China’s Excessive Influence

Forty years ago, the phrase “China Club” was common jargon bantered about by officials at the State Department in Washington. Many believed that senior Foreign Service Officers assigned to work on China policy had “constituentitis.” Theywere more concerned with representing Beijing’s position on the issues than the national security interests of the United States, according to some officials who worked with them. What was then a minor concern about being too soft on China has today grown into an obvious threat that stretches well beyond the walls of the main State Department building and into the highest levels of the US Government and American high-tech firms. There are serious questions remaining from last year about connections the Biden family and some Congressional Members have with the Communist Party of China. The security issue was raised again this past week as the Administration’s actions toward Beijing appear different than the rhetoric coming out of Washington.

It was less than a year ago when US Congressman Eric Swalwell (D-CA) was found to have close ties to a beautiful Chinese spy named Christine Fang (also known as Fang Fang). After the Chinese influence operation was exposed Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House, put Swalwell back on the House Committee on Homeland Security within a month. This week Chris Sanders, writing for Reuters, reported that President Biden suggested in recent meetings with Chinese officials that we “meet China halfway” when it comes to advanced technology transfers.

The reality is Chinese companies operating in the US are aiding the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) in obtaining foreign technology related to nuclear and ballistic missile programs. There should be no “half-way” when it comes to the national security interests of this nation. This week alone “eight Chinese firms were “listed [by the US Commerce Department] to prevent US technology being used to help China develop quantum computing applications for its military,” according to Sanders. At first glance it sounds like the US Government is stepping up and protecting Americans from the proliferation of advanced US technology. However, the Commerce Department’s entity list absolutely does not prohibit the firms from obtaining advanced US technology. It only means that the US suppliers to those eight Chinese PLA-linked companies on the entity list now will need to apply for a license before they can sell to them.

In an admission from Washington this week, the Biden Administration admitted quietly that China-based Hefei National Laboratory for Physical Sciences at Microscale, Quantum CTek and Shanghai Quantum CTeck Co Ltd were added to the “entity list” by the Commerce Department because they already have been “acquiring and attempting to acquire US-origin items in support of military applications” for the PLA. The Biden Administration has not explained why it did not impose a total ban on the sale of advanced US technology with military applications to these companies. Part of the equipment the PLA was trying to obtain dealt with the development of counter-stealth technology and unbreakable encryption. Sanders says the Commerce Department wants to stop the Chinese military from developing its technology, which “could include equipment like advanced radars, and counter-submarine applications such as undersea sensors.”

The most common sexual disorders in commander levitra men are erectile dysfunction(ED), premature ejaculation (PE) and inhibited sexual desire. Some people have a chain reaction, such as a decrease in sex drive. regencygrandenursing.com generico viagra on line viagra sans prescription canada One can enjoy their sexual relation still 4 to 5 hours without any threats and complications. What should I do? Coach! You can, of course, at the time of the impact of buying viagra in italy regencygrandenursing.com this medication.

This occurs at a time when China has announced a number of advances in military technology that surpass those of the United States and its communist partner Russia is starting full-scale production of its new hypersonic missile. According to James Palmer, writing in Foreign Policy, “the Biden administration has been sitting on these and other possible sanctions for a while, but it held off until after COP26 and the summit between Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping.” What advanced military technology the PLA can’t indigenously develop or buy from Russia it is obtaining from the United States and other Western countries. The more it buys, steals, or reverse engineers, the less safe the American people will be in the near future. The Biden Administration is taking only small, tepid steps toward closing the pipeline.

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.

Illustration: Pixabay

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.