The privately funded
Polaris Program is planning its first crewed launch on a SpaceX Crew
Dragon spacecraft in December, a mission that will include the first
spacewalk on a private mission.
US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) holds
her weekly press conference at the U.S. Capitol on July 21, 2022, in
Washington, DC. Nathan Howard/Getty Images
This story originally appeared in Common Dreams on Aug. 1, 2022. It is shared here with permission under a Creative Commons license.
The arrogance of power is especially ominous and
despicable when a government leader risks huge numbers of lives in
order to make a provocative move on the world’s geopolitical chessboard.
Nancy Pelosi’s plan to visit Taiwan is in that category. Thanks to her,
the chances of a military confrontation between China and the United
States have spiked upward.
Biden’s
unwillingness to clearly head off such a visit reflects the insidious
style of his own confrontational approach to China.
Long combustible over Taiwan, the tensions between Beijing and
Washington are now close to ablaze, due to Pelosi’s desire to be the
first House speaker to visit Taiwan in 25 years. Despite the alarms that
her travel plans have set off, President Biden has responded
timidly—even while much of the establishment wants to see the trip
canceled.
“Well, I think that the military thinks it’s not a good idea right now,” Biden said about the prospective trip on July 20. “But I don’t know what the status of it is.”
Biden could have put his presidential foot down and ruled out
Pelosi’s Taiwan trip, but he didn’t. Yet, as days went by, news trickled
out that opposition to the trip was extensive in the upper reaches of
his administration.
“National security adviser Jake Sullivan and other senior National
Security Council officials oppose the trip because of the risk of
escalating tension across the Taiwan Strait,” Financial Times reported.
And overseas, “the controversy over the trip has sparked concern among
Washington’s allies who are worried that it could trigger a crisis
between the U.S. and China.”
Underscoring that the US commander in chief is anything but an
innocent bystander in terms of Pelosi’s trip, officials disclosed that
the Pentagon intends to provide fighter jets as escorts if she goes
through with the Taiwan visit. Biden’s unwillingness to clearly head off
such a visit reflects the insidious style of his own confrontational
approach to China.
More than a year ago—under the apt New York Times headline “Biden’s Taiwan Policy Is Truly, Deeply Reckless”—Peter Beinart pointed out that from the outset of his presidency Biden was “chipping away” at the longstanding US “one China” policy: “Biden became the first American president since 1978 to host Taiwan’s envoy at his inauguration. In April, his administration announced
it was easing decades-old limitations on official U.S. contacts with
the Taiwanese government. These policies are increasing the odds of a
catastrophic war. The more the United States and Taiwan formally close
the door on reunification, the more likely Beijing is to seek
reunification by force.”
“We keep
claiming our ‘one China’ policy hasn’t changed, but a Pelosi visit would
clearly be precedent setting and can’t be construed as in keeping with
‘unofficial relations,'” said Susan Thornton, a former acting assistant secretary for East Asian and Pacific Affairs at the State Department.
Beinart added: “What’s crucial is that the Taiwanese people preserve
their individual freedom and the planet does not endure a third world
war. The best way for the United States to pursue those goals is by
maintaining America’s military support for Taiwan while also maintaining
the ‘one China’ framework that for more than four decades has helped
keep the peace in one of the most dangerous places on earth.”
Now, Pelosi’s move toward a visit to Taiwan has amounted to further
intentional erosion of the “one China” policy. Biden’s mealy-mouthed
response to that move was a subtler type of brinkmanship.
Many mainline commentators, while very critical of China, acknowledge
the hazardous trend. “The Biden administration remains committed to
being more hawkish on China than its predecessor,” conservative
historian Niall Ferguson wrote
on Friday. He added: “Presumably, the calculation in the White House
remains, as in the 2020 election, that being tough on China is a
vote-winner—or, to put it differently, that doing anything the
Republicans can portray as ‘weak on China’ is a vote-loser. Yet it is
hard to believe that this calculation would hold if the result were a
new international crisis, with all its potential economic consequences.”
Meanwhile, the Wall Street Journalsummed up
the current precarious moment with a headline declaring that Pelosi’s
visit “would likely sink tentative rapprochement between U.S., China.”
But the consequences—far from being only economic and
diplomatic—could be existential for all of humanity. China has several
hundred nuclear weapons ready to use, while the United States has
several thousand. The potential for military conflict and escalation is
all too real.
“We keep claiming our ‘one China’ policy hasn’t changed, but a Pelosi
visit would clearly be precedent setting and can’t be construed as in
keeping with ‘unofficial relations,'” said
Susan Thornton, a former acting assistant secretary for East Asian and
Pacific Affairs at the State Department. Thornton added: “If she goes,
the prospect of a crisis goes way up as China will need to respond.”
Last week, a pair of mainstream policy analysts from elite think
tanks—the German Marshall Fund and the American Enterprise Institute—wrote in the New York Times:
“A single spark could ignite this combustible situation into a crisis
that escalates to military conflict. Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan
could provide it.”
But July ended with strong indications
that Biden has given a green light and Pelosi still intends to go ahead
with an imminent visit to Taiwan. This is the kind of leadership that
can get us all killed.
Norman Solomon
Norman Solomon is the co-founder of RootsAction.org, and founding director of the Institute for Public Accuracy.
One more day will tell a whole lot about these news stories; meanwhile there's more!Arizona’s secretary of state race is the most eye-catching and
consequential of Tuesday’s primary battles, in part because of
Republican state Rep. Mark Finchem.
The retired Michigan police
officer and current Arizona House member was at the Capitol on Jan. 6
and contends Trump lost Arizona because of rampant fraud. He backed a
controversial and much-criticized state Senate “audit” of the 2020 election results
in the state’s most populous county and this year tried to get the
Republican-controlled Legislature to notify Congress that Arizona wanted
to decertify Joe Biden’s election win.
Finchem
also is suing in federal court with a leading GOP contender for Arizona
governor to block the use of vote-counting machines in Arizona. The
lawsuit contends they are potentially prone to hacking that can change
votes. A judge is considering whether to throw out the case.
Finchem’s claims come despite the lack of valid evidence of any widespread fraud that would have changed the result in Arizona, where Biden beat Trump by just over 10,000 votes. He maintains that “fictitious ballots” marred the results.
“So
for you to say that there’s no evidence, I think the media is willfully
disregarding the evidence that’s out there,” Finchem said....
His primary competitors
include another state House member, Shawnna Bolick, a Trump supporter
who contends the 2020 election was deeply flawed. She said in a
televised debate that she would not have certified the election had she
been secretary of state, despite it being a requirement to do so absent a
court order.
“And I
would have been breaking the law at that point and that would have been
fine,” she said on the debate carried on Arizona PBS.
“Was there organized, rigged fraud that that changed the outcome of the election?” he asked. “I have seen no evidence of that.”
The other two Republican candidates are state Sen. Michelle Ugenti-Rita,
who acknowledges Biden’s victory and has made election reform a key
focus during her 12 years in the Legislature, and Beau Lane, a
businessman and political newcomer who has earned the endorsement of
Republican Gov. Doug Ducey