An Adult in the Room

For John, BLUF:  When I knew Dr Condoleezza Rice she was an Intern on the Joint Staff and someone with solid ideas and an ability to communicate.  She moved on to be the National Security Advisor and then Secretary of State.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The New Axis of Evil: Condoleezza Rice on War in Israel and a Changed World

Here is the sub-headline:

The former secretary of state says an attack on Israel is an attack on America.

From The Free Press, by Interviewer Bari Weiss, 13 October 2023.

Here is Secretary Rices response to one of Reporter Bari Weiss' questions:

If you really think the world is better off with Saddam Hussein murdering a million people and putting them in mass graves, be my guest.  If you really think it was a better Afghanistan when women were beaten in stadiums, given to the Taliban by the UN, when girls and women couldn’t go to school, well be my guest.  The United States is not a perfect power.  There’s no such thing.  But I would argue that on balance, the United States has been a force for stability in the world, that a lot of what we think of as a stable international system, not to mention a prosperous one, is because the United States has been willing to step up and to try to be the provider of a security commons, the provider of an economic commons—sometimes with not much benefit to ourselves.  When I hear this, I think, “Do you really think the world is better with the United States stepping back?”  Well, take a look out of your window at Vladimir Putin.  Take a look out of your window at Hamas.  Take a look out of your window at what Xi Jinping is doing in the South China Sea or in Taiwan.  If you really want the United States to step back, that’s what you’re going to get.

Yes, America is not perfect.  I come from segregated Birmingham, Alabama.  I was a little girl at a time when you could not go to a movie theater or to a restaurant.  Speaking of terrorism, I had a classmate killed in the 16th Street bombing of that church in Birmingham in September of 1963.  I don’t look at the United States through rose-colored glasses, but I can tell you there is no country like it on the face of the earth with this kind of power and this kind of capability that has tried—sometimes a little bit clumsily, sometimes a little bit failingly—to provide for a more prosperous, more democratic, and safer world.

I believe that Americans carry simultaneously in their heads two very different thoughts.  One is, “Haven’t we done enough? We defeated the Soviet Union.  We unified Germany.  We liberated Eastern Europe.  We were able to defeat at least al-Qaeda.  Haven’t we done enough?  Can’t somebody else do it?”  I understand that sense of exhaustion.  On the other hand, other Americans carry in their heads, “I can’t watch Syrian babies choke on nerve gas.  I can’t watch the massacre of the people in Sderot.  I can’t watch as a large country decides to extinguish its smaller neighbor to rebuild an empire.”  And then Americans say, “If not us, then who?”  And under those circumstances, Americans can be led to take this burden, if you want to call it that, or this obligation, to be a part of a more stable world.  I’m just looking for American leaders who are willing to say that.

As Law Professor Glenn Reynolds would say, "Read the whole thibg."

Regards  —  Cliff

Selling Out to WHO?

For John, BLUF:  We must be careful of our Federal Government giving away authority to supra-national organizations, especially ones dominated by nations with different views on governance, freedom and social organization.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Biden Seeks New Unilateral Powers for WHO Chief to Declare Public Health Emergencies

From Epoch Times, by Commentator Mark Tapscott, 17 May 2022.

Here is the lede plus four:

President Joe Biden’s administration is pushing amendments to the World Health Organization’s (WHO) governing regulations to give Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus unilateral authority to declare a public health emergency in any nation based on whatever evidence he chooses.

The proposed U.S. amendments were forwarded to the WHO in January for consideration next week by the UN’s 75th World Health Assembly in Geneva, Switzerland.

In a January 26 letter to a virtual meeting of WHO’s executive board, Loyce Pace, Assistant Secretary for Global Affairs of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) described “the importance of equity and equitable access to medical countermeasures and the negative impacts of misinformation and disinformation related to the pandemic.  We agree that we must all do better.

“The United States led an inclusive and transparent process to develop this decision, as we are mindful that updating and modernizing the [International Health Regulations] IHR are critical to ensuring the world is better prepared for and can respond to, the next pandemic.”

I liked the "inclusive and transparent" words regarding the process.  I didn't feel included and it didn't seem transparent.  I didn't notice it in the newspapers I read.  In fact, the little mention I saw was in what I might consider fring publications.  Is this typical of the current Administration.

And, I am not too keen on giving more power to WHO, or to even national level parts of the administrative state.  If COVID taught us anything it should have been that larger governmental organizations sometimes get it wrong.  The corrolary is that larger governmental organizations will not just resist alternative views, but actively work to suppress alternative views.  Such actions are not "science".

