I wrote an article about Sen. Barack Obama’s trip that appears in today’s edition of the Berlin-based German national daily newspaper, Die Welt.  Full text is below. 

Accepting President John F. Kennedy’s challenge to "Let them come," Senator Barack Obama will descend upon Berlin – a Phoenix of Freedom – to lecture the world on the state of the Transatlantic relationship. Such a speech is ironic, for Senator Obama has yet to show any understanding of the fundamental truths that have linked the Transatlantic Alliance through time and tribulations.

As recently practiced by Chancellor Angela Merkel who, defying pressures from the Communist Chinese, chose to meet with the Dalai Lama in her offices, or as expressed by President Ronald Reagan in the shadows of the Brandenburg Gate, Europe and America’s unbreakable bond of belief is this: We understand "the practical importance of liberty…that freedom and security go together, [and] that the advance of human liberty can only strengthen the cause of world peace."

No people can understand this better than the Germans of Berlin, who saw the strength of this bond in the Berlin Airlift, as Americans stood shoulder to shoulder with their West German counterparts along that bleak scar of a Wall that divided the city and represented the enslavement of a people, and as two generations of American Presidents and German Chancellors stood together to demand freedom and unity when others in Europe and elsewhere were not so willing.

Standing near the hallowed ground where past "Free World" leaders refused on principle to sacrifice the liberty of Berliners at the popular altar of pragmatism, Senator Obama will, it is hoped, intuit our shared bond, and, consequently, further "refine" his shifting positions regarding our nations’ shared sacrifices to win the Free World’s unsought, trans-national struggle against terrorism.

Perhaps, strolling down the Unter den Linden, the erstwhile chair of the European Subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Affairs Committee will realize how, in daunting times, human nature has a dangerous instinct to abandon immutable principle for injurious pragmatism; but that while pragmatism may temporarily mask the danger of the moment, principled acts practically advance the cause of human freedom.

Maybe, while listening to JFK’s "Ich Bin Ein Berliner" speech on his I-pod beneath his safety helmet as he pedals past the Reichstag, Senator Obama will recall how, throughout the Cold War, the leaders of the Transatlantic Alliance resisted the siren song of popular pragmatism and, through the practical effects of principled policies, emancipated tens of millions of people from the shackles of the Soviet Union.

Perhaps Senator Obama will take the time to tour a united Germany to see that what President Reagan deemed "the practical importance of liberty" is manifest upon a free European continent, whole, peaceful, and prosperous. But that is probably too much to expect from a man who is taking the, "If-it’s-Thursday-it-must-be-Berlin" approach to foreign policy.

Indeed, what can anyone expect from Senator Obama, whose pragmatic populist approach to the advancement of human liberty led him 18 months ago to oppose the surge in Iraq; to later arbitrarily declare "the surge is not working"; and – even after Osama bin-Laden declared Iraq a "central front" in his war against freedom – to continue to assert Iraq is a "distraction" that he (Obama) "would end as President."

Yes, of late Senator Obama has been responding to realities on the ground: within the last month, he has ended his criticism of the surge and now acknowledges its success; and is further advocating a surge against al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, though he never quite manages to commend the courageous sacrifices made in Afghanistan by allies such as Germany.

The frustrating crux of the Senator’s chaotic politics is this: nowhere in Mr. Obama’s pragmatic, politically expedient pronouncements is there a fundamental affirmation of the Transatlantic Alliance’s unbreakable bond of belief that expanding human liberty will defeat its enemies.

This explains how Senator Obama can one day arbitrarily oppose the surge and callously condemn Iraqis to a living death or worse beneath al-Qaeda, and the next day dismiss the surge’s success as a "distraction." It explains why so many Americans, Europeans, other free peoples, and those yet to be free, are so dismayed at the prospect of Senator Obama’s potential elevation to the Leader of the Free World during a trans-national war against terrorism.

Thus in Berlin no one knows which Obama will show. Will it be the ideological left-wing Democratic primary candidate who vowed to "end" the war rather than win it, or the Democratic nominee who dismisses the progressing coalition victory as a "distraction"? Will it be the American populist who has told supporters in the United States that he will demand more from our allies in Europe and get it, or the liberal internationalist hell-bent on being liked in Europe’s salons?

To be sure, Berliners may expect a peppy performance Senator Obama. But what Berliners should not expect from the man reaching for the mantle of Kennedy is the courageous and defiant moral clarity he exhibited most obviously in Berlin:

"Freedom is indivisible, and when one man is enslaved, all are not free," President Kennedy said. "So let me ask you as I close, to lift your eyes beyond the dangers of today, to the hopes of tomorrow, beyond the freedom merely of this city of Berlin, or your country of Germany, to the advance of freedom everywhere, beyond the wall to the day of peace with justice, beyond yourselves and ourselves to all mankind."

