The actions President Obama has taken in the first days of his office reinforce our audacity to hope that much needed change will take place to restore America’s historic place in the world.
The announcement to close the Guantanamo detention camp suggests his desire to return America to moral high grounds.
The calling of world leaders on his first day of office reflects his desire to rejoin the international community and replace the go-it-alone approach with cooperation and consensus building.
But the nomination of Timothy Geithner as the new Treasury Secretary and the statement Geithner submitted in his pre-confirmation hearing about China’s alleged currency manipulation is deeply troubling.*
First of all, it’s hard to see how the old accusation, regardless of validity, will solve America’s current economic ills.
Mr. Geithner will not be able to explain how the exchange rate of renminbi to the dollar caused the creation of the sub-prime mortgages and naked derivatives, the mess responsible for the collapse of Wall Street.
Nor, can he explain how the Chinese currency caused Detroit to persist on building humvees and gas guzzlers, thereby taking the auto companies to the brink of bankruptcy.
Nor, can he come up with a logical way to blame China for our SEC that facilitated Madoff in absconding billions from investors around the world.
Since Mr. Geithner is said to be a smart man and slated to be Obama’s point person in overcoming the economic difficulties, he probably does understand that America’s economic woes is not China’s fault.
Since the U.S. pressured China off the peg to the dollar, the yuan has appreciated about 20%. The appreciation did not materially alter the economic balance between the two countries and to assume further appreciation will have any impact on the current mess would be shockingly naïve.
Perhaps he feels that he needs to pay lip service to members in the Senate or to certain constituents of the Democratic Party that are still spoiling to blame China for our problems.
However, to pull out of the “worst economic crisis since the Depression” (Obama’s words), Geithner needs the courage (and audacity) to explain to the Congress and the American people that we need China’s cooperation rather than enmity.
We need China to continue to buy our Treasury notes and hold on to dollars. We need China to want to continue to invest in Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac and in America.
It’s now obvious to everyone in the world that the economic crisis is a global one and the solution will depend on close collaboration of all the major players, the most prominent being China and the U.S.
The road to economic recovery will be long and uphill all the way. It will be up to Geithner and the rest of Obama’s economic team to focus on the real issues in order to successfully get to the end of the road.
To dilute their attention and energy on bogus issues because of domestic politics will surely be disastrous for America.
* In today's Wall Street Journal, there is a commentary critical of Mr. Geithner even more substantively than this piece.
An edited version was posted on New America Media including a translation in Chinese.
Monday, January 26, 2009
Thursday, January 22, 2009
The Democracy of Money
Any of you getting tired of the endless fund raising solicitations from all political stripes? Here is my recent response to Morgan Freeman, allegedly raising funds for the Democratic Senate.
Dear Mr. Freeman,
I too am proud that we have as our new president an intelligent man of color, willing to listen and not afraid to make changes.
I am also weary of how much America’s democracy is dependent on money. We need to raise money before election and after election and all the time in between. When do we not need money but let principles of right and wrong guide our government to do the right thing in the interest of all Americans?
I am frankly completely turned off by the incessant solicitations from political organizations of every ilk.
Dear Mr. Freeman,
I too am proud that we have as our new president an intelligent man of color, willing to listen and not afraid to make changes.
I am also weary of how much America’s democracy is dependent on money. We need to raise money before election and after election and all the time in between. When do we not need money but let principles of right and wrong guide our government to do the right thing in the interest of all Americans?
I am frankly completely turned off by the incessant solicitations from political organizations of every ilk.
Sunday, January 4, 2009
Richardson's Withdrawal as Commerce Secretary
I have been among those that objected to the nomination of Bill Richardson as the next Secretary of Commerce. Governor Richardson's recent withdrawal from his nomination as the next Commerce Secretary is due to ongoing grand jury investigation of possible corruption related to political campaign contribution. I feel neither elation or sadness over this outcome. It is a development over which I have no basis to pass judgment.
