Hey! Israel--Before Cheering, Look At Taiwan

Much ink both real and virtual has been spilled in Israel as well as pro-Israeli outlets in the US praising President Obama for his forthright stance regarding US support of the embattled and increasingly isolated Jewish state.  Even a man who has to be a bete noir around the Oval, Benjamin Netanyahu, almost broke his arm patting Obama on the back.

Given the context of the impending UN action on the request for recognition requested by the Palestinian Authority, the outpouring of hosannas is not surprising.  However, the Israelis and their American supporters would be well served by taking a close look at the Obama administration's handling of the request by the government of Taiwan for a significant upgrading of their aerial self-defense capacities.

By way of background, it must be recalled that the US is committed to assure that the island nation has sufficient means to defend itself against attack by the Peoples Republic of China.  This commitment is contained in the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) of 1979.  This piece of legislation was a key part of the complex mechanism by which the US finished the job of facing the reality that the PRC was a real state with a real government deserving of both American diplomatic recognition and the status as a permanent member of the UN Security Council.  The TRA was designed by members of the Congress to assure that Taiwan would not be taken over by the mainland by either the reality or threat of military attack.  It was passed by overwhelming majorities in both houses of the Democrat controlled Congress and quickly signed by Jimmy Carter.

Until recently, the act served to assure that the US sold or provided military means adequate to the task of deterring Beijing's ambitions to reclaim the "rebellious" province.  Things changed in the past decade as the Chinese military underwent a transformation.  The vast modernization program has resulted over the past few years in the PRC developing a massive preponderance of force.

During the last two years of the George W. Bush administration, the Taiwanese government forwarded a set of requirements for an expansion and modernization program including new F-16 fighters and submarines.  A portion of the request was filled before the days of Bush/Cheney came to an end.  A second part was filled (along with supplemental items) by the Obama administration.  Along the way, the submarines were deleted by the US side.  The desired F-16s of the C/D model remained in limbo.

In limbo they stay today. The administration did not deny the request but offered in its stead an upgrade package for the 160 or so F-16 A/B variants in the Taiwanese inventory.  The upgrade package for these now aging aircraft (dating back to 1992) do not include new engines capable of higher speeds and greater combat endurance.  As a consequence, the improvements in sensor, guidance, and weapons suites do not give the Taiwanese air force the additional capacities needed to survive in the air against the several hundred more modern, more competent, mainland fighters.

In a slight but pardonable exaggeration, the average Taiwanese pilot flying an "upgraded" F-16 might survive long enough to shout, "Mayday" before being shot down.  This is not the end the congress had in mind when it passed the TRA.

Whether or not the Nice Young Man From Chicago simply capitulated to Beijing's opposition to this (or any) arms deal with Taiwan is, as they say, "a subject fit for adjudication."  The fact remains that the Obama "team" effectively eviscerated the TRA.

Given the continued force draft development of the PRC's air, naval, ground, and missile forces as well as the probable running down of American air and naval power in the Pacific, all that Beijing needs to do is be patient for a couple more years and then take back the "lost" province with a short, sharp, and decisive little war.  The US will be able to do nothing other than ask the Security Council for a resolution.  That, of course, will be vetoed by the Chinese.

The Obama administration's interpretation of American responsibilities under the TRA gives a strong hint as to the reliability of his steadfastness under pressure.  No political leader in Israel should see the president's words at the General Assembly as other than empty rhetoric.  Even the prospect of an American veto of the PA's request shows no depth of commitment, no willingness to run real risk.

Should some larger consideration enter the American field of view, the seemingly resolute support of Israel radiated yesterday will evaporate with blinding rapidity.  All that need be kept in mind is that before the PRC embarked on its massive rearmament program, Washington went ahead with arming Taiwan, showing total indifference to the whims of Beijing.  Now, affairs are a bit different.

Should the OPEC bully boys decide on another oil embargo, the US would be sorely tested in its relation with Israel.  Should such a hypothetical occur during the run up to a presidential election, it is doubtful that the smart money would be placed on the Israeli connection trumping.

Fifty years ago, the hard hearted, cold eyed Charles de Gaulle acted on a belief that many Europeans shared when he ordered the creation of an independent French nuclear force.  He was of the view that the US would never place Chicago at risk to defend Paris.  We will never know if the general was right, but his apprehension was well placed and well rooted in history.  The US has not always been noted for consistency over administrations, particularly if new and unpleasant realities develop as they have in China.

The takeaway for Israel is both simple and disheartening.  As Taiwan has found out over the past four years, an American promise--even one enshrined in law--is not bankable.  How much less is a piece of oratory given by a president up for reelection in a tough environment?

China Triumphant?

It cannot be said that the government of China is lacking in self-esteem. Nor can it be said that the Trolls of Beijing do not believe fully that the Forbidden City has reclaimed the "Mantel of Heaven" from the barbarians of the West--including the US.

The reaction of the Trolls to the announced sale by the US of Patriot missile batteries, Blackhawk helicopters, and Osprey mine hunting ships to Taiwan has surpassed previous denunciations of American support for the island state. Sanctions against US companies as well as other unspecified consequences have been spit like rail gun projectiles since the deal was announced.

The tone of the Beijing message has been that of superior to inferior. The lofty disapproval and threats of punishment by the Central Kingdom against those barbarians who fail to show proper deference, to pay tribute, to kowtow.

The response by the Trolls undoubtedly surpassed the expectations of the Obama administration--as is evidenced by the pathetic sense of timing shown by Secretary of State Clinton during her remarks in Paris the other day. Remarks which threatened China with diplomatic isolation and other icky-poo things should the Trolls not go along with the next round of sanctions on Iran.

The howls from the Trolls as well as "consequences" for the US will grow louder and perhaps more harmful should the Obama administration find Taiwan is in justified need of the jet fighters and submarines which it has requested. It might be noted in passing that the American sale, even if it should finally include the jets and subs, will in no way alter the basic military balance between China and Taiwan. That balance is irrevocably tilted in favor of the Trolls whose military expenditures continue to expand at double digit percentages year after year.

As the Obama administration and, in particular, the Secretary of State consider the implications of the Chinese reaction, lack of cooperation on Iran, and massive holdings of US debt, they might also consider where the responsibility for the current degenerate situation resides. A bit of pondering on that question might give insight as to where the solution might be found.

Chinese triumphalism is predicated on US money. American bucks have been flowing in ever larger torrents ever since President Clinton "opened the door." Clinton believed for reasons rooted in ideology rather than realpolitik that open trade made for good neighbors. He was wrong. The Chinese hold to a course of world politics which has been and will be hostile to the national security and strategic interests of the US.

President W. Bush pushed the trade door open even further. He also was propelled by ideology rather than realism. His ideology was rooted in the supposed benefits for "bidness" as well as the American consumer. Both did benefit economically, the former more than the latter. But, the benefits for both "bidness" and consumer were at the expense of the nation as a whole.

As anyone with a minimal knowledge of both Chinese history and basic economics could have told either President Clinton or his successor, the Chinese would rake in dollars almost beyond counting. These dollars would furnish the ways and means not only for commercial development, economic expansion, and jobs but also for military expansion and--here is the Mr Big of things--purchasing foreign debt, particularly American debt.

Thus, in so far as the Chinese are feeling triumphant, it is a triumph which we have handed them on a Yankee greenback tray. The feeling of triumph need not last. That is the good news.

First of all, the Chinese are already demonstrating a degree of hubris which would have done Bush/Cheney proud. Whether engaging in espionage on an industrial scale in the West (as MI 5 has noted regarding the UK) or declaring "nyet" with a volume which the old Soviets never showed regarding Iran or waving rhetorical cudgels at the US without a thought as to possible responses, the Trolls are exhibiting hubris at an astronomical level.

The US is not without means to slow Chinese economic recovery. It is not without the capacity to impair the sale of Chinese origin goods in the US. Doing so would not only be salutary to the Trolls, it would do some good for American businesses particularly those few which still make things rather than provide services.

Sanctions against US companies who furnish equipment to Taiwan must be met on an augmented "tit for tat" basis. So also should lack of cooperation on Iran be countered by a similar response.

Now for the hard part. The administration and Congress must wean themselves from dependence on the Chinese debt purchasers. Considering the ability of the Fed and Treasury to create more inflationary "virtual" dollars, this should not be impossible. Catastrophic inflation may reside in either option, but the second approach at least lessens the capacity of the Trolls to limit American foreign policy freedom.

The Great American Public had a long, long spending spree due to China. The dues collector has come so we all will take a necessary hit in the short to mid-term, but that is better than having to bend our national and strategic interests to the dictates of the Trolls of Beijing.

Now, repeat after the Geek, "Buying Chinese is trading with the enemy." That may have been beyond the comprehension of three American presidents (including the incumbent,) but it should and must not be beyond ours.

Talk About Bad Timing!