Bluntly, if his past decisions are any guide, Berliners should not expect to hear Senator Obama affirm the unbreakable bond of belief cementing our eternal Transatlantic Alliance: the universality of human freedom. And no carefully choreographed picture of Obama worth a thousand words from a fawning media can compensate for the deafening absence of this one enduring truth.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

I recently publshed an OpEd in one of my hometown papers, The Northville Record, discussing the need for a 21st century energy plan which provides a responsible, and balanced approach incorporating a few key components, which are production, conservation, and free market innovation. The goal of which is to keep America's economic opportunities and energy security the world's greatest. I invite you read the article and let me know your thoughts.

A 21st Century Energy Plan

by Rep. Thaddeus McCotter, (MI-11)

If you had the power to stabilize spiraling gas prices and implement a 21st Century American Energy Plan, would you?

You would.

But this Congress won't.

Daily, we see the disastrous consequences of a "lethargy" policy that is opposed to producing more American oil and energy and, instead, proffers taxation, regulation, litigation, and "government innovation" as an answer to rising gas prices shrinking our family budgets and increasing unemployment. In our Great Lakes State, for example, the cost of American energy is harming our struggling manufacturing sector and endangering jobs. In sum, manufacturers' fixed costs - especially energy - are soaring at the very time an anemic economy forces price reductions; consequently, we experience the nightmare of the manufacturing sector laying off or terminating our family members, friends, and neighbors.

True, some politicians and academics claim blue collar jobs will "one day" be replaced by "green collar" jobs. We've heard this promise before, haven't we? Now, due to a Congress that refuses to admit we need more American energy, such rhetoric provides cold comfort to us in Michigan, especially our fellow citizens in the manufacturing sector, who are being promised a green collar job someday to replace the real job they're losing today.

This must end!

What we need in the United States is a common sense, responsible, and balanced 21st Century American Energy Plan, the key components of which are production, conservation, and free market innovation; and the goal of which is to keep America's economic opportunities and energy security the world's greatest.

First, we must squarely confront the challenge. America's dangerous addiction to oil and its price is increasing daily: we consume nearly 21 million barrels of oil per day; and, while our demand amounts to over 25f global oil production, our known oil reserves constitute but 3f global supply. As the developing world's energy demands escalate, our nation's dependence upon this finite fuel - often obtained from unfriendly sources - poses grave concerns for our economy, environment, and national security. And, yes, we must admit that, as this challenge didn't happen overnight, neither will it be solved in a day.

Therefore, common sense provides a solution: The 21st Century American Energy Plan. The 21st Century Energy Plan is a free-market road map for free people that will enhance our prosperity, security, and environment by guiding us to energy independence. Trusting in Americans' ingenuity and industriousness, this energy independence policy contains three cardinal, integrated elements: production, conservation, and innovation.

To responsibly facilitate this transition from fossil fuels to alternative energies, we must produce more domestic American energy from existing sources - including oil, clean coal, solar, wind, water and nuclear power - and implement sound regulatory reform and broad tax incentives to encourage its "green" acquisition and utilization.

Then, we must simultaneously conserve our existing energy resources through free market reforms that reduce American's utilization of fossil fuels by encouraging the growing consumer demand for and manufacturers' production of alternative energies and flex-fuel vehicles; and fostering domestic conservation and environmental stewardship measures, including infrastructure improvements, traffic congestion mitigation measures, and voluntary, community based "green" initiatives to reduce energy consumption.

Finally, the production of existing energies speeds the innovation of alternative energies. Government revenues derived from increased energy exploration and production must be dedicated to tax credits for alternative energy innovations and implementations. For example, this entrepreneurial energy policy will nurture the growing consumer demand for plug-in hybrid vehicles; and spur the research, development, production and utilization of alternative fuels in the emergent areas of bio-mass, bio-diesel, ethanol, hydrogen, and clean coal. Further, government must encourage the new infrastructure required to make alternative energies readily available and commercially viable; establish competitive prizes for distinguished accomplishments in the private research and development of alternative energies; and, engage America's allies in a determined collaboration to develop alternative energies and enhance global environmental stewardship.

Yet such a common sense, responsible, and balanced approach seems lost upon Congress. Stubbornly resurrecting their failed 1970's approach, this Congress still claims Big Brother knows best, and argues for higher taxes, government dictates and boondoggle spending. In consequence, Americans will suffer energy insecurity due to energy price hikes and domestic energy shortages.

There is a better path. The 21st Century Energy Plan will constructively change America from fossil fuels to alternative energies; and allow us to achieve and declare energy independence. While it won't happen instantly, it will happen certainly - because America's greatest resource remains the virtuous genius of her free people.

Congressman Thaddeus McCotter (R-Livonia) represents Michigan's 11th District and is chairman of the House Republican Policy Committee.

Find this article online: http://hometownlife.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080612/OPINION01/806120666/1202/NEWS12

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

Recently I spoke about my disappointment with the European Union and their decision to end diplomatic sanctions on Cuba at Babalublog.com. See below:

Annals of Shame

Yesterday [Thursday, June 19 2008], the European Union (EU) unilaterally offered to end its diplomatic sanctions on Cuba. Originally, in 2003, in spasm of moral clarity, the EU imposed a ban on high-level talks with communist Cuban officials after communist Cuba's dictator Fidel Castro arrested a group of political dissidents called the Group of 75.

