Where in China is Chen Guangcheng?

Who is helping him hide from the authorities after he  fled house arrest last week?  Is he in American hands in Beijing?

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will be stepping into this mess to attend two days of talks in Beijing this week.  The Strategic and Economic Dialogue,  as this meeting is called is part of the administration’s policy to manage America’s  relations with China through regular discussions on a wide spectrum of issues.

Again a meeting in a foreign country is being overshadowed by shenanigans of others.  In this case a prostitute is not involved.

“The Chinese government regards foreign criticism of its human rights policies and practices as undue interference in its internal affairs, and it will almost certainly use the occasion of the talks to drive that point home, diplomats in Beijing said. In fact, the Chinese might go forward with the planned talks specifically to have the chance to confront Mrs. Clinton about it.” NYT April 29, 2012

Mr. Chen, 40, became famous because of his strong opposition to forced abortions and sterilizations conducted as part of China’s policy of limiting families to one child per couple.  NYT April 29, 2012

The presumptive challenger in next year’s election in the United States of  America stated,  “Our country must play a strong role in urging reform in China and supporting those fighting for the freedoms we enjoy.”

Why must we always interfere in the affairs of other nations?

President Barack  Obama’s top counterterrorism adviser, John O. Brennan was asked about Chen Guangcheng’s whereabouts on “Fox News Sunday,” and he declined to discuss anything.  He did acknowledged that “the United States is “working very closely with the individuals involved in this.”

Continuing to meddle in China’s policy he  went on to say the administration seeks an appropriate balance when advocating for human rights in strategically important countries like China.

“I think, in all instances, the president tries to balance our commitment to human rights, making sure that the people throughout the world have the ability to express themselves freely and openly,” Mr. Brennan said, “but also that we can continue to carry out our relationships with key countries overseas.” NYT April 29, 2012

Related articles

• US and China iron out deal over blind activist Chen Guangcheng (telegraph.co.uk)
• How to Handle Chen Guangcheng (brookings.edu)
• Chen Guangcheng: Fears for Chinese activist He Peirong who helped ‘barefoot lawyer’ escape (dailymail.co.uk)

Will Hillary Clinton Challenge Barack Obama?

“Diplomacy saves lives,” Bill Clinton said in his eulogy to Richard Holbrooke. “In the end,what matters is that there are a lot of people walking around on the face of the earth” because of diplomatic triumphs. Hillary Clinton’s stature lends gravitas to the work of diplomacy. As the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq wind down, as relationships from China to Pakistan to Iran fester, this is the moment for diplomacy to be restored to center stage, as senior partner to our military might. That was Richard Holbrooke’s obsession. It should be Hillary Clinton’s legacy.
In the Arena by Joe Klein, TIME January 31, 2011

The answer my friend is blowing in the wind. No! She has higher ambitions.

Always Shaking Hands

Leaders Don’t Make Decisions Based on Polling.

Image via Wikipedia

At the White House, discussing the U.S. strategy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton was posed this question:

17:25 Secretary Clinton, the new ABC News/Washington Post poll (states) sixty percent of the American people say the war in Afghanistan is not worth fighting anymore.  That’s a high.  Considering that the US withdrawal date is not until 2014. How can the Obama administration continue to wage this war with so little public support?

18:22 Well first Jake, I think it is important to remember, as the president reminded us once again, why we are fighting this war.  We all understand the stresses that this war causes first and foremost on the men and women of the military and our civilian forces who are there and their families. And we certainly understand the budgetary demands that are called for, but it’s our assessment backed up by 49 other nations that are also committing their troops, their civilians, their taxpayer’s dollars… that this is critical to our national security. Obviously if we had concluded otherwise, we would have made different decisions.  But having inherited what we did, and having spent an intensive period of time in 2009 reviewing every possible approach, and frankly listening to quite contrasting points of view about the way forward, the president and we agreed that this was a commitment that we had, to not only to continue, but we had to adopt a new strategy. We had to resource it more and we had to pursue it, and the diagnostic review that we have just undertaken, that we’ve described to you, has concluded that we are making gains on that strategy.

19:23  I’m well aware of the popular concern and I understand it, but I don’t think leaders, and certainly this president will not make decisions that are matters of life and death, and the future security of our nation based on polling. That would not be something you will see him or any of us deciding. We’re trying to do the very best we can with the leadership that we’ve all been entrusted with, to avoid making the mistakes that were made previous years, where we did not develop the kind of relationship and understanding and coordination with either Afghanistan or Pakistan that would enable us to have a better way of interacting with them and perhaps preventing some of what came to pass. And (we’re) frankly we walked away at some critical moments in the last 25, 30 years. That created conditions that we had a hand in,  and unfortunately contributing to. So I think it is understandable.

20:43  I am very respectful of the feelings of the American people but the question I would ask is: How do you feel about a continuing American commitment that is aimed at protecting you and your family now and into the future? Because that’s the question that we’ve asked and that’s how we’ve answered it.

Who are the chief financial supporters of many extremist activites? article by Andrew W. Lehren

“A classified memo sent by Mrs. Clinton last December made it clear that residents of Saudi Arabia and its neighbors, all allies of the United States, are the chief financial supporters of many extremist activities. “It has been an ongoing challenge to persuade Saudi officials to treat terrorist financing emanating from Saudi Arabia as a strategic priority,” the cable said, concluding that “donors in Saudi Arabia constitute the most significant source of funding to Sunni terrorist groups worldwide.”” NYT2010/12/06
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/06/world/middleeast/06wikileaks-financing.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=a2