President-elect Obama publicly acknowledged and thanked Richardson for putting the nation's interest ahead of his own by withdrawing from the nomination. So be it.
I am among those that continue to believe that it would in our nation's interest for Governor Richardson to acknowledge the error of his conduct and apologize to Dr. Wen Ho Lee and the Asian community for racial profiling and violation of judicial due process. Thus, if the current investigation absolves Governor Richardson and in the future he is again considered for positions of public service, at least his action that so offended the Asian American community need not be revisited again.
Background and chronology of the Wen Ho Lee case is readily available.
President-elect Obama publicly acknowledged and thanked Richardson for putting the nation's interest ahead of his own by withdrawing from the nomination. So be it.
I am among those that continue to believe that it would in our nation's interest for Governor Richardson to acknowledge the error of his conduct and apologize to Dr. Wen Ho Lee and the Asian community for racial profiling and violation of judicial due process. Thus, if the current investigation absolves Governor Richardson and in the future he is again considered for positions of public service, at least his action that so offended the Asian American community need not be revisited again.
Background and chronology of the Wen Ho Lee case is readily available.
Thursday, January 1, 2009
Is It America's Turn to Learn from China?
On Jan. 1, 30 years ago, the United States and China resumed normal diplomatic relations—a culmination of the fence mending between the two nations that began with President Nixon's historic visit to China in 1972.
A simultaneous public announcement of the bilateral agreement came two weeks earlier. The People's Daily, the official newspaper of the government, rushed out a rare extra edition. The last time The People's Daily had printed an extra edition—with bold headlines and in red ink—was when China detonated its first atomic bomb 14 years earlier.
The reaction in Washington to the bilateral agreement was more muted. There was a perfunctory announcement. At the time, the United States was the world's largest economy and China was in the process of moving up from the world's 30th.
America's economic partners were Europe and Japan. China hardly made any difference. Today China is in a virtual tie with Germany as the world's third largest economy and holder of the largest amount of American debt.
How the United States chooses to deal with China now will make a world of difference.
Thirty years ago, no playbook existed on how to transform a state-planned economy to a free and open market. Deng Xiaoping was the paramount leader who saw that a normal relationship with the United States was essential to China's road to reform. He came to Washington that January to celebrate the newly established relationship, to don a cowboy hat and savor some Americana.
More importantly, Deng opened China to Western ideas. Measures of financial performance, articles of incorporation for a functioning enterprise, regulations governing joint ventures, guidelines for bank financing, taxation with incentives for new investments and many more ideas became part of China's legal environment. These were conditions necessary to attract foreign investment and encourage the growth of the private sector.
In 30 years, China's economy has increased by more than 30 fold. Few would deny that China's reform has been a spectacular success. It is the United States that is now at a crossroads and in need of drastic systemic reform.
While China's economic development has too short of a history to provide any useful lessons on bailing out a crashing economy, if Barack Obama were to visit China after the inauguration, he could find some fresh and useful approaches.
China has shown that step-by-step reform rather than sudden "big bang" reform—or deregulation in the case of the United States—proved to be the road to success. Applying this principle, Obama might follow gradual steps toward re-regulation.
If Obama wishes to see how infrastructure investments can act as stimulants to the national economy, all he needs to see is how the building of mass transit systems, airports, bridges, tunnels and super highways have benefited China's economy and its cities.
More importantly, Obama would see a China vastly different from the image portrayed in the West. He would see a nation of people working hard striving for a better life. He would see a society surprisingly free and open.
He would also see a country that shares many of the challenges and aspiration the United States faces. From anti-piracy off the Somalia coast, to security from global terrorists, stopping drug trafficking, pollution abatement, developing clean alternate sources of energy, and increasing drinkable water supply, China and the United States are facing common hurdles best overcome through working together.
By joining China in a true partnership, Obama's administration can leverage the relationship and accomplish the same goals at a lower level of national expenditure. By selling clean technology and other high-tech products, Obama can even generate more business for American companies.
