Tag: foreign policy

Categories
deficits and debt international affairs

Billions and Billions

China, gold, national debt, foreign policy

While we were going about our business, and maybe even soaking in some summer sunshine, the “US National Debt,” as the federal government’s explicit financial obligation is called, passed the $37 trillion mark. 

As if to mark the occasion, the Chinese government unloaded a whopping eight billion, two hundred million dollars worth of U.S. Treasuries onto the market.

It’s a lot of money.

It’s a lot of debt.

And now China no longer holds it. 

Thus they are not quite as invested in our future.

Is that scary?

Well, everything about our federal debt load should scare us. If we are placid and unperturbed now, how many extra billions and trillions would it take to shake us?

If you are especially concerned about world stability, it might make sense to comfort you with this . . . interesting . . . piece of information: China still holds over $750 billion in United States debt.

A more important piece of information might be what the Chinese central bank has been replacing the U.S. debt with: gold.

Lots of gold.

About 200,000 kilograms of gold!

Nicholas Nassim Taleb, author of The Black Swan, insists that “a single asset has overtaken the US dollar’s position as the world’s de facto reserve currency.” That asset is gold.

We aren’t on the gold standard, but it looks like we may be falling backwards into something like one.

It makes me wonder if there is still gold in Fort Knox . . . and just how much. 

Mr. Trump? 

Congress? 

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
defense & war international affairs

Still a Big Advantage

allies, South China Sea, China, CCP, defense, foreign policy, war

In all the talk of America First — and of the United States as the indispensable nation — we Americans sometimes forget this doesn’t mean “America Alone.” 

“Ultimately, a strong, resolute, and capable network of allies and partners is our key strategic advantage,” U.S. Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth recently informed the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. “China envies what we have together. And it sees what we can collectively bring to bear on defense.”

Hegseth was speaking directly to Indo-Pacific allies, whom he reminded: “it’s up to all of us to ensure that we live up to that potential by investing” to “quickly upgrade [our] own defenses.”

Our alliances of free nations in Europe and Asia constitute a huge edge against a bullying, totalitarian China.

My entire life, these past six decades, Big Daddy America was by far the biggest, best military on the block. Still is the best. But it’s no longer the biggest: China now has a bigger navy, much greater shipbuilding capacity, and many more soldiers in uniform. Technological and other strategic advantages have been diminished as well.

The defense secretary acknowledged that — after “a lot of ongoing conversations with our military leadership in the Indo-Pacific” — “there is something to be said for the fact that China calculates the possibility and does not appreciate the presence of other countries . . . as part of the dynamics or decision-making process, and, if that is reflected in their calculus, then that’s useful.”

We cannot afford to squander our “ally advantage.” We need each other.

This is Comon Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
international affairs public opinion

An Independent Nation

Taiwan, China, defense, war, foreign policy

Our leaders have been surprisingly expressive in signaling U.S. military support for the defense of Taiwan. 

Ironic, considering that official U.S. policy is dubbed “strategic ambiguity,” meaning we don’t say one way or the other about our defensive intentions for helping the island nation against a regularly threatened and rehearsed-for Chinese invasion or naval blockade. 

Four separate times during his term, however, former President Joe Biden publicly pledged American military help to counter a People’s Republic of China assault on Taiwan. As for the Trump 2.0 Pentagon, weeks ago it leaked (or suffered a leak of) a global defense strategy memo that said preventing a PRC takeover of Taiwan was the “sole pacing scenario” engaging our armed forces. 

Surprising unanimity for the two parties in Washington. But has anyone asked what the American people think?

Well, Humanity for Freedom Foundation conducted a poll, released yesterday.*

Informed that “China claims Taiwan as its own territory,” 82 percent of respondents agreed that “Taiwan is an independent country.” Only 3 percent felt “Taiwan is part of China.”

A 58 percent majority favored full U.S. diplomatic recognition for Taiwan. When it comes to American military defense, a plurality of 39 percent wanted to continue the status quo of not saying (“strategic ambiguity”), while 32 percent of Americans preferred their government make a clear commitment to Taiwan. Only 2 percent supported ending arm sales and adopting a neutral stance.

The above results are thoroughly — and surprisingly — non-partisan, with arch conservatives and far-out progressives finding common ground to defend Asia’s freest society against the world’s most maniacal totalitarian state. 

