US condemns UN referendum in Taiwan

[myata]

So, democratic referendum on UN membership in a democratic state what has existed, on its own, without generous hand outs and interventions, for some 60 years, is wrong (Reuters story)?

Separation of Kosovo, equally opposed by Serbia and some UNSC members, which never existed as a country, is right?

Then, separation of some fringe areas in the new nations of the former Soviet Union, also based on their own local referendums, is wrong again?

Can anybody see the logic in this? Other than, of course, the obvious, might makes right. There goes moral leadership and human rights championship of the world.

P.S> no I'm not an idealist and understand the challenges of dealing with the worlds greatest aspiring power. However, we're talking about democratic will of people - the holy grail of US's recent quest on this planet, for which cities were bombed and countless people have perished. What happened? Why all of a sudden, even a muffled statement to the extent that e.g. "it's not helpful for stability in the region but it's within democratic power of people to exercise their choice", is so hard to come by?

Edited September 15, 2007 by myata

[bush_cheney2004]

So, democratic referendum on UN membership in a democratic state what has existed, on its own, without generous hand outs and interventions, for some 60 years, is wrong (Reuters story)?

Guess again....Taiwan received plenty of American foreign aid in the 1950's and 1960's because of the Cold War.

[myata]

And I do not doubt they did. Yet they've been able to stand on their own, by and large. Anyways, it does not answer the main question, about America's very selective approach to advancing the democracy in the world. In some places, they are ready to bomb and burn against all odds (Vietnam, Iraq); in others, like Taiwan, with already established and functioning democracy, even a few words of, not even encouragement, simply acknowledgement of democratic principle, is not appropriate. Go figure.

[bush_cheney2004]

And I do not doubt they did. Yet they've been able to stand on their own, by and large. Anyways, it does not answer the main question, about America's very selective approach to advancing the democracy in the world. In some places, they are ready to bomb and burn against all odds (Vietnam, Iraq); in others, like Taiwan, with already established and functioning democracy, even a few words of, not even encouragement, simply acknowledgement of democratic principle, is not appropriate. Go figure.

It is completely appropriate, because the purpose and analysis is far more complex than simple slogans and principles. Taiwan has certainly not stood on its own....shall it pretend otherwise, rejecting US ("One China") interests while happily accepting aid and support from Uncle Sam all these years?

Taiwan's "democracy":

http://www.antiwar.com/chu/chu-col.html

[myata]

I suspected that the analysis would be very complex and so on, but it should be possible to at least shed some light on their way of thinking?

Unless, of course, the analysis is much more simple. The US does not really care about "democracy" thing. What they always need is pawns and allies to advance their interests here and there. So when democracies behave in the way which is inconvenient, or does not align with their interests, the democratic fanfare goes silent. I hate to think that this is the real "principle" in their foreign policies, but it appears as one logical explanation.

BTW I have no idea what this anti-war site is, do you?

[Guest American Woman]

...it does not answer the main question, about America's very selective approach to advancing the democracy in the world. In some places, they are ready to bomb and burn against all odds (Vietnam, Iraq); in others, like Taiwan, with already established and functioning democracy, even a few words of, not even encouragement, simply acknowledgement of democratic principle, is not appropriate. Go figure.

America does not advance democracy in the world. America looks out for America. Iraq is about our needs-- plainly put, oil. We got involved in Vietnam, which was already in conflict before our involvement, because of the fear of the spread of communisim, which was about us-- not the Vietnamese. Furthermore, it wasn't "against all odds." The U.S. went into these places with the idea that they would be a more powerful force. So while America may give the illusion that it "advances democracy in the world," it doesn't. In fact, it's interfered in democracies when the leaders haven't met with our approval (ie: our interests).

[bush_cheney2004]

BTW I have no idea what this anti-war site is, do you?

The purpose of posting the link to that site was to illustrate just how far off base is any assertion that Taiwan is a "democracy", or has "stood on its own" for 60 years.

Democracy is the cover story for economic interests, and it is not just the United States using it. Canada does the exact same thing on a smaller scale for its own interests (e.g Haiti, East Timor, UN/NATO interventions, mining, First Nations, etc.), favoring the "human rights" angle, every bit as misleading. There is no need to be naive about such things, and I have not been shy about not only admitting this reality, but demonstrating the consistency throughout American history. Those who maintain the fantasy of "Democracy's Champion" should disabuse themselves of any such notion, or at least recognize that any gains in democracy, real or imagined", are directly related to economic and geopolitical interests.

