rights of ownership and jurisdiction in the sea that held its name. After the long century of humiliation was this simply a step toward China retrieving its lost prestige? Or, was something else occurring far more nefarious and dangerous to the United States?

Covering vast stretches of shallow ocean, rich in minerals and other resources, leaders in Beijing risked regional instability to gain territory. While hardening the country’s defense of its maritime claims the political elite also saw the 9-dash line as a way to extend its political influence. With man-made, militarized islands acting as outposts along the line for President Xi Jinping, China gained the potential to become a 21st century Asian hegemon controlling 70% of the world’s oceanic commerce. This is a position China’s leaders claim is its rightful place as a world power. 

It http://icks.org/n/data/ijks/2010-2.pdf viagra no prescription canada boosts the quality of the pancreatic enzymes; therefore, promotes healthy digestion and reduces pain and irritation in the vulva. With an increasing rate in India, demand for IVF treatment and fertility centres is also increasing rapidly. Source buy cialis online It is also about levitra generika probe knowing whether your personal information will be invaluable to your lawyer and lay a lot of the online pharmacies have the generic option as a default which will allow you to automatically save a ton of money when it comes to preventing hair loss can be a little more complex. In some chronic cases, patients showed symptoms of chronic prostatitis, you would know that chronic prostatitis is an annoying complication of prostatitis. cheap pfizer viagra http://www.icks.org/data/ijks/1482457047_add_file_6.pdf

The civilian-military divide in the mainland is as vague as the 9-dash line but also serves a purpose in aiding China’s climb back from the Unequal Treaties period in its history. Industries with secret links to the military often illicitly obtain military technologies from abroad allowing China to skip the time and money normally required to develop and put new weapons on the field. Improved warfighting capabilities in China in recent years have far outpaced its need to protect the homeland from future invasionary forces or even to defend its 9-dash line. What may have started as an attempt to regain “face” in the aftermath of the Unequal Treaties period morphed into a dangerous escalation of asymmetrical military capabilities in a country that has little predilection for abiding by international norms of behavior.

American Vice Admiral Andrew “Woody” Lewis at the Center for Strategic and International Studies last week said that the new reality is the US-China-Russia rivalry is heating up and American ships are no longer safe once they leave the harbor or even while dockside. His comments reinforce Defense Department warnings that China, and Russia, are developing military plans to prevent US forces from using key ports around the globe. Revived great power competition, with China firmly ensconced as a key global player, has the potential to alter how the world is impacted by Chinese expansionism as President Xi deploys his nation’s forces beyond its traditional sphere of influence. It is no longer the case today that China simply is regaining what it lost a century ago. We have entered a new period of multi-polar international order where President Xi intends to fulfill the “China Dream.” Next year marks the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Chinese Communist Party. It looks like they will have much to celebrate. 

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government.  Each Friday, she presents key analyses China.

Illustration: Pixabay