Anger at China – USA Gov Policy

Why aren’t you hearing about the American people`s boiling anger at China?

A recent Rasmussen poll disclosed that U.S. voters think China is chiefly to blame for the coronavirus, and most now believe the Chinese should pay at least some of the global costs of the pandemic.

China’s malfeasance in dealing with its Covid-19 disaster resulted in more harm to the U.S. economy and civilian population than just about any event in over a century. But compare it to the extraordinary mood that swept the nation in the aftermath of the 9/11 disaster. Amazingly, the media reports almost no public anger.

Obviously, that’s not an accurate representation of the American public’s mood. Speak with everyday people, and a sense of their fury comes through loud and clear. A Gallup report found that 55% of the public disapprove of the media’s coverage of the Chinese-caused pandemic.

Why the dichotomy? There are two explanations.

The first and most significant is the most successful propaganda and influence buying campaign in American history. Leftist leaders, Media barons, and corporate chiefs have decided that their devotion to Beijing’s money far exceeds any inclination towards the truth, patriotism, or concern for their fellow countrymen.

Since 2012, notes one recent analysis, Beijing has made a significant effort to influence U.S. public opinion by buying into Hollywood and other outlets of popular influence and culture. This affects both fiction and news broadcasting.

USNews notes that “Beijing is increasingly looking to global media as a tentacle for sharing its ideology…China…has interfered in content dissemination, public debate, and in some cases, electoral politics outside of China.

Freedom House finds that China’s state media outlets have vast sums to gain influence on foreign media outlets. Beijing spends heavily on buying the support of foreign journalists, politicians and businesses seeking to do business in China.

Why haven’t those American corporations that have been devastated by COVID protested? The Washington Post explains:

There are also other symptoms such as anxiety and stress can also devensec.com cialis without prescription lead to ED. The cells contain insulin viagra sample pills receptors that allow the cells to use glucose as a fuel. The order viagra without prescription Facts on Erectile Dysfunction Erectile dysfunction is the frequent or consistent inability to get or sustain an erect penis for sexual activity. It was primarily used in cheap generic levitra and became the teen idol during 1980’s.

“In subtle and sophisticated ways, Beijing convinces, cajoles and cudgels American companies to…enshrine self-censorship about China in their corporate cultures. When it’s successful, as with ESPN, the company advances Chinese propaganda…One way American companies protect the party’s view is by suppressing negative information…”

Beijing’s message is blunt. If you want to do business in China, kowtow to all the wishes of its Communist leadership.

The second explanation is campaign politics and political corruption.

Despite clear contrary facts, Democrats, in a bid to gain a campaign issue, have ignored China’s culpability. They have attempted to rather absurdly focus blame on a Trump Administration that had actually moved early to contain the disease. This approach hides the reality that when President Trump closed down the U.S. border to travel from China, Democrats called the move “racist” and “xenophobic,” and key Democrat cities refused to take action.

Corruption places a key part as well.

The billions of dollars elected officials have gained from personal dealings with China is a key part of the story. Some of those billions represent blatant corruption, such as the Biden family’s income from Beijing during Joe’s tenure as Vice President. Other prominent officials from both political parties have also profited heavily, in ways ranging from thinly disguised bribes to quasi-legitimate business deals. The downplaying of China’s malicious culpability proceeded in return for the profit Biden and other politicians gained.

In a fascinating portrayal of how events can bring together disparate individuals, both capitalist President Trump and Socialist Bernie Sanders have complained about China’s influence in U.S. politics.

A heavily Beijing-influenced media refuses to pursue the story, and pushes the line of their Chinese benefactors.

Photo: China’s leader, Xi Jinping (Official China government photo)

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.