Technically, the US is not a "democracy"....it is a constitutional republic with democratic principles (in theory). America has no obligation to live up to the false expectations of others, and every obligation to act in self interest.

[Riverwind]

However, we're talking about democratic will of people - the holy grail of US's recent quest on this planet, for which cities were bombed and countless people have perished. What happened? Why all of a sudden, even a muffled statement to the extent that e.g. "it's not helpful for stability in the region but it's within democratic power of people to exercise their choice", is so hard to come by?

Taiwan is collateral damage. China's obsession with Taiwan is quite rediculous and the US has pledged to defend Taiwan in the face of agression by China. In return, the US expects Taiwan to play along with the charade that keeps the mad dog living next door quiet. Provoking China is not in the interest of Taiwan or the US right now.

[geoffrey]

Riverwind is spot on above. It's about not provoking China.

The US is far more concerned with the interests of the Taiwanese than those in Kosovo.

[myata]

America has no obligation to live up to the false expectations of others, and every obligation to act in self interest.

No, it's not expectations of others, its the standard they themselves proclaim at every corner. If I didn't hear those preachings of Universal Good and so on at every occasion and without such, I'd be perfectly OK with everybody's right to look after their interests - in less violent ways, perhaps?

[bush_cheney2004]

No, it's not expectations of others, its the standard they themselves proclaim at every corner. If I didn't hear those preachings of Universal Good and so on at every occasion and without such, I'd be perfectly OK with everybody's right to look after their interests - in less violent ways, perhaps?

Or not....give us a call when your own nation figures out how to live up to "proclaimed" expectations. America doesn't owe anybody compliance with the "standard", wherever professed, and especially at the hapless United Nations.

[jbg]

Can anybody see the logic in this? Other than, of course, the obvious, might makes right. There goes moral leadership and human rights championship of the world.

I agree with you strongly on this one. Why don't you support Israel?

[jbg]

Taiwan is collateral damage. China's obsession with Taiwan is quite rediculous and the US has pledged to defend Taiwan in the face of agression by China. In return, the US expects Taiwan to play along with the charade that keeps the mad dog living next door quiet. Provoking China is not in the interest of Taiwan or the US right now.

I'd like to see the Chinese system dead.

[kuzadd]

It is completely appropriate, because the purpose and analysis is far more complex than simple slogans and principles. Taiwan has certainly not stood on its own....shall it pretend otherwise, rejecting US ("One China") interests while happily accepting aid and support from Uncle Sam all these years?

Taiwan's "democracy":

http://www.antiwar.com/chu/chu-col.html

Hmmm, so the US is using Taiwan, or at least, trying to keep them on hand, to be used as a destabilizing force in/against China, if necessary?

[kuzadd]

America does not advance democracy in the world. America looks out for America. Iraq is about our needs-- plainly put, oil. In fact, it's interfered in democracies when the leaders haven't met with our approval (ie: our interests).

Aaah, succinct summary of facts!

I recall saying this endlessly to Canadians who think "America is our friend"

my reply, America, the country has no friends , only interests, stop being so naive.

Now the American people? Another story, I know some great ones and count them to be my friends!

[jbg]

Aaah, succinct summary of facts!

I recall saying this endlessly to Canadians who think "America is our friend"

my reply, America, the country has no friends , only interests, stop being so naive.

Now the American people? Another story, I know some great ones and count them to be my friends!

Canada, Australia and UK are special cases, given the commonality of language and culture. Note, we sacrificed a lot of people in WW I (where we were not attacked) to save the British Empire from defeat.

[myata]

America doesn't owe anybody compliance with the "standard", wherever professed, and especially at the hapless United Nations.

If one doesn't comply with their own standard, which btw they never forget to preach to anybody and anything whether they want to hear it or not, there's only two logical possibilities: 1) an irresponsible babbler, not worth taking seriously; or 2) a cynical manipulator bent on extending their will through any means possible.

Either one is hardly a respectable position.

[myata]

I agree with you strongly on this one. Why don't you support Israel?

I do support Israel as far as it can achieve peaceful existence with its neighbours in the mutually agreed borders.

At issue of this topic, however is the principle to support of legitimate democratic processes. Not unquestionable support for something

legitimacy of which is can be considered highly questionable.

[ScottSA]

Aaah, succinct summary of facts!

I recall saying this endlessly to Canadians who think "America is our friend"

my reply, America, the country has no friends , only interests, stop being so naive.

Now the American people? Another story, I know some great ones and count them to be my friends!

