Defense Cuts Impact on the States

  The dire effects of slashing our military budget can already be seen in the states.  New York is a good example. 

   It should be remembered that the “Great Depression” of the 1930s only ended when the United States became the arsenal of democracy and created employment in armaments factories.  As the threat from Germany loomed large in Europe, and Japan moved to conquer the whole of the Pacific region, Americans finally emerged from the nightmare of mass unemployment by finding work building tanks, airplanes and ships.

   Today, the world again rests upon the precipice of disaster. China has a navy that will soon equal ours, and the world’s largest armed forces. They have already used that navy to steal resources from the Philippines, threaten Japan, and intimidate almost every other nation in the region. A resurgent Russia possesses a nuclear arsenal greater than America’s, and the gap continues to grow in Moscow’s favor.  Once again, the newly liberated nations that used to be part of the Soviet Empire live in fear.

   Despite these frightening realities, as well as the need to reverse an unemployment level not seen since the Great Depression, the White House continues to demand that the military bear the brunt of spending cuts.  Additionally, other high-tech, job-producing endeavors such as the space program have been shelved. The results have become clearly evident close to home. 

   Currently, New York State has one of the most severe unemployment levels in the nation, at 9.1%, as opposed to the national level of 8.1%.   The problem is about to get bigger. As a result of military spending cutbacks, Sikorsky has announced that it will close its plant in Big Flats, New York—a loss of 570 jobs. The size of the work force had already dwindled down from 1,300.

   The facility, located near Elmira, is relatively new, (it was constructed in 2007) and is in a region of the state particularly hard hit by unemployment.  The New York State Department of Labor notes that from August 2011 to August 2012, not even one private sector job was produced in the region, and 2,100 jobs were lost.

   The issue has become a political battle between the two candidates for U.S. Senate.  The incumbent, Kristie Gillibrand is a Democrat but apparently couldn’t convince fellow Democrat Obama to take steps to save the plant.  Her rival, Republican challenger Wendy Long, has advocated a jobs and economic growth agenda along with support for enhanced defense capabilities. She has severely criticized the plant closing.

   New York is not alone. The multi-year $487 billion in defense reductions already in existence may soon be almost doubled by “sequestration” cuts scheduled to go into effect in January unless deficit-reducing measures are agreed to in Washington.  The Wall Street Journal’s Kimberly Strassel notes that “Dramatic cuts in military spending are beginning to take a toll on defense jobs in…states such as Ohio, Virginia, and Florida.”

   Concerns about the domestic impact of the White House’s insistence on reducing military spending have been voiced, even within the president’s cabinet.  Defense Secretary Leon Panetta warned that this policy would lead to a loss of 1.53 million jobs, dramatically increasing unemployment.  Additionally, the demobilizing of significant numbers of soldiers, sailors, airmen and marines into a near-depression economy would swell the ranks of the unemployed at the worst possible time.

White House Negligence

  Americans have a long tradition of healthy disagreement on just about every issue.  We don’t expect our politicians or our news media to be perfect.  There has always, however, been a general consensus that our key elected officials should be, at a minimum, hard working; that they should be reasonably honest with the public, and that they should put the national interest above their own careers. Similarly, while we acknowledge that journalists are human and have their own perspectives, we do expect them to separate their biases from their reporting.

   The stunning spectacle of the White House failure to take necessary precautions in Libya after clear warnings, its insincere and overtly false blaming of the incident on a little-seen video, and the worrisome failure of the press to honestly report this are cause for concern for all.

   Here are the facts:  three days before the assault on the Libyan Embassy, the U.S. Government was warned of a planned 9/11/12 attack, and did nothing about it. This resulted in the deaths of four Americans, including Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens.  The attacks were a specific response to the June drone attack on al-Qaeda leader Abu Yahya al-Libi and, perhaps, other key Al Qaeda leaders.   This has been corroborated by the President of Libya, Mohamed Yousef El-Magariaf, and a Libyan security official, Jamal Mabrouk.  On the day of the attack, there was absolutely no “spontaneous demonstration,” there was a well-coordinated military maneuver including rocket propelled grenades and machine guns by well prepared militants.  On the same day, a well-planned assault on our embassy in Cairo coordinated by Islamic extremists and attended by major Al Qaeda leaders took place.

