Saturday, November 28, 2009

The Banquet of Great Expectations

President Obama’s November 2009 state visit to China gave him a first hand opportunity to see the human face of China as he tried to convince Beijing that Washington is its partner, not its rival. It was the most important political “chewing the fat” banquet on earth as Obama’s low key approach promised to achieve a lot more than America’s traditional swaggered lectures. Bringing a carrot without the stick to stir up any contentious issues was sweet.

“The United States does not seek to contain China, nor does a deeper relationship with China mean a weakening of our bilateral alliances,” Obama said. “On the contrary, the rise of a strong, prosperous China can be a source of strength for the community of nations.”

What impressed the Chinese public the most about Obama was the report that he had insisted on paying for his own hamburger at a Washington restaurant and the fact that he carried his own umbrella when he got off Air Force One in Shanghai.

The unrealistic expectations, and unfair criticism, of Obama’s China November summit by the western media and American talking heads of all political hues, for its lack of concrete accomplishments, reflects America’s lack of understanding of the inherent distrust both countries have towards each other.

How can China trust the U.S. overnight when the U.S. National Intelligence Strategy 2009 identifies China as a “global challenger” on par with the so-called axis of evil to U.S. interests? This on the heels of U.S. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates saying China’s ever-advancing arms would create a “new threat” to the U.S. army and weaken its military power in the Pacific region? America’s determination to sell more advanced weapons to Taiwan, coupled with its increased surveillance activities of China’s military expansion, as it increases the volume of its accusations that China is expanding its espionage activities in the U.S. ─ and protectionism ─ are not endearing gestures of trust.

The question on the Chinese minds is whether America was being capricious because of its economic difficulties, which force it to be nice, or is this a genuine change of U.S. attitude towards China?

Thursday, November 12, 2009

Sino-U.S. Relations, Chop Suey Style

Chop Suey is an Americanized Chinese dish that cannot be found in China. America has to come up with a new political chop suey style recipe for its relationship with China. Hopefully, Presidents Obama and Hu will during Obama’s upcoming trip to China.

America must wake up to reality. The finance, banking, insurance and real estate sectors together rose to represent more than a fifth of U.S. gross domestic product, while once mighty American manufacturing contributed less than 13 percent. Millions in China had work and Americans’ purchasing power was artificially boosted as they bought cheap Chinese-made goods and ran up more debt.

America may be waking up. The U.S. trade deficit shrank 28.7 percent in November 2008, the biggest contraction in 12 years, as weak consumer demand and plummeting oil prices caused a record drop in imports, according to the Commerce Department.

A treaty formalizing biannual meetings between the leaders of the two countries is long overdue. Any treaty with China requires a two-thirds vote by the U.S. Senate, a potential hurdle with Democrats retaining their overwhelming majority in both houses. Thirty years after diplomatic relations were established between the two countries, there is still an overwhelming lack of trust in China by the American Congress.

Hopefully, Congress will listen to an American public that favors co-operation and engagement with China. A poll conducted by the Chicago Council on Global Affairs in the summer of 2008 showed that 64 percent of Americans favor “friendly cooperation and engagement” as the appropriate response to China’s rise. America and China are interlocally connected and dependent on each other. The sooner America embraces this reality, the quicker the Sino-U.S. relationship will blossom into a pragmatic and constructive one that is mutually beneficial and rewarding.

America cannot afford to risk a trade war with China while it is in the economic danger zone just because Congress yields to powerful lobbyists from the producers and manufacturers association, labor unions and business. U.S. business and labor groups are pushing lawmakers to take a harder line with China. Not when America is trying to spend its way out of a recession with Chinese financing. America needs more than $2 billion a day just to stay afloat. It’s not smart to bite the hand that feeds America. Political chop suey is a much more pragmatic solution.

Thursday, November 05, 2009

Climbing the Climate Hurdles

The U.S. and China got over their first joint climate hurdle by signing their first bilateral memorandum of understanding between Beijing and Washington on climate change in early 2009 in preparation for the Copenhagen climate change conference in December 2009. Hopefully, their agreement will become the template for the other nations attending in the hope of reaching an agreement to succeed the Kyoto Accord to which the U.S. is not a signatory. The U.S. and China are responsible for 40 percent of the world’s greenhouse-gas emissions and can lead their respective developed and developing world constituencies to the dotted signature lines.

Twenty percent across-the-board cuts in emissions is an excellent starting point. The target was first set by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in California, an average of 6.2 liters per 100 kilometers for all cars and light trucks by 2016, has now been adopted by President Obama for the entire country. That will eventually cut U.S. vehicle emissions by 40 percent. It also means that U.S. oil imports may fall up to half by 2019.

By the time the U.S. reaches its 6.62 liters per 100 kilometers target in 2016, most other countries will have moved on to an average of 5.2 liters per 100 kilometers or better. China’s current requirement is 5.5 liters per 100 kilometers. The U.S. is playing catch-up. But at least its back in a game it can easily win and lead with China that has clearly demonstrated it’s willingness to partner to make sure the rest of the world follows.

With the sun missing its spots, the solar cycle is speaking volumes of the impact of climate change. Ever since Samuel Heinrich Schwabe, a German astronomer, first noted in 1843 that sunspots grow and wane over a roughly 11-year cycle, scientists have carefully watched the sun’s activity. In the latest lull, the sun reached its calmest whitest, least pockmarked state in the autumn of 2008.

For operators of satellites and power grids, that is good news. The same magnetic fields that generate sunspot blotches also accelerate a devastating rain of particles that can overload and wreck electronic equipment in irbit or on earth. A panel of 12 scientists assembled by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration now only predict only 90 sunspots during the peak month of May 2013. That would make it the weakest solar maximum since 1928, when there were 78 sunspots. During an average solar maximum, the sun is covered with 120 sunspots.

Some global warming skeptics speculate that the sun may be on the verge of falling into an extended slumber similar to the so-called Maunder-Minimum ─ a period of several sunspot-scarce decades during the 17th and 18th centuries that concided with an extended chilly period. Another ice-age? C’mon, if anything it will be the Ice Age in reverse. More like the “Roaster Age,” “Hell’s Age,” “Fossil Age,” or destructive “Human Age.”

The U.S. House of Representatives in Washington unveiled four bills in 2009 to foster closer relations with China on climate change, trade, energy and boost teaching of Chinese in the U.S. The 55 member congressional U.S.-China Working Group is finally tackling climate change as seriously as China. It is about time America acknowledge reality and stopped blaming China and its requests for an industrial development break as it is developing and weathering the current financial and economic meltdown, not to mention the nuclear one with Iran and North Korea.

America and China have to get their scientists to not only address all the ramifications of climate change the last century and next, but how they compromise their respective radical extremes on getting there, primarily because of Big Oil. It is about time science and the corporate world, regardless of whether they followed the capitalist or Confucian model, start thinking about the various ways and means their scientists can start helping the majority of the world’s citizens, as well as themselves and their shareholders. Otherwise they will lose it all.
Web Counter
Website Counter