Could the specter of a future dictated by the Chinese Communist Party be bringing the world closer together?

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

* In full disclosure, I’m on HFF’s board of directors. As for the national poll, it had 800 respondents, giving the results a 3.5 percent margin of error with a 95 percent confidence level. Full results are here.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
defense & war international affairs

To Halve and Halve Not

China, Taiwan, war, foreign policy

“Why is Taiwan such a hot flash point?” 

That’s what U.S. Senator Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) asked Admiral Samuel Paparo, head of the United States Indo-Pacific Command. “Why could it lead not only to a catastrophic war, but also global Great Depression? Why should Americans care about an island on the other side of the world?”

The admiral told the Senate Armed Services Committee that the senator’s “last point [was] quite salient. Many a research organization postulate that conflict in the western Pacific over the Taiwan question would result in a 25 percent GDP contraction in Asia and a knock-on effect of 10 to 12 percent GDP reduction in the United States of America, with unemployment spiking seven to 10 points above base and likely 500,000 excess deaths of despair above base as well.

“This is just the importance of the regional stability to the world economy and its effect on people’s lives,” added Paparo. “And this is a function of freedom of navigation; it’s a function of the world dependency on semiconductors.”

“And to be clear,” offered Sen. Cotton, “simply having the conflict over Taiwan which is such a center of gravity in the modern economy could lead to many of the consequences you just outlined.”

Paparo explained that “most of the things” he has “studied indicate that American intervention would halve that impact,” adding “a successful American intervention would. 

“Still a grave result,” Admiral Paparo acknowledged, “but half as grave, with savings of a lot of human misery.”

Let’s hope and pray and prepare militarily to deter Chinese aggression.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
defense & war international affairs

Resisting Invasion

China, Taiwan, foreign policy, war, defense, deterrence

“China is the Department’s sole pacing threat, and denial of a Chinese fait accompli seizure of Taiwan — while simultaneously defending the U.S. homeland,” Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth declared (using the latest jargon) in a memo setting forth global U.S. strategy, “is the Department’s sole pacing scenario.” 

Recently shared with military brass and congressional national security committees, and recently leaked, Hegseth’s Interim National Defense Strategic Guidance is, according to The Washington Post, “extraordinary in its description of the potential invasion of Taiwan as the exclusive animating scenario that must be prioritized over other potential dangers.”

While I can’t find a copy of the leaked document, The Post relates that “given personnel and resource constraints,” the United States will focus on China and “pressure allies in Europe, the Middle East and East Asia to spend more on defense to take on the bulk of the deterrence role against threats from Russia, North Korea and Iran.”

This makes enormous sense. We are already at war in Ukraine and across the Middle East, while China, the most dangerous aggressor, has been ratcheting up its bullying and threats against its neighbors whom we have pledged to defend. 

Taiwan is too important — especially strategically, but also economically, and even symbolically, as an incredible democratic success story — to allow it to be gobbled up by the genocidal Chinese Communist Party regime. 

Europe can step up to defend itself and is increasingly doing so. Germany has troops and tanks headed to Lithuania, the first such deployment since the Second World War.

These are serious times. Glad to have a more serious plan to address them. And to count other free countries as allies. We will need each other.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

P.S. On four separate occasions, President Biden publicly promised that the United States would come to Taiwan’s assistance militarily should China’s repeated threats to invade come to fruition, but where President Trump would stand in his second term seemed uncertain. Would he make a deal with Xi Jinping that sold out Taiwan, as John Bolton, his former national security advisor, has claimed? Bolton has been wrong before.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
free trade & free markets international affairs tax policy

The Tariff King

The fight over the president’s tariffs is taking place in Congress. 

Or is it?

“House Republicans blocked on April 9 an effort by Democrats to force a vote on halting the reciprocal tariffs imposed by President Donald Trump,” explains The Epoch Times, “which are currently paused for three months.”

Let’s make that clearer. These now-infamous/much-debated “reciprocal tariffs” went “into effect” immediately after midnight yesterday. As Republicans “sneakily” worked to change the rules to disallow any congressional move to dissolve the president’s declared emergency — which, by Congress’s own legislation, gives the executive a great deal of latitude to change tariff rates — and Democrats moved to do just that, get rid of the “state of emergency,” President Trump put most of his tariff hikes on hold for three months.