   Despite these clear and explicit facts, the White House intentionally deceived the American public and blamed the tragedy on a little-seen video.  Even Al Jazeera, the Arab news service, noted that the YouTube trailer was barely known. The White House did this to intentionally hide its negligence in this particular instance as well as its numerous failures in the Muslim world. 

Among these failures are the irrational rendering of apologies for offenses our nation never committed, and his abandonment of our ally Israel in this quest. It includes his enthusiastic backing of the overthrow of a pro-American Egyptian government by Islamic fundamentalists and al Qaeda personnel who hate our country, advocate for war in the Middle East, and who threaten to kill Coptic Christians in their own nation. It includes the failure to prevent Iranian interests from gaining the upper hand in Iraq.  It also includes his failure to take any effective steps to slow Iran’s headlong rush to gain a nuclear weapon, and the President’s reluctance to take a firm stand against the ongoing human rights disaster in Syria.  Perhaps most devastating, the amateurish step of announcing our departure date from Afghanistan has given rise to a resurgence of the same forces that mounted the original 9/11/01 attacks. 

   The White House sought to distract the public from the fact that the President utterly failed to attend intelligence briefings for a full week before the attacks and ignored warnings about them. Indeed, even the day after the attacks, the President delivered a dispassionate statement about the Libyan assault, and totally ignored the Egyptian incident.  Immediately afterward, he skipped yet another intelligence briefing, and hopped aboard his plane to fly to Vegas for his latest campaign fundraiser.  The President’s nonchalance about the Middle Eastern crisis was further exemplified by his claim to be too busy to meet with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu, and instead appearing at (yet another) fundraiser with an ex-drug dealing rap star, and a radio show with a DJ nicknamed “The Pimp with a Limp.”

   As a result of the White House’s relentless publicizing of the little-known YouTube video in its attempt to deflect attention from its failures, Muslims throughout the world who knew nothing of the film before now became aware of it and, led by militants, used it as an excuse to attack western embassies throughout the world.

   The major media outlets, instead of reporting these facts, did everything possible to assist the Administration’s deception.  As it has now been proven,  a number of reporters even worked together to insure that any response from challenger Mitt Romney would be severely criticized no matter what the candidate said. 

    The criticism of the media’s biased and dishonest response doesn’t just come from Republicans or others who dislike President Obama.  In the aftermath of the 9/11/12 embassy attacks, I spoke with radio hosts across the United States and Canada; all were dismayed over the complete rejection of journalistic ethics by the major media outlets.

   As a nation, we can and should have healthy disagreements about what the best policy choices for the Middle East are.  But we all should agree that our President must at least show up for work, attend intelligence briefings, and that, when his policies fail, as they clearly have, he should be prepared to honestly disclose that to the public and to a media that has a bare minimum of journalistic ethics.  

The Attack On Our Embassies

Eleven years to the day after the attack on the World Trade Center, American embassies in Libya and Cairo were brutally assaulted, resulting in the death of U.S. ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and several others. Despite warnings 48 hours in advance of last week’s attacks on our embassies, nothing was done to protect American diplomats, military, and civilian personnel.

   It must be remembered that the 9/11/01 attack was the second attempt to destroy the Twin Towers.  On February 26, 1993, these buildings were targeted by the same al Qaeda forces that later succeeded, eight years later. That try, using a van full of explosives in a parking garage below the WTC, didn’t succeed in collapsing the towers, but it did manage to kill six people and injure one thousand. 

   Unlike the invasion of Afghanistan ordered by President Bush after 9/11, President Clinton’s response to the 1993 attack was minor and ineffective.  Al Qaeda gained the confidence that it could engage in a direct assault on the American homeland without suffering a significant counter-attack.  Osama Bin Laden believed he could bring massive destruction to the U.S. and have a possible chance of keeping his organization intact. Seven years later, the USS Cole, docked in Yemen’s Aden harbor for refueling, was bombed.

   After 9/11, however, the forceful response by the Bush Administration, the heroism of our armed forces, and the constant vigilance of the NYPD and federal counterintelligence forces prevented the additional massive attacks that all feared would follow.

