- FTW - Recent news stories
circulating widely on the Internet and targeted at conservative U.S. interest
groups, indicating that the Government of China (GOC) is actively supporting
the Taliban and providing troops to assist Taliban and al Queda fighters
are false. China, which gained admittance to the World Trade Organization
just two days after the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Center
and the Pentagon, is a full partner in globalization and has an essential
and vested interest in seeing US war and economic plans succeed. Further,
US economic influence in China, the world s largest global market, is
currently controlling political and military events as China faces a massive
energy crisis that only US companies can resolve.
An analysis of China s economic relations with the United States reveals
the overriding reasons for a Chinese/US alliance and gives the lie to
recent stories published by the Debka news organization which are designed
to instill fear in the US public and divert attention away from US government
covert economic, drug smuggling and military operations in the region.
As reprinted by the conservative World Net Daily on October 22 the Debka
Intelligence Files (www.debka.com) published a story entitled Chinese
fighters killed in U.S. strikes. That story reported that, Military sources
in Dushnabe and Bishbeck, capitals of Tajikistan respectively, report at
least 15 Chinese fighting men on the side of the Taliban, were killed
in last week s U.S. bombing over Kandahar &
The story continues to state that Osama bin Laden aide Basir al Masri
now reportedly deceased enjoyed the protection of at least 10 Chinese
bodyguards, some of whom were reportedly killed in recent U.S. air attacks.
The Debka report, using selected quotes from British and American papers,
including the Washington Post which has long-documented affiliations
with the Central Intelligence Agency - refers to prior stories indicating
that the GOC has established intelligence and funding relationships with
the Taliban in recent years. It quotes one Washington Post story as stating
that Beijing and the Taliban signed a memorandum of understanding on September
11 for greater economic and military cooperation.
These relationships fail to take into account a gift of $43 million to
the Taliban from Secretary of State Colin Powell last May, or the fact
that, through the Pakistani intelligence service, the ISI, the CIA has
continually provided aid to the Taliban virtually up until the moment of
the September 11 attacks.
The implication of this story, especially when combined with previous
Debka stories claiming massive Chinese troop deployments in and around
Afghanistan, is that the United States is potentially facing a direct military
confrontation with China.
Nothing could be further from the truth.
In spite of the fact that one additional October 22 story from the Hindustani
Times states that Taliban Commander-in-Chief Jalaluddin Haqquani has claimed
that the militia was in touch with China, which was assisting in the
war against the U.S, there remains no credible evidence of such Chinese
involvement. In fact, a simple examination of the economic interdependence
of the U.S. and China makes such conclusions totally unbelievable.
U.S.-China Economic Interdependence
With more than three billion citizens China represents the world s largest
untapped marketplace, both for oil and for consumer goods. Not only is
the economic future of major U.S. corporations dependent upon continued
access to Chinese markets, the Chinese economy as demonstrated by its
relentless 15-year effort to gain access to WTO is as dependent upon
U.S. investment and economic assistance. China was swiftly admitted to
the WTO on September 13.
There s an old saying that in a ham and eggs breakfast, the chicken is
involved but the pig is committed. Many major U.S. corporations are totally
committed to ongoing business relations with China and the Chinese government.
This was demonstrated by China s hosting of the recent APEC conference
in Shanghai. China is in dire need of continued investment and operations
from U.S. based companies. This was a matter of pre-eminent concern to
George W. Bush during the conference and is also reflective of the Bush
family s long-standing business interests in China.
According to the U.S-China Business Council (USCBC) (www.uschina.org),
new foreign direct investment in China in 2000 alone equaled some $62.66
billion US. This represented a 50.8% increase over 1999. Major U.S. corporations
with active investments in China include: Federal Express, Honeywell,
Corning, Ford, Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Halliburton, AIG, Nortel, Microsoft,
FMC, Cargill, Xerox (which, according to the Wall Street Journal, is moving
it manufacturing operations to China), Chubb and Emerson Electric.
In the first quarter of 2001 alone, according to the USCBC, selected US
exports to China rose by the following percentages: power generation equipment
(+48%); electrical machinery & equipment (+17.3%); air and spacecraft
(+113.7%); iron and steel (+88.5%). Total U.S. trade with China is expected
to top $107 billion in 2001.
American International Group (AIG), which manages the second largest pool
of investment capital in the world, has approximately 40% of its business
operations centered in or around China. AIG began its history as an American
owned Chinese insurance company, the C.V. Starr Company. (See FTW, Vol.
IV, No. 5 August 14, 2001)
Outgoing USCBC President Robert Knapp, in text prepared, apparently within
hours of the WTC attacks and China s admission to the WTO, issued a press
release stating, The WTO negotiations have consumed fifteen years,
Knapp pointed out, but they are now crowned with success & Never
has the need for cooperation between the United States and China, both
bilaterally and in the multilateral environment, been clearer. The two
countries must now work together, intensely and in good faith, to ensure
that both nations realize the maximum benefits from China s WTO participation.
Oil
Nowhere is China s dependence upon the United States more clearly demonstrated
than its need for oil and gas to continue its economic expansion. As discussed
with full sourcing - in the Oct. 15 issue of From The Wilderness (FTW),
the Unocal Corporation has resumed long-standing plans for the construction
of a trans-Afghani pipeline system to transport oil and gas from the Central
Asian republics to the Pakistani coast for sale to China and Japan. This
1500-mile pipeline from the oil and gas-rich regions of Tajikistan, Turkmenistan,
Uzbekistan and Kazakhstan is the only feasible way to transport oil and
gas to China, which is heavily dependent upon imported oil and gas.
China cannot build a pipeline across Asia for two reasons.
First, the construction of a nearly 4,000-mile pipeline across the northern
end of the Himalayas and through the mountains regions of Central China
would take decades and is beyond China s technical abilities. The construction
expertise of companies like Halliburton who s CEO until 2000 was Dick
Cheney is essential.
Second, China has its own Muslim insurgency in the Uighur region. Islamic
fundamentalists there have been trained by the Taliban and are fighting
their own campaign for an independent Islamic state. This region is in
the Himalayas; just bordering the Central Asian republics and any construction
undertaken there would, of necessity, demand a two-front battle against
terrorists bent on destroying the pipeline and the forbidding terrain as
well.
As reported in the Oct. 15 issue of FTW, Although Unocal ostensibly abandoned
the project the next year, things have changed since September 11th. An
October 10 story from the Pakistani newspaper, The Frontier Post, opened
with: The US ambassador to Pakistan, Wendy Chamberlain, paid a courtesy
call on the Federal Minister for Petroleum and Natural Resources, Usman
Aminuddin here Tuesday and discussed with him matters pertaining to Pak-US
cooperation in the oil and gas sector.
In a later paragraph the story said, Usman Aminuddin also briefed the
Ambassador on the proposed Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan gas pipeline
project and said that this project opens up new avenues of multi-dimensional
regional cooperation particularly in view of the recent geo-political
developments in the region.
A Reasonable Explanation
There may be a few ethnic Chinese fighting with the Taliban but they are
most certainly Uighur Muslims and not PLA Chinese troops. Remember that
during the Spanish Civil War of the 1930s Americans formed volunteer fighting
units that fought on both sides of that conflict. That did not mean that
the U.S. government had endorsed either side.
The Debka reports are dubious and highly suspect as to their intent. WorldNet
Daily, which has a well-deserved reputation for solid journalistic standards,
should be careful of risking its credibility by republishing such outrageous
and unfounded stories. Such stories can and have had the effect of distracting
attention from important debate and increasing fear levels in selected
groups. And as fear increases, logical, relevant and essential analysis
goes out the window.
|