 

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

Recently, Rep. Zach Wamp and I appeared on CNN's Lou Dobbs tonight to discuss the threats of communist China.  Click here to check it out.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

In their latest assault on free speech, the Democrats have forgotten or ignored Thomas Jefferson’s spirited defense of humanity’s God-given freedom of conscience: “I have sworn upon the altar of almighty God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man.”

This post orginally appeared on The Hill Blog.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

Today I attended a ceremony at the White House honoring Pope Benedict XVI. It was a blessing to be a part of the momentous occasion of Pope Benedict's visit to the White House. Like his predecessor, the Holy Father has struck a chord with the American people by serving as a humble servant of God, who is full of timeless wisdom. Pope Benedict reminded us how, during our earthly journey, we are compelled to promote the liberty and dignity of our fellow human beings. His message of renewal and hope touches people of all faiths and has a heartening effect for all humanity throughout our turbulent times. The Holy Father eloquently expressed the moral duty of public officials to serve the least of our brothers and sisters through a humane dialogue Founded upon faith and reason, the first principles upon which our free republic was founded. People of all faiths should pray for the Holy Father; embrace his message of renewal and hope; and wish him a happy birthday.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

While appearing as a panelist at this year’s Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC), I was heartened to see so many young conservatives in attendance.

I was not swept with nostalgic sentiment for my youth as a nascent Reaganite, though those days were filled with excitement and exploits – a few of which can be recounted in polite company. What struck me was the prescience of modern conservatism’s intellectual founder, Russell Kirk. Today, as this generation of young conservatives embarks upon their service to America, I hope they will be inspired and guided by Kirk’s caution to my Generation X conservatives, many of whom did not heed his wisdom:

"…all ideologies work mischief. I am fortified by a letter from an influential and seasoned conservative publicist, who applauds my excoriation of young ideologues fancying themselves to be conservatives, and of young conservatives fondly hoping to convert themselves into ideologues. This latter correspondent agrees with me that ideology is founded merely upon ‘ideas’ – that is, upon abstractions, fancies, for the most part unrelated to personal and social reality; while conservative views are founded upon custom, convention, the long experience of the human species. He finds himself confronted, from time to time, by young people, calling themselves conservative, who have no notion of prudence, temperance, compromise, the traditions of civility, or cultural patrimony."

Again, he is talking about my Generation X conservatives.

Read on . . .

"The woods are full of these creatures,’ this gentleman writes. ‘The conservative ‘movement’ seems to have reared up a new generation of rigid ideologists. It distresses me to find them as numerous and in so many institutions. Of course, many are libertarians, not conservatives. Whatever they call themselves, they are bad for the country and our civilization. Theirs is a cold-blooded, brutal view of life.’

"Amen to that…

"The triumph of ideology would be what Edmund Burke called ‘the antagonist world’ – the world of disorder; while what the conservative seeks to conserve is the world of order that we have inherited, if in a damaged condition, from our ancestors. The conservative mind and the ideological mind stand at opposite poles. And the contest between those two mentalities may be no less strenuous in the twenty-first century than it has been during the twentieth. Possibly [these words] may be of help to those of the rising generation who have the courage to oppose ideological zealots."

Unlike so many of my own generation, I trust the inspiring youths of this rising generation of conservatives will take Kirk’s advice to heart; fulfill their noble role in our troubled world; and redeem our tortured times. For while daunting, I know they will embrace and transcend the challenge in the virtuous spirit of Rupert Brooke’s verse:

"Now, God be thanked,
Who has matched us with His hour,
And caught our youth,
And wakened us from sleeping…."

To learn more about Russell Kirk read The Conservative Mind: From Burke to Eliot or visit www.kirkcenter.org

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

The poster-child of failed hopes, today’s United Nations (UN) is a global Tammany Hall lethal to the liberty and dignity of our human family.

First, the UN’s membership is stacked against free people.  According to Freedom House, of 192 UN member states, 89 are "fully free" and 103 are not.  Thus, a solid majority (54of member states know liberty directly threatens their survival, which requires the suppression of their own peoples and, through their UN membership, the entire human community.

Yet, since 1945, the U.S. has been the UN’s largest annual contributor.  In 2006, American taxpayers forked over $423.5 million in dues (or 22f the UN’s regular budget) and over $5.3 billion in total to the UN.  Still, we and all free people remain the UN’s tyrants’ favorite targets.

Two statistics gauge this dysfunction:  Only 46f the UN’s members are free nations; but the UN’s top ten financial contributors are all free nations.

In our global age, wherein a world condensed by an internet cannot endure half-slave and half-free, we can no longer rely on a debased UN for collective security.  With our survival at stake, all free nations must prudently diminish their participation in the UN; and unite in the cause of human dignity and liberty.

We must create a Liberty Alliance.

Transcending the "Community of Democracies," the Liberty Alliance must be founded upon the self-evident truth all human beings are endowed by their Creator with the unalienable rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; and it must be steeped in the wisdom of how extending liberty to the enslaved will ensure liberty for ourselves.