America is our freind. It's in America's best interest to be our freind, and there's nothing wrong with that motivation; the US president's job, contrary to what passes for leftist "thought," is not to hold hands with all the "nations" within reach and sing kumbaya; it's to work for the betterment of the US. But that doesn't mean that the practical effect of that freindship is devalued. If we suffered an international disaster, America would be here fixing it a whole lot quicker than the Cubans or Palestinians, giving you a chance to snivel that they're trying to steal our logs or some such.

[kuzadd]

America is our freind. It's in America's best interest to be our freind, and there's nothing wrong with that motivation; the US president's job, contrary to what passes for leftist "thought," is not to hold hands with all the "nations" within reach and sing kumbaya; it's to work for the betterment of the US. But that doesn't mean that the practical effect of that freindship is devalued. If we suffered an international disaster, America would be here fixing it a whole lot quicker than the Cubans or Palestinians, giving you a chance to snivel that they're trying to steal our logs or some such.

LOL!!!

Yah, liked the quickly fixed New Orleans eh?!!!!

naive

[ScottSA]

LOL!!!

Yah, liked the quickly fixed New Orleans eh?!!!!

naive

Kinda like that I guess. I didn't say they have magical powers and could wave a wand with a good flick of the left hand and put all to rights again in an instance. Unfortunately they're constrained by physical reality just like us. I said that if there is a disaster in canada, you can bet they'll be the first one on our doorsteps asking us what they can do to help. Is there a point to this outburst?

[bush_cheney2004]

If one doesn't comply with their own standard, which btw they never forget to preach to anybody and anything whether they want to hear it or not, there's only two logical possibilities: 1) an irresponsible babbler, not worth taking seriously; or 2) a cynical manipulator bent on extending their will through any means possible.

Either one is hardly a respectable position.

Methinks you are ignoring the fact that the country was founded by booting your king in the ass (old standard) for "freedom" and "liberty" while maintaining slave labor for almost the next 90 years (new standard). "Respectability" (e.g. "being loved") is a far more cherished notion in Canada, where I might add that government falls way short of the "advertised standard", domestically and internationally as well. If you want to talk about reality based cyncism, that is closer to the mark and far more relevant to current circumstances as well as American history. "Standards" change to suit such circumstances.

Edited September 17, 2007 by bush_cheney2004

[myata]

Whatever the faults of this country, there's only one nation on this planet and at this time, that is an unquestionable leader in producing democratic rhethoric, by weight, volume or any parameter and whether such teachings were requested or not (but mostly the latter).

Methinks it's that propensity to preach and profess that creates certain misunderstanding, and not practical cynicism or cynical practicism, whatever you want call it, per se. When British did their business at the time of empire, it was for the queen, empire and glory. With the US, same things are done, of course, for the universal good. Does it have something to do with its protestant origins, where things (especially, uglier ones) simply cannot be called by their proper names, but should be expressed in terms of piety and universal goodness?

[Guest American Woman]

I recall saying this endlessly to Canadians who think "America is our friend"

my reply, America, the country has no friends , only interests, stop being so naive.

Do you feel this is true of every nation, or only America? In other words, do other nations have friends? Does Canada have friends? And when other nations act on our behalf, to help us out, if they're not doing it because they are our friend, are they doing it only in their own interest?

[ScottSA]

Do you feel this is true of every nation, or only America? In other words, do other nations have friends? Does Canada have friends? And when other nations act on our behalf, to help us out, if they're not doing it because they are our friend, are they doing it only in their own interest?

I assume that's a rhetorical question for kuzzad, so I don't feel bad intruding. The problem the American left doesn't seem to 'get' is that in waltzing around with upside down flags in pink leotards claiming you speak for all Americans is that it creates a twofold effect:

First, it emboldens your enemies; and by that I mean your REAL enemies, the ones in Dearborn Michigan, the ones in Pakistani caves, and the ones in Iraq. The ones who are trying to kill you, and the more the better. It gives the impression that you are a divided nation and therefore a weak nation. Remember, these people don't understand the very concept of democracy or free speech, so they interpret what you say within a paradigm they understand. Also remember that they wanted to kill you long before Bush took power.

The second effect is that it allows the sloppy thinkers of the left in other countries to buy into the same sloganized arguments, but by virtue of being sloppy thinkers they create a dichotomy in their mind that involves an 'us' and 'them' quite different from the 'us' and 'them' you are thinking of. They simple lump you all into an amorphous concept of "Americans." It's rampant in Europe and hardly unknown here in Canada.

Take a moment to watch the entire video I posted in this forum under another thread. That's Europe. That's their idea of "freedom." It's not the same as yours. You'll be shocked at just how lucky you are as an American.