In the Great Game of Nations complexity is the rule. This being the ground truth, the main rule of the matter it ill behooves a country to make the game even more complex. However, this is what the Obama administration has managed to do in its so far bootless effort to constrain Iranian nuclear ambitions.

To be quite fair events outside the control of the administration have also served to render the Iranian nuclear question even more complex and resistant to solution. The specific event here is the killing of Hamas heavyweight Mahmoud al-Mabhou in Dubai.

The specific complication for which the Obama administration must take full responsibility is the sale of defensive weapon systems to Taiwan at almost the very moment that Secretary of State Clinton was making threats against Beijing in Paris. The administration acknowledged the obvious in advance: That the Chinese would go exoatmospheric over the sale.

Still, the sale and the threat of "diplomatic isolation" went on in apparent tandem. It is bizarre enough to utter dark predictions of evil consequences which would ensue upon the Trolls of Beijing continuing their opposition to another round of UN sanctions given that China is soon to be the second largest economy on the planet and holds oodles and oodles of Uncle Sam's IOUs with more on route. It is beyond the merely bizarre to assert such threats when the US needs the understanding cooperation of Beijing on many levels far more than the Chinese need Washington.

China may not veto any new round of Security Council sanctions, but it is not likely to abide by them. The same may be said of the Russians--and other countries. Even if Russia is on board with another sanction effort, it is less than probable that it would move to enforce them. Also questionable is the continued will and resolve of either Germany or France to take the economic hit of actually curtailing the thriving trade which businesses in both nations have carried on with the Iranians.

The cover for major sanction busting is already in place. It is provided by the internal opposition to the mullahocracy. An easy argument to the effect that any particular sanction requirement might hurt the Iranian people but not the government or Revolutionary Guard Corps exists.

Even if not true, even if the sanctions are narrowly directed against the Revolutionary Guard and other governmental entities, it may be said with a more-or-less straight face that the ultimate effect of any particular sanction (such as one hitting the gasoline deficiencies in the country) can be seen as weakening the opposition by hurting the person in the street. Thus, sanctions no matter how worded will be porous to the extreme.

The US has pinned too many hopes on the sanctions. So far none have worked. None are likely to given the resistance of the Trolls of Beijing and the ability of others to excuse sanction violations. As a result there exist two almost equally unpleasant alternatives: Accept Iran as a nuclear capable power and pray for sanity in Tehran or use the "military option."

In the interim the administration has to accept the probability that Iran will strike at Israel using proxies such as Hamas and Hezbollah. That the administration is doing just this is seen in the recent comment by former Marine general and current National Security Advisor, James Jones, that such are both probable and near term.

The near term just became shorter with the killing of the Hamas commander in Dubai. No matter who precisely suffocated (or electrocuted following torture) the guy, Hamas has already (surprise here) pointed the finger at Mossad. While it is equally probable that al-Mabhouh was killed by individuals in no way connected with either Mossad or Israel, the "Zionist entity" will be held responsible not only by Hamas but Tehran.

The Iranians are the largest supporter of Hamas as they are Hezbollah. Unlike Hezbollah which is subject to a fair amount of Syrian influence if not control, Hamas is answerable only to Tehran. The consequence is simply that if the interests of both are served, the resulting unity will assure Hamas takes its best shot at Israel (including Israel's external interests.)

The consequence of the new Dubai complication does reinforce the message of SecState Clinton to Beijing: That Iran is key to (in)stability in the region and this will redound to either the advantage or disadvantage of China.

The only bright ray of hope in the current set of reinforcing complexities is to be found in the inherent Chinese distaste for instability. More than most Western governments and societies turbulence of a social and political sort is anathema to the Chinese. If their Mideast/Persian Gulf regional experts are on the ball, the possibilities for burgeoning instability resident not only in the Iranian bomb dream but in the Iranian use of proxies against Israel and others will be properly highlighted for their bosses' attention and action.

Of course, the promptings of regional experts will be drowned out at least in the near future by the sense of outrage resounding around the Forbidden City in the wake of the US selling gigabucks of hardware to a recipient considered by the Trolls to be a province in rebellion. The rights and wrongs of this position are manifold but the consequences are not. China is not likely to heed either the threats of Secretary Clinton or the advice of their in-house experts.

So what?

So, the Obama administration can set yet one more deadline for Tehran's compliance. Or not. The end is the same. Iran will continue to pursue the bomb. The Israelis will have a very difficult decision to make. Hamas will seek to kill more.

Like some Frenchman once wrote, "The more things change, the more they stay the same."