The Liberty Alliance’s members shall be free nations.  Observer nations must domestically expand their people’s liberty before admission as members.  Importantly, member nations diminishing their people’s liberty must be demoted to Observer status and, when necessary, expelled from the Alliance.  

The governing structure of the Liberty Alliance shall be determined by its member nations with the objective being the maximization of transparency, equity, and democracy in accordance with the effective expansion of human liberty and dignity.  As in Truman’s doctrine, the Alliance "must assist free peoples to work out their own destinies in their own way."  Thus, through diplomatic, political, economic, and cultural initiatives, the Alliance will empower and emancipate individuals, communities, and emerging free governments from dictatorial rule.  Further, the Alliance must not have a military component; and must never infringe upon a member nation’s rights.

The Liberty Alliance’s headquarters shall be sited on the free soil once scarred by colonialism, communism, fascism, world wars, and the Holocaust - Eastern Europe, where, cradled in the intrepid human sprit, liberty’s lamp triumphantly pierced these benighted recesses of evil.

Finally, the Liberty Alliance would not invite the Free World to exit the UN.  The U.S. and all free nations should remain in the UN to keep a wary eye on liberty’s enemies.  But we must stop paying through the nose to get kicked in our assets.  Instead, we and other free nations will pay no more to the UN than a free-loading tyrant.  Free nations’ monies and personnel spared from the UN shall be dedicated to the Liberty Alliance.  

Discombobulated global sophisticates will decry the Liberty Alliance as undesirable and impossible.  They are overwrought and wrong.  Within the Alliance, Americans and all free peoples will remain cemented and steeled by the harmonic bonds of liberty, comity, and duty; and, like our greatest generation, we will not bend, we will not break in our reasoned faith in a future graced by free nations.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

Here's the text of a letter I wrote to Governor Granholm of Michigan regarding the vetoed SCHIP bill.

The Honorable Jennifer M. Granholm

Governor, State of Michigan
P.O. Box 30013
Lansing, Michigan 48909

Dear Governor Granholm;

Given your recent statements regarding the S-CHIP [MI-CHILD in our home state], I need a clarification of your position on the following:

1.      According to the State of Michigan’s own budget projections as submitted to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services, in 2008 you will be spending 71.6f Michigan kids’ S-CHIP funding on childless adults.  Is this true?  (If so, it makes Michigan number one in the country.)

2.      According to the Congressional Research Service, in 2006 approximately 46f all Michigan S-CHIP enrollees were adults – not kids.  Is this true?  If so, will this percentage of adults increase under the proposed S-CHIP expansion?

3.      According to the Congressional Budget Office, the proposed S-CHIP bill’s new sin-tax on tobacco requires at least 22 million new smokers to fund its promised expansion.  How many new smokers do you believe Michigan is going to contribute to this number, and how are you going to encourage non-smoking Michiganders to “pick the habit?”  (For the record:  I, at least, am paying my fair share of tobacco taxes “for the kids.”)

4.      Speaking of sin taxes, if the recent S-CHIP proposal’s tobacco tax proves insufficient to fund an expanded program, do you support raising other federal and/or state taxes to fund it?  (I am, in fairness, not assuming that, because your Michigan tobacco tax preceded your recent state income tax hike on working families, you will necessarily support similar federal tax hikes on working families.)

5.      According to the Congressional Budget Office, the proposed S-CHIP expansion will allow illegal immigrants to enroll in the program and, by 2012, cost federal and state taxpayers $6.5 billion dollars.  Do you approve of federal and/or state taxpayers’ money being spent on illegal immigrants?  If yes, since states must put up a matching share under the current and the proposed S-CHIP program, how much of our recently hiked state income taxes are you going to give to adult illegal immigrants?

6.      Do you agree reasonable people acting in good faith differ over means and still support a common goal for the common good?

7.   Hey, will you reconsider your recent state income tax hike?  (It was worth a shot…)

As ever, I look forward to your input on this important issue, although it would admittedly be nicer through a phone call than press accounts; and, despite some people’s oratorical pyrotechnics launched from the partisan darkness, I remain dedicated to working with all stake-holders to ensure poor kids get medical care and all kids inherit the best health care system in the world.

Respectfully,

Thaddeus McCotter

U.S. Representative

Michigan’s Congressional 11th District

NOTE: While hosting a press conference in Detroit today asking Michigan Republicans who have voted against the expansion of S-CHIP to reconsider their vote, Governor Granholm singled out two Members of Congress, including U.S. Representative Thaddeus McCotter (MI-11). A vote to override the President's veto of the S-CHIP bill is scheduled for this week in the House of Representatives.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 8 Comments | Permalink

In 1998, "President" Jiang Zemin enunciated communist China's operative foreign policy axiom in their "unrestricted warfare" against the Free World: "Intimidate with force, seduce with money."

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

I wanted to bring your attention to this Weekly Standard article written by John Tkacik of the Heritage Foundation.

