The most common dictionary definition of terrorism is: "The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims." So it actually covers a whole bunch of activities, not just what we have come to believe as "acts of terrorism" such as bombing, and other forms of indiscriminate killing of people. Using the dictionary definition, we can identify acts committed by individuals or groups going back since the dawn of history! Certainly the ancients committed acts of terrorism, as we call it today and simply thought of it as an expedient means to an end. But the word or the term "terrorism" itself didn't appear until 1794 in France, during the so-called "Reign of Terror" when the French coined the word terrorisme. In 1869 a Russian revolutionary by the name of Sergey Nechayev formed a group which he named "People's Retribution" and called the members' violent activities as acts of "terrorism." But it took another half a century or so before the terms terrorist and terrorism became firmly established in our lexicon.
It started with persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Initially it was just scattered street assaults by the "brown shirts" which led to more violent attacks and eventual expulsion of German Jews. The Nazis "allowed" Jews to leave Germany if they chose to go to Palestine. They did not allow the Jews to go elsewhere in Europe or the United States, but were willing to let them go to Palestine. The British controlled Palestine at the time and they accepted Jews who were being expelled from Germany. Because, after all, Palestine was considered to be the biblical/historical homeland of Jews. Before long, there were a quarter of a million Jews in Palestine! The Jews built new settlements and overall were much more capable of building and maintaining modern infrastructure. Parts of Palestine where Jews settled were a vast improvement over much of the rest of Palestine, which appeared to be still struggling with modernity and didn't seem to have changed since biblical times. It didn't take long before the Arab population in Palestine turned against the newly arrived Jews in resentment.
Since the British were supportive of the Jewish settlement in Palestine at the time, the Arabs rose up against the British and began a campaign of terror. This was the first instafada. It was the first time since Nechayev in Russia that the word terrorism received widespread use. The British, who were woefully undermanned at the time referred to the Arab Uprising as "terrorism" and the Arabs who participated in the uprising as "terrorists." It is ironic that today when we hear the word terrorism, we almost immediately associate it with Arab or Islamic Terrorists, the very name that the British began using almost a century ago! But then it isn't all that surprising. Since that time, all through the 20th Century, it was the various Arab groups that carried out terror acts and names like Black September Group and PLO, etc., became well known to average person. Today, of course, it is ISIS/ISIL, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, and a few more!
The leader of the Arab Uprising, the Arab Terrorist movement, was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini. He was initially appointed to that position by the British. But when Jewish migration to Palestine grew, the Grand Mufti opposed it and started the uprising. The British beefed up their forces and eventually were able to subdue the Arab Uprising. It is interesting to note that the Israelis today use almost exactly the same tactics that the British used to quell the uprising. The British started bulldozing the homes of anyone supporting the terrorists and relocating the families. The Israelis are still doing it! The British built fences to separate the Arabs, the Israelis are doing the same thing!
The Grand Mufti escaped British capture. He first went to Syria, then on to Baghdad, once his welcome had worn out in Syria. He fled Baghdad when the British invaded Iraq, and ended up in Berlin. He met with Hitler and became good friends with Heinrich Himmler, the head of the SS! The Grand Mufti helped the Nazis by convincing Balkan Muslims to join the Nazi cause, enabling the Nazis to raise a division of Bosnian Muslim troops for an SS Division, the notorious 13th Waffen SS Division! There was a second, the 21st Waffen SS Division that was mostly made up of Albanian Muslims. There is no solid proof, but it is said that the Grand Mufti collaborated with Himmler on plans for the "final solution" for Jews, i.e., the use of gas ovens, poison showers, etc., for the extermination of Jews. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was not only an Arab Terrorist, but he was a Nazi as well! Somehow he managed to escape the Jews and everyone else and actually lived into the 1970s and died in Lebanon!
So, although the word "terrorist" did not begin with Arabs or Islam, it has became very closely associated with Arabs and the Muslim faith owing to the more recent "terror" activities, beginning with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who was, by all indications, a very evil man! However, there were many others, none Muslims, who carried out terror acts, Hitler, Stalin, and today Kim Jong Un of North Korea, just to name a few. But, ironically, it was a Muslim leader, the Grand Mufti of Palestine and his followers who gave birth to modern, popular usage of the term "terrorist." Therefore, as unfair as it may seem, today, the terms terrorist and Islamic terrorist go hand in hand!
Tuesday, June 28, 2016
Father of modern "Terrorism"
The most common dictionary definition of terrorism is: "The use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims." So it actually covers a whole bunch of activities, not just what we have come to believe as "acts of terrorism" such as bombing, and other forms of indiscriminate killing of people. Using the dictionary definition, we can identify acts committed by individuals or groups going back since the dawn of history! Certainly the ancients committed acts of terrorism, as we call it today and simply thought of it as an expedient means to an end. But the word or the term "terrorism" itself didn't appear until 1794 in France, during the so-called "Reign of Terror" when the French coined the word terrorisme. In 1869 a Russian revolutionary by the name of Sergey Nechayev formed a group which he named "People's Retribution" and called the members' violent activities as acts of "terrorism." But it took another half a century or so before the terms terrorist and terrorism became firmly established in our lexicon.
It started with persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Initially it was just scattered street assaults by the "brown shirts" which led to more violent attacks and eventual expulsion of German Jews. The Nazis "allowed" Jews to leave Germany if they chose to go to Palestine. They did not allow the Jews to go elsewhere in Europe or the United States, but were willing to let them go to Palestine. The British controlled Palestine at the time and they accepted Jews who were being expelled from Germany. Because, after all, Palestine was considered to be the biblical/historical homeland of Jews. Before long, there were a quarter of a million Jews in Palestine! The Jews built new settlements and overall were much more capable of building and maintaining modern infrastructure. Parts of Palestine where Jews settled were a vast improvement over much of the rest of Palestine, which appeared to be still struggling with modernity and didn't seem to have changed since biblical times. It didn't take long before the Arab population in Palestine turned against the newly arrived Jews in resentment.
Since the British were supportive of the Jewish settlement in Palestine at the time, the Arabs rose up against the British and began a campaign of terror. This was the first instafada. It was the first time since Nechayev in Russia that the word terrorism received widespread use. The British, who were woefully undermanned at the time referred to the Arab Uprising as "terrorism" and the Arabs who participated in the uprising as "terrorists." It is ironic that today when we hear the word terrorism, we almost immediately associate it with Arab or Islamic Terrorists, the very name that the British began using almost a century ago! But then it isn't all that surprising. Since that time, all through the 20th Century, it was the various Arab groups that carried out terror acts and names like Black September Group and PLO, etc., became well known to average person. Today, of course, it is ISIS/ISIL, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, and a few more!
The leader of the Arab Uprising, the Arab Terrorist movement, was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini. He was initially appointed to that position by the British. But when Jewish migration to Palestine grew, the Grand Mufti opposed it and started the uprising. The British beefed up their forces and eventually were able to subdue the Arab Uprising. It is interesting to note that the Israelis today use almost exactly the same tactics that the British used to quell the uprising. The British started bulldozing the homes of anyone supporting the terrorists and relocating the families. The Israelis are still doing it! The British built fences to separate the Arabs, the Israelis are doing the same thing!
The Grand Mufti escaped British capture. He first went to Syria, then on to Baghdad, once his welcome had worn out in Syria. He fled Baghdad when the British invaded Iraq, and ended up in Berlin. He met with Hitler and became good friends with Heinrich Himmler, the head of the SS! The Grand Mufti helped the Nazis by convincing Balkan Muslims to join the Nazi cause, enabling the Nazis to raise a division of Bosnian Muslim troops for an SS Division, the notorious 13th Waffen SS Division! There was a second, the 21st Waffen SS Division that was mostly made up of Albanian Muslims. There is no solid proof, but it is said that the Grand Mufti collaborated with Himmler on plans for the "final solution" for Jews, i.e., the use of gas ovens, poison showers, etc., for the extermination of Jews. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was not only an Arab Terrorist, but he was a Nazi as well! Somehow he managed to escape the Jews and everyone else and actually lived into the 1970s and died in Lebanon!
So, although the word "terrorist" did not begin with Arabs or Islam, it has became very closely associated with Arabs and the Muslim faith owing to the more recent "terror" activities, beginning with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who was, by all indications, a very evil man! However, there were many others, none Muslims, who carried out terror acts, Hitler, Stalin, and today Kim Jong Un of North Korea, just to name a few. But, ironically, it was a Muslim leader, the Grand Mufti of Palestine and his followers who gave birth to modern, popular usage of the term "terrorist." Therefore, as unfair as it may seem, today, the terms terrorist and Islamic terrorist go hand in hand!
It started with persecution of Jews in Nazi Germany in the 1930s. Initially it was just scattered street assaults by the "brown shirts" which led to more violent attacks and eventual expulsion of German Jews. The Nazis "allowed" Jews to leave Germany if they chose to go to Palestine. They did not allow the Jews to go elsewhere in Europe or the United States, but were willing to let them go to Palestine. The British controlled Palestine at the time and they accepted Jews who were being expelled from Germany. Because, after all, Palestine was considered to be the biblical/historical homeland of Jews. Before long, there were a quarter of a million Jews in Palestine! The Jews built new settlements and overall were much more capable of building and maintaining modern infrastructure. Parts of Palestine where Jews settled were a vast improvement over much of the rest of Palestine, which appeared to be still struggling with modernity and didn't seem to have changed since biblical times. It didn't take long before the Arab population in Palestine turned against the newly arrived Jews in resentment.
Since the British were supportive of the Jewish settlement in Palestine at the time, the Arabs rose up against the British and began a campaign of terror. This was the first instafada. It was the first time since Nechayev in Russia that the word terrorism received widespread use. The British, who were woefully undermanned at the time referred to the Arab Uprising as "terrorism" and the Arabs who participated in the uprising as "terrorists." It is ironic that today when we hear the word terrorism, we almost immediately associate it with Arab or Islamic Terrorists, the very name that the British began using almost a century ago! But then it isn't all that surprising. Since that time, all through the 20th Century, it was the various Arab groups that carried out terror acts and names like Black September Group and PLO, etc., became well known to average person. Today, of course, it is ISIS/ISIL, Al Qaeda, Boko Haram, and a few more!
The leader of the Arab Uprising, the Arab Terrorist movement, was the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, Amin al-Husseini. He was initially appointed to that position by the British. But when Jewish migration to Palestine grew, the Grand Mufti opposed it and started the uprising. The British beefed up their forces and eventually were able to subdue the Arab Uprising. It is interesting to note that the Israelis today use almost exactly the same tactics that the British used to quell the uprising. The British started bulldozing the homes of anyone supporting the terrorists and relocating the families. The Israelis are still doing it! The British built fences to separate the Arabs, the Israelis are doing the same thing!
The Grand Mufti escaped British capture. He first went to Syria, then on to Baghdad, once his welcome had worn out in Syria. He fled Baghdad when the British invaded Iraq, and ended up in Berlin. He met with Hitler and became good friends with Heinrich Himmler, the head of the SS! The Grand Mufti helped the Nazis by convincing Balkan Muslims to join the Nazi cause, enabling the Nazis to raise a division of Bosnian Muslim troops for an SS Division, the notorious 13th Waffen SS Division! There was a second, the 21st Waffen SS Division that was mostly made up of Albanian Muslims. There is no solid proof, but it is said that the Grand Mufti collaborated with Himmler on plans for the "final solution" for Jews, i.e., the use of gas ovens, poison showers, etc., for the extermination of Jews. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was not only an Arab Terrorist, but he was a Nazi as well! Somehow he managed to escape the Jews and everyone else and actually lived into the 1970s and died in Lebanon!
So, although the word "terrorist" did not begin with Arabs or Islam, it has became very closely associated with Arabs and the Muslim faith owing to the more recent "terror" activities, beginning with the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, who was, by all indications, a very evil man! However, there were many others, none Muslims, who carried out terror acts, Hitler, Stalin, and today Kim Jong Un of North Korea, just to name a few. But, ironically, it was a Muslim leader, the Grand Mufti of Palestine and his followers who gave birth to modern, popular usage of the term "terrorist." Therefore, as unfair as it may seem, today, the terms terrorist and Islamic terrorist go hand in hand!
Saturday, June 25, 2016
Iranian Iraq
With all the flap about our incredibly messed up presidential campaign, the recent natural disasters (wild fires and flooding), and the most recent reports about Great Britain exiting the European Union, there is very little news coming out of Iraq or Syria. But then, we know that the news media will report basically what it wants us to read, hear, and see on TV, not necessarily what really is taking place. Our domestic politics, presidential elections, etc., have been essentially "controlled" by the news media since the days of the Vietnam War. That was when the media discovered what a powerful weapon it had in TV reporting. It could manipulate the outcome of events by selective reporting and slanting news stories, which it did.
Today, one often hears the refrain that you shouldn't believe everything that you read on the internet. This is the age of instant communication with smart phones and computers, and internet has become a most used resource for information. Unfortunately, although some do say that we shouldn't believe everything we see or hear on TV, the vast majority of the public does "believe" what it sees and hears on TV! Therefore, the TV reporting has remained the number one influencing factor in American lives, although the internet has become a strong number two! With that said, let's look at what is happening in Iraq.
In some of my earlier blogs I mentioned that we have more or less turned over Iraq to Iran. That has happened in more ways than just the Iran's presence on the battle field against ISIS. Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, a powerful Iranian cleric, has become a very influential figure in Iraqi politics. He has embedded himself in the Iraqi domestic politics to a point that now he calls some of the shots in Iraq's decision making. Amazingly, although he is a cleric with no military experience, he has also inserted himself into a position where he is making some military decisions as well! The so-called Shia Militia, PMU (Popular Mobilisation Units) in Iraq is predominantly Iranian! It is heavily made up of Iranian Special Operations (Quds) and other Iranian "volunteers," and sprinkled with Iraqi volunteers. Besides PMU, there is another Iranian proxy, the Hezbollah. Yes, that Lebanese terrorist organization that is supported by Iran first made its appearance in Syria. Now, without any fanfare, elements of Hezbollah have joined with PMU in Iraq. Strange that the news media never made much of the fact that Iranian backed PMU and Hezbollah are so prominent in the war against ISIS in Iraq. Could it be that they don't want us to know that Iraq is for all practical purposes, under Iranian control?
General Petraeus, the former Commander in Chief of US Forces in Iraq may be disgraced for his indiscretion and security violation (sharing classified material with his mistress), but he was and is a superb military commander. During his tenure in Iraq Petraeus flatly stated that: "US must not become Shia Militia's air force!" This, we have become! We are providing air support to PMU! The former Commander of Central Command, General Austin stated as recently as March 26, 2016 that: "I will not, and I hope we never, coordinate or cooperate with Shia Militia." Guess what Generals Petraeus and Austin, you obviously don't know better, because we are doing exactly what you said we mustn't!
To give you some perspective, the New Iraqi Army is made up of about 50,000 men. Of that number, only about half are actual combat troops. Considering the billions of dollars that we spent thus far building Iraq's army, it is truly amazing how few troops have been raised and trained for all that money! In the current battle against ISIS, in Fallujah, the only Iraqi forces participating in the campaign are the Iraqi Special Forces, those trained and led by our Special Forces! There are some support artillery and armor units, but as far as real fighting is concerned, it is that small number of Iraqi Special Forces, led by US Special Forces, and the proxy Iranian forces - PMU and Hezbollah! So, the majority of the fighting force on the ground is Iranian supported or Iranian!
The Kurds have a much larger and better fighting force, but no air force or other heavy support units. There are about 100,000 Peshmergas and another 100,000 KDP fighters is Kurdistan. But, they are Sunni, not Shia, and cannot be put on the same battlefield on the same side! It is ironic that the Kurds have a larger and much better fighting force than Iraqis, yet receive a fraction of the support and aid that we give to Iraq!
Regardless of the outcome of the battle for Fallujah and other battles that may follow to oust ISIS from Iraq, it is a foregone conclusion that we have lost control of Iraq. We have lost control of Iraq after spending all that money and losing and destroying thousands of American lives. We have lost Iraq through sheer stupidity and arrogance. Obama is known for his arrogance. That is one of the reasons he has alienated so many foreign leaders. His rift with Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu occurred on their first meeting, when Obama proceeded to lecture Netanyahu on Middle East politics! Yes, Obama lectured Netanyahu on Middle East! ISIS may not gain control of Iraq, but neither will we. Iraq is now firmly in Iranian hands!
Just how much in control is Iran in Iraq? When the fight against ISIS stalled recently and rumors began to circulate that US might send in the Marines to break the stalemate, the leader of Asaib Ahl al-Haq, the Iranian led Shia Militia announced that they would turn their fight against the US Marines if the Marines set foot in Iraq! Now do you wonder why we don't put boots on the ground except for small number of trainers and advisors! When John Kerry was recently asked about the situation in Iraq, about Iran's seeming total control, Kerry refused to say anything. After all, what can he say, he was the chief engineer in that wonderful Iran Nuclear Deal!
Yes, Iraq is lost, one way or another. It will either fall to ISIS or be under Iranian control. More than likely it will be the latter. Ironically, it is because of us that Iran will gain control of Iraq. We gave Iraq to Iran in the Iran Nuclear Deal, that was one of the fringe benefits! American tax payers should be furious about this! We have been engaged in Iraq for over a decade, lost thousands of lives and thousands more maimed. American lives have suffered and have been destroyed in more ways than can be counted. But I guess owing to lack of reporting by news media, nobody really cares as long as gas prices and taxes don't rise! Our politicians, most especially the White House, don't care.
Today, one often hears the refrain that you shouldn't believe everything that you read on the internet. This is the age of instant communication with smart phones and computers, and internet has become a most used resource for information. Unfortunately, although some do say that we shouldn't believe everything we see or hear on TV, the vast majority of the public does "believe" what it sees and hears on TV! Therefore, the TV reporting has remained the number one influencing factor in American lives, although the internet has become a strong number two! With that said, let's look at what is happening in Iraq.
In some of my earlier blogs I mentioned that we have more or less turned over Iraq to Iran. That has happened in more ways than just the Iran's presence on the battle field against ISIS. Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani, a powerful Iranian cleric, has become a very influential figure in Iraqi politics. He has embedded himself in the Iraqi domestic politics to a point that now he calls some of the shots in Iraq's decision making. Amazingly, although he is a cleric with no military experience, he has also inserted himself into a position where he is making some military decisions as well! The so-called Shia Militia, PMU (Popular Mobilisation Units) in Iraq is predominantly Iranian! It is heavily made up of Iranian Special Operations (Quds) and other Iranian "volunteers," and sprinkled with Iraqi volunteers. Besides PMU, there is another Iranian proxy, the Hezbollah. Yes, that Lebanese terrorist organization that is supported by Iran first made its appearance in Syria. Now, without any fanfare, elements of Hezbollah have joined with PMU in Iraq. Strange that the news media never made much of the fact that Iranian backed PMU and Hezbollah are so prominent in the war against ISIS in Iraq. Could it be that they don't want us to know that Iraq is for all practical purposes, under Iranian control?
General Petraeus, the former Commander in Chief of US Forces in Iraq may be disgraced for his indiscretion and security violation (sharing classified material with his mistress), but he was and is a superb military commander. During his tenure in Iraq Petraeus flatly stated that: "US must not become Shia Militia's air force!" This, we have become! We are providing air support to PMU! The former Commander of Central Command, General Austin stated as recently as March 26, 2016 that: "I will not, and I hope we never, coordinate or cooperate with Shia Militia." Guess what Generals Petraeus and Austin, you obviously don't know better, because we are doing exactly what you said we mustn't!
To give you some perspective, the New Iraqi Army is made up of about 50,000 men. Of that number, only about half are actual combat troops. Considering the billions of dollars that we spent thus far building Iraq's army, it is truly amazing how few troops have been raised and trained for all that money! In the current battle against ISIS, in Fallujah, the only Iraqi forces participating in the campaign are the Iraqi Special Forces, those trained and led by our Special Forces! There are some support artillery and armor units, but as far as real fighting is concerned, it is that small number of Iraqi Special Forces, led by US Special Forces, and the proxy Iranian forces - PMU and Hezbollah! So, the majority of the fighting force on the ground is Iranian supported or Iranian!
The Kurds have a much larger and better fighting force, but no air force or other heavy support units. There are about 100,000 Peshmergas and another 100,000 KDP fighters is Kurdistan. But, they are Sunni, not Shia, and cannot be put on the same battlefield on the same side! It is ironic that the Kurds have a larger and much better fighting force than Iraqis, yet receive a fraction of the support and aid that we give to Iraq!
Regardless of the outcome of the battle for Fallujah and other battles that may follow to oust ISIS from Iraq, it is a foregone conclusion that we have lost control of Iraq. We have lost control of Iraq after spending all that money and losing and destroying thousands of American lives. We have lost Iraq through sheer stupidity and arrogance. Obama is known for his arrogance. That is one of the reasons he has alienated so many foreign leaders. His rift with Israel's Benjamin Netanyahu occurred on their first meeting, when Obama proceeded to lecture Netanyahu on Middle East politics! Yes, Obama lectured Netanyahu on Middle East! ISIS may not gain control of Iraq, but neither will we. Iraq is now firmly in Iranian hands!
Just how much in control is Iran in Iraq? When the fight against ISIS stalled recently and rumors began to circulate that US might send in the Marines to break the stalemate, the leader of Asaib Ahl al-Haq, the Iranian led Shia Militia announced that they would turn their fight against the US Marines if the Marines set foot in Iraq! Now do you wonder why we don't put boots on the ground except for small number of trainers and advisors! When John Kerry was recently asked about the situation in Iraq, about Iran's seeming total control, Kerry refused to say anything. After all, what can he say, he was the chief engineer in that wonderful Iran Nuclear Deal!
Yes, Iraq is lost, one way or another. It will either fall to ISIS or be under Iranian control. More than likely it will be the latter. Ironically, it is because of us that Iran will gain control of Iraq. We gave Iraq to Iran in the Iran Nuclear Deal, that was one of the fringe benefits! American tax payers should be furious about this! We have been engaged in Iraq for over a decade, lost thousands of lives and thousands more maimed. American lives have suffered and have been destroyed in more ways than can be counted. But I guess owing to lack of reporting by news media, nobody really cares as long as gas prices and taxes don't rise! Our politicians, most especially the White House, don't care.
Sunday, June 19, 2016
Our Failure Against ISIS - Part Two
In my last blog about our so-called war against ISIS, I failed to mention anything about our confrontations with Russians. There have been a number of cases where Russian planes had "buzzed" our planes and had bombed rebel encampments. We have protested, but the Russians have simply ignored our protests and continue to behave like they own the skies above Syria.
When Russia entered the war in Syria, we went through an elaborate process of establishing a "hot line" so that there would not be "accidents." The "hot line" was established so that we could directly communicate with the Russian headquarters about any possible dangers involving unintentional confrontations between our and their aircrafts. It is a great idea, but it only works if both sides abide by the established rules and are willing to communicate.
Most recently, two days ago, two Russian SU-34 fighter bombers attacked a known rebel staging area near Jordanian border. This rebel compound is/was used to stage and train rebel forces for mainly fighting ISIS in Syria. Since this was a CIA supported compound, there were no doubt US trainers and advisors on the ground. The US headquarters watched with surprise and horror as the Russian fighter bombers went directly for the compound, seen clearly on radar as well as video screens! The Russian planes bombed the compound, causing death and injury to rebel forces. Our HQ immediately picked up the red "hot line" phone and called the Russian HQ. You guessed it, they would not answer the phone! In desperation we scrambled two FA-18s to provide cover for the rebel forces while they tried to evacuate from the compound. In the meantime, the Russian jets left, being low on fuel. Our planes followed them at a distance and watched them refuel in midair from an air tanker. Our planes returned. The Russian planes, after refueling, returned for another bombing run!
No amount of trying to communicate with Russian HQ seem to work. Direct communication, aircraft to aircraft by our communications plane in the air also failed. The Russian pilots were obviously under orders to completely ignore any attempts by us to communicate with them! Why didn't our planes at least attempt to interfere with the bombing? Why bother to send the planes to provide "cover" if they are not allowed to do anything? Our planes should have shot down those Russian planes! At the very least they should have fired warning shots to divert the attack. But obviously they were under strict orders not to do anything, lest we provoke the ire of Russians!
This is exactly what I meant in earlier blogs when I said that Putin had our number! Putin, after testing the air, found that Obama wasn't going to do anything if he pushed. So he pushed, took Crimea and later a portion of eastern Ukraine. I have no doubt in my mind that the Russians have orders to operate freely and ignore our warnings. Shooting down those Russian jets would not have started World War Three or any kind of an armed conflict with Russia as some in our government seem to fear. It would have instead sent a signal to Putin that he cannot bully us as he has been doing! Remember, the Turks shot down a Russian plane that had entered Turkish airspace! Nothing happened except that Putin spouted some threats and now Russians are very careful about entering Turkish airspace. We, on the otherhand, allowed Russian planes to bomb a rebel compound that more than likely had US personnel on the ground. We had two planes in the air supposedly to "defend" the compound yet they were not allowed to do anything! Just how were they supposed to provide "cover" for evacuating rebels? The Russians came back for a second run after refueling!
This incident took place after the 51 US diplomats signed a petition of protest, saying that we should be more aggressive in our policy in Syria, that we should bomb Assad's forces! I can well imagine what those 51 diplomats, who put their careers on the line with this protest, must feel now, after the latest incident! We are behaving very cowardly, completely gutless. Putin is counting on it and has formed his policy in dealing with us on that basis. He has no respect for our leadership! Just think about it! Turkey, a country that is certainly not a world power, shoots down a Russian plane without hesitation when it entered its air space and refused to respond to the commands to turn back. Russians made threats, lot of noise after the incident, but nothing happened. If Turkey can react to Russia's bullying tactics like that, why can't we? We, instead, try to play down such incidents as the one that just occurred. There may have very well been American deaths involved in this last incident, either CIA personnel or Special Operations trainers/advisors. But you can bet that the public will never hear about it!
I believe that our military leaders, especially those in Pentagon, should be more vocal and let their dissatisfaction over our so called "Policy in Syria" be known. Although one hears occasionally of individual officers who object to the way we are conducting the war in Syria, there has not been a large group, certainly not like the 51 in the State Department who risked their careers in their protest. Perhaps if more military officers objected, Obama and his people would listen.
Currently there are critical articles appearing in some publications written by former military officers (usually retired). I have yet to see a critical article that has been written by an active duty officer.
I know that there are many out there who are very critical of our State Department personnel. Our diplomats are often referred to as "cookie pushers" and by other more unkindly names. But remember, that so far, only these "cookie pushers," "the pin-striped wimps" were the ones who risked their careers by openly protesting our worthless policy and conduct of war in Syria!
When Russia entered the war in Syria, we went through an elaborate process of establishing a "hot line" so that there would not be "accidents." The "hot line" was established so that we could directly communicate with the Russian headquarters about any possible dangers involving unintentional confrontations between our and their aircrafts. It is a great idea, but it only works if both sides abide by the established rules and are willing to communicate.
Most recently, two days ago, two Russian SU-34 fighter bombers attacked a known rebel staging area near Jordanian border. This rebel compound is/was used to stage and train rebel forces for mainly fighting ISIS in Syria. Since this was a CIA supported compound, there were no doubt US trainers and advisors on the ground. The US headquarters watched with surprise and horror as the Russian fighter bombers went directly for the compound, seen clearly on radar as well as video screens! The Russian planes bombed the compound, causing death and injury to rebel forces. Our HQ immediately picked up the red "hot line" phone and called the Russian HQ. You guessed it, they would not answer the phone! In desperation we scrambled two FA-18s to provide cover for the rebel forces while they tried to evacuate from the compound. In the meantime, the Russian jets left, being low on fuel. Our planes followed them at a distance and watched them refuel in midair from an air tanker. Our planes returned. The Russian planes, after refueling, returned for another bombing run!
No amount of trying to communicate with Russian HQ seem to work. Direct communication, aircraft to aircraft by our communications plane in the air also failed. The Russian pilots were obviously under orders to completely ignore any attempts by us to communicate with them! Why didn't our planes at least attempt to interfere with the bombing? Why bother to send the planes to provide "cover" if they are not allowed to do anything? Our planes should have shot down those Russian planes! At the very least they should have fired warning shots to divert the attack. But obviously they were under strict orders not to do anything, lest we provoke the ire of Russians!
This is exactly what I meant in earlier blogs when I said that Putin had our number! Putin, after testing the air, found that Obama wasn't going to do anything if he pushed. So he pushed, took Crimea and later a portion of eastern Ukraine. I have no doubt in my mind that the Russians have orders to operate freely and ignore our warnings. Shooting down those Russian jets would not have started World War Three or any kind of an armed conflict with Russia as some in our government seem to fear. It would have instead sent a signal to Putin that he cannot bully us as he has been doing! Remember, the Turks shot down a Russian plane that had entered Turkish airspace! Nothing happened except that Putin spouted some threats and now Russians are very careful about entering Turkish airspace. We, on the otherhand, allowed Russian planes to bomb a rebel compound that more than likely had US personnel on the ground. We had two planes in the air supposedly to "defend" the compound yet they were not allowed to do anything! Just how were they supposed to provide "cover" for evacuating rebels? The Russians came back for a second run after refueling!
This incident took place after the 51 US diplomats signed a petition of protest, saying that we should be more aggressive in our policy in Syria, that we should bomb Assad's forces! I can well imagine what those 51 diplomats, who put their careers on the line with this protest, must feel now, after the latest incident! We are behaving very cowardly, completely gutless. Putin is counting on it and has formed his policy in dealing with us on that basis. He has no respect for our leadership! Just think about it! Turkey, a country that is certainly not a world power, shoots down a Russian plane without hesitation when it entered its air space and refused to respond to the commands to turn back. Russians made threats, lot of noise after the incident, but nothing happened. If Turkey can react to Russia's bullying tactics like that, why can't we? We, instead, try to play down such incidents as the one that just occurred. There may have very well been American deaths involved in this last incident, either CIA personnel or Special Operations trainers/advisors. But you can bet that the public will never hear about it!