Mutual trust and confidence would be built from increased contact and personal rapport between Obama and the leaders of China, and the hundreds of billions of dollars that the United States has allocated for advanced weapons development could be cut from the national deficit.
Originally posted on New America Media.
A simultaneous public announcement of the bilateral agreement came two weeks earlier. The People's Daily, the official newspaper of the government, rushed out a rare extra edition. The last time The People's Daily had printed an extra edition—with bold headlines and in red ink—was when China detonated its first atomic bomb 14 years earlier.
The reaction in Washington to the bilateral agreement was more muted. There was a perfunctory announcement. At the time, the United States was the world's largest economy and China was in the process of moving up from the world's 30th.
America's economic partners were Europe and Japan. China hardly made any difference. Today China is in a virtual tie with Germany as the world's third largest economy and holder of the largest amount of American debt.
How the United States chooses to deal with China now will make a world of difference.
Thirty years ago, no playbook existed on how to transform a state-planned economy to a free and open market. Deng Xiaoping was the paramount leader who saw that a normal relationship with the United States was essential to China's road to reform. He came to Washington that January to celebrate the newly established relationship, to don a cowboy hat and savor some Americana.
More importantly, Deng opened China to Western ideas. Measures of financial performance, articles of incorporation for a functioning enterprise, regulations governing joint ventures, guidelines for bank financing, taxation with incentives for new investments and many more ideas became part of China's legal environment. These were conditions necessary to attract foreign investment and encourage the growth of the private sector.
In 30 years, China's economy has increased by more than 30 fold. Few would deny that China's reform has been a spectacular success. It is the United States that is now at a crossroads and in need of drastic systemic reform.
While China's economic development has too short of a history to provide any useful lessons on bailing out a crashing economy, if Barack Obama were to visit China after the inauguration, he could find some fresh and useful approaches.
China has shown that step-by-step reform rather than sudden "big bang" reform—or deregulation in the case of the United States—proved to be the road to success. Applying this principle, Obama might follow gradual steps toward re-regulation.
If Obama wishes to see how infrastructure investments can act as stimulants to the national economy, all he needs to see is how the building of mass transit systems, airports, bridges, tunnels and super highways have benefited China's economy and its cities.
More importantly, Obama would see a China vastly different from the image portrayed in the West. He would see a nation of people working hard striving for a better life. He would see a society surprisingly free and open.
He would also see a country that shares many of the challenges and aspiration the United States faces. From anti-piracy off the Somalia coast, to security from global terrorists, stopping drug trafficking, pollution abatement, developing clean alternate sources of energy, and increasing drinkable water supply, China and the United States are facing common hurdles best overcome through working together.
By joining China in a true partnership, Obama's administration can leverage the relationship and accomplish the same goals at a lower level of national expenditure. By selling clean technology and other high-tech products, Obama can even generate more business for American companies.
Mutual trust and confidence would be built from increased contact and personal rapport between Obama and the leaders of China, and the hundreds of billions of dollars that the United States has allocated for advanced weapons development could be cut from the national deficit.
Originally posted on New America Media.
Friday, December 12, 2008
Steven Chu—Smart Policy, Not Politics
President-elect Barack Obama’s appointment of Steven Chu as Energy Secretary reaffirms his commitment to change our national energy policy and make the development of alternative energy sources a top priority.
Since taking over the leadership of Lawrence Laboratory, the Nobel laureate physicist Chu has been busy promoting the need to combat global warming by shifting away from dependence on fossil fuel. His laboratory has become an active center of research on alternative energy. He has been prominent in various local and national forums stressing the urgent nature of global warming.
Chu has the technical expertise, personal charisma and passion to help Obama change the way we consume energy and heat up the atmosphere. Obama’s decision not to select a Washington insider, but someone with a firm grasp of the relevant technological issues, suggests that he is serious about finding the right person to deal with the threat of global warming.