Except for those on China — now in effect, at a rate of 125 percent.

It sure looks like Trump’s main concern is trade relations with China, not Lesotho or Israel or anywhere else. And much can be said about China’s trade policies (try selling American consumer goods in China) or respect for intellectual property. But it is the matter of constitutionality that interests me most.

Whatever the alleged merits of high tariffs, unilateral free trade, or any of these issues, these policies should not be decided by the president; the Constitution gives Congress the responsibility “to lay Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises” and “regulate Commerce with foreign Nations.”

By handing the president “emergency” powers to change tariff policy in the first place, Congress has abdicated its role in setting tax policy. Republicans in the House seem gung-ho about Trump’s prerogatives. And Democrats haven’t sought to repeal the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, which gives the president legislative taxing authority.

Apparently, Congress wants the president to be king.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with Krea and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
defense & war general freedom international affairs

Xi Excuses, Demands, Assaults

South China Sea, threat

The good news — to hear Xi Jinping, chief Butcher of Beijing, tell it — is that Mr. Xi will “not take the bait.”

You see, China’s authoritarian leader complained (in a conversation last year with European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen) that the U.S. had been “goading” him, trying “to trick” his Chinese Communist Party (CCP) into a military invasion of Taiwan. 

How difficult it must be for this totalitarian titan to restrain himself from launching a murderous assault against a neighboring country . . . and all triggered because the bad ole USA talks to the ROC (Republic of China/Taiwan) and provides the weapons it needs to defend itself. 

One constantly reads that China claims Taiwan as its own province, of course, though the actual history behind that assertion tells a much different story. 

History regardless, Taiwan today ought to belong to today’s Taiwanese.

But it is another Chinese “claim” that may first lead to a full-fledged world war: Xi and Company demand virtually an entire ocean, the 90 percent of the South China Sea captured within their nine-dash-net. 

Now, back in 2016, the Permanent Court of Arbitration, an international tribunal at The Hague, heard a case brought by the Philippines, in which it ruled that China lacked any reasonable basis for its nine-dash-line demands.

Last week, reported VOA News, “China announced its coast guard will be empowered to investigate and detain for up to 60 days ‘foreigners who endanger China’s national security and interests’ in the disputed waters.”

Yesterday, Foreign Policy informed us that China is “sharply increasing its violent attacks against Philippine vessels and sailors in disputed waters off the Philippine coast,” and that on “Monday, China Coast Guard ships intercepted Philippine vessels attempting to resupply their own sailors grounded on a shoal inside the Philippines’s own exclusive economic zone (EEZ), barely 100 miles off the western coast of the archipelago.

“The Philippine Armed Forces chief of staff likened the Chinese assault” — perpetrated by “ax- and knife-wielding Chinese crewmen” — to “a pirate attack.”

China has a long rap sheet in its treatment of the Philippines, and with everyone in the region save for North Korea. 

War rages in Europe. And the Middle East. Now the world’s worst regime, the CCP, inches ever closer to World War III.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
general freedom international affairs

Mostly Peaceful Indo-Pacific

China, aggression, threat, foreign policy, Xi

“Gentlemen may cry peace, peace, but there is no peace.”

— Patrick Henry

The 2023 Chicago Council Survey shows 58 percent of us view China as “a critical threat” and a “plurality of Americans (46%) say that US leaders are not paying enough attention to the issue of US competition with China.”

On the other hand, libertarian political scientist Joseph Solis-Mullen pooh-poohs these fears, which he sees as manufactured by the powers that be, the military-industrial complex, the Deep State. Since our un-beloved Deep State has been known to wander to and fro about the Earth manufacturing crises and conflicts, the case possesses a surface plausibility. 

Still, “The Fake China Threat,” an episode of The Tom Woods Show* from last month, failed to convince. See if you can detect the reason.

“This is something maybe we should mention,” Solis-Mullen told Woods, before disclosing that China “fought a border war” with India in 2020 with “hundreds” dead.

“The Philippines is a big one,” he added, “because there’s also a lot of conflict over the South and East China Seas.”

“Conflict”? You don’t say. 

“So, it’s not just Taiwan,” explained this researcher and journalist. “There’s danger everywhere over there — because Washington really wants to be involved in these disputes.”