I believe that our military leaders, especially those in Pentagon, should be more vocal and let their dissatisfaction over our so called "Policy in Syria" be known. Although one hears occasionally of individual officers who object to the way we are conducting the war in Syria, there has not been a large group, certainly not like the 51 in the State Department who risked their careers in their protest. Perhaps if more military officers objected, Obama and his people would listen.
Currently there are critical articles appearing in some publications written by former military officers (usually retired). I have yet to see a critical article that has been written by an active duty officer.
I know that there are many out there who are very critical of our State Department personnel. Our diplomats are often referred to as "cookie pushers" and by other more unkindly names. But remember, that so far, only these "cookie pushers," "the pin-striped wimps" were the ones who risked their careers by openly protesting our worthless policy and conduct of war in Syria!
Friday, June 17, 2016
Our Failure Against ISIS
Frankly, I wasn't going to do a blog on this subject. I thought I had worn out the topic with previous blogs. It was tempting, with the most recent ISIS inspired massacre in Orlando taking place. But I held off. However, several things happened in the last two days that made me rethink my reluctance to talk about this subject again.
Yesterday, Senator John McCain got himself into a bit of a tight spot with the news media when he said that Obama was directly responsible for what took place in Orlando. Taking his remark from the perspective that the news media wanted the public to take, McCain's comment seemed over the top, a typical political bashing statement. But as usual, the news media wanted the public to hear only what it wanted to convey, i.e., that McCain was nuts, overly critical of Obama. But when you listen to McCain's explanation of what he meant, it makes perfect sense. What he said was that Obama was directly responsible because of how he pulled out of Iraq, causing Al Qaeda to spread, to move to Syria, where elements of Al Qaeda evolved into the new terror group that we now know as ISIS/ISIL. McCain had predicted as much when Obama ordered the pull-out from Iraq. He said that things would get much worse and that Al Qaeda (there was no ISIS at the time) would spread and bring terror attacks to our shores. He was absolutely right!
I well remember how both the news media and the liberal members of our government scoffed at McCain's prediction and even political cartoonists were having a time showing McCain as a warmonger, a hawk! What actually has happened since McCain's predictions are much worse! Yesterday, before a congressional hearing, the Director of CIA John Brennan stated that we are no longer able to successfully combat ISIS! ISIS is spreading, using a different approach to their form of jihad and operating in smaller cells and relying on sympathizers, "volunteers" to carry out terror acts. Make no mistake about it, the San Bernardino husband and wife team and the recent Orlando killer Omar Mateen are ISIS! They may not have joined ISIS formally, but they are ISIS, exactly the way ISIS wants to carry out attacks! The CIA Director warned that we are to expect more such attacks!
This morning, in a surprise announcement, the majority of State Department career employees (Foreign Service and domestic) who are involved in working on Middle Eastern Affairs, said that they opposed Obama's "policy" in Syria and felt that we should bomb Assad's government forces! For those who are unfamiliar, the vast majority of State Department employees tend to be politically liberal. I know, during my time in the Foreign Service, I took a lot of grief and ribbing from my colleagues for my conservative political views. In short, State Department, although a very conservative organization, tends to be made up of liberally minded individuals who are predominantly registered Democrats! So, for this body of individuals to openly oppose Obama's "policy" in Syria is truly a surprising turn.
It seems to me that Obama's government is more concerned about passing more gun control legislation than fighting Islamic Terrorism! All the rhetoric that one hears from Obama's camp is about enforcing stricter gun laws, nothing about doing something about the spreading of ISIS influence or stopping Islamic terrorists before they commit acts of terror! Remember the terrible tragedy in Paris? Twice as many people were murdered in Paris as in Orlando and those terrorists had no trouble sneaking-in their weaponry into a country that has gun laws that are much stricter than ours! Yesterday, in London, a nut case shot and stabbed a British politician to death. The killer used a knife and a pistol. Oh by the way, pistols are illegal in UK for private citizens. As the saying goes, "where there is a will, there is a way!" No amount of legislation is going to keep weapons out of the hands of determined individuals.
This blog is not about the gun control issue, it is rather about curbing terrorist activities. To do that, we must be more thorough, more vigilant, and yes, at times severe in our actions. Omar Mateen was "interviewed" twice by the FBI, he was on the FBI watch list. Yet, he carried out this horrid act. There are many unanswered questions. Why did the FBI not check to see if he had firearms? Why did the FBI not put him on the "no buy" list. In order to purchase a firearm, any kind of firearm, you must undergo an FBI check. If your name is on the list, you can't buy a gun! I know of cases where people were put on the list for drug possession and DUI! These people were never on the FBI watch list of terrorists, yet they were put on "no buy" list. Mateen was on the FBI watch list, hell, they interviewed him twice! Yet, he was never put on "no buy" or "no fly" list! Something is terribly wrong with our system!
You can rest assured that nothing will happen in terms of new policies or new plans for fighting ISIS. We have a totally dysfunctional government when it comes to carrying out a war against Islamic Terrorists. We have the best military in the world, the best trained and equipped military. Yet, we can't seem to defeat a bunch of Islamic fanatics dressed in baggy black PJs! It seems that we had that problem before, facing enemy dressed in black PJs! Remember the Viet Cong? We were able to defeat Viet Cong, however, we lost the war at home for political reasons! In case of the current black PJ clad enemy, we are just not fighting the way we are capable. We are fighting in bits and pieces, a very controlled (politically controlled) fighting. You can't win wars that way! That is how we lost Vietnam!
It seems that the State Department employees at least have a sense of history and remember what happened before. They know that we can't fight a "selective" war with "selective" battles. Right now we are fighting ISIS in Syria with not only one hand tied behind our back, but with one eye covered as well. ISIS is sticking close to Assad's forces because Assad is only interested in fighting rebels, those who oppose his government. Russia is helping Assad maintain his power and are just as interested in bombing rebels! What State Department employees are saying is that we should bomb Assad as well as ISIS, get rid of them both! I heartily agree! But it will never happened, not with this administration, not with Obama sitting in the oval office! Unfortunately, should Democrats win the election, the present policy will just continue. Remember, Hillary was Obama's Secretary of State when the Syrian mess began!
Yesterday, Senator John McCain got himself into a bit of a tight spot with the news media when he said that Obama was directly responsible for what took place in Orlando. Taking his remark from the perspective that the news media wanted the public to take, McCain's comment seemed over the top, a typical political bashing statement. But as usual, the news media wanted the public to hear only what it wanted to convey, i.e., that McCain was nuts, overly critical of Obama. But when you listen to McCain's explanation of what he meant, it makes perfect sense. What he said was that Obama was directly responsible because of how he pulled out of Iraq, causing Al Qaeda to spread, to move to Syria, where elements of Al Qaeda evolved into the new terror group that we now know as ISIS/ISIL. McCain had predicted as much when Obama ordered the pull-out from Iraq. He said that things would get much worse and that Al Qaeda (there was no ISIS at the time) would spread and bring terror attacks to our shores. He was absolutely right!
I well remember how both the news media and the liberal members of our government scoffed at McCain's prediction and even political cartoonists were having a time showing McCain as a warmonger, a hawk! What actually has happened since McCain's predictions are much worse! Yesterday, before a congressional hearing, the Director of CIA John Brennan stated that we are no longer able to successfully combat ISIS! ISIS is spreading, using a different approach to their form of jihad and operating in smaller cells and relying on sympathizers, "volunteers" to carry out terror acts. Make no mistake about it, the San Bernardino husband and wife team and the recent Orlando killer Omar Mateen are ISIS! They may not have joined ISIS formally, but they are ISIS, exactly the way ISIS wants to carry out attacks! The CIA Director warned that we are to expect more such attacks!
This morning, in a surprise announcement, the majority of State Department career employees (Foreign Service and domestic) who are involved in working on Middle Eastern Affairs, said that they opposed Obama's "policy" in Syria and felt that we should bomb Assad's government forces! For those who are unfamiliar, the vast majority of State Department employees tend to be politically liberal. I know, during my time in the Foreign Service, I took a lot of grief and ribbing from my colleagues for my conservative political views. In short, State Department, although a very conservative organization, tends to be made up of liberally minded individuals who are predominantly registered Democrats! So, for this body of individuals to openly oppose Obama's "policy" in Syria is truly a surprising turn.
It seems to me that Obama's government is more concerned about passing more gun control legislation than fighting Islamic Terrorism! All the rhetoric that one hears from Obama's camp is about enforcing stricter gun laws, nothing about doing something about the spreading of ISIS influence or stopping Islamic terrorists before they commit acts of terror! Remember the terrible tragedy in Paris? Twice as many people were murdered in Paris as in Orlando and those terrorists had no trouble sneaking-in their weaponry into a country that has gun laws that are much stricter than ours! Yesterday, in London, a nut case shot and stabbed a British politician to death. The killer used a knife and a pistol. Oh by the way, pistols are illegal in UK for private citizens. As the saying goes, "where there is a will, there is a way!" No amount of legislation is going to keep weapons out of the hands of determined individuals.
This blog is not about the gun control issue, it is rather about curbing terrorist activities. To do that, we must be more thorough, more vigilant, and yes, at times severe in our actions. Omar Mateen was "interviewed" twice by the FBI, he was on the FBI watch list. Yet, he carried out this horrid act. There are many unanswered questions. Why did the FBI not check to see if he had firearms? Why did the FBI not put him on the "no buy" list. In order to purchase a firearm, any kind of firearm, you must undergo an FBI check. If your name is on the list, you can't buy a gun! I know of cases where people were put on the list for drug possession and DUI! These people were never on the FBI watch list of terrorists, yet they were put on "no buy" list. Mateen was on the FBI watch list, hell, they interviewed him twice! Yet, he was never put on "no buy" or "no fly" list! Something is terribly wrong with our system!
You can rest assured that nothing will happen in terms of new policies or new plans for fighting ISIS. We have a totally dysfunctional government when it comes to carrying out a war against Islamic Terrorists. We have the best military in the world, the best trained and equipped military. Yet, we can't seem to defeat a bunch of Islamic fanatics dressed in baggy black PJs! It seems that we had that problem before, facing enemy dressed in black PJs! Remember the Viet Cong? We were able to defeat Viet Cong, however, we lost the war at home for political reasons! In case of the current black PJ clad enemy, we are just not fighting the way we are capable. We are fighting in bits and pieces, a very controlled (politically controlled) fighting. You can't win wars that way! That is how we lost Vietnam!
