POLITICS – REVIEWS AND VIEWS OF LIFE

HUAWEI

There is an ongoing hybridization of American capitalism and Chinese communism. Is Trump’s authoritarianism becoming more like Xi’s communism or Xi’s authoritarianism becoming more like Trump’s capitalism? One wonders–are we growing closer together or farther apart?

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

House of Huawei (The Secret History of China’s Most Powerful Company)

Author: Eva Dou

Narration by: Nancy Wu

Eva Dou (Author, American journalist who reports on technology for The Washington Post.)

“House of Huawei” is a complex history of the growth and development of what became a Chinese multinational technology company that builds smartphones, laptops, smartwatches, and most importantly, telecom infrastructure for cloud services around the world. It is China’s version of Amazon that becomes a massive seller of tech equipment, internet use, and communication.

Ren Zhengfei (Chinese entrepreneur and engineer, founder of Huawei Technologies.)

There are many names of Huawei business leaders that are largely unknown to most Americans. Ren Zhengfei is the founder and most important person in Dou’s story. He is born in 1944 to schoolteacher parents during the Cultural Revolution. He served in the Chinese armies engineering corps that shaped his management style. He worked through famine, political purges, and the strict discipline of military service. He became the founder of Huawei in 1987.

Deng Xiaoping (China’s Chairman of the Central Advisory Commission of the Chinese Communist Party, 1982-1987)

The advance of Deng Xioping opens a capitalist door to the world for Huawei. Beginning in 1978 through 1989 Deng reforms the communist party and encourages a limited form of capitalism in China. When Xi takes over, Huawei becomes more directly subject to communist party oversight. As a company, Huawei is pulled closer to China’s government control. The Huawei network is classified as a national-security asset. Though Huawei may or may not have sought closer association with the CCP, it became entangled with state strategy.

Xi makes Huawei a national champion of innovation and semiconductor technology. It becomes a symbol of China’s technology ambitions while being a target of U.S. sanctions. Dou shows Huawei becomes a battleground for tech strategy between China and the Untied States

Sun Yafang (Chinese engineer and Chairwoman of Huawei, 1999-2018.)

Sun Yafang is a former chairwoman of Huawei. Her ties to Chinese intelligence services are viewed as a recurring controversy with Huawei’s involvement with America. Her relationship with China’s state power structure creates concern on the part of the U.S. with Huawei’s data collection as a part of Huawei’s practices in America.

Meng Wanzhou (aka Cathy Meng or Sabrina Meng, Deputy Chairwoman and CFO of Huawei.)

Ren’s daughter, Meng Wanzhou, becomes the Chief Financial Officer of Huawei. Wanzhou became known to the world when she is detained in Canada in 2018 at the request of the United States. Her arrest ironically leads to more familiarity with Huawei and its expansion in the world. The primary concern the author reveals is how dependent Huawei may be on the Chinese government for information about America’s technology services.

The fundamental concern of America, Germany, and Japan is Huawei’s use of data collection in their countries.

In the end, these countries decide to ban or restrict the use of Huawei’s equipment because of their ties to the Chinese Communist Party, government, and military. Beginning in 2019 the U.S. banned some of Huawei’s services and global chip supplies. By 2026, Huawei is banned from American federal networks, and telecom infrastructure services. Germany and Japan take similar actions between 2018 and 2026.

Dou explains Huawei’s history exposes deep contradictions with China’s government-directed economic growth.

The authoritarian and state-directed economic and political structure of China is a challenging contradiction to the idealism of communism. China’s communism is compelled to change ideologically from Marxism-Leninism to a state-directed form of capitalism. Huawei becomes a telecom giant euphemistically called socialism with Chinese characteristics. In truth, Huawei is structured to be more capitalist than communist with interventionist potential by the state if it conflicts with centralized control of the party.

Communist captitalism.

Dou explains how Party committees are created within Huawei’s management system. These committees exercise ideological control over Huawei’s executives. Huawei’s objectives are required to conform to national priorities. The development of 5G and telecom infrastructure becomes a national, not private asset of the company. This generates fear in the U.S. about security liabilities and foreign influence of China on U.S.’ and allied countries’ political and/or economic affairs. Dou notes China’s leadership insists on enforcing its security laws, data practices, and CCP’s rules of the road for Huawei’s operations.

Huawei discipline.

Dou notes that Xi’s anti-corruption campaign pressures Huawei to tighten internal governance. Executives of Huawei were disciplined for being too extravagant. The CCP organized ideological training for company employees to more fully align them with the Party. China’s government interference in Huawei’s management leads to U.S. sanctions and an arrest of Meng Wanzhou’s in Canada. The United States has effectively banned Huawei telecom and surveillance equipment. Federal agencies cannot use Huawei devices. American internet companies in the U.S. that receive federal funds must remove Huawei equipment. Though Huawei phones and laptops are not banned in the U.S., they are not sold by major U.S. carriers or retailers. The UK, Germany, France, Japan, Australia, and Canada have taken similar actions against Huawei services. Huawei product like laptops and mobile phones are not universally banned but many Western countries have barred telecom infrastructure because of national security concerns.

What is striking about Dou’s book is the history of Huawei shows both confluence and separation between Communism and Capitalism.

Both use the capitalist tools of competition, private enterprise, and global markets. Both are involved in the private sector and provide preferential treatment, political protection, and financing. Nationalism is a greater force than Marxism for both China and the U.S. American corporate discipline is similar to communist party discipline. Further, economic and political strategies of America and China have similarities. However, the two cultures conflict with each other over globalization and levels of interference or control of private companies. America leans toward transparency, partnership, open markets, and international trust. China opts for secrecy, political reliability, ideological conformity, and oversight to ensure national security. Furthermore, America thrives on risk-taking, experimentation, a free market and decentralized decision making while China emphasizes political correctness, Party control, ideological discipline, and insistence on corruption elimination.

In sum, it seems there is an ongoing hybridization of both American capitalism and Chinese communism. Is Trump’s authoritarianism becoming more like Xi’s communism or Xi’s authoritarianism becoming more like Trump’s capitalism? One wonders–are we growing closer together or farther apart?

WARNING

“The Fire Next Time” signals a political and prophetic warning to America. The continued existence of Baldwin’s observations about racial inequality are compounded by the rising gap between rich and poor and gender inequality in the 21st century.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Fire Next Time

Author: James Baldwin

Narration by: Lawrence Fishburne

JAMES BALDWIN (1924-1987 AMERICAN NOVELIST, SOCIAL CRITIC)

“The Fire Next Time” is written when James Baldwin is only 38 years old. He lives for 25 more years before his death in 1987. His book about life as a Black American is an emotional journey into the struggle of Black Americans that exposes the venality of white suppression and inequality in American history. The intensity of his writing is a brutal exposure of the consequence of discrimination that overwhelms a reader or listener. In many ways, his book is professorial but his view of life as a minority in white America is appalling.

“Learning from the Germans” tells of how post WWII Germany dealt with the history of the holocaust more forthrