THE KISSINGER MOUTHPIECE SPEAKS OR AMBASSADOR ROY STAPLETON AT THE PRINCETON CLUB
"AS BETWEEN YOU AND US, EVEN IF WE SOMETIMES CRITICIZE EACH OTEHR, WE WILL COORDINATE OUR ACTIONS WITH YOU, AND WE WOULD NEVER PARTICIPATE IN A POLICY TO ISOLATE YOU. AS FOR JAPAN AND EUROPE, WE AGREE THAT WE SHOULD COOPERATE ON ALL ESSENTIAL MATTERS WITH THEM....IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT YOU AND WE UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE GOING TO DO AND TO COORDINATE OUR ACTIONS, AND THEREFORE WE ALWAYS TELL THE PRIME MINISTER [CHOU EN-LAI] WHAT OUR PLANS ARE IN VARIOUS AREAS OF THE WORLD SO THAT YOU CAN UNDERSTAND THE INDIVIDUAL MOVES WHEN THEY ARE MADE."Henry Kissinger In Conversation with Mao Tse-Tung & Chou En-lai, "MEMORANDUM OF CONVERSATION", 18 FEBRUARY 1973, IN THE KISSINGER TRANSCRIPTS: THE TOP SECRET TALKS WITH BEIJING AND MOSCOW. Edited William Burr. (1998), pp. 89,91. On Tuesday, the 7th of May, former Ambassador to the Peoples Republic of China, Indonesia and Assistant Secretary of State for Intelligence, as well as currently Vice-Chairman of Kissinger Associates, spoke to a select gathering at the Princeton Club in Mid-town Manhattan on the subject of 'China and the United States: forming a new strategic relationship'. The following were some of the Ambassador's comments: That Peking's new leadership is under a lot of 'domestic' pressure on the subjects of economic reform, corruption, widening income inequality and the newest issue of smog. As per Ambassador Stapleton, 'ten years of empty talk', from China's departing leadership has left much of the Chinese population frustrated. In addition 'popular nationalism' is a serious problem for the government in Peking. Citing a Martin Wolf piece in a recent Financial Times, the Ambassador raised the likelihood of the China having to deal with 'middle income trap', of economic growth stagnating after the PRC would reach certain level of per capita income (approximately $5,000-$7,500). That this would be 'difficult transition' for China. As per the Ambassador there was a contradiction between the PRC's twin goals of 'Peaceful development' and China's 'territorial claims', id. est., the off-shore island chains in the North and South China Seas. As per Ambassador Stapleton, American policy is also inconsistent and that the USA needs a healthy balance of 'co-operation and competition' with the PRC. That those 'pessimists' who posit that the Sino-American relationship is headed for a crash 'are wrong', as the trade variable between the two countries greatly reduces the likelihood of conflict. That due to the American treaties with Japan and the Philippines there was 'danger of conflict' involving the United States in these countries conflicts with the PRC. That Chinese military was endeavoring to build-up 'counter-intervention' capabilities to prevent the USA from actively intervening in any such conflicts. The underlying problem with the Sino-American relationship consisted of the need to build 'a new great power relationship'. That there needed to be constant consultations between the two powers in order to avoid unnecessary tensions and conflicts. That the United States needed in sotto voce fashion, to liquidate American policy supporting the independence of Formosa and Japan's claims to the Senkaku Islands. Indeed, as per Ambassador Stapleton it was the Japanese rather the the PRC which was at fault as per the escalating problem of the Islands. The Ambassador finished by attacking President Clinton's pro-Human Rights criticism of the regime in Peking in his first term of office. With those words, Ambassador Stapleton took questions from the floor and the even was soon at an end. It would be a truism of say that the upshot of the Ambassador's comments are the worst sort of appeasement of the revisionist and aggressive tendencies of the PRC. It is quite plain to see that if left to itself, the regime in Peking will endeavor to browbeat and threaten its neighbors in an aggressive and antagonistic fashion. The mere fact that the Ambassador endeavored to find equivalence between the USA and Peking and even more egregiously, endeavored to posit that it was Japan (!) who was at fault in the current tensions between Tokyo and Peking speaks volumes about how pro-Chinese members of the Kissinger Associates circle truly are. As the above referenced quote shows, Henry Kissinger has for ages now, shown a strange sort of partiality towards the PRC and its leaders. The fact that its leaders, starting with Mao Tse-tung were blood thirsty criminals ang gangsters seems to not interested the good Doctor very much. The financial lucre that Kissinger associates garners from working with the current regime in Peking is merely an icing on the cake, and per se, cannot au fond explain the peculiar mindset of either Dr. Kissinger or his subordinates past and present. One can only express thanks that current American policy towards the PRC, for all its faults is not so craven and spineless as no doubt Dr. Kissinger would like it to be.