>Anybody besides me noticed Rumsfeld's increasing hostility to
>China?
>
>What the hell is he up to? Why?
>
>I thought our corporations wanted to do business with China.
>It doesn't seem to be urged by our military.
>
>So, why Rumsfeld's hostility? It doesn't seem to me to serve
>any US purpose. Is there some deeper purpose I'm missing?
Seems to me to be one of those rare fissures in the ruling class, with the hardline right into bashing China while the mainstream wants to do business. It's going to be very interesting to see if the big boys can rein in the lunatics.
Meanwhile, Richard Perle is turning up the Euro-bashing.
Doug
----
Financial Times - June 5, 2001
NMD hawk to lead US defence advisory panel By Peter Spiegel in Washington
An outspoken advocate of a US National Missile Defence system and harsh critic of European security policies is to lead a Pentagon advisory panel that could play a growing role in the Bush administration's foreign policy decision-making.
Richard Perle, a top Pentagon official under former President Ronald Reagan, will be named head of the Defence Policy Board.
In the past, the board - made up largely of private sector experts - has had limited influence on Defence Department policy.
But Mr Perle (pictured above) has told associates its profile will be raised and it will have regular contact with Donald Rumsfeld, US defence secretary and a Perle ally.
The appointment emerged as Mr Rumsfeld began a week-long European tour that includes a meeting with Nato defence ministers on Thursday and Friday, where the National Missile Defence (NMD) programme is expected to be a key issue.
Mr Rumsfeld was prepared to raise NMD "as part of a larger discussion about the way the administration sees the international environment growing", a senior defence official said.
Mr Rumsfeld was in Turkey on Monday, where he warned that Chinese and other foreign aid to Iraq was helping to improve Saddam Hussein's air defences, raising the risk that US and British planes enforcing a northern no-fly zone will be shot down.
Mr Perle, a fellow of right-wing think tank the American Enterprise Institute and adviser to the Bush election campaign, has been one of the most ardent critics of European opposition to NMD, arguing that Nato allies should have little input into domestic national security decisions.
"If the Europeans asked us not to defend ourselves, while asking us to defend them, [that] simply is unsustainable," Mr Perle said last month at a conference on Nato. "We are going to proceed with the missile defence and either they can join us in that endeavour or they can sit on the sidelines and complain about it."
He has also criticised the stance of Tony Blair, British prime minister, on the defence shield, saying Mr Blair's wait-and-see attitude was "wishy-washy" and "dodging the issue".
Mr Perle has advocated a shift in the US's role in Nato, indicating he supported some American disengagement, particularly if Europeans proceeded with their own defence force independent of Nato.
"The sense of liberation [in Europe] because they no longer need us is a two-way street," he said last month. "We no longer need them in the way that we once did. They are no longer vital to the defence of our interests in the world."
He has reserved particular criticism for France, which he said was less important to US security now that there was no threat from the east.
"Maybe it's time for us to stop indulging the French," he said. "My solution to Nato enlargement is - by all means let's bring in some new members, and if we lose some old ones, I've got a candidate."