To even remotely suggest that the appointment of Chu is in some way a response to the growing objection to incoming Commerce Secretary Bill Richardson – who was Secretary of Energy during the Wen Ho Lee case – is to discredit Obama’s intention to recruit the best and most qualified, not to mention discounting Chu’s sterling credentials.
Certainly, Richardson’s credentials could also be considered those of a heavyweight – except, ironically, for his record as the Energy Secretary under the Clinton administration.
In late 1998 and early 1999, right-wing opponents were attacking Bill Clinton from multiple fronts, including the accusation that military secrets were being leaked to China. To relieve the pressure of these attacks, Richardson made Wen Ho Lee, then employed at the Los Alamos Laboratory, a convenient scapegoat. He fired Dr. Lee two days after an article from the New York Times indicated that secrets had been leaked from Los Alamos.
Lee was fired without due process. He didn’t know what he did wrong. It took months after his dismissal for prosecutors and the FBI to come up with 59 counts against him, all but one of which was thrown out by the court. Lee had to plead guilty to one count of downloading sensitive data from a secured central computer in order to justify the nine months he had already spent in solitary confinement. (At about the same time, CIA Director John Deutsch took his own secured laptop home against regulations and he didn’t even spend a day in jail.)
The presiding judge apologized to Lee. The New York Times and other major members of the media published mea culpas. Even the FBI admitted falsifying evidence against Lee. Only Richardson to this day will not admit that he had done anything wrong. His inability to admit a mistake and apologize continues to be a heavy blot on his credentials.
The appointment of Chu should be a welcomed fresh breeze to erase the stench of a past national disgrace. As a native-born American, Chu presumably will not be subject to racial profiling. By serving as the director of an agency that less than a decade ago was so riddled with racial bias is to indicate that the Obama administration truly signifies a new beginning.
With an Asian American serving as the energy czar, national laboratories should begin to see increasing numbers of Asian Americans with a renewed interest in working there. It has been no secret that scientists and engineers of Asian ancestry represent one of our most valuable national resources.
This commentary first appeared in New America Media.
------------------------------------------------
Dr. Robert Vrooman was the counterintelligence director at Los Alamos National Laboratory who fiercely objected WHL's arrest. Vrooman himself was reprimanded by Bill Richardson for continuing to oppose the charges and actions against WHL. He supported the campaign to free WHL through many speeches and the media. See his statement opposing Richardson's appointment in the Obama administration.
Since taking over the leadership of Lawrence Laboratory, the Nobel laureate physicist Chu has been busy promoting the need to combat global warming by shifting away from dependence on fossil fuel. His laboratory has become an active center of research on alternative energy. He has been prominent in various local and national forums stressing the urgent nature of global warming.
Chu has the technical expertise, personal charisma and passion to help Obama change the way we consume energy and heat up the atmosphere. Obama’s decision not to select a Washington insider, but someone with a firm grasp of the relevant technological issues, suggests that he is serious about finding the right person to deal with the threat of global warming.
To even remotely suggest that the appointment of Chu is in some way a response to the growing objection to incoming Commerce Secretary Bill Richardson – who was Secretary of Energy during the Wen Ho Lee case – is to discredit Obama’s intention to recruit the best and most qualified, not to mention discounting Chu’s sterling credentials.
Certainly, Richardson’s credentials could also be considered those of a heavyweight – except, ironically, for his record as the Energy Secretary under the Clinton administration.
In late 1998 and early 1999, right-wing opponents were attacking Bill Clinton from multiple fronts, including the accusation that military secrets were being leaked to China. To relieve the pressure of these attacks, Richardson made Wen Ho Lee, then employed at the Los Alamos Laboratory, a convenient scapegoat. He fired Dr. Lee two days after an article from the New York Times indicated that secrets had been leaked from Los Alamos.
Lee was fired without due process. He didn’t know what he did wrong. It took months after his dismissal for prosecutors and the FBI to come up with 59 counts against him, all but one of which was thrown out by the court. Lee had to plead guilty to one count of downloading sensitive data from a secured central computer in order to justify the nine months he had already spent in solitary confinement. (At about the same time, CIA Director John Deutsch took his own secured laptop home against regulations and he didn’t even spend a day in jail.)
