Categories
defense & war general freedom international affairs

‘Meat on the Table’

“Vietnamese newspaper Tien Phong reported that 40 individuals from foreign ships thrashed the fishermen aboard the Vietnamese ship with iron pipes and stole their fishing gear,” relayed The Eur-​Asian Times. Four fishermen were seriously injured, three had broken limbs.

At the time of that September 29th report, the vessels that attacked the fishing boat were only identified as “foreign.” But everyone knew which country was responsible.

Only the Chinazis, as Hong Kongers call those atop the Chinese Communist Party, behave with such brutality and callous disregard for the rights of others. The boats involved turned out to be part of China’s Maritime Safety Administration.

“Safety”?

Well, safe for Chinese exploitation of the entire South China Sea (SCS), 90 percent of which the genocidal totalitarian regime claims as its own and is now actively policing — without regard to international law or the rights of the Vietnamese, Filipinos, Malaysians, Taiwanese, Indonesians and others.

After arbitration between the Philippines and China under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Seas, an international court ruled in 2016 that China’s SCS claims were without any foundation. Obviously China continues to ignore the international court — and with increasing force.

“[T]he Chinese Coast Guard and the Philippine Navy clashed at sea and in the air a whopping six times in August over key areas of the SCS,” noted a story in The National Interest, adding that five of the six incidents occurred in Philippines’ Exclusive Economic Zone. The sixth was in international waters. None took place anywhere close to China.

Without a military alliance with the United States “China would basically consider you as a meat on the table,” explained Professor Renato Cruz De Castro of De La Salle University in Manila,

“China would simply subjugate you,” the professor continued, “whether you appease China or challenge China.”

This stark reality now drives even Vietnam to seek help from the United States … as the world lurches closer to World War III.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


Note: After putting this commentary to bed, news broke last night that China’s military is encircling Taiwan in a military exercise practicing an invasion and/​or blockade of the democratic island nation.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
free trade & free markets international affairs tax policy

Trump’s Tariff Question

If Donald Trump fails to re-​take the White House in November (and then for real in early 2025), his legacy may quickly devolve into a matter for historians, not live politics. After people calm down and the culture war stuff recedes (once again, if allowed by events), what will be left to argue over are a half-​dozen major issues, which include war, mass migration … and tariffs.

Tariffs have long been Mr. Trump’s major hobby horse; he gets excited about 100 percent levies. The whole business about the “bloodbath” quote was his insistence that American auto industry will be destroyed if Trump himself doesn’t get the chance to erect ultra-​high tariffs against automobiles from Mexico.

Trump looks at tariffs on foreign goods as harming foreign nations and helping us, the Americans.

But it is worth noting that economists from Adam Smith and David Ricardo onward have regarded tariffs as chiefly harming consumers within the country that erects them. 

At Reason you can read Veronique de Rugy make the classic free-​trade case, anew, in “No, Trump-​Style Tariffs Do Not Grow the Economy.” If Frédéric Bastiat didn’t convince you, maybe de Rugy will.

But something’s missing. Surrounding Trump’s talk against free trade in general and China in particular there was always another element that neither Bastiat nor de Rugy emphasize: free-​trading with China helps Chinese and Americans, sure; gotcha — but it also helps the Chinese state, and its ruling Communist Party. 

“Trump is an avowed restrictionist on both immigration and trade,” de Rugy writes. But both unchecked immigration and free trade present problems not economic so much as political. It’s about real bloodbaths, actual warfare, not metaphorical ones.

Even if Trump misdiagnosed the domestic economy, he saw problems with China perhaps more clearly than anyone else.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
international affairs

Home of the Brave

Another incident of China’s militarized coast guard ramming a Filipino vessel in the South China Sea hundreds of miles from China … this time with 60 Minutes on board

We are headed toward World War III. People deserve the truth from those who pretend to lead.

Years ago, I would have advocated bringing our troops home. Today, I think it’s too late. A military pullout by the United States would be disastrous for both Asia and us. And anything less will require standing up to China. Now or later.

Not to mention that ending the U.S. role in Asia is not even being discussed. 

Which means that U.S. assets in the region will eventually be attacked. Already we see the harassment of Taiwan and the bullying of the Philippines and others in the South China Sea. The U.S. has treaty commitments to fight for Japan, South Korea and the Philippines — plus, through the Taiwan Relations Act, we have pledged to help Taiwan stay free.

I would therefore call for spending more on the military. On weapons of war. On military capabilities half a world away. (Hard to believe it myself.) And I would prepare the country for the horrific possibility of war.

I think that is the only way to back China down from its aggressions against just about every neighbor as well as the rule-​based international order and, ultimately, us. 