It seems that the State Department employees at least have a sense of history and remember what happened before. They know that we can't fight a "selective" war with "selective" battles. Right now we are fighting ISIS in Syria with not only one hand tied behind our back, but with one eye covered as well. ISIS is sticking close to Assad's forces because Assad is only interested in fighting rebels, those who oppose his government. Russia is helping Assad maintain his power and are just as interested in bombing rebels! What State Department employees are saying is that we should bomb Assad as well as ISIS, get rid of them both! I heartily agree! But it will never happened, not with this administration, not with Obama sitting in the oval office! Unfortunately, should Democrats win the election, the present policy will just continue. Remember, Hillary was Obama's Secretary of State when the Syrian mess began!
Thursday, June 16, 2016
China's Increasing Belligerent Behavior
With the recent horrible tragedy in Orlando taking up much of the news headlines, one hardly hears of any other "incidents" from around the world. That is as it should be expected. The senseless and vicious terror attack in Orlando by a sick, misguided homegrown Islamic Terrorist does indeed overshadow other occurrences from around the world, until something even more horrid takes place elsewhere! But there has been a steady increase of certain incidents involving China that should not be overlooked, but has been more or less shoved back to the back burner by the news media.
China, in recent times, has become increasingly more belligerent in its behavior towards its neighbors over territorial water disputes. This increase in belligerence is directly related to China's increasing economic and military power. The more powerful they become, the more belligerent their behavior. It is doubtful that China would go to war with anyone over these territorial water disputes, but they are "pushing the envelop," so-to-speak, to see just how far they can push!
Throughout the years there have been periodic news reports about China's dispute with Japan over some tiny islands in East China Sea. Occasionally one would hear about a Chinese fishing boat that supposedly strayed into foreign waters. But there was nothing consistent about these incidents, and they were not increasing in numbers. But lately that has changed, and to add to the problem, the Chinese military has stepped-in to intervene in many instances.
A few days ago there was a brief news report that a Chinese spy ship was trailing U.S. and Japanese warships that were engaged in exercises. That may not seem like much, but just a few years ago that would have been unthinkable. The same applies to numerous incidents involving Chinese warplanes buzzing US ships and US planes. In some cases they came dangerously close, at one point as close as 50 feet off the bow of a US ship! This is all tied-in with the increasing number of incidents involving Chinese fishing vessels being seized in foreign waters around East China Sea. Both South Korea and Philippines recently seized a bunch of Chinese fishing trawlers off its shores, within the 20 mile limit! Whereas in the past, the incidents were settled by a quiet apology from the Chinese Foreign Ministry to the effect that "it won't happen again." Now the response is quite different.
In the most recent incident in Philippines where Chinese vessels were seized fishing within five miles of Philippines' coastline, the Chinese Foreign Ministry demanded that Philippines release the boats and the crew immediately. The spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry sarcastically commented that some countries arbitrarily set their boundaries disregarding international law! All the countries that share the East China Sea with China have complained in the International Courts about China's behavior. China has extended its boundaries way beyond international line, claiming that they had a right to extend the boundaries due to their extensive coastline. But at the same time, it does not appear to recognize the boundaries of its neighboring countries!
It is, in a way, understandable that the Chinese fishing fleets are getting more and more desperate for new fishing waters. They have the world's largest population to feed, a population that is not only increasing in size, but increasing in wealth almost daily and demanding more and more sea food delicacies. The Chinese fishing fleet is owned by the Chinese government, so it is a part of the Chinese merchant marine force and they operate under orders from the government! It is not a fishing fleet like in other countries, privately owned. Although the Chinese fishing fleet operates under the auspices of some companies, these companies are government owned. So it is in the best interest of Chinese government to see that their fishing fleet operates far and wide unmolested.
This new belligerent behavior by the Chinese has not really surfaced until more recent times. Remember in an earlier blog I mentioned that China was now a part of a new Axis with Russia and North Korea. That was not an exaggeration. China's current behavior, buzzing of our ships and planes by their war planes, is strongly reminiscent of Russia's behavior, and yes, North Korea's behavior as well. Except that in case of North Korea, they are just as liable to launch a missile or fire a burst from one of their fighter planes!
The situation has changed dramatically in the last decade. It wasn't long ago that we ruled the Pacific, despite the presence of Russian submarines. But now, with the combined force of Russian and Chinese (as well as North Korean) submarine force and the change in behavior, we no longer can sail the Pacific unmolested. All of the countries that have shorelines in East China Sea have asked us to continue to patrol the Pacific, to provide them with security against China! China, on the other hand, no longer sits back and allows us to operate in what they consider "their" waters. They threaten our ships physically with their planes and additionally, verbally threaten our presence in East China Sea.
It is unlikely that this situation will develop into a war, but it is also entirely possible that in some instance, in one of the countries, someone will cut loose with a machinegun and blood will be shed. There may even develop a skirmish of sorts. Remember the border dispute with Vietnam back in 1979? Something like that is entirely possible. It is only hoped that when something like that happens, we will not be involved!
Saturday, June 11, 2016
The Tragedy of Taiwan
The post Vietnam War generation and most certainly the younger generation today, those in their 30s and 40s, more than likely do not know or care about the tragic history of modern day Taiwan. When I use the word "tragic," I use it in a sense that it had been betrayed by its closest ally and is little recognized for its accomplishments and completely overshadowed by former enemy, the People's Republic of China (PRC). We, its biggest supposed supporter, have actually abandoned it in favor of better relations with PRC. It seems that for our government, everything revolves around what is politically expedient or what the policies of that particular administration dictate. Since we have a very short historical memory and seem to be concerned with what appears advantageous to us only at the present, our government tends to make some very rash and seemingly poor decisions.
Most of us of Vietnam War generation, especially those of us who lived in the Far East, may remember Taiwan fondly. Some of us may have actually lived in Taiwan when we still had military presence there in the 1960s and early 1970s. It would have been unthinkable for most us to think that our government would abandon Taiwan, our staunch ally, in order to better our relations with PRC. Ironically it was precisely because of the existence of PRC that we supported Taiwan and swore allegiance and undying support for that small island nation.
I know it came to me as a bit of a shock and an unpleasant surprise when our government announced in 1978 that we were going to break official ties with Taiwan! I did have a kind of a lingering suspicion that something like that was going to happen, especially in view of how quickly and unceremoniously we abandoned the Republic of Vietnam, the very country that we pledged to defend forever and where we lost over 55,000 American lives! But seeing as how it was Nixon who hatched the so-called "Vietnamization" policy which led to the abandonment of South Vietnam, I was not too surprised. Nixon's and Kissinger's trips to PRC that followed, getting chummy with Mao Tse Tung and Chou En Lai over Chinese brandy, sent a clear signal that somebody else was going to be sold down the river! In this case it was obvious - Taiwan!
I am sure that not everyone knows the background of our so-called alliance with Taiwan or Republic of China as it was more commonly called in the day. Our abandonment of Republic of China actually took place much earlier when we became disillusioned with the corrupt government of Koumintang (Nationalist Chinese Party) led by the dictator Chiang Kai Shek. Chiang was our ally during World War Two against Japan. However, we were having problems with him even then, not agreeing with his policies and not able to understand his thinking. When World War Two ended and full scale civil war broke out in China between the nationalists and Mao's communists, we were unsure who we should support. We sent missions to Yenan, Mao's communist stronghold, and decision makers in our government were divided in supporting the nationalists or communists. Ultimately, we simply withdrew and let them fight it out. But the nationalists took a beating and lost the civil war. Chiang asked for our help when he was losing, but we refused to send help to him.
Ultimately Chiang and the nationalists were chased off the mainland to Taiwan. No doubt the outcome would have been the same even if we had poured in more aid to the nationalists. So, when it came to Republic of China, 1949 was the first time that we abandoned the nationalists. However, Mao and his 8th Route Army stepped into Korea in late November of 1950 and the Korean War turned badly for us again. The South Korean Army and what there was of the unprepared US Army that was sent from Japan were routed in the initial stages of the war in the summer of 1950. After the Inchon Landing, the combined UN forces pushed all the way to the Manchurian border by Thanksgiving 1950, that was when the Chinese stepped in and once again routed the UN forces, pushing all the way into the south.
President Truman at this point knew that we needed allies to counter the Communist Chinese threat in Asia, and we had none! There were no Asian countries close by that could be deterrent to PRC, so we poured in aid to previously abandoned Nationalists and built up a strong military in Taiwan. This part of our history with Nationalist China and Taiwan is rarely mentioned or discussed in our history books, making it appear as if we supported the nationalists all the way through their civil war and escape to Taiwan. Such is not the case. We dumped them after World War Two but became bosom buddies when we needed them to counter PRC and swore undying support! Within a year after the cease fire in Korea, in 1954 we began to be involved in what was called French Indochina at the time. So, we needed Nationalist China even more as our involvement in Southeast Asia grew and we ultimately entered into a full blown war. Nationalist China and Taiwan was crucial to us at that stage.
But after we abandoned South Vietnam, and after Nixon and Kissinger traveled to PRC and became drinking buddies with Mao, we no longer needed Nationalist China. In fact, if anything, if we were to make friends with PRC, Taiwan had to go! So, in 1978 we announced that we would no longer maintain official relations with the Republic of China in Taiwan. We were going to abide by our one China policy.
In 1978 I was in the process of changing my careers from teaching at Chico State to joining the Foreign Service. At the time I taught a very popular course, Introduction to Asian Studies, which was essentially a historical/political survey course on Asia. Naturally, PRC and Nationalist China situation was covered quite a bit, and when we broke our relations with Taiwan, I was somewhat critical of our actions in my lectures. Some of my students knew that I was leaving soon to work for the State Department and asked me how I was going to reconcile my differences of opinion when I went to work for the government! It really made me stop and think. Also, at the time we had a "Junior Year in Taiwan" program. Fortunately, that program was not affected by the political changes!