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

The World Is Improving

For John, BLUF:  Most of human existence has been a history of poverty and degregation.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Glenn Reynolds:  Actually, things are pretty good

Here is the sub-headline:

Free markets and free inquiry have changed the historic 'norms' of poverty and violence.

From USA Today, by Law Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds, 21 December 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

Amid stories of terrorism, government incompetence and corruption, mass migration and economic stagnation, there’s actually some good news:  Global poverty has fallen below 10% for the first time ever.

That’s right:  A new study by the World Bank estimates that less than 10% of the world’s population is living in what it calls poverty — an income of less than $1.90 per day.  Twenty-five years ago, over a third of the global population was living on less.  The biggest changes have come in East Asia and around the Pacific, but even sub-Saharan Africa, the worst place in the world for incomes, has improved significantly, with poverty dropping from 56% to an estimated 35.2% since 1990.

For most of human history, of course, extreme poverty was the norm.  People worked hard to get — if they were lucky — three meals a day and clothes on their backs.  Money was scarce, possessions were few, leisure existed only when all the work was done, which was seldom, and capital for investment was scarce — as were things to invest in.

And yet, this progress is not locked in.  The trust in a society is very important to its success.  We should want to be a "high trust" society.  It doesn't help when we call each other names.

At this Christmas Season it would be good for all of us to be men (and women) of good will.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

China Trade War

For John, BLUF:  China has tried to maximize its own economy by snookering other nations.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

China has already lost the trade war.  Here's why

From Fox News , by Ms Helen Raleigh, 22 September 2019.

Here is the lede plus two:

China already lost in the trade war with the U.S.  Although you will never hear Chinese authorities, especially President Xi Jinping, admit it as such, the evidence is everywhere and only becoming more compelling by the day.

Reuters recently reported that based on the Chinese government's own data, China's economic slowdown has worsened in August, with "growth in industrial production is at its weakest in 17-1/2 years amid spreading pain from a trade war with the United States and softening domestic demand.  Retail sales and investment gauges worsened too."  Despite such poor readings, Premier Li Keqiang insists that China is still on track to achieve 6 to 6.5 per cent growth rate this year.

Given the Chinese government's tendency to present a rosier economic picture to satisfy political goals, most China watchers believe that Li's statement was an about-face, and that the actual economic situation is much worse.

It is about farm imports, and in particular, pigs.

Second, China's own hog industry is experiencing the worst African swine fever in decades.  The government has been criticized for its ineffective measures to stamp out the epidemic.  It is estimated that China could lose up to 50 percent of its pig population by the end of 2019.  Pork prices have spiked by more than 46 percent so far, and some experts predict the price increase may be over 80 percent by next year.  This spike has pushed prices for other types of meat higher as well, increasing inflation pressure to the overall economy.  This has hindered Chinese consumers' willingness and capacity to spend in other areas.  Given the pivotal role pork plays in the Chinese diet, the country could potentially experience social unrest if the pork price continues to skyrocket while the supply continues to be sparse.

China exempted U.S. farm products, including soybean and pork, from additional tariffs, effective Sept. 17.  This announcement was seen widely as a goodwill gesture ahead of the October trade talks between U.S. and China.  But this seems to be a desperate, self-serving measure, because all the other pork exporting countries combined couldn't fill China's supply shortage.  Simply put, China has a need of pork from the U.S., and its suspension from additional tariffs is, in essence, a tactical and indirect acknowledgment that it won’t be able to sustain this trade fight for much longer.

And, it isn't a flash in the pan.  The trade war started with China and finally a US President stood up.

If China had hoped that it could simply wait until Trump loses the 2020 presidential election to get out of the trade war, it has to think again.   At the most recent Democrat presidential debate, not a single candidate proposed to remove the trade tariffs Trump imposed on China.  So even if Trump loses, China likely would not get someone friendlier in the White House.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Looking at Illegal Immigration Globally

For John, BLUF:  The Media still doesn't realize that Mr Trump was just the one to fill the gap and that gap is world wide.  We are seeing a revolt of the hoi-polloi.  The coastal elites don't get it.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Border Crisis

And it is a crisis, and not just in the Southwest of the United States.  It is a crisis in Europe.  It is a crisis in South America, with a million Venezuelans having gone to Columbia.  Then there is Central America, which is emptying out as people head for the United States.  It is a crisis in Asia, including Afghanistan/Pakistan, Burma/Bangledesh and China/North Korea.  The Chinese have even moved army troops up to its border with North Korea.  One assumes they fear economic collapse on top of serious human rights violations.