August 7, 2007

The Arsenal of the Iraq Insurgency: It's made in China.

by John J. Tkacik, Jr.

This year, many truckloads of small arms and explosives direct from Chinese government-owned factories to the Iranian Revolutionary Guards have been transshipped to Iraq and Afghanistan, where they are used against American soldiers and Marines and NATO forces. Since April, according to a knowledgeable Bush administration official, "vast amounts" of Chinese-made large caliber sniper rifles, "millions of rounds" of ammunition, rocket-propelled grenades (RPGs), and "IED [improvised explosive device] components" have been convoyed from Iran into Iraq and to the Taliban in Afghanistan.

Secretary of Defense Robert Gates insists there is "no evidence as yet" that Tehran government officials are involved in shipping weapons to Iraq for use against U.S. forces, a judgment that seems to hinge on the view that the Revolutionary Guards are not part of the "government." But the administration source cautioned, "these are Revolutionary Guards trucks, and although we can't see the mullahs at the wheel, you can bet this is [Tehran] government-sanctioned."

In addition, in early June the Washington Times reported from Kabul that the Pentagon had evidence of new shipments of Chinese shoulder-fired HN-5 antiaircraft missiles reaching Taliban units in Afghanistan's Kandahar province. This shouldn't be surprising. The Pentagon has known since last August that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards had supplied Chinese-made C-802 antiship missiles with advanced antijamming countermeasures to Hezbollah in Lebanon. One slammed into the Israeli destroyer Hanit killing four sailors on July 14, 2006, during the Lebanon war.

The amount of raw intelligence on these Chinese arms shipments to Iran is growing, according to the official, who has seen it. Some items show Iran has made "urgent" requests for "vast amounts" of Chinese-made sniper rifles, apparently exact copies of the Austrian-made Steyr-Mannlicher HS50 which the Vienna government approved for sale to Iran's National Iranian Police Organization in 2004 (ostensibly to help customs officers police Iran's long and sparsely populated mountainous borders). At the time, the United States and Great Britain glowered at the Austrian government and slapped a two-year sales ban on Steyr-Mannlicher. Then in February, as if to confirm the worst suspicions, U.S. troops in Iraq uncovered caches of about 100 of the sniper weapons that looked like the Austrian rifles, the Daily Telegraph reported.

U.S. officials in Baghdad told reporters that at least 170 U.S. and British soldiers had been killed by well-trained and heavily armed snipers. On June 22, for example, an Army specialist was struck by a sniper as he climbed out of his Abrams tank during Operation Bull Run in Al Duraiya. Earlier that morning, the same sniper shot out the tank's thermal sights. He was "probably the most skilled sniper we've seen down here," the soldier's platoon leader told National Public Radio.

But were the Iraqi snipers indeed using Austrian-made armor-piercing .50 caliber weapons?

Perhaps not. There was little official American reaction to the discovery of the sniper rifle cache in February. In March, Steyr-Mannlicher claimed that U.S. authorities had yet to ask it for help in tracing the weapons, a simple matter of checking serial numbers, or even letting Austrian technicians examine the rifles. The Americans never approached the Austrian firearms firm. On March 29, Vienna's Wiener Zeitung quoted U.S. Central Command spokesman Scott Miller as admitting, "No Austrian weapons have been found in Iraq."

Upon hearing this, Steyr-Mannlicher owner Franz Holzschuh noted that the patents on the HS .50 expired "years ago," and they were being counterfeited all over the world. A quick Google search for "sniper rifles" confirms that China South Industries' AMR-2 12.7mm antimateriel rifle is a good replica of the HS .50.

In fact, Iran's Revolutionary Guards had placed large orders for Chinese sniper rifles, among other things. According to the administration official, U.S. intelligence picked up urgent messages from Iranian customers to Chinese arms factories pleading that the shipments were needed "quickly" and specifying that the "serial numbers are to be removed." The Chinese vendors, according to the intelligence, were only too happy to comply. The Chinese also suggested helpfully that the shipments be made directly from China to Iran by cargo aircraft "to minimize the possibility that the shipments will be interdicted."

According to sources who have seen the intel reports, the evidence of China-Iran arms deliveries is overwhelming. This is not a case of ambiguous intelligence. The intelligence points to Chinese government complicity in the Iranian shipments of Chinese small arms to Iraqi insurgents.

Yet top State Department and National Security Council officials prefer to believe that the relationship between Chinese government-owned and operated arms exporters and Iranian terrorists is "unofficial." Therefore, they ought not make too much out of it, lest the Chinese government be unhelpful with the North Koreans. This is the "China exception" at work; it pervades both the intelligence and national security bureaucracies. Moreover, there is a belief in some circles in the administration and on Capitol Hill that Iran's government can be "negotiated" with and therefore the activities of Tehran's Revolutionary Guards must not be seen as reflecting Iranian government policy.

