A year after the Chinese sent an incredibly expensive spy plane back to the USA in tiny bits, Jiang Zemin has just agreed with Bush to underwrite the removal of nuclear weapons from North Korea. (This also protects North Korea from US invasion).
He declined however to respond to Bush's public appeal to support the USA in its unilateral threat to Iraq. These are the processes of equilibration by which even Bush's hegemonic unilateralism gets contained in a multi-lateral context. Why did Bush go public? We will have to guess at present.
China has not publicly criticised the US-British draft resolutions, leaving France and Russia to make the running. There are only occasional comments by Chinese academics such as People's University professor Jin Canrong on Washington's "new imperialism".
The question now is what kind of price Mr Jiang can exact for Chinese acquiescence - for, whatever the final resolution, everyone expects Beijing at least to abstain. Washington has already made a downpayment by listing the Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement as a terrorist organisation - undercutting any criticism of Chinese human rights abuses in Xinjiang region.
Chris Burford
London
- [PEN-L:31606] Re: Morgan-ists Ride On, (continued)
- [PEN-L:31606] Re: Morgan-ists Ride On, lisa stolarski Sun 27 Oct 2002, 16:18 GMT
- [PEN-L:31603] time for tax 'reform' again, Ian Murray Sun 27 Oct 2002, 02:43 GMT
- [PEN-L:31602] profits, Michael Perelman Sun 27 Oct 2002, 01:06 GMT
- [PEN-L:31601] CIA expands, Dan Scanlan Sat 26 Oct 2002, 18:50 GMT
- [PEN-L:31592] US-China equilibrate, Chris Burford Sat 26 Oct 2002, 08:06 GMT
- [PEN-L:31591] Could Wellstone still win, Chris Burford Sat 26 Oct 2002, 07:58 GMT
- [PEN-L:31595] Re: Could Wellstone still win, Michael Perelman Sat 26 Oct 2002, 16:00 GMT
- [PEN-L:31596] Re: Re: Could Wellstone still win, Carrol Cox Sat 26 Oct 2002, 16:09 GMT
- [PEN-L:31598] Re: Re: Re: Could Wellstone still win, Michael Perelman Sat 26 Oct 2002, 16:17 GMT