The presiding judge apologized to Lee. The New York Times and other major members of the media published mea culpas. Even the FBI admitted falsifying evidence against Lee. Only Richardson to this day will not admit that he had done anything wrong. His inability to admit a mistake and apologize continues to be a heavy blot on his credentials.
The appointment of Chu should be a welcomed fresh breeze to erase the stench of a past national disgrace. As a native-born American, Chu presumably will not be subject to racial profiling. By serving as the director of an agency that less than a decade ago was so riddled with racial bias is to indicate that the Obama administration truly signifies a new beginning.
With an Asian American serving as the energy czar, national laboratories should begin to see increasing numbers of Asian Americans with a renewed interest in working there. It has been no secret that scientists and engineers of Asian ancestry represent one of our most valuable national resources.
This commentary first appeared in New America Media.
------------------------------------------------
Dr. Robert Vrooman was the counterintelligence director at Los Alamos National Laboratory who fiercely objected WHL's arrest. Vrooman himself was reprimanded by Bill Richardson for continuing to oppose the charges and actions against WHL. He supported the campaign to free WHL through many speeches and the media. See his statement opposing Richardson's appointment in the Obama administration.
Reasons why Obama needs a new start with China-part 5 of 5: End to Racial Profiling
The Obama Administration takes office on the promise of change and one of the most critical changes he can make is to reboot our relations with China based on mutual respect and shared interests. A strong and positive alliance with China is more important now than ever.
By treating China as an equal partner, the Obama Administration would not only recognize the reality of China’s position in the new world order but would gain an ally that could reduce America’s military expenditures, provide diplomatic cover in certain parts of the world essential to world stability and help rescue America’s foundering economy.
Another change though not directly connected to relations with China is stopping the practice of racial profiling by law enforcement agencies. In the case of Chinese Americans, it is the idea that somehow their feelings about their ancestral land, a natural feeling with any first generation immigrants, are somehow unnatural and a cause of disloyalty.
Ethnic bias runs deep in certain parts of the American government. Broad and ambiguous export control policy provides cover for justifying racial profiling by the enforcement agencies. Sometimes the bewildered target of the FBI investigation was tripped up by the idea that a civilian use could have military implications. Other times, they didn’t do anything but were harassed anyway for merely being ethnic Chinese.
The FBI has always espoused the idea that China uses the so-called “grains of sand” practice of espionage. Simply stated, FBI believes every ethnic Chinese in America is a potential spy for China.
The idea that China is patiently collecting tidbits of information from a million sources that add up to devastating intelligence is preposterous but this theory serves to excuse those in counter-intelligence for failing to catch anyone and justify their random arrests of Chinese Americans.
Though it hardly qualifies as espionage, exporting to China can get a person in trouble, especially if the person is ethnic Chinese.
The Obama administration should conduct an anti-ethnic cleansing of the leadership of FBI and get rid of the bigots and the racially biased culture that reside there since J. Edgar Hoover. Racial profiling under grains of sand or any other pretense is still a show of ignorance and in the case of the FBI, incompetence.
Stopping the harassment of Chinese Americans will contribute to a positive atmosphere with China and will re-direct the energies of the law enforcement bodies to issues related more directly to homeland security, a cause we all support.
Read entire 5 part article on Asia Times.
By treating China as an equal partner, the Obama Administration would not only recognize the reality of China’s position in the new world order but would gain an ally that could reduce America’s military expenditures, provide diplomatic cover in certain parts of the world essential to world stability and help rescue America’s foundering economy.
Another change though not directly connected to relations with China is stopping the practice of racial profiling by law enforcement agencies. In the case of Chinese Americans, it is the idea that somehow their feelings about their ancestral land, a natural feeling with any first generation immigrants, are somehow unnatural and a cause of disloyalty.
