The main topic in the press, though strange: China vs the Environment. Hong Kong’s democracy movement progresses, their opposition (mostly professors and members of government) also get louder. The US even piped in, stating that they were likely to endorse Taiwan’s pro-Beijing controlling KMT party. While the US is most likely trying to say whatever makes Beijing happy, the KMT became extremely unpopular during August and early September with scandals becoming public. US statements about the elections in Taiwan would likely enrage the Taiwanese public, leading voters of both Hong Kong and Taiwan to view all three governments being against them. While China was considered viz the environment, the people in Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the Philippines (the volatile zone) are being pitted against all the governments’ controlling parties, US included. This could add a new dynamic to the swelling conflict.
The Chinese Civil War Continues
…Article on how the KMT Nationalists and Chinese Communists are playing footsie, but may never be friends. · · · →
The Taiwan military rhetoric of last week was compounded by a food oil scandal affecting many large Taiwan food suppliers. The ultimate effect will hurt the pockets of the de facto pro-Beijing KMT Nationalist party controlling Taiwan. As the spirits of HK and Taiwan strengthen together, from valuable mistakes, Beijing faces a new weapon: human resolve.
The Japanese development of not being solely dependent on the US for defense came with consideration: A nation needs more than weapons for defense; it needs ethics, values, and a narrative. The region is realizing that this conflict won’t be fought in one single battle, but every day, with small run-ins and decisions to become strong or to bow to the big bully of the Pacific.
Top US security adviser expected in Beijing
…Strategically at the same time as the West plans to move against ISIS in Iraq.
Political Cartoon: The unfairness of “fairness” between China and Taiwan in trade agreement, CSSTA, illustrating why the Sunflower movement’s takeover of Taiwan’s Legislature made some sense. · · · →
You know that point… where you’ve been trying to persuade a friend to get smart, think about his actions, and change his ways… and you’ve finally convinced him to open his eyes and he sees his situation… but then he looks at you as if he’s been violated… then he shrinks back into his emotional cave, stops listening, buckles down, and walks away?
We reached that point this week with China.
More importantly, we reached another point with Taiwan: shock and realization.
In China’s defense, the Communists don’t want Hong Kongers to have “buyer’s remorse” similar to what many Americans and Taiwanese feel for their presidents. But, more from Chinese domineering culture than from Communism ideology, Beijing’s solution is to seize control from the people, rather than allowing the people to learn from their consequences of their voting.
Chinese reportedly violated Taiwan’s airspace, then denied it, then moved military vehicles through busy streets of Hong Kong. · · · →
Asia has a bigger problem now: A Beijing spy investigation. This could tip the balance in the US military favor because the Western public doesn’t like Beijing spies. Beijing is unlikely to back down. Even in online gaming, the Chinese have trouble knowing when they are losing. They are also easy to provoke on accident.
The official “story” is that Taiwan may have gotten rid of a Beijing spy. But it gets deeper and harrier, with flashbacks to Blagojevich’s self-defense in Illinois, along with two main questions: Who helped him and why did only one person resign?
Whether it was intentional, no one helped the supposed “spy” (Chang 張顯耀) more than Taiwan’s Nationalist party (KMT). Top government leaders enacted and proposed agreement after agreement with China that encouraged secret talks between Beijing and Taiwan’s government. Spies love secrecy every bit as much as the KMT does.
Why did only one head roll? · · · →
Many threats and predictable responses this week. It would be easier for authorities to identify threats if they were allowed to interpret normal people as having an understandable sense of humor, interpret feisty, angry people, who are itching for a fight as possible, unplanned “showdown confrontation” instigators, and wanna-Be’s as willing to tout the appearance of power that they don’t have. Law enforcement’s inability to identify these three different types of people leaves them vulnerable and easy to distract. While the TSA is busy patting-down a 10 year old, airport staff can smuggle box cutters past security.
Balling-up and easily being provoked to “lock-down” mode makes one an easier target. The way to overcome threats, whether disease or violence, is for authorities to keep joy, a sense of humor, wit, ingenuity, and to stay clever. Police and security must learn to differentiate between ordinary people who may have an ill sense of humor and danger threats who have no joy whatsoever and are constantly looking for a reason to feel “important”, even at the expense of someone else. · · · →