Despite all of the negative things that befell Taiwan since 1978, it still managed to develop a strong economy on its own and become an economic power in Asia. Initially Taiwan was ruled by military dictatorship with Chiang Kai Shek at the helm. Chiang died in 1975 and his son took over. But gradually, even his successors began a democratization process which led to a complete change and a free election system. Today Taiwan, although not recognized by vast majority of countries in the world, still has an economy that is ranked 21st in the world and per capita income that ranks 17th! PRC insists that the Taiwan government is illegitimate. But what is illegitimate about it? Taiwan holds free elections and not elections that are controlled by the communist party! Recently Taiwan elected a very progressive (but conservative) woman, Tsai Ing Wen as its President.
If anything, considering all of the obstacles they faced in recent times, Taiwan is truly a remarkable example of success in our times. Yet, it is not recognized by all but 22 countries in the world. It was kicked off its seat in the UN to be replaced by PRC, and it can't even represent itself as a country in the Olympics! The younger generation in Taiwan no longer consider themselves Chinese, they call themselves Taiwanese. They do not wish to join PRC, but wish to develop their own identity. PRC would love to take in Taiwan as one of its provinces! Per capita, the Taiwanese population is better educated and better trained in various skills than most populations in the world. Taiwan has more MBAs, PH.Ds and MDs per capita, trained abroad (mostly U.S.) than PRC! It is dynamic, growing, and a free society. The only way PRC will gain control of Taiwan is if they take over militarily. Hopefully, that day will never come!
Most of us of Vietnam War generation, especially those of us who lived in the Far East, may remember Taiwan fondly. Some of us may have actually lived in Taiwan when we still had military presence there in the 1960s and early 1970s. It would have been unthinkable for most us to think that our government would abandon Taiwan, our staunch ally, in order to better our relations with PRC. Ironically it was precisely because of the existence of PRC that we supported Taiwan and swore allegiance and undying support for that small island nation.
I know it came to me as a bit of a shock and an unpleasant surprise when our government announced in 1978 that we were going to break official ties with Taiwan! I did have a kind of a lingering suspicion that something like that was going to happen, especially in view of how quickly and unceremoniously we abandoned the Republic of Vietnam, the very country that we pledged to defend forever and where we lost over 55,000 American lives! But seeing as how it was Nixon who hatched the so-called "Vietnamization" policy which led to the abandonment of South Vietnam, I was not too surprised. Nixon's and Kissinger's trips to PRC that followed, getting chummy with Mao Tse Tung and Chou En Lai over Chinese brandy, sent a clear signal that somebody else was going to be sold down the river! In this case it was obvious - Taiwan!
I am sure that not everyone knows the background of our so-called alliance with Taiwan or Republic of China as it was more commonly called in the day. Our abandonment of Republic of China actually took place much earlier when we became disillusioned with the corrupt government of Koumintang (Nationalist Chinese Party) led by the dictator Chiang Kai Shek. Chiang was our ally during World War Two against Japan. However, we were having problems with him even then, not agreeing with his policies and not able to understand his thinking. When World War Two ended and full scale civil war broke out in China between the nationalists and Mao's communists, we were unsure who we should support. We sent missions to Yenan, Mao's communist stronghold, and decision makers in our government were divided in supporting the nationalists or communists. Ultimately, we simply withdrew and let them fight it out. But the nationalists took a beating and lost the civil war. Chiang asked for our help when he was losing, but we refused to send help to him.
Ultimately Chiang and the nationalists were chased off the mainland to Taiwan. No doubt the outcome would have been the same even if we had poured in more aid to the nationalists. So, when it came to Republic of China, 1949 was the first time that we abandoned the nationalists. However, Mao and his 8th Route Army stepped into Korea in late November of 1950 and the Korean War turned badly for us again. The South Korean Army and what there was of the unprepared US Army that was sent from Japan were routed in the initial stages of the war in the summer of 1950. After the Inchon Landing, the combined UN forces pushed all the way to the Manchurian border by Thanksgiving 1950, that was when the Chinese stepped in and once again routed the UN forces, pushing all the way into the south.
President Truman at this point knew that we needed allies to counter the Communist Chinese threat in Asia, and we had none! There were no Asian countries close by that could be deterrent to PRC, so we poured in aid to previously abandoned Nationalists and built up a strong military in Taiwan. This part of our history with Nationalist China and Taiwan is rarely mentioned or discussed in our history books, making it appear as if we supported the nationalists all the way through their civil war and escape to Taiwan. Such is not the case. We dumped them after World War Two but became bosom buddies when we needed them to counter PRC and swore undying support! Within a year after the cease fire in Korea, in 1954 we began to be involved in what was called French Indochina at the time. So, we needed Nationalist China even more as our involvement in Southeast Asia grew and we ultimately entered into a full blown war. Nationalist China and Taiwan was crucial to us at that stage.
But after we abandoned South Vietnam, and after Nixon and Kissinger traveled to PRC and became drinking buddies with Mao, we no longer needed Nationalist China. In fact, if anything, if we were to make friends with PRC, Taiwan had to go! So, in 1978 we announced that we would no longer maintain official relations with the Republic of China in Taiwan. We were going to abide by our one China policy.
In 1978 I was in the process of changing my careers from teaching at Chico State to joining the Foreign Service. At the time I taught a very popular course, Introduction to Asian Studies, which was essentially a historical/political survey course on Asia. Naturally, PRC and Nationalist China situation was covered quite a bit, and when we broke our relations with Taiwan, I was somewhat critical of our actions in my lectures. Some of my students knew that I was leaving soon to work for the State Department and asked me how I was going to reconcile my differences of opinion when I went to work for the government! It really made me stop and think. Also, at the time we had a "Junior Year in Taiwan" program. Fortunately, that program was not affected by the political changes!
Despite all of the negative things that befell Taiwan since 1978, it still managed to develop a strong economy on its own and become an economic power in Asia. Initially Taiwan was ruled by military dictatorship with Chiang Kai Shek at the helm. Chiang died in 1975 and his son took over. But gradually, even his successors began a democratization process which led to a complete change and a free election system. Today Taiwan, although not recognized by vast majority of countries in the world, still has an economy that is ranked 21st in the world and per capita income that ranks 17th! PRC insists that the Taiwan government is illegitimate. But what is illegitimate about it? Taiwan holds free elections and not elections that are controlled by the communist party! Recently Taiwan elected a very progressive (but conservative) woman, Tsai Ing Wen as its President.
If anything, considering all of the obstacles they faced in recent times, Taiwan is truly a remarkable example of success in our times. Yet, it is not recognized by all but 22 countries in the world. It was kicked off its seat in the UN to be replaced by PRC, and it can't even represent itself as a country in the Olympics! The younger generation in Taiwan no longer consider themselves Chinese, they call themselves Taiwanese. They do not wish to join PRC, but wish to develop their own identity. PRC would love to take in Taiwan as one of its provinces! Per capita, the Taiwanese population is better educated and better trained in various skills than most populations in the world. Taiwan has more MBAs, PH.Ds and MDs per capita, trained abroad (mostly U.S.) than PRC! It is dynamic, growing, and a free society. The only way PRC will gain control of Taiwan is if they take over militarily. Hopefully, that day will never come!
Wednesday, June 8, 2016
OIG - Office of Inspecor General (State Department)
A few weeks ago there was a flurry of news coverage about the State Department's Office of Inspector General (OIG) report on Hillary Clinton's email saga. The media coverage, although widespread, was not thorough and somewhat fuzzy. As expected, the whole thing faded away within a week. It was as if the news media planned it that way, reporting that although some of the verbiage found in the OIG report was damaging, it was still up to the forthcoming FBI report to decide whether any serious security breach was made. Conveniently, some sentences were quoted selectively out of the OIG report, never giving a complete picture. Of course, the fact that the OIG has no arrest or indictment power or function was not mentioned. OIG only investigates and reports its findings, nothing more. If action needs to be taken, then it is up to the Justice Department to carry it out. Therefore, it is the FBI that should be doing any filing of charges or indictments, which more than likely will not take place, if ever, perhaps only after the forthcoming elections!
All U.S. government agencies and the military have their Inspector General's offices, usually referred to simply as the "IG." The IG in the military and other agencies is not a popular organization, it is, for lack of better comparison, is looked upon like the much disliked Internal Affairs of Police Departments (which is Police Departments' version of the IG!). Anyone watching TV police dramas is well aware of how the IA or Internal Affairs is seen by most rank and file police, it is disliked, indeed hated by some. The IG may not be seen quite the same way by the various federal agencies and the military, but nevertheless, it is not exactly popular. In contrast, the State Department's Inspector General's Office, the OIG, is looked upon in a totally different light by State Department employees, both Foreign Service and domestic. It is not seen as the "IA" of the State Department, although it does perform that function.
The main purpose of the OIG is to inspect and determine if a particular office is performing its function correctly and efficiently. When something is found to be incorrect or improperly performed, then it is pointed out in a report and suggestions are made as to how to correct the situation. The OIG is thought of as a "constructive criticism" organization, one that inspects embassies and consulates abroad and various State Department offices domestically, and corrects any improper procedures and improves the function and operation of that embassy/consulate/office. It is, by far the most rank heavy office in the federal government.
The OIG is made up of Inspection Teams. Each team is composed of six to eight members ranging in pay grades from the lowest rank of GS-14 to the team leader who is of Ambassadorial rank (equivalent to a 3 or 4 star General). Normally, half of the team is composed of Foreign Service (FS) personnel, and the other half of General Schedule (GS) personnel. The Foreign Service personnel are in grades FS-1 (0-6/Colonel) to Senior Foreign Service (1 to 4 star). The GS personnel are usually all GS-15s (same as FS-1 or 0-6/Colonel) with occasional GS-14 as the lowest ranking person on the team. So, as you can see, there is an awful lot of rank on an OIG Inspection Team. If they were to wear military ranks, they would be all Colonels and Generals! A job with the OIG is something that is sought, not avoided like the IA jobs with the Police Departments.
In 1993, after completing my academic year at Harvard's Center for International Affairs as a Fellow, I went to work for the OIG. I was advised to seek a job with OIG by my career counselor who thought it would expand my knowledge of how the State Department operates, prepare me for bigger and better things, or so he thought. Within a month after leaving Harvard, we barely had time to find a house in Virginia before I was off on my first inspection trip overseas. I worked for a total of 18 months for the OIG and inspected embassies and consulates in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia on my first inspection trip with side trip inspections to Seychelles and Mauritius. Returned for a couple of months only to go off to inspect Panama, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala. Returned again for a few months of rest, then stayed in Washington to inspect various offices within the State Department, before I got the assignment to Cairo and left the States six months early. I had to request the OIG to let me go six months early, since my assignment to OIG was for two years.