Wait a second . . . how many disputes? 

“There’s disputes with Japan, disputes with Korea, disputes with Vietnam, disputes with Philippines, India,” Solis-Mullen recalled. “I think one or two more. I can’t remember off the top of my head.”

It does appear to be a lot to keep up with! 

Nor is the problem that “Washington really wants to be involved,” certainly not for Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the Philippines, etc. . . . even Vietnam. Instead, every dispute, conflict, danger, and threat that Solis-Mullen cites has a singular cause: China. 

Heck, someone might dedicate an entire website to “Tracking Chinese Communist Party Aggression Worldwide.”

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob. 

* The discussion centered on Solis-Mullen’s new book, The Fake China Threat and Its Very Real Dangers, published by the Libertarian Institute. 

PDF for printing

Illustration created with PicFinder and Firefly

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
defense & war general freedom international affairs

Armageddon, Anyone?

war, Russia, nuclear bomb

Ah, the things one hears at high-dollar Democratic Party fundraisers!

Like declaring Russia’s threat to unleash nuclear weapons against Ukraine as the most serious “prospect of Armageddon in 60 years.”

Last week, Sleepy Joe “startled many Americans” with those remarks at a closed-door meeting of big donors.

Backpedaling on Friday, “U.S. officials stressed . . . that the United States has no reason to change its nuclear posture.” No reason? We’re backing one side in a war in which nukes are on the table!

Andrea Kendall-Taylor, director of the Transatlantic Security Program at the Center for a New American Security, didn’t defend Biden’s “Armageddon” terminology but offered that it was “useful for the president and the administration to be having a conversation with the public about the risk.”

Of course, the president gave this frank evaluation to his party’s top check-writers, not the public. And that’s the second biggest problem with U.S. foreign policy: it’s totally divorced from the people. 

The biggest? Headin’ towards Armageddon. If Mr. Biden is serious about slouching towards the End Times, he should do more than make it the subject of political locker-room talk. 

Like what? How about:

  1. Seek to reduce tensions, wherever possible, and help Mr. Putin find an off ramp from his war in Ukraine; 
  2. Double- and triple-down on technologically defending the American people from the threat posed by nuclear weapons and other weapons of mass destruction; and  
  3. Speak to the people about these threats and the U.S. response.

While security concerns may dictate that information not be shared publicly, if it’s good enough to share on the rubber-chicken circuit, it good enough for ‘We the People.’

We pay the highest prices; we deserve to hear the sales pitch.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

Illustration created with DALL-E

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts

Categories
international affairs

Play with Fire?

China, hypersonic, war

Weeks ago, the U.S. military confirmed that China tested a hypersonic missile last summer capable of speeding around the globe with a nuclear payload. 

Top generals called it “a Sputnik moment.”

Speaking of Sputnik, on Monday the Russians blew up one of their own orbiting satellites with a missile test that reportedly sprayed dangerous debris into the orbital path of the international space station.

On Monday evening, President Joe Biden and Chinese President Xi Jinping held an hours-long virtual summit to discuss issues between the two countries.

“Their relationship had become so toxic and so dysfunctional,” BBC’s China correspondent Stephen McDonnell wrote, “that these video discussions have been, in part, an attempt to ensure that competition between China and the US didn’t drift into armed conflict due to a misunderstanding at a global hotspot.”

“Competition”? 

“Drift” into a shooting war? 

Caused by “misunderstanding”?

Stop the silly pretense. China’s building and militarizing islands in the South China Sea, its bullying of numerous neighboring countries, its threats of a military invasion against free, democratic Taiwan and its genocidal oppression of the Uighurs, etc., have nothing to do with drifting, are not a big misunderstanding, nor the result of normal economic competition.

The Chinazis are dangerous. 

Most endangered? 

Taiwan — which, in contorted diplomatic double-speak, the U.S. has sorta pledged to defend.

“President Xi warned President Biden,” CBS News explained, that “U.S. support for Taiwan would be like playing with fire.”

Let’s not “play” with fire. Sure. But while Biden’s response that Taiwan is “independent” and “makes its own decisions” is right and true, it is still hardly above the level of smoke signal. 

More’s needed. 

Like what?

Actual defense.

This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.

PDF for printing

See all recent commentary
(simplified and organized)
See recent popular posts