Ethnic bias runs deep in certain parts of the American government. Broad and ambiguous export control policy provides cover for justifying racial profiling by the enforcement agencies. Sometimes the bewildered target of the FBI investigation was tripped up by the idea that a civilian use could have military implications. Other times, they didn’t do anything but were harassed anyway for merely being ethnic Chinese.
The FBI has always espoused the idea that China uses the so-called “grains of sand” practice of espionage. Simply stated, FBI believes every ethnic Chinese in America is a potential spy for China.
The idea that China is patiently collecting tidbits of information from a million sources that add up to devastating intelligence is preposterous but this theory serves to excuse those in counter-intelligence for failing to catch anyone and justify their random arrests of Chinese Americans.
Though it hardly qualifies as espionage, exporting to China can get a person in trouble, especially if the person is ethnic Chinese.
The Obama administration should conduct an anti-ethnic cleansing of the leadership of FBI and get rid of the bigots and the racially biased culture that reside there since J. Edgar Hoover. Racial profiling under grains of sand or any other pretense is still a show of ignorance and in the case of the FBI, incompetence.
Stopping the harassment of Chinese Americans will contribute to a positive atmosphere with China and will re-direct the energies of the law enforcement bodies to issues related more directly to homeland security, a cause we all support.
Read entire 5 part article on Asia Times.
Wednesday, December 10, 2008
Reasons why Obama needs a new start with China-part 4 of 5: As High Tech Export Market
The Obama Administration takes office on the promise of change and one of the most critical changes he can make is to reboot our relations with China based on mutual respect and shared interests. A strong and positive alliance with China is more important now than ever.
By treating China as an equal partner, the Obama Administration would not only recognize the reality of China’s position in the new world order but would gain an ally that could reduce America’s military expenditures, provide diplomatic cover in certain parts of the world essential to world stability and help rescue America’s foundering economy.
In general, China prefers high tech equipment and machinery from the U.S. over the competitors from Western Europe, Japan or Russia. However, none of the other suppliers require the buyer to jump through the hoops that the U.S. government imposes on China for the privilege of buying from us.
The U.S. export control policy towards China needs to be revamped and hostile bias removed so that China can be accorded the same respect as with any customer. The notion that goods sold for civilian use could also find military use and therefore must be restricted when exporting to China is outdated and gratuitously insulting.
The U.S. export licensing process has been costly to administer, costly for American manufacturers to comply and costly for the Chinese buyer to follow. The policy has not made America more secure but has impeded export sales and made buying from us less attractive than buying from our competition.
The export control process was instituted during the cold war to guard against American technology falling into the Soviet hands. The efficacy of this policy was questionable then and its relevance certainly more questionable now.
China is too important a market for American high tech goods for us to continue to tolerate a policy that undermine our own competitiveness.
Read entire 5 part article on Asia Times.
By treating China as an equal partner, the Obama Administration would not only recognize the reality of China’s position in the new world order but would gain an ally that could reduce America’s military expenditures, provide diplomatic cover in certain parts of the world essential to world stability and help rescue America’s foundering economy.
In general, China prefers high tech equipment and machinery from the U.S. over the competitors from Western Europe, Japan or Russia. However, none of the other suppliers require the buyer to jump through the hoops that the U.S. government imposes on China for the privilege of buying from us.
The U.S. export control policy towards China needs to be revamped and hostile bias removed so that China can be accorded the same respect as with any customer. The notion that goods sold for civilian use could also find military use and therefore must be restricted when exporting to China is outdated and gratuitously insulting.
The U.S. export licensing process has been costly to administer, costly for American manufacturers to comply and costly for the Chinese buyer to follow. The policy has not made America more secure but has impeded export sales and made buying from us less attractive than buying from our competition.
The export control process was instituted during the cold war to guard against American technology falling into the Soviet hands. The efficacy of this policy was questionable then and its relevance certainly more questionable now.
China is too important a market for American high tech goods for us to continue to tolerate a policy that undermine our own competitiveness.
Read entire 5 part article on Asia Times.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