During my 18 months with the OIG, I learned an awful lot about how the various embassies and their offices operated and how the many offices within the State Department worked. Probably the most important things that I learned in my time with OIG was what not to do! In all, it was a very valuable experience and paid dividends for me. The State Department being the kind of an organization that it is, never strongly criticizes anybody, unless the mistake or particular act is especially egregious! There were many instances where I thought our final report on a particular office or post overseas was too "gentle," too soft! But I learned that we simply did not bash anybody over the head, we rather "nudged" them. If we did say something strong, then the offense or the mistake must have been really bad!
Just reading the bits and pieces contained in the OIG report on Hillary that the news media selectively picked, I can tell you that by State Department standards, it was a scathing report, not just a career killer, but something for which serious consequences were called for. The very fact Hillary has not yet been made to pay for those serious breaches of security is absolutely disgusting. Whoever said that the rich and powerful in this country are treated the same way as the rest has been either smoking funny stuff or living in another country! Hillary so far has gotten away with an offense for which any other State Department employee would not have only been fired, but jailed as well!
Let me give you an example of how unforgiving and harsh the State Department can be to those who it thinks have broken the law or trust. A very good friend of mine, a brilliant Foreign Service Officer with an outstanding career was unceremoniously fired not only from his job but from the Foreign Service for what the Department considered a breach of trust and unprofessional conduct! At the time, my friend was the US Consul General in Rome, not an insignificant position. He held the job and the personal rank of military equivalent of a 2 star general. Rome is considered to be one of our plumb posts and is sought after by many. It is also a very popular place for our congressmen and other high officials to come visiting on boondoggles. It was particularly bad during my friend's time in Rome. There was a constant flow of "CODELs," Congressional Delegations to Rome, stretching the embassies resources to a breaking point.
After one particularly tiring and annoying CODEL visit, my friend, in an unofficial email to a friend, voiced his frustrations about the situation and did say a few unkindly things about our illustrious Congressmen. The email was sent through the Department's unclassified server which allows employees to use it for personal emails. However, like all communications in and out of State Department and overseas posts, it was monitored. His email reached the desk of the front office of management and he was promptly, unceremoniously fired. He received a call from Washington within days telling him to pack his bags and leave Rome for processing out of the State Department employment! After more than 25 years of loyal and superior service, my friend who had served wherever he was asked to go, was simply fired for what the Department called, "unprofessional language and conduct." He did not commit a security violation! He simply said things that someone didn't like! I am not saying what he did was right, only that his slip was nowhere near the level of seriousness as Hillary's!
I know of number of other cases where Foreign Service Officers were fired for acts that were not anywhere near the seriousness of Hillary's email escapades! Yeah, I guess if you are rich and famous, you can get away with stuff that the rest of us common folks would be jailed for doing. You can also give a speech on inequality (what irony!) wearing a $12,495 Armani jacket and get only mild coverage for a day or so, essentially getting a pass from the news media!
All U.S. government agencies and the military have their Inspector General's offices, usually referred to simply as the "IG." The IG in the military and other agencies is not a popular organization, it is, for lack of better comparison, is looked upon like the much disliked Internal Affairs of Police Departments (which is Police Departments' version of the IG!). Anyone watching TV police dramas is well aware of how the IA or Internal Affairs is seen by most rank and file police, it is disliked, indeed hated by some. The IG may not be seen quite the same way by the various federal agencies and the military, but nevertheless, it is not exactly popular. In contrast, the State Department's Inspector General's Office, the OIG, is looked upon in a totally different light by State Department employees, both Foreign Service and domestic. It is not seen as the "IA" of the State Department, although it does perform that function.
The main purpose of the OIG is to inspect and determine if a particular office is performing its function correctly and efficiently. When something is found to be incorrect or improperly performed, then it is pointed out in a report and suggestions are made as to how to correct the situation. The OIG is thought of as a "constructive criticism" organization, one that inspects embassies and consulates abroad and various State Department offices domestically, and corrects any improper procedures and improves the function and operation of that embassy/consulate/office. It is, by far the most rank heavy office in the federal government.
The OIG is made up of Inspection Teams. Each team is composed of six to eight members ranging in pay grades from the lowest rank of GS-14 to the team leader who is of Ambassadorial rank (equivalent to a 3 or 4 star General). Normally, half of the team is composed of Foreign Service (FS) personnel, and the other half of General Schedule (GS) personnel. The Foreign Service personnel are in grades FS-1 (0-6/Colonel) to Senior Foreign Service (1 to 4 star). The GS personnel are usually all GS-15s (same as FS-1 or 0-6/Colonel) with occasional GS-14 as the lowest ranking person on the team. So, as you can see, there is an awful lot of rank on an OIG Inspection Team. If they were to wear military ranks, they would be all Colonels and Generals! A job with the OIG is something that is sought, not avoided like the IA jobs with the Police Departments.
In 1993, after completing my academic year at Harvard's Center for International Affairs as a Fellow, I went to work for the OIG. I was advised to seek a job with OIG by my career counselor who thought it would expand my knowledge of how the State Department operates, prepare me for bigger and better things, or so he thought. Within a month after leaving Harvard, we barely had time to find a house in Virginia before I was off on my first inspection trip overseas. I worked for a total of 18 months for the OIG and inspected embassies and consulates in Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia on my first inspection trip with side trip inspections to Seychelles and Mauritius. Returned for a couple of months only to go off to inspect Panama, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Guatemala. Returned again for a few months of rest, then stayed in Washington to inspect various offices within the State Department, before I got the assignment to Cairo and left the States six months early. I had to request the OIG to let me go six months early, since my assignment to OIG was for two years.
During my 18 months with the OIG, I learned an awful lot about how the various embassies and their offices operated and how the many offices within the State Department worked. Probably the most important things that I learned in my time with OIG was what not to do! In all, it was a very valuable experience and paid dividends for me. The State Department being the kind of an organization that it is, never strongly criticizes anybody, unless the mistake or particular act is especially egregious! There were many instances where I thought our final report on a particular office or post overseas was too "gentle," too soft! But I learned that we simply did not bash anybody over the head, we rather "nudged" them. If we did say something strong, then the offense or the mistake must have been really bad!
Just reading the bits and pieces contained in the OIG report on Hillary that the news media selectively picked, I can tell you that by State Department standards, it was a scathing report, not just a career killer, but something for which serious consequences were called for. The very fact Hillary has not yet been made to pay for those serious breaches of security is absolutely disgusting. Whoever said that the rich and powerful in this country are treated the same way as the rest has been either smoking funny stuff or living in another country! Hillary so far has gotten away with an offense for which any other State Department employee would not have only been fired, but jailed as well!
Let me give you an example of how unforgiving and harsh the State Department can be to those who it thinks have broken the law or trust. A very good friend of mine, a brilliant Foreign Service Officer with an outstanding career was unceremoniously fired not only from his job but from the Foreign Service for what the Department considered a breach of trust and unprofessional conduct! At the time, my friend was the US Consul General in Rome, not an insignificant position. He held the job and the personal rank of military equivalent of a 2 star general. Rome is considered to be one of our plumb posts and is sought after by many. It is also a very popular place for our congressmen and other high officials to come visiting on boondoggles. It was particularly bad during my friend's time in Rome. There was a constant flow of "CODELs," Congressional Delegations to Rome, stretching the embassies resources to a breaking point.
After one particularly tiring and annoying CODEL visit, my friend, in an unofficial email to a friend, voiced his frustrations about the situation and did say a few unkindly things about our illustrious Congressmen. The email was sent through the Department's unclassified server which allows employees to use it for personal emails. However, like all communications in and out of State Department and overseas posts, it was monitored. His email reached the desk of the front office of management and he was promptly, unceremoniously fired. He received a call from Washington within days telling him to pack his bags and leave Rome for processing out of the State Department employment! After more than 25 years of loyal and superior service, my friend who had served wherever he was asked to go, was simply fired for what the Department called, "unprofessional language and conduct." He did not commit a security violation! He simply said things that someone didn't like! I am not saying what he did was right, only that his slip was nowhere near the level of seriousness as Hillary's!
I know of number of other cases where Foreign Service Officers were fired for acts that were not anywhere near the seriousness of Hillary's email escapades! Yeah, I guess if you are rich and famous, you can get away with stuff that the rest of us common folks would be jailed for doing. You can also give a speech on inequality (what irony!) wearing a $12,495 Armani jacket and get only mild coverage for a day or so, essentially getting a pass from the news media!
Sunday, June 5, 2016
What Happened to America's Educational System?
Before World War Two, America's primary and secondary school systems were not considered to be at the top of the heap in the world's educational systems. Make no mistake about it, it was considered good, certainly better than many other countries'. But it was our universities that caught the attention of others and became popular for foreign students. American universities, especially the better known ones, were drawing foreign students as far back as the turn of the 19th Century!
The end of the World War Two brought about a big change in our educational system over all. Without a doubt, the newly created G.I. Bill of Rights had much to do with it. Many returning veterans, millions of them, who previously could not have even dreamed of going to post secondary education now could attend colleges and universities with Uncle Sam's help. This situation not only brought about a need for increase in colleges and universities, but provided a new influx of educated young Americans. Never in the history of the United States, in fact, in the history of the whole world were there suddenly so many young people with university education as there were in America in the early 1950s. Our industry benefitted with new engineers, chemists, biologists, accountants, you name it, all across the board. Naturally there was an increase in new crop of teachers at all levels. Our economy boomed. This was a perfect example of how better educated work force can benefit the economy, and it has repeated in other countries as well, most notably Japan and now South Korea, the two countries that lead the world in percentage of college graduates in their population!
Through the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, for approximately a quarter of a century after the end of World War Two, America was the reigning champion of education. We had the most educated population in the world. We had the highest percentage of population that had completed secondary education, either through actual school attendance or the newly created GED system, and we also had the highest percentage of population with college degrees. During this period America was consistently ranked as the top nation when it came to education. It was also a period when we dominated the world's economy.