Of course, it is inconceivable that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards send convoys of newly minted Chinese weapons into Iraq and Afghanistan without the clear intention of killing U.S. troops there. And it is equally inconceivable that the Chinese People's Liberation Army facilitates these shipments from its own factories and via its own air bases without the same outcome in mind. If, however, the shipments are occurring against the wishes of Beijing--if the Chinese central government cannot control the behavior of its own army--then the situation is dire indeed: How can anyone expect Beijing to restrain shipments of even more destructive weapons (missiles, submarines, torpedoes, nuclear weapons components) to rogue states? It is a prospect that U.S. officials simply cannot handle.

After leaks of this alarming intelligence surfaced in Bill Gertz's "Inside the Ring" column in the Washington Times, top Pentagon officials began to acknowledge the troubling truth behind them. On July 22, Agence France-Presse quoted the top U.S. military spokesman in Baghdad, Rear Admiral Mark I. Fox, as acknowledging: "There are missiles that are actually manufactured in China that we assess come through Iran" in order to arm groups fighting U.S.-led forces.

Deputy Undersecretary of Defense Richard Lawless told the Financial Times on July 7 that the United States has "become increasingly alarmed that Chinese armor-piercing ammunition has been used by the Taliban in Afghanistan and insurgents in Iraq." The FT quoted one unnamed U.S. official as saying that the United States would like China to "do a better job of policing these sales," as if China actually wanted to "police" its arms exports.

Lawless, revered in the Pentagon as a steely-eyed China skeptic, evinced less agnosticism to the FT, explaining that the country of origin was less important than who was facilitating the transfer. One might wonder why Beijing, as a matter of policy, would sell weapons to Iran for the clear purpose of killing American soldiers. "There is a great shortfall in our understanding of China's intentions," said Lawless of China's overall military policies, and "when you don't know why they are doing it, it is pretty damn threatening. . . . They leave us no choice but to assume the worst."

Why China is "doing it" need not be a mystery. In 2004, Beijing's top America analyst, Wang Jisi, noted, "The facts have proven that it is beneficial for our international environment to have the United States militarily and diplomatically deeply sunk in the Mideast to the extent that it can hardly extricate itself." It is sobering to consider that China's small-arms proliferation behavior since then suggests that this principle is indeed guiding Chinese foreign policy.

Beijing's strategists learned much from their collaboration with Washington during the 1980s, when the two powers prosecuted a successful decade-long campaign to drive the Soviet Union out of Afghanistan. The trick is to avoid a head-to-head confrontation with your adversary while getting insurgents to keep him tied down and taking advantage of his distraction to pursue your interests elsewhere. The cynical difference is that in the Afghan war of the 1980s, the U.S.-supported mujahedeen killed tens of thousands of Soviet troops, while in the early 21st century, Iranian (and Chinese)-supported insurgents in Afghanistan and Iraq are mostly killing Afghans and Iraqis.

The "China exception" notwithstanding, the ease with which Chinese state-owned munitions industries export vast quantities of small arms to violence-prone and war-ravaged areas--from Iraq and Afghanistan to Darfur--leaves no room to doubt that the Chinese government pursues this behavior as a matter of state policy. A regime with $1.3 trillion in foreign exchange reserves cannot claim that it "needs the money" and so turns a blind eye to dangerous exports by its own military. But until the scales fall from the eyes of Washington's diplomats and geopoliticians and they see China's cynical global strategy for what it is, few of the globe's current crises are likely to be resolved in America's--or democracy's--favor. In particular, U.S. soldiers and Iraqi and Afghan civilians will continue to be killed by Chinese weapons.

John J. Tkacik Jr., a senior fellow atthe Heritage Foundation in Washington, D.C., served in Beijing, Guangzhou, Hong Kong, and Taipei in the U.S. Foreign Service.

http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Articles/000/000/013/956wspet.asp

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 4 Comments | Permalink

During their mutual month-long August recesses, wherein public confidence in each has plummeted to record lows, the American Congress (“Our Bums”) is denouncing the Iraqi Parliament (“Their Bums”) as “do nothings.” Further, despite American military progress on the ground in Iraq, Washington claims Baghdad’s failure to meet political benchmarks will doom General Petraeus’ plan for victory.

The premise of this claim is absolutely backwards.

Read on...

Along Iraq’s bloody path to freedom, the greatest obstacle has been the average Iraqi’s wary neutrality in the battle between the United States’ “Coalition of the Willing” and the insurgents. Today, a nihilistic insurgency has been revealed to offer average Iraqis nothing but subjugation and extermination; in stark contrast, General Petraeus’ counter-insurgency strategy is delivering both the eradication of the insurgents and localized reconstruction efforts – i.e., a palpable hope for security and prosperity. Consequently, the true measure of political progress in Iraq is NOT found in its national Parliament; the true measure of political progress in Iraq is occurring in local tribes, towns and provinces where Iraqis are choosing liberty instead of the insurgency.

This Iraqi “election for freedom” is not an intrinsically military development. It is fundamentally a political development complementing and speeding military progress; and hastening the day such individual and local “grassroots” political wins collectively dictate political progress in Baghdad.

