Coddling China: Obama bows again
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Sunday, Sept. 22, 2013, 9:00 p.m.
Plumbing new depths of foreign policy deferentialism, the Obama administration now seriously entertains Chinese requests to end or ease restrictions on exports of U.S. space, military and defense technology critical to national security.
“The administration has asked agencies to discuss what to give the Chinese,” an unnamed U.S. official “close to the discussions” tells The Washington Free Beacon.
China's requests include ending all sanctions Congress imposed after 1989's Tiananmen Square massacre (which would require congressional action), plus sanctions on five Chinese companies that have illicitly sold arms to Iran and other rogue states; no limits on commercial satellite exports; greater access to aerospace, electronics and deep-water oil and gas exploration technology; and putting the Commerce Department, rather than the State Department, in charge of America's arms export control list.
Beijing also wants the administration to block language in the fiscal 2014 House defense appropriations bill restricting U.S. information technology exports to China. U.S. Rep. Frank Wolf, R-Va., who chairs the subcommittee that drafted that bill, says he's “surprised the administration would allow the Chinese government to interfere with the operation of the American government.”
Mr. Wolf is too generous. Bowing to Beijing's wishes would blur the distinction between China's government and America's, outrageously ceding U.S. sovereignty to new, hostile Chinese leadership that idolizes Chairman Mao.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Fixing Ford City’s water leaks: Time is money
- Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances
- Saturday essay: The gardeners’ etiquette
- 2014 Greater Connellsville Chamber of Commerce Awards: In service to their community
- Another EPA crock: Sulfur silliness
- Greensburg Laurels & Lances
- ‘Un-American’? That’s Harry Reid, the Senate’s lowly smear artist