Consensus and Tolerance
Chinese president Hu Jintao gets a warm welcome in Nigeria: Analysts said Hu's offer of an alternative to the United States' prescriptive foreign policy and "War on Terror" would be welcomed by African leaders.Would that be the same consensus China seeks when it stands with North Korea and Iran, against most of the rest of the world? And the same tolerance they've shown Tibetans, or their native Christians and Muslims? China doesn't clash with other civilizations, oh no, it brutally represses them. How long will the "consensus and tolerance" canard fly as their thirst for oil grows and they are forced to interact more and more with the rest of the world? Will they ever fly to the aid of disaster victims, or is that just something bullies like the US do?
"China is saying it wants to build a new world order based on consensus and tolerance, not the clash of civilizations," said former foreign minister Bola Akinyemi.
"It is bound to resonate in Africa, where we have 900 years of coexistence between Christianity, Islam and traditional religions."Oh yes, everything is just peachy in Africa and has been since the dawn of Man. If by peachy you mean violence bordering on barbarism. Odd that Akinyemi draws the line at 900 years. Christianity in Africa goes back as much as 2000 years, and "traditional" African religions must go back further. Is he unaware of the role Islam has played in Africa?
Black Africans were transported to the Islamic empire across the Sahara to Morocco and Tunisia from West Africa, from Chad to Libya, along the Nile from East Africa, and up the coast of East Africa to the Persian Gulf. This trade had been well entrenched for over 600 years before Europeans arrived, and had driven the rapid expansion of Islam across North Africa.Oh, I see. He said "coexistence", not "peaceful coexistence".
posted by Tanstaafl at 4/29/2006 12:18:00 PM
5 Comments:
As long as the US engages in gunboat diplomacy, China can plan to make big oil contracts and arms sales for years to come. Wahoo! Go Red Tide!
http://www.cfr.org/publication/9557/
Lets make sure when we send peacekeepers to Darfur the Chinese oppose it. Nothing like keeping perspective.
Forget the Spanglish lessons - time to work on the Mandarin.
"Sudan has proven reserves of some 563 million barrels of oil, with the potential for far more in regions of the country made inaccessible by conflict. Sudan is one of the world's poorest countries."
What a difference jihad makes.
Bolivia
458 million barrels of oil
6.7 billion cubic meters of gas
2.9 billion cubic meters of gas exports (2001)
and
"...long one of the poorest and least developed Latin American countries,"
http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/bl.html
Not trying to be a jihadi-sympathizer, but I think there may be a bigger picture to 3rd world economic problems.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/18/AR2005121800329.html
What a difference democracy makes?
In Sudan it's Islamism, in Bolivia Marxism. Both are totalitarian and produce similar results.
In Bolivia, the marxism is a response to corruption of the democratic process. And its truly totalitarian because the "marxist" leader is a coca farmer - he clearly has questionable motives.
The point being capitalism, democracy and potential exports dont equate to success. The 3rd world has numerous examples of povery amidst resource riches. Corruption, regardless of govt type or relationship to the US, always seems to dictate the conditions. Totalitarianism is one response to corruption (sometimes even having a positive change).
The point being that while we are transfixed on jihad, our influence in the world wanes. Iraq has created a condition where at best we can tread water elsewhere. Clearly, China has made significant economic strides and wields political influence that is going to secure their energy needs to maintain growth. Gunboat diplomacy is working against us and foreign govts are moving away from us (ie south america). This does not mean we change directions in iraq, afghan or WOT campaigns, but we need to begin to address the other issues thru diplomacy without threats (go back to the carrot and stick). Domestically, we need some real leadership to redirect the nation away from oil - "we are addicted to oil" - when you have an addiction you dont increase the supply and lower the cost, you decrease the supply and raise the cost (to wean off if you cant go cold turkey).
I dont think the leadership is there now, and i dont see anyone rising among the ranks. Its time for new blood.
Post a Comment
<< Home