The best news on this front is that the U.S. is not having to beg and plead for support for an alliance to check China or to go it alone:

  • Germany just sent warships through the Taiwan Strait for the first time in two decades. 
  • Taiwan has nearly doubled its defense spending. 
  • Japan is doubling its military spending and mending relationships in the region to form closer alliances. 
  • The Philippines has given the U.S. four bases in strategic territory.
  • Even Vietnam has befriended the U.S. 

Why? All fear China. 

Right now what the world needs is an alliance of the free. And a leader … to be very brave.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 


PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
international affairs

So It’s War, Then?

About the South China Sea situation, what needs to be said?

Not about it, but to the Chinese government.

“We’ve said everything we possibly can say,” Gatestone Institute senior fellow Gordon Chang told Fox Business News, expounding on what he thinks the United States’ next step should be. “We are done talking with you and we’re now going to start to act. And in the South China Sea, unfortunately that means we need to flood the zone with the U.S. Navy and Air Force to show that we will defend our ally the Philippines.”

This is, he explains, “one of those moments like Czechoslovakia in 1938 or Poland in 1939. It’s that serious.”

Serious, indeed: ominous. I think he’s likely correct, but he’s talking about possible escalation to war.

My Trumpian friends will insist upon raising this niggling little thought: the slide into war in the South China Sea “would never have happened under Trump.”

China’s ramped-​up belligerence does seem to have spiked with Biden as president, just as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine would have been far less likely under Trump’s leadership. 

Gordon Chang is correct that “the Biden” has “been talking to the Chinese intensively throughout the Biden Administration and things have only gotten worse” — but was this the best that could have been done? Has the Biden’s diplomacy been enough talk of the right kind?

Trump scared China. 

He also scared our Deep State.

We may have been safer then.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Midjourney and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights international affairs social media

Banned in Brazil

Twitter is being banned in Brazil by a “Supreme Court justice” who seems to be the de facto ruler of the country. Who is also threatening Brazilians with massive fines, $8,900 USD daily, if they try to reach Twitter through a VPN.

A VPN or virtual private network hides your IP address and encrypts your web traffic. VPNs protect privacy and let you visit sites otherwise inaccessible. Sites that purvey “disinformation,” i.e., criticism of the government, and other verboten content. VPNs combat censorship and surveillance.

The justice, Alexandre de Moraes, issued an edict to ban Twitter after Twitter owner Elon Musk refused to obey censorship orders.

Twitter had told users that it expected to be shut down by Justice de Moraes “because we would not comply with his illegal orders to censor his political opponents.”

Now Musk declares that an “unelected pseudo-​judge in Brazil is destroying [free speech] for political purposes.”

Twitter CEO Linda Yaccarino adds that according to Brazil’s own constitution, “censorship of a political, ideological and artistic nature is forbidden.… Until there is change in Brazil, X [Twitter] will be shut down.”

Dictatorships often issue “illegal orders” in the sense that these contradict constitutional provisions whose force has faded … or that were never intended to do anything but fool people to begin with. Such political systems are not truly constitutional.

Nor would the situation be any better were the “constitution” more honest, simply announcing that whatever the dictator says goes.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts

Categories
First Amendment rights international affairs social media

Give Mr. Bean Another Hearing

Twelve years ago, Rowan Atkinson of “Mr. Bean” fame took a stand against a law that criminalizes “insulting” speech. He was participating in a campaign to reform Section 5 of the Public Order Act of 1986.

In his remarks launching the campaign, recently resurrected on Twitter, Atkinson said that his concern was less for himself as a person with a high public profile than “for those more vulnerable because of their lower profile. Like the man arrested in Oxford for calling a police horse gay. Or the teenager arrested for calling the Church of Scientology a cult. Or the café owner arrested for displaying passages from the Bible on a TV screen.”

And what about the thousands of cases that “weren’t quite ludicrous enough to attract media attention? Even for those actions that were withdrawn, people were arrested, questioned, taken to court and then released.… That is censoriousness of the most intimidating kind.…”

And he said more than this. Luckily it’s recorded.

This effectively delivered argument, forceful and often funny, by a well-​known personality, had its effect. The Reform Section 5 campaign succeeded. The law was amended.

But the victory, though important, was narrow. And, since that win, sweeping assaults on speech that offends somebody or other continue in Britain, the United States, and other Western countries where people should know better than to emulate the censorship of authoritarian governments to which we aspire to provide an alternative. We’re going to need a lot more funny speeches.

Because this threat to freedom is so serious.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.


PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)

See recent popular posts