Disobedience Renewed
After being largely subdued for months, protests have been resumed in Hong Kong despite limitations on gatherings. Hundreds have been arrested including a lawmaker and a child only 12 years old. Protesters often gather in shopping malls for a sing-a-longs but commonly spill into the streets when police intervene. The resulting violence is what we have come to expect as China continues to assert its authority. Resistance remains alive and well and is expected to increase into the summer.
The Chinese National People’s Congress (widely held to be a rubber stamp for the communist agenda) is pushing back with new “security” laws that have raised tensions in regards to Hong Kong. The new laws against “sedition” and “treason” equate to far more serious repercussions for protesters. Internationally the move is seen as infringing on the “one country, two systems” policy in place since Hong Kong was returned to Chinese control. Should China forge ahead and establish its “Security Services” in Hong Kong, the special trade status the city has maintained with the U.S. may be revoked. Hong Kong has long been exempt from the trariffs imposed on China. Over 1,300 American companies do business in Hong Kong and more than 80,000 of our citizens currently reside there.
Thanks Anyway, Russia
A critical shortage of ventilators was one of the main reasons for panic touted by “experts” early in the Coronavirus outbreak. Countries scrambled to compensate for this perceived shortfall, though even the usefulness of intubation has been questioned since then. In the initial rush the United States procured some hundreds of ventilators from a Russian manufacturer. While they never made their way into our hospitals, having been held in reserve, they were used in Russia. Now the same model ventilator, the Aventa-M, has been blamed for at least 2 deadly hospital fires. In St. Petersburg 5 died and in Moscow 1, but in each instance hundreds more had to be evacuated. All those who died were intubated. A short circuit reportedly caused the ventilators to explode and smoke from the fires suffocated the victims.
Farewell, Afghanistan?
After reaching an agreement with the Taliban last February, U.S. troop withdrawals are ahead of schedule. Only about 8,600 soldiers remain, down from 13,000 when the agreement was reached. Forces are expected to be completely withdrawn by May of next year.
The Taliban continues to resist the government in Kabul. Attacks have even increased in some areas in spite of the agreement. It remains to be seen whether the western-backed government and military can survive without continued support or if circumstances will postpone a complete withdrawal and extend America’s longest war. As eager as everyone is to consign this affair to the past, to leave after 19 years with the Taliban still intact, having expended $1 trillion and thousands of American lives doesn’t exactly savor of victory.
Peripheral Struggle
Meng Wanzhou, the Chief Financial Officer of Chinese technology company Huawei has been under house arrest in Vancouver, Canada for a year and a half. She has been hoping to avoid extradition to the United States to face charges of bank fraud. This could be seen as part of the larger struggle between the U.S. and China, particularly as it relates to technological expansion and the race to provide 5G infrastructure to the world. The ability to collect data via phones and networks and the effective control that a company has over its own equipment is a real concern.
Huawei’s network equipment has been off limits in the United States since 2012 and its cellphones and other devices disappeared from shelves about a year ago. The U.S. has also pressured Europe to exclude their products. What has brought Meng within reach of U.S. authorities is a completely different issue however. She has been detained for allegedly misleading HSBC in regards to dealings that Huawei has with an Iranian company, putting HSBC in violation of sanctions. The situation has also strained Canadian relations with China. Communist papers called Canada “a pathetic clown and a scapegoat in the fight between China and the U.S.” A Judge has ruled against the first portion of Meng’s appeal against extradition.
They Gave Their Lives To Keep Us…Safe?
Gave their lives to keep us what? Safe? If they’d known we’d quietly quarantine for months, give up free will and the right to pursue happiness on the basis of fake news and a host of petty local tyrants, maybe the true heroes would never have displayed such high-risk bravery in the first place. The United States of America might have been defeated long ago if those warriors had known we’d turn out to be such ninnies. During New York Governor Andrew Cuomo’s Memorial Day statement, he mentioned those that had gone before and “gave their lives to keep us safe.”
How sneaky! They never gave their lives to keep us safe! They gave their lives to secure our FREEDOM from the kind of despotism displayed by America’s enemies. The idea that we’d voluntarily surrender our Constitutional rights, cowering inside and scared into submission by phony numbers and fear-mongering commentators never crossed their minds. Now the despots are, of all things, governors and mayors. It may take an act of Congress to get America’s big cities up and running again. And you can bet the farm the liberal precincts will keep things closed indefinitely if they think they can blame the economic disaster on President Trump, and at long last, drive him from the Oval office.
But the governor of New York spoke the line as if authentic, and it’s not. What’s next? Are we going to have to change the lyrics to the Battle Hymn of the Republic? To keep us safe? Freedom has become the enemy of the would-be dictators. We’re not free anymore, and probably never will be again if it means petty tyrants can tell us what we can and cannot do.
Brexit Climate
Negotiations between the UK and the EU have hit a snag over climate issues. In its own right, Britain has imposed rather stringent limits on itself. In addition to participating in the Paris climate agreement Britain ambitiously bound itself to net zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. We’ll see, since that actually means ALL man-made emissions must be removed from the atmosphere. The EU has so far been unable to get all of its members to sign on to such a target.
Regardless, the EU is upset that the UK will not bind itself to whatever future rulings the bloc makes on this subject. That may sound foolish in and of itself, and in fact it is. The larger issue at stake is sovereignty. What the EU wants is open ended compliance by the UK. If the UK submits to carte blanche regulatory authority by the EU then Brexit exists only in name.
This will be the larger struggle that plays out over the coming months, when the final details have to be addressed at last and we can ascertain what Brexit actually means. Much is still up for grabs. This particular issue illustrates how absurd and impassable certain problems can become. Britain has climate goals exceeding that of the EU as a whole yet the EU demands permanent future alignment. Logic need not apply to things considered “increasingly politically sensitive.”