But then, something began to slip here and there. Many other countries in Europe and in Asia (specifically Japan) began not only to catch up but pass America in some categories of education. On the economic front, Japan and West Germany began to really make noise. Japan in particular took over the world's electronic market and came close to do the same in automotive field. But we were still hanging on to the tenuous position of leading in education. But our decline in education started, with science and math, then spread to other subjects, finally reaching a point where today, depending on the particular survey or study, we are ranked anywhere from 14th down to as low as 36th among world's nations in education. In the latest study conducted by a world body organization, Japan and South Korea are playing musical chairs from year to year for the number one spot as the most "educated population" and we fall somewhere below way below that, down to fourteenth place for 2016! The popularity and success of Japanese electronics and cars is well established, but do you wonder why South Korea suddenly surged into the picture with their Hyundai, Kia, Samsung, etc.?
What has caused such a drop from the top spot that we enjoyed earlier? For one thing, there has been a consistent attempt to "dumb down" our programs so that more students can "pass" and go on to the next level in our primary and secondary schools. I won't go into details of why schools or school districts are doing that, other than to say that everything is driven by money and federal and state aid to schools is determined/calculated by the number of students in school. That is a very simplistic and incomplete explanation, but it will have to do. Bottom line, the more students pass from grade to grade, the more money the school receives.
This "dumb down" system has affected the public schools more than anything. Private schools, fortunately, have been spared this disaster for the most part. In school districts that have a reputation for being "bad," those parents who can afford it end up sending their kids to private schools. This created a vicious circle of "bad" schools becoming even worse because better students no longer attend those schools and the "dumb down" system goes into full gear for the public school to survive, to receive federal and state funding. There are many other reasons tied to the disintegration of our public schools, inner city crime, drugs, etc., just to name a few. But all in all, our public school systems, even those that are not in inner cities, are crumbling.
Our college and university systems are still at the top level. We have more four year colleges and universities than any other country in the world. At the last count, there were a bit over 3,000 accredited four year schools in America. They are still considered top notch and are sought after by students from around the world. There are over one million international students in America who bring in approximately $30 billion a year, so they are very good for our economy! Approximately 250,000 of these students are from China, 150,000 from India, and 100,000 from South Korea. Now, keep in mind that these are "foreign students," not Asian students who are either citizens or residents of the United States!
In terms of educated population, we are beginning to seriously lose ground to other countries. Our slide began in the 1980s and has continued to a point where we are now. It is said that a high school education in America in the 1950s and 60s was equivalent to a college degree today! One often hears that to get the kind of a job a high school graduate could get in the past now requires a college degree! Does this mean that the population in America is that much smarter today than it was before? Not really! Let's face it, all you have to do is look at the kind of people we continually elect into important offices to realize that the average American voter really doesn't seem to know what he or she is doing!
We still have a sizable portion of our population that graduates from secondary school and universities as well. However, we are now a nation of almost 320 million, that's a lot of people. New figures released claim that we graduate 80% of our high school students. Yet, in the same study, the figure of 1.2 million is given as those who fail to graduate. America is ranked 18th in the world for percentage of high school graduates in the population. At the same time, the percentage of high school graduates among the current work force is lower among 18 to 35 age group than for 45 to 65 age group! In other words, older workers are better educated! That doesn't speak well for our future.
There are still millions of bright young people in America who, even if they don't go to college, succeed in life. Others, that do go to college have that good fortune of attending some of the world's best institutions of higher learning. I know that there are great universities in other parts of the world. But overall, ours are still the best on this planet, otherwise, why would so many foreign students flock to our schools? China, our biggest competitor in world today has a population of billion and a half souls, yet it has fewer universities than we do. China has 2,236 four year universities with 20 million students enrolled. Small wonder they send so many to our shores as well as other countries to study! Japan's population is less than half of ours at 127.3 million people and it has 745 four year universities.
South Korea's population is only slightly larger than California's at 49 million, about 1/3 of Japan's population and it has 352 four year universities. Well over half of the population in South Korea has university degrees and the country enjoys a 98% literacy rate, highest in the world. A primary or secondary school teacher in South Koreas makes about 25% more in salary than a comparable teacher in America. Yet, the overall per capita income in South Korea is lower than ours. Obviously, education is considered very important in that country. Now I think you can see how that can tie in with their economic success in recent years.
We have got to overhaul our education system if we are to maintain a top spot in the global position. We have got to start with our primary and secondary schools and just like with the military, increase the pay for teachers! Until we do this, we will continue to slip in the world as a leader in just about every phase!
The end of the World War Two brought about a big change in our educational system over all. Without a doubt, the newly created G.I. Bill of Rights had much to do with it. Many returning veterans, millions of them, who previously could not have even dreamed of going to post secondary education now could attend colleges and universities with Uncle Sam's help. This situation not only brought about a need for increase in colleges and universities, but provided a new influx of educated young Americans. Never in the history of the United States, in fact, in the history of the whole world were there suddenly so many young people with university education as there were in America in the early 1950s. Our industry benefitted with new engineers, chemists, biologists, accountants, you name it, all across the board. Naturally there was an increase in new crop of teachers at all levels. Our economy boomed. This was a perfect example of how better educated work force can benefit the economy, and it has repeated in other countries as well, most notably Japan and now South Korea, the two countries that lead the world in percentage of college graduates in their population!
Through the 1950s, 60s, and 70s, for approximately a quarter of a century after the end of World War Two, America was the reigning champion of education. We had the most educated population in the world. We had the highest percentage of population that had completed secondary education, either through actual school attendance or the newly created GED system, and we also had the highest percentage of population with college degrees. During this period America was consistently ranked as the top nation when it came to education. It was also a period when we dominated the world's economy.
But then, something began to slip here and there. Many other countries in Europe and in Asia (specifically Japan) began not only to catch up but pass America in some categories of education. On the economic front, Japan and West Germany began to really make noise. Japan in particular took over the world's electronic market and came close to do the same in automotive field. But we were still hanging on to the tenuous position of leading in education. But our decline in education started, with science and math, then spread to other subjects, finally reaching a point where today, depending on the particular survey or study, we are ranked anywhere from 14th down to as low as 36th among world's nations in education. In the latest study conducted by a world body organization, Japan and South Korea are playing musical chairs from year to year for the number one spot as the most "educated population" and we fall somewhere below way below that, down to fourteenth place for 2016! The popularity and success of Japanese electronics and cars is well established, but do you wonder why South Korea suddenly surged into the picture with their Hyundai, Kia, Samsung, etc.?
What has caused such a drop from the top spot that we enjoyed earlier? For one thing, there has been a consistent attempt to "dumb down" our programs so that more students can "pass" and go on to the next level in our primary and secondary schools. I won't go into details of why schools or school districts are doing that, other than to say that everything is driven by money and federal and state aid to schools is determined/calculated by the number of students in school. That is a very simplistic and incomplete explanation, but it will have to do. Bottom line, the more students pass from grade to grade, the more money the school receives.
This "dumb down" system has affected the public schools more than anything. Private schools, fortunately, have been spared this disaster for the most part. In school districts that have a reputation for being "bad," those parents who can afford it end up sending their kids to private schools. This created a vicious circle of "bad" schools becoming even worse because better students no longer attend those schools and the "dumb down" system goes into full gear for the public school to survive, to receive federal and state funding. There are many other reasons tied to the disintegration of our public schools, inner city crime, drugs, etc., just to name a few. But all in all, our public school systems, even those that are not in inner cities, are crumbling.
Our college and university systems are still at the top level. We have more four year colleges and universities than any other country in the world. At the last count, there were a bit over 3,000 accredited four year schools in America. They are still considered top notch and are sought after by students from around the world. There are over one million international students in America who bring in approximately $30 billion a year, so they are very good for our economy! Approximately 250,000 of these students are from China, 150,000 from India, and 100,000 from South Korea. Now, keep in mind that these are "foreign students," not Asian students who are either citizens or residents of the United States!
In terms of educated population, we are beginning to seriously lose ground to other countries. Our slide began in the 1980s and has continued to a point where we are now. It is said that a high school education in America in the 1950s and 60s was equivalent to a college degree today! One often hears that to get the kind of a job a high school graduate could get in the past now requires a college degree! Does this mean that the population in America is that much smarter today than it was before? Not really! Let's face it, all you have to do is look at the kind of people we continually elect into important offices to realize that the average American voter really doesn't seem to know what he or she is doing!
We still have a sizable portion of our population that graduates from secondary school and universities as well. However, we are now a nation of almost 320 million, that's a lot of people. New figures released claim that we graduate 80% of our high school students. Yet, in the same study, the figure of 1.2 million is given as those who fail to graduate. America is ranked 18th in the world for percentage of high school graduates in the population. At the same time, the percentage of high school graduates among the current work force is lower among 18 to 35 age group than for 45 to 65 age group! In other words, older workers are better educated! That doesn't speak well for our future.
There are still millions of bright young people in America who, even if they don't go to college, succeed in life. Others, that do go to college have that good fortune of attending some of the world's best institutions of higher learning. I know that there are great universities in other parts of the world. But overall, ours are still the best on this planet, otherwise, why would so many foreign students flock to our schools? China, our biggest competitor in world today has a population of billion and a half souls, yet it has fewer universities than we do. China has 2,236 four year universities with 20 million students enrolled. Small wonder they send so many to our shores as well as other countries to study! Japan's population is less than half of ours at 127.3 million people and it has 745 four year universities.
South Korea's population is only slightly larger than California's at 49 million, about 1/3 of Japan's population and it has 352 four year universities. Well over half of the population in South Korea has university degrees and the country enjoys a 98% literacy rate, highest in the world. A primary or secondary school teacher in South Koreas makes about 25% more in salary than a comparable teacher in America. Yet, the overall per capita income in South Korea is lower than ours. Obviously, education is considered very important in that country. Now I think you can see how that can tie in with their economic success in recent years.
We have got to overhaul our education system if we are to maintain a top spot in the global position. We have got to start with our primary and secondary schools and just like with the military, increase the pay for teachers! Until we do this, we will continue to slip in the world as a leader in just about every phase!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)