<html>
<body>
At 01:43 PM 3/9/2006, you wrote:<br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Jeff et. al.<br>
<br>
So I assume then that you oppose the economic restrictions our government
has imposed on Cuba? We should follow the "economic
engagement" model you suggest with Cuba? </blockquote><br>
<b>Yes - it is time that we open trade relations with Cuba.
Besides, we need access to their cigars, sugar cane and baseball
players.<br><br>
</b><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">And that the economic
sanctions against South Africa during apartheid were a mistake? We
should have engaged in business as usual with South Africa?
</blockquote><br>
<b>Yes - they were a mistake. There is ample evidence that the
sanctions we imposed hurt the people we were trying to help more than the
separatists we were trying to harm. But that problem seems to have
been resolved.<br><br>
</b><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">Or the sanctions against
Iraq after Gulf War One? Those were a mistake
also?</blockquote><br>
<b>Maybe - this one really depends on whether you believe the Hussein
regime had WMD. With hindsight on this one - maybe we should have
not stopped Gulf War 1 when we did.<br><br>
</b><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">And the threat of sanctions
against Iran now to persuade them to alter their plans for nuclear
developments? This also is a mistaken policy? </blockquote><br>
<b>I don't believe economic sanctions will be effective in deterring
Iran's development of WMD. I am not all that opposed to trying, but
I am not optimistic about the outcome. A religious ideology is difficult
to break with economics.<br>
</b> <br>
<blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">You imply the answer to my
objections to US based corporations engaging in violations of
environmental, labor and human rights law when doing business in other
nations, violations that help these corporations out compete their
competitors, is the extreme response of restricting international
business with these nations. I provided a link to information
regarding the US Congress debating placing conditions upon US based
companies, like Yahoo and Google, to not cooperate with China's Communist
Party in violating the free speech and political rights of Chinese
citizens. <b>Odd that you made no reference to the fact </b>that US
corporations are complicit in cooperating with China's totalitarian
dictatorship in sending political dissidents to jail for exercising free
speech rights.</blockquote><br>
<b>I implied no such thing. In fact, you note that I made no
comment whatsoever. I am researching this question and if I am
persuaded to a position, I will be forthcoming with my thoughts.
<br><br>
</b><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite=""> I am suggesting what
was suggested by the US Congress. I did not suggest blocking all
trade with China. Let our corporations be a firm guide in promoting
democratic values in other nations, not a sleazy co-conspirator
cooperating with a dictatorship to violate the human rights of its
citizens. </blockquote><br>
<b>At this point, I have no hard evidence to substantiate your
allegation. I am aware of many positive actions by US companies,
including Internet companies. But I will seek to learn more about
your "conspiracy" allegations and, if persuaded by the evidence
I obtain, will post you on my findings.<br><br>
</b><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">As to favoring a
"cold" or "hot" war with China, I think to some
extent we have a "cold war" now with China. Witness
China's recent release of a report on US human rights violations, listing
our treatment of prisoners in the war on terror, and our treatment of
people in the Hurricane Katrina disaster, as human rights
violations. China's response is partly aimed at the US criticisms
for China's human rights violations. This tit for tat exchange of
accusations is an expression of an ideological cold war now under way
between China and the US. If holding US based corporations to a
firm stand blocking egregious violations of human rights, environmental
standards and labor laws implies a "cold war" with China, then
so be it. </blockquote><br>
<b>Well, labels are easy to apply - I think of a "cold war"
that focuses on weapons build up, DefCon 5, strong anti -your opponent
comments and so forth. The dialogue between the two nations looks
more to me like "establishing the conditions of trade and economic
markets and not cold war. Let's just agree to disagree on this
one. It is too rooted in definitions to lead to a meaningful
dialogue.<br><br>
</b><blockquote type=cite class=cite cite="">The notion that capitalism
always implies democracy is a mistaken idea. China no doubt is and
will be a fierce competitor in the capitalist world. But US
corporations engaging in human rights violations in China could just as
well be a green light for the Chinese Communist Party to continue their
repressions of their citizens, rather than an influence to democratize
that nation. Why should the Chinese Communist Party give up their
firm hold on power when the world's leading democracy assists them in
jailing political dissidents who dare speak out against the Chinese
Communist Party? Or when Google agrees to censor their search
engine to block references to the truth about Tienanmen Square? If
I was China's leader, I would quietly smile to myself thinking how
successful China has been in compromising the democratic idealism of the
USA in gaining their complicity in maintaining the Socialist Communists
hold on power! All the Chinese Communist Party must do to continue
its dictatorial hold on power is assure the American capitalists that
they can make a killing off the cheap labor and other competitive
advantages China offers. Then the USA will not take a firm stand
against China's human rights abuses beyond meaningless propaganda
statements. </blockquote><br>
<b>Again, let's just agree that we see the world differently on this
point. We have been attempting to build economic bridges with the
Chinese for decades. Our efforts have only begun to bear fruit -
but our trade relations really enjoy only about a 20 year history.
During the past decade, many thousands of Chinese have been schooled in
the US. It will take time for all that investment to bear a full
return. Allow a taste of capitalism (free enterprise, risk and return,
freedom of choice) and the appetite for other freedoms will
grow.<br><br>
Thanks for your response. As I get my head around the "US
Internet Corporations conspiracy with China's Communist Party" I
will weigh in.<br>
</b></body>
</html>