From Salim Mansur <[email protected]>
Subject Beijing's gangster-regime is West's most implacable enemy
Date March 27, 2020 2:17 PM
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
  Links have been removed from this email. Learn more in the FAQ.
Dear Friend,

Below, dear friends, are two essays by Guy Sorman and a youtube video I did with Robert Vaughan of the Just Right Media uploaded a few days ago, that I am sending out for what they are worth, especially Sorman's essays in this year one of the Wuhan-virus.

When in President Nixon’s first term (1968-72) the diplomatic initiative was secretly launched to recognize Communist China, the objective was to seize the geopolitical advantage of the split between Beijing and Moscow in the height of the Cold War struggle between the West and the East.

But that geostrategic move executed by Nixon-Kissinger morphed into a full-blown appeasement of the Maoist gangster regime that began with the end of the Cold War.

Deng Xiaoping who eventually succeeded China's so-called Great Helmsman, Mao Zedong, as the main architect of China’s opening to the West and as the chief power wielder in Beijing was not a Jeffersonian liberal democrat.

Deng was as much of a ruthless murderer as was Mao. The Tiananmen Square massacre of students demanding freedom in June 1989 under orders from Deng should have been taken in the West as a warning of what Communism meant for the Chinese people and the rest of the world.

For my generation coming of age in the sixties and seventies in the East during the Vietnam War, China under Mao was held up as an inspiring model of revolution and progress by our elders.

In India the left-wing intellectuals, including those in the Congress party of Mahatma Gandhi and Nehru, were enthralled since the Bolshevik revolution by Marxism and Leninism, and in Bengal this adulation of Marxism swung to the extreme with the embrace of Maoism.

In Pakistan, the military dictator Ayub Khan made a strategic pact with the Chinese Communists following the Indo-China war of 1962. It was simply another version of “my enemy’s enemy is my friend.” And that pact subsequently blossomed under Ayub Khan’s successors, especially Zulfikar Ali Bhutto, in turning Pakistan into a full-fledged junior partner of Beijing’s ambition in southwest and central Asia. It was this partnership that provided the secret gateway to Kissinger’s back and forth between Washington and Beijing via Islamabad during 1970-71 in his preparation for Nixon’s famous journey to Beijing in February 1972 and the meeting with Mao.

I recall this past half-century in the midst of the Wuhan-virus pandemonium, since as a teenager I and my peers were mesmerized by what was happening right before our eyes and how we found our elders occupied with endless discussions on the intricacies of these events. I recall moving in those years between Calcutta visiting my grandparents and relatives during holidays, and returning to school in Chittagong in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) and caught up in the political fever raging then of hearing politicians of all stripes raising slogans cheering Chairman Mao as “our” Chairman and “our” Leader regardless of whether the cheering was done in India or in Pakistan. The Red Book of Mao was everywhere, and like everyone else I, too, had my copy all marked up and well thumbed.

Then in 1971 came war that led to the break-up of Pakistan preceded by genocide in Bangladesh by the Pakistan army and its collaborators. And Mao’s China was in full-throttled support of the Pakistani military dictator, Yahya Khan, and his criminal gangster army that unleashed the massacre of the civilian population in Bangladesh; and yet the virus of Maoism was so deeply embedded in the bloodstream of the left-wing intellectuals across South Asia that Communist China remained for them an inspiring model for revolution in third world agrarian societies. Instead, as good Marxists and Communists and Lenin’s “useful idiots”, they directed their rage not on Maoist perfidy but frothed and denounced American imperialism for the killing fields in Bangladesh and later Cambodia.

I was among those fortunate to flee the devastations of those years and find refuge and home in Canada. And from here I watched the same Maoist criminals in Beijing supporting the Khmer Rouge under Pol Pot unleash a worse, if there can be a worse when it comes to genocides, massacre in Cambodia turning that country into a killing field in 1975.

But again, to the intellectuals on the left everywhere, including the West, Communist China remained an inspiring model. As an undergraduate in U. of Toronto I found myself in the study of comparative politics and economics having to read about China, about Maoism, and acquire a small library of my own of books on Chinese history, politics and culture. China has continued to have a beguiling influence upon the West and, unlike a more clear-eyed perspective on the former Soviet Union since the Iron Curtain descended dividing Europe in 1946, the West has remained infatuated with China.

In his memoirs of the White House years Kissinger recalls his almost undisguised excitement in heading to China on his secret mission. The pages he devoted to Mao in the first volume of his 2-volume memoir of the years in the White House and as Secretary of State provide one of the more intriguing inside account of those in the West who romanticized the politics of the Chinese Communists from the outside. It began with Edgar Snow, the American journalist, reporting on Mao and his peasant army during the Long March in the 1930s and has continued right into the present.

And as we now, I hope, fully comprehend both the recent past and present, what began as “triangular diplomacy” in Nixon-Kissinger’s vocabulary of opening to Communist China turned in the post-Cold War years into a sell-out. This sell-out by the West, which was engineered by the United States and seized upon by the West in general with the prodding of the Globalists in the UN, as President Trump has had the courage to openly describe it, became the largest theft or plunder in modern history by the Beijing gangsters of resources and markets of North America and Europe. Moreover, this grand theft could only occur with the complicity of Western political leaders and business oligarchs.

In retrospect, what was needed after the collapse of the Soviet Union was a new resolve by the United States to engage in a revised version of the containment policy, in principle similar to the one deployed against the Soviet Union, directed against Communist China. At a minimum, a prudent policy of containment would have kept the Beijing gangsters at some distance and not fed the delusion that the West would ease the transition of Communist China into a relatively open society, and which would be headed in the promising direction of some sort of representative democracy.

The coronavirus pandemic has come late, but nevertheless it is a belated wake-up call for the West to distance itself from the Beijing gangsters and reverse the sell-out to Communist China. A hard-headed realism is urgently needed, which realigns the West strategically to bring about the collapse of Communism in China and liberation of the Chinese people from the clutches of the Beijing gangsters.

If this is not done soon, then the rapid diminution of the West brought about by the combined forces of Chinese Communism and Islamism under the banner of Globalism will only be the prelude to the suffocation of freedom and liberal democracy in what remains of the now enfeebled West.

[link removed] <[link removed]>

[link removed] <[link removed]>

[link removed] <[link removed]>

Salim



-=-=-
Peoples Party of Canada London North Centre EDA - Canada
This email was sent to [email protected] To stop receiving emails: [link removed]
-=-=-

Created with NationBuilder - [link removed]
Screenshot of the email generated on import

Message Analysis