Let us, as the sovereign citizens of our free republic, ever remember how in representative democracies Parliaments and Congresses do not dictate to sovereign citizens; sovereign citizens dictate to Parliaments and Congresses. Thus, in Iraq each citizen in his or her respective tribe, town and province must inform and consent to federal laws being enacted, implemented, and honored; and, when this consent is individually granted in sufficient numbers, Iraq will complete its transformational emancipation from tyranny to liberty.

Further, let us, as the sovereign citizens of our free republic, ever remember how we cannot abandon Iraq’s fledgling democracy – or any democracy – under terrorist attack. The War for Freedom must be won through ideological, political, economic, diplomatic and – as an ultimate resort – martial means. If the U.S. abandons Iraq’s democracy, we will also abandon our and the entire free world’s inherited legacy of and professed commitment to freedom. If this betrayal of ourselves and the Iraqis occurs, our enemies will be empowered and we will be ideologically disarmed in the face of the enemy. If not liberty, what political principle will a discredited and defeated U.S. promote to turn the Middle East’s oppressed away from Al Qaeda’s extremism?

Come September 15th then, Americans must focus on the true measure of political progress in General Petraeus’ initial strategic assessment – tribal, local, and provincial support for liberty instead of the insurgency; and we must do so cognizant of the truth expressed and proven by prior generations of Americans who, in times of national trial, preserved and promoted our nation’s revolutionary experiment in human freedom: The only way to ensure liberty for ourselves is to extend liberty to the enslaved.

Of course, it would help too, if the collective bums in both the Iraqi Parliament and the American Congress remembered all power in a democracy is vested in its sovereign citizens, not its subservient government.

Chairman McCotter originally wrote this piece for Redstate.com, check it out here.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

HRPC Chairman McCotter Speaks at the Heritage Foundation 8.2.07. The Bush Administration's new surge strategy and offensives in Baghdad and the surrounding provinces have been a focus of fierce debate in Washington.  The entire complement of U.S. forces has been in place only since June, but many critics have already dismissed the surge as a failure.  Congress is demanding a change in the Iraq strategy even before the commanders on the ground fully understand the implications of the surge.   Watch and listen as military historians examine past U.S. counter insurgency efforts and reflect on the U.S. government's ability to grade the effectiveness of current military operations.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 1 Comments | Permalink

Part 1



Part 2



Part 3



Part 4

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink

Earlier today, I spoke on the floor of the House to defend the sovereignty and national dignity of our friend and ally Estonia; condemn Russia’s unwarranted intrusions against these free people; and affirm our commitment to America and Estonia’s common cause of human freedom.

After a long, illegal, and unjust Soviet occupation, Estonia now rightly and proudly stands by our side in the ranks of free nations.  Nobly and selflessly, Estonia is steadfast in its defense of civilization from our barbaric enemies, and has championed the cause of human freedom throughout our world.  Disturbingly, last week this free people’s very national sovereignty was threatened.

In what should come as no surprise to Americans, whose own Founding generation gained their independence from an imperial power, Estonia relocated an aging statute of a Soviet-era soldier from a central location in Tallinn to the city’s Garrison Cemetery.  Obstinately refusing to recognize Estonia’s patent right to do so, or the obvious irony in the statue’s new location, Russia used this routine act of municipal administration by the City of Tallinn to engage in a coordinated attempt to interfere in Estonia’s internal affairs.

Using state-controlled TV broadcasts into Estonia, the former Soviet Union used its state controlled television broadcasts to spew propaganda into Estonia.  This provocative Russian propaganda falsely claimed Estonia’s relocation of the insulting Soviet statue constituted an international crisis.  Russia did so to agitate and, thereby, incite the vandalism and violence which occurred in Tallin from April 26^th through 29^th.  Prior to these outbreaks of violence, Russian Embassy officials were observed meeting with the organizers of radical pro-Russia fringe groups; and, while Russian-speaking mobs roamed Tallinn’s streets, Estonia’s government web servers came under cyber attack, the cause of which was later traced to IP addresses located in Moscow and owned by the Russian Presidential Administration.  So too, there is a new report Russia has conveniently discovered a need to repair its rail links entering Estonia and, as a result, is suspending oil shipments to Estonia.  Further, Russia continues to flout the Vienna Convention by allowing Russian nationalist extremists to surround and vandalize Estonia’s Embassy in Moscow. 

When one weighs this inexcusable incident along with Russia’s recent refusal to adhere to the Conventional Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty, its recent arrest of Russian democracy advocates, and its refusal to honor past agreements to withdraw its military forces from countries, such as Moldova, one is compelled to question a former-KGB lieutenant colonel’s commitment to democracy; and whether the red bear is awakening from its hibernation to once more feast upon the free peoples of eastern Europe and the world.

I urge my colleagues to join in a righteous defense of Estonia’s sovereignty; a condemnation of Russia’s belligerent intrusions into this democratic nation’s internal affairs; and affirm, in the tradition of American Presidents from Harry Truman to Ronald Reagan, we will stand united against tyranny with our Estonian brothers and sisters as one free people.