   Thanks to the decade-long effort initiated by President Bush and completed with the heroism of the Navy Seals, with the approval of President Obama, Bin Laden is finally dead. But is Washington again sending signals of weakness, encouraging those who wish harm to America and its allies? 

   The answer is unsettling. President Obama ordered a withdrawal of most U.S. forces from Iraq before taking steps to counter influence from Iran.  The delay by the White House in implementing strict sanctions against Iran for its nuclear program has brought both the U.S. and Israel to the very brink of a holocaust.

   The danger exceeds just the Middle East or Al Qaeda.  The vacillation of the Obama Administration to Moscow in the ABM issue further enhances an image of an America in full retreat, as does the White House’s approval of the New Start treaty which gives Moscow a permanent advantage in nuclear weapons.  One hideous example: Russia now has a ten-to-one advantage over the U.S. in tactical nuclear weapons.

   Nor is the weakness confined to Europe and the Middle East.  In the Pacific, China has engaged in outright aggression against the Philippines, thanks to its massively enlarged navy. Beijing’s warships literally invaded and now occupy a resource-rich area belonging to Manila. The assault remains unanswered by Washington, despite America’s treaty obligations to our ally. 

   Russia, China, and Iran have sharply increased their military budgets, and all three have a significant presence in the Caribbean and throughout Latin America, a dangerous threat ignored by the White House. Russian nuclear capable bombers have patroled our west coast, and enemy nuclear subs have cruised under the waters of our Eastern and Southern coasts.

   Despite these vast and still growing dangers, our defense budget is being cut, and there are plans to further slash it drastically in the very near future.  This weakness breeds extraordinary danger to America, just as Britain’s weakness encouraged Nazi Germany to launch the Second World War in Europe.

      Those who lost their lives have left a permanent hole in our hearts. Cancers and other enduring injuries still linger in those who were there but survived. Now, we must add additional names to the roster of those lost to terrorists who sensed American weakness.

Killing Blue Collar Jobs

    The answer to why New York City has increasingly inadequate blue collar employment can be found at the Department of City Planning, which regulates zoning issues.

     That may sound odd, but the fact is, blue collar employment in the manufacturing sector is literally being zoned out of existence. (“Zoning,” as defined by the Harper Collins Dictionary of American Government & Politics, is “The process by which local government can designate the types of structures and activities for a given area.”)

    Land use planning policies that have chased factories out have devastated the job supply and created an urban economy that is increasingly fragile.  

    The Pratt Center for Community Development reports that “Even as the demand for goods in New York City remains strong, city government’s own policies are threatening manufacturer’s ability to do business here. When Mayor Bloomberg came into office in 2002, New York City had 12,542 acres of land where manufacturing businesses could legally operate. Today, thanks to zoning changes, it has fewer than 10,746, and another 1,800 acres would be converted to other uses under additional rezoning proposed by the Bloomberg administration.  If the planned rezoning goes through, New York City will have lost 20 percent of all its manufacturing space in the span of just a few years.  Of the 95 New York City re-zonings from 2003 to 2008, one-quarter converted manufacturing districts into some other category of land use…not one added a single acre of new space for manufacturers.”

     Unfortunately, New York City is not alone in its assault on manufacturing and the above-average wages that it produces.  An examination indicates that American manufacturing is being devastated by a number of factors, including the highest corporate taxes among industrialized nations; an increasingly burdensome regulatory regime; a weak national and global economy; a downturn in federal support for cutting-edge R&D; a slowdown in military procurement of major weapons systems; the rise of China, with its cheaply paid labor force, and that nation’s unfair competitive practices, as well as intellectual property theft; an increasingly poorly schooled workforce; and high energy costs.

    Regulatory burdens are the key factor depressing manufacturing in the United States.  Kevin Williamson recently wrote in National Review that the cost of regulatory compliance—which may be between one and two trillion dollars annually—is a bigger burden than taxes. He noted that, in addition to the cost, the regulatory burden is more infuriating because “you can boot out your representative if he votes for a tax hike, but you can’t vote out executive-branch bureaucrats.”  In many cases, the regulatory system is geared against the very type of ingenious, highly productive new firms the nation needs to rejuvenate its industrial base in favor of politically connected older companies with the capital to hire powerful lobbyists to influence politicians. 

    The increasing problem of complying with politically-oriented regulations that produce no benefit, particularly those relating to the environment, has accelerated manufacturing’s decline. The Competitive Enterprise Institute worries that “The pace at which the Obama administration has issued new Clean Air Act regulations unrelated to carbon dioxide is without precedent in the statute’s 40 year history…”  Compliance costs are in the trillion dollar range—if compliance can be done at all.  Some of the demands call for the purchase and implementation of technology that is not yet available. 

   In an attempt to save the U.S. economy, The House of Representatives has passed H.R. 10: Regulations From the Executive in need of Scrutiny Act, better known as REINS. The bill is not expected to pass the Senate and would certainly be vetoed by President Obama if it ever did.  With only minor exceptions, the vote on the bill followed straight party lines, with Republicans favoring it and almost all but four Democrats voting against it.  The purpose of the bill is to limit the ability of the White House and its Environmental Protection Agency to implement economically harmful regulations without appropriate oversight, and a clear rationale of why the measures are actually needed.

   America’s manufacturing, unemployment and national debt crises must not be prolonged by “bureaucrats gone wild.” 

The New Threat From Russia

We would rather not believe it, and it certainly doesn’t fit in with President Obama’s contention that there has been a successful “reset” of our relations with Russia. The facts, however, cannot be denied.  Thanks to the Kremlin’s determination and the White House’s weakness, the Cold War is back.

     As ex-KGB officer Vladimir Putin solidifies an iron grip on his nation, he is resorting to a standard ploy of dictators throughout the past century.  Distract the populace, suffering from an oligarchic and corruption-filled government and a stumbling economy by turning to military adventures abroad.

     Even as the shrunken and exhausted American military faces the prospect of radical budget cuts in just five months, Putin is returning his nation to a Cold War footing.  As unpleasant as it is to contemplate, Washington must begin to face reality and acknowledge that a newly aggressive Russia has engaged in:

·       vigorous and greatly expanded armaments expenditures;

·        adventurous military patrols across the globe;

·   seeking naval bases abroad;

·   support of vehemently anti-western regimes in Syria, Iran, and Venezuela;

·   a belligerent attitude towards other nations;

·   threats of a “pre-emptive strike” against American missile defense installations in Poland;

·   energy “blackmail” against Europe;

·   Joint war game maneuvers with China;

·   Soviet-style repression of its own people; and

·   Soviet-style treatment of the former captive nations of Eastern Europe as well as former Soviet Republics. 

     As Americans celebrated the 4^th of July, Russian nuclear-capable bombers and submarines threatened our Western and Gulf coasts. Russian Bear-class nuclear capable bombers had to be chased away from our western shores. During this same period, an Akula-class nuclear sub patrolled the Gulf of Mexico, undetected.  The depleted U.S. Navy simply doesn’t have the assets to be as vigilant as it needs to be.

     Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) was enraged when he learned of the incident. He complained to the White House:

 “This submarine patrol, taken together with the air incursions, seems to represent a more aggressive and destabilizing Russian military stance that could pose risks to our national security.  This is especially troubling given the drastic defense cuts sought by President Obama, which include reductions in funding for antisubmarine defense systems.”

     The Departments of Energy and Defense has noted that “Russia maintains a fully functional nuclear weapons design, development, test and manufacturing infrastructure capable of producing significant quantities of nuclear warheads per year.”  This contrast sharply with the U.S., which according to the New Deterrent Working Group “has effectively eliminated its nuclear weapons production capacity and allowed its infrastructure to atrophy.  We no longer produce successive generations of nuclear weapons and we have discontinued underground testing.”

   

     In 2011, while the American nuclear arsenal shrank, its Russian counterpart grew larger, according to the Heritage Foundation.  During that year, the U.S. reduced the number of warheads on deployed ICBMs and SLBMs, and nuclear warheads counted for deployed heavy bombers, by 0.6%.  In contrast, Russia’s similar arsenal increased by 1.9%.  In terms of total deployed ICBMs, SLBMs and heavy bombers, America reduced its numbers by a dramatic 6.8%, while Russia’s decreased by just 1.0%.  America reduced the number of launchers for ICBMs and SLBMs by 7.2%, while Moscow’s increased by 0.7%. 

    These are unpleasant facts—but facts they are.  If ignored, the immediate safety of our nation is in deep peril. 

Government By, For, And Of The Politicians

     As COMACTA has previously noted, we have replaced government by, for, and of the people with one that is by, for, and of the politicians, who are increasingly contemptuous of their constituents.  While there has always been corruption and incompetence, we are plunging to new depths throughout our city, state and nation. 

     It’s seen in New York City, for example, in the rejection of two referendums in which the people voted in favor of term limits by a billionaire mayor who “influenced” enough city council members to overturn the will of the voters. 

     We see traditional values of fair play and decency replaced by something far worse.  In Chicago, for example, former Obama chief of staff and current Mayor Rahm Emmanuel has invited leading anti-Semite and race-baiting bigot Louis Farrakhan to advise him on violence issues.

     The growing disdain for the citizenry on the national front was evident during the Senate interviews with President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee, Elena Kagan.  Ms. Kagan couldn’t bring herself to confirm that, in her opinion, Americans had “unalienable rights” as promised in our Declaration of Independence.  It was eventually followed by President Obama’s “You didn’t build that” comment about America’s small business owners, saying that those individual and family owners, many of whom labor for over 12 hours a day, don’t deserve credit for their efforts. 

     Increasingly, the concept of constitutional government is being replaced by thinly-veiled one man rule.  Cabinet responsibilities that are supposed to be held by individuals approved by the Senate are instead given to “Czars” answerable only to the President. We see the machinery of government being used not to establish justice, but to enhance the political power and policies of a White House that has made no secret of its disdain for the legislative process, using neo-fascist slogans such as “We Can’t Wait” as an excuse for unilaterally enacting policies and ignoring laws it doesn’t agree with. 

      We see the machinery of government being used to bully citizens into complying with a socialist view of government control that Americans never agreed to.

"Buy America"

  The battered American economy faces numerous challenges.  This summer, Congress began the process of calling attention to what many believe to be one of the most serious: the enormous and growing trade imbalance.

     Rep. Brian Bilbray (R-Ca.) has introduced H. Res. 705, which calls for the designation of a “Buy America” week.  According to Bilbray, the 2011 U.S. global trade deficit in goods was $726,700,000,000, representing a stunning $100,000,000,000 increase from 2010. The latest report from the federal government notes that there was $42.9 billion trade deficit in June 2012 alone, the last month for which data is available.  $27.4 billion of the deficit was due to commerce with China, an increase of $1.4 billion from May.  The European Union accounted for another $8.4 billion, and Japan represented another $6 billion.   

     The results of this harsh imbalance are extensive.  Domestic manufacturing currently accounts for only 9% of the U.S. labor force, down from 13% in 2000.  America lost approximately 5,200,000 factory jobs during that period.  There are little prospects for improvement.  President Obama’s cuts in the two manufacturing areas that are almost exclusively American—defense and space—mean that this crisis will get even worse.

     While there is disagreement on how to solve the problem, there is a general consensus that it is a threat to American prosperity.  According to the Cato Institute’s trade analyst Daniel Griswoki, “A nearly universal consensus prevails that the goal of U.S. trade policy should be to promote exports over imports, and that rising imports and trade deficits are bad for economic growth and employment.”

     Alan Uke, an entrepreneur from San Diego, recently wrote a book, “Buying America Back,” detailing the crisis, and what must be done to address it. He outlines the threat to the nation.  Consumer spending comprises 70% of the U.S. economy, and 60% of all manufactured goods purchased by consumers are imported.  The American trade deficit is the worst of any industrialized nation, accounting for 4% of our entire Gross Domestic Product.  Uke estimates that to end the high unemployment levels, which have risen sharply under the Obama administration, a healthy  manufacturing employment section, providing jobs for about 20% of the labor force,  is vital.

     A growing response—a “Buy America” movement—is beginning to take shape.   His basic concept is that consumers aren’t even aware that the products they purchased weren’t made in the U.S.A. His solution doesn’t embrace concepts like tariffs or protectionism.  Instead, he believes that products sold should be clearly labeled to indicate where they were produced.  It’s an idea, he believes, that has already proven valuable in marketing healthier foods.  Another analogy could be drawn to items such as “conflict diamonds.”

   His solution calls for mandatory labeling on all consumer products containing information detailing:

·   ·       The percent content by country of origin to a reasonable accuracy;

·   ·       The present U.S. trade ratio with that country; and

·   ·       The manufacturer’s nationality.

     This information would be displayed on the product’s packaging, on catalogues and web sites where the item is offered for sale, and on the item itself, as it is displayed for sale. 

     Uke’s concept has received broad bipartisan support, but it remains to be seen whether elected officials, who seem to pay more attention to this problem during election years, will continue their concentration after November.

The Changing Role of Government

    It’s time for an uncomfortable but urgent conversation about the direction our government has taken. Although Americans have always disagreed on specific policies, the vast majority of us were united in the fundamentals:   the Constitution was to be followed, and our elected officials were in office to serve us, not their own careers.  They had the right to govern, but not rule, because the people, not the government, have sovereignty.

    We agreed that our nation as a whole, and our communities in particular, had basic needs that required attention before our tax dollars were spent on anything else.  America had to be defended from foreign enemies, and our borders secured.  Our system of justice needed to be maintained and our rights protected.  Locally, government was responsible to protect us from crime and fire, and to provide basic services such as education, transportation, and sanitation.

    Today, those key essentials are held hostage to numerous issues that are, at best, of secondary importance, and may not be the jurisdiction of government at all. Nationally, despite rising threats, our military faces sharp funding cuts. Support for our current and future technological and economic edge, coming from agencies like NASA, has been discarded. Funds collected for social security were tossed into the general fund.  Most of the dollars these essentials should have received are diverted to causes sponsored by political contributors or interest groups that are vital to some politician’s re-election, accomplishing nothing for the country. As a result, our taxes are higher than they should be, discouraging enterprise and keeping unemployment at over 8%. Our most experienced and dedicated workers in the private and public sectors are laid off because funds have been diverted to questionable programs staffed by the politically connected. 

     Senator Tom Coburn annually compiles lists of wasteful projects that divert your taxes from necessities to those that merely help incumbents get re-elected.  Some are vast sums for ideas that have failed for decades to accomplish their goals but are too important as a source of political patronage to discard.  “Over the past 12 months,” Coburn noted, “politicians argued, debated and lamented about how to reign in the federal government’s out of control spending.  All the while, Washington was on a shopping binge, spending money that we do not have on things we do not absolutely need.  Instead of cutting wasteful spending, nearly $2.5 billion was added each day in 2011 to our national debt…”

     In addition to nationwide programs that waste funds on an enormous scale,  singular pork barrel projects  to help get individual politicians re-elected accounted for about $6.5 billion of your tax dollars for nonsense such as bridges to nowhere, “video game preservation,” annual chocolate festivals, subsidies for pancakes, and other blatant dollars-for-votes schemes. 

     Sometimes, those actions border on the clinically deranged, particularly on the local level.  As NYC crime escalates, Mayor Bloomberg concentrates on telling mothers of newborns not to bottle feed their infants.  As the city’s transportation needs grow, he converts the high line railway to a park, chops up thoroughfares for bike lanes and pedestrian malls, and makes irrational statements such as “the streets are for moving people, not cars.”  When will our allegedly “tough” New York media begin to seriously question the mental stability of the mayor?

    Unfortunately, much of our mainstream media seems reluctant to criticize the arrogant, unethical, or possibly psychotic actions of our current leadership. Calls for “civility,” a thinly veiled plea to not criticize the worst crop of elected officials America has ever produced, are frequently heard. Not since the Great Depression has high unemployment lasted this long. Not since the day before Pearl Harbor has our nation been so vulnerable.  However, sycophantic TV reporters seem more eager to make excuses than to seriously probe the Washington missteps that led to this dire state. 

     Silence, however, in the face of ruinous incompetence and corruption will not solve the nations’ deepening crises.  The utter refusal to put the needs of Americans before the careers of politicians, on both the national and urban levels, has brought this nation to the brink of bankruptcy at home and extreme vulnerability abroad.  The people have a right and a duty to respond.

China in the Americas

   The Monroe Doctrine,  the American policy that has kept foreign powers from pursuing military gains in our Western Hemisphere for two centuries, is apparently no longer in vogue in Washington.

   Pursuing three main goals, the Beijing government has dived deeply into Latin America and the Caribbean.  Economically, China seeks access to raw materials throughout the region.  Diplomatically, it seeks to persuade nations to cut ties with Taiwan.  And finally, and perhaps most worrisome, it seeks to gain dependable military outposts right on America’s borders. 

   China has become a major factor in Latin American affairs. After President Hu Jintao’s first visit to Latin America in 2004, it took just three years for bilateral trade to reach over $100 billion, notes policy expert Russell Hsiao. 121 bilateral agreements and cooperation initiatives have been signed since 2000, concentrating in trade, cultural, public administration/consular affairs, science and technology, tourism, and military matters.

   Along with billions in cash, thousands of Chinese workers have poured into the region, training troops, manning strategic facilities, and deeply interacting with inter-American organizations.   Beijing joined the Organization of American States as a permanent observer. It also joined the Inter-American Development Bank  with a donation of $350 million.  It expanded diplomatic ties with the Group of Rio, the Andean Community, and the Caribbean Community groups.  

   China clearly seeks to replace American influence in the region. Its government recently sent a very celebratory congratulatory message to Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez and Chilean President Sebastian Pinera last December on the founding of the “Community of Latin American and Caribbean States” (CELAC), a grouping that includes every nation in the western hemisphere except the United States and Canada.

   China’s recently released official policy statement on Latin America clearly adopts a policy of ever-deepening military relations with our neighbors to the south.

    Any rational analysis of China’s investments leads to the conclusion that military, as well as economic, goals are the top priority.  As Dr. Evan Ellis notes in Chinese Engagement with Nations of the Caribbean, Beijing has developed port facilities on both the east and west sides of the Panama Canal, and a massive deepwater port and airport facility in Freeport, The Bahamas, just 65 miles from the USA, as well as a deep sea port in Suriname.

  To enhance its military’s familiarization with the region, China has sent a naval hospital ship to Cuba and peacekeeping forces to Haiti. Ellis notes that “The PRC also conducts significant interactions with the militaries of virtually all of the Caribbean nations with which it has diplomatic relations.  A series of senior level Caribbean military leaders have visited China in the past two years…At a lower level, people-to-people military interactions have included inviting uniformed Caribbean military personnel and defense civilians for professional education trips to the PRC…The PLA donated $3.5 million in non-lethal military equipment to the Jamaica defense Force in 2010….The PLA is also reported to have personnel at Soviet-era intelligence collection facilities in Bejucal, Lourdes, and Santiago de Cuba…” 

   The U.S.-China Economic & Security Review Commission reports that Venezuela, Chile, Bolivia and Cuba now maintain strong ties to the Chinese military “through a high number of official visits, military officer exchanges, port calls, and limited arms sales.”  Venezuela, Bolivia and Ecuador have begun to buy Chinese arms and military equipment, including radar and aircraft.  Bolivia has signed a military cooperation agreement with China. 

   A Jamestown Foundation study of China’s arms sale to the region notes highlights China’s goal of allowing Latin American and Caribbean nations to distance themselves from Washington,  The report notes indicates that “Beijing’s military to military ties are growing with the states of South America across the board:  military missions, educational exchanges and arms sales.  This activity is part of Beijing’s overall advancement of a foreign policy.”

  For centuries, presidents, whether Republicans or Democrats, liberals or conservatives, have reacted forcefully and quickly to foreign military inroads to this region.  President Kennedy’s forceful response in the Cuban Missile Crisis and President Reagan’s moves to oust the Soviets from Central America are the most recent examples.  The White House needs to inform Americans why it has abandoned this successful policy.