negating non-intervention

[Michael Pollak]

On Mon, 1 Jan 2001, Yoshie Furuhashi wrote:

> *****   Since 1994, the Clinton administration's "China Policy" has
> gradually revealed clear political orientation, namely engagement and
> enlargement, more simply referred to as a policy of engagement.<15>

Yes, exactly.  My whole worry was that these people talked like that's the
one thing they wanted to change.  But you're probably right and my worry
is groundless.  Capitalist self-interest will count for much more than any
such so-called "ideas."  As I now recall, Clinton peddled a similar
version from the liberal side when he was campaigning, about how the
Republicans had backbone in dealing with China, something to do with the
butchers of Tiennamen Square, and that sure got dropped instantly once he
was in power.  So for better and for worse we'll probably have exactly the
same foreign policy we would have had if they'd counted the votes.  More
than likely Gore, facing a Congress like this and an even worse one in two
years, would probably have let the missle system keep on going as well.

Thanks for the reality check.

Michael

__________________________________________________________________________
Michael Pollak................New York City..............mpollak at panix.com