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 2 Comments | Permalink

In the past, I have noted how the Republican Party neglected to send me the memo renouncing anti-communism; and how someone neglected to send the communists a memo informing them they were no longer evil.  I imagine the latter memo read thus:

Dear Friends (nee “Comrades”),  

Since you lack a free press, let us be the first to inform you the West has won the Cold War against the Soviet Union.  Sure, we did not directly defeat your tyrannical regime, but the big bear is tamed and so are you. 

Thus, it is time for you to be sporting about this:

1) Abandon your evil ideology;

2) Free your enslaved peoples; and

3) Play nice. 

To hasten you transition, we have taken the liberty (no offense meant) to attach an article on “The End of History” and a copy of the 1970s’ seminal foreign policy treatise, “I’m O.K., You’re O.K.”  If this insufficiently helpful, we will wage a campaign of schlock and awe against your tyrannical regimes which will culminate in a group hug on Oprah or an unwelcome visit from James Earl Carter.  (Name your poison!)  If still you persist, we will achieve your utter destruction by unleashing upon you a rain of riches unseen in human history.

Humbly Submitted,

The West

This latter proved no idle threat.  In the years since President Clinton (who, as candidate Clinton – remember him? – promised to get “tough” with the butchers of Tiananmen Square) signed the Permanent Normalization of Trade Relations with communist China (H.R. 4444) on May 24, 2000, the West has adopted a dubious “Make Loot Not War” strategy of pacifying communist regimes through trade and vainly hoping it undermines their ideology.  To us recalcitrant Reaganite fossils still wedded to the antiquated concept of America’s moral duty to help all human beings breathe free, the early returns alarm.

Teetering on the edge of the ash can of history when it killed kids in Tiananmen Square for quoting Thomas Jefferson, Beijing’s communist regime has made a comeback worthy of Dick Nixon.  Thanks to the West’s “Make Loot Not War” strategy, communist China rules the world’s fastest growing economy – an estimated 2006 GDP of $10 trillion dollars with a 10.5% growth rate.  (This is reminiscent of the 1950’s Soviet Union – remember them?  Didn’t their brief surge of prosperity transform Lenin’s spawn into liberal snuggle bunnies?)  As of January 2007, communist China held $353.6 billion in U.S. Treasury Bonds and, including non-treasury securities, as of 2005 they held over $527.3 billion in total U.S. debt.  (Overall, from 2004-2005, communist China’s holdings of U.S. debt increased by 54.6%).  Further, as of December 31, 2006, these entrepreneurial Maoists had a trade surplus with the United States of $232,548,600 (up 17% over the prior year). Who’d have ever thought trading with a slave labor regime would be so expensive?

Given Western elites’ odes to this vanguard of the proletariat’s new penchant for riches, one is tempted to assume these kinder, gentler Chinese communists are conscientiously using their new-found wealth to advance worthy causes, such as promoting dolphin-free tuna and refurbishing the Clinton library’s “jungle room.”  But these running dogs of communism evidently believe charity begins at home.  This year, communist China’s defense spending will be $45 billion (up 17.8%), the largest increase in the past half-decade.  This is not to say Beijing’s priorities are exclusively parochial.  Communist China is spending billions around the globe to acquire resources from and cement its relations with pro-American nations, like Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, and, yes, Comrade Putin’s Russia (through such benevolent associations as the Shanghai Cooperation Organization – remember them?).  In sum, communist China is spending the literally boatloads of money we ship them in some very curious places.  At this “end of history,” it’s a good thing there’s no such thing as a “world-wide communist menace.”

At the risk of sounding ungrateful, in addition to our burgeoning foreign debt and trade deficit, the destruction of our domestic manufacturing base, and their defense build up and investment in America’s enemies – oops, “adversaries” – what other boons have we bought with our “peaceful co-existence” with communist China?    

Well, there have been some attempts at “reforms,” though Chinese communists have reverted to form on key human rights issues by committing numerous and heinous abuses of their subjugated people’s human rights.  Still, if one ignores the fact the communist party, not the government, is the supreme ruler, one could claim progress in the realm of legislative elections.  One must also ignore how, in 2004, communist China’s highest “legislature” blocked Hong Kong’s efforts toward a direct democracy on the grounds changes needed to be gradual, lest they endanger the people’s “stability” and “prosperity.”  To be fair, one should not ignore the fact elections in communist China do occur in selected rural communities for village leader and for local “People’s Congresses,” which then conduct an election for the next higher level of “People's Congresses” and, ultimately, for the national “legislature.”  But to be heartened by this development, one must ignore the fact the “voters” choose only amongst eight small, officially registered parties controlled by the Chinese Communist Party; one must ignore the fact no subversive political opposition groups legally exist; and one must ignore the fact the regime has identified the Falungong spiritual movement and the China Democracy Party as subversive groups.  Come to think of it, at this rate of “reform” in communist China, the West will have to ignore the fact we will go broke before we buy them off.

This fact the communist Chinese do not ignore, as they execute their strategy of “Make Loot Then War.”   

Posted in Chairman McCotter | 0 Comments | Permalink