This piece is from PJ Media, by Richard Fernandez (of the The Belmont Club), 24 June 2018.

Here is the lede plus four:

On both sides of the Atlantic borders have become a big issue in the guise of the equivalent question of whether a country can restrict the entry of migrants to numbers the electorate regards as sustainable.

In the US the family impact of arresting illegal aliens has intensified political hostility nearly to the point of physical conflict.  The New York Times sadly notes Trump supporters no longer even listen to the media's frequent denunciations of the incumbent president.  How can they stand him?  "This includes portions of the wealthy college-educated people in swing counties ... and the endless stream of tough cable news coverage and bad headlines about Mr. Trump only galvanizes them further."

Both sides have dug in along some gigantic political Western Front.  The NYT argued it was Trump's failure to follow the unofficial policy that immigration law was best humanely ignored or at least, as Kevin Jennings former assistant deputy secretary of Education under President Obama argued in the LA Times, transcended, that caused the crisis.

Jennings wrote "coming here 'illegally' did not even exist as a concept" until a hundred years ago.  With opinion so divided it is not surprising that White House press secretary Sarah Sanders "was booted from a Virginia restaurant because she works for President Donald Trump, the latest administration official to experience a brusque reception in a public setting."  Nor will she likely be the last.  Mother Jones tweeted:  "Trump officials can no longer eat out in peace."

In Europe things are if anything worse.  A growing coalition of parties demanding control over national boundaries was threatening the future of the European Union itself -- or at least the chancellorship of Angela Merkel.  "European Union leaders gather in Brussels on Sunday in an attempt to bridge their deep divisions over migration, an issue that has been splitting them for years and now poses a fresh threat to German Chancellor Angela Merkel."

For those who think the border crisis is just about President Trump, the fact is, it isn't.

The author continues:

The fact that borders have become an issue at all after decades of assurance the circle could be squared is perhaps the most significant fact of all.  For years the bipartisan consensus was to politely pretend it could all be worked out.  As the New York Times wrote, "for more than a decade ... seasonal spikes in unauthorized border crossings had bedeviled American presidents in both political parties, prompting them to cast about for increasingly aggressive ways to discourage migrants from making the trek.  Yet for George W. Bush and Barack Obama, the idea of crying children torn from their parents’ arms was simply too inhumane — and too politically perilous — to embrace as policy."

The problem is, it is too politically perilous, across the globe, to no longer work this issue.

If you want some background, read the 1973 novel by Frenchman Jean Raspail, The Camp of the Saints, summarized here.  By the way, the very corrupt Southern Poverty Law Center has condemned the book.  All the more reason to read it.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Things Getting Better

For John, BLUF:  The world is a better place than it was when we were born..  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

World Bank:  'extreme poverty' to fall below 10% of world population for first time

Here is the sub-headline:

It projects 702 million people or 9.6% of the world’s population will be living in extreme poverty in 2015, down from 902 million people or 12.8% in 2012

From The Guardian, via Reuters, 4 Oct 2018.

Here is the lede plus one:

The number of people living in extreme poverty is likely to fall for the first time below 10% of the world’s population in 2015, the World Bank said on Sunday as it revised its benchmark for measuring the problem.

“This is the best story in the world today,” said World Bank president Jim Yong Kim.  “These projections show us that we are the first generation in human history that can end extreme poverty.”

Extreme poverty has long been defined as living on or below $1.25 a day, but the World Bank’s adjustment now sets the poverty line at $1.90 a day.

The Bank said the change reflects new data on differences in the cost of living across countries, while preserving the real purchasing power of the previous yardstick.

So, is this due to the spread of Socialism, including Bolivarian Socialism and juche or due to various forms of capitalism, or due to the secret spread of some third approach?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

A Pole Gets Three Wishes

For John, BLUF:  There are some deep seated hatreds in Eurasia.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

I had forgotten this joke, until I just saw it.

A Polish man finds a genie in a bottle, one decades-old joke goes. The genie offers him three wishes.

The Pole says, “I want the Chinese to invade Poland and then go back to China.”

So it happens.

For his next wish, the Pole also asks for the Chinese to invade Poland and then go home.

So it happens.

For his third wish, the Pole again asks for the Chinese to invade Poland and go home.

“I gave you three wishes,” the genie cries. “Why did you ask for the Chinese to invade Poland and then go home three times?”

“Because they had to march across Russia six times.”

Regards  —  Cliff