- Several months ago, I focused attention on our peaceful
northern neighbor, Canada, and the problems they were apparently having
with the Communist Chinese. Inasmuch as the Communist Chinese successfully
infiltrated every level of the Clinton Administration with a cash-for-access
plan, a dual process was taking place in Canada. Massive land purchases
and alarming dual-use technology business buy-outs were documented in Project
Sidewinder, compiled by Canadian Security Intelligence Service (the full
report still hasn't been released). Communist Chinese were filtering through
Canada, only to disappear somewhere in America. Dual-use technology purchases
of fiber optic gyroscopes, funneled through Canadian businesses to China,
were exposed by custom agents. My concern over these activities, and my
assertion that they were part of a coordinated effort, made some people
speculate that I had tipped my bag and lost a few of my proverbial marbles.
-
- Nevertheless, Chinese spies were successful in infiltrating
the Atomic Energy of Canada, Ltd., (AECL) and making off with plans for
their Slowpoke nuclear reactor. The AECL has recently been forced to shelve
it's own plans to sell the reactor abroad because China's stolen copy is
much less expensive. According to a Globe report dated January 24, 2000,
China didn't even have the courtesy to change the reactor's name, calling
their own a "Slowpoke." How did they gain access to this technology?
A source indicated, "What they didn't buy, they stole." (Globe,
January 24, 2000). Sound familiar?
-
- When I attempted to focus attention on Senator Tom Daschle's
plan to give the Soviets $1.2 billion on military aid (of which they ultimately
received $444,000,000), decrying their continued cooperation with China's
military build-up, some folks were positive I had turned daffy.
-
- Nevertheless, in August of 1999, China purchased 2 billion
in Su-30MKK fighter jets, which are now in use, and on December 25, 1999,
accepted delivery of a Russian Sovremenny Class destroyer, Type 956. We
pay them millions to keep their military solvent, and China buys billions
in Russian military technology. Who is kidding who?
-
- When I chided Congress for not listening to FBI Director
Louis Freeh's 1997 testimony before the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence,
regarding his concerns for expanding encryption code allowances, some folks
thought I was uninformed.
-
- Nevertheless, the United States is now pressing China's
government to comply with new encryption regulations by February 1, 2000,
in the hopes of getting the encryption horse back in the barn:
-
- "Under regulations that take effect on Monday, all
foreign and mainland companies or individuals using encryption technology,
which protects electronic communication from eavesdropping, must register
with the government." (South China Morning Post, "Encryption
Rules Focus of US Talks," Reuters in Washington, January 29, 2000).
-
- Given their past record of non-compliance, we have nothing
to fear, right?
-
- When I insisted that our disastrous policy of continued
engagement with China could only hurt the United States, some folks were
sure I was overreacting.
-
- Nevertheless, "Andy Marshall, who takes charge of
threats evaluation section of the US Department of Defense, recently said
that he was worried that 'a nonsymmetrical war' would break out [over Taiwan]
in which US weak points would be thoroughly exposed. Under Marshall's instructions,
former Deputy Assistant Defense Secretary Bai Bang-rui designed a war game
with China as the opponent, which showed that although the US had the most
powerful armament in the world, more often than not it became the loser
in a fight against the PLA." (BBC Summary of World Broadcasts, January
17, 2000).
-
- Don't mind me. I'm just counting my marbles.
-
- Carolyn Katzan contributed to this article.
-
- www.american-partisan.com
-
-
-
-
- http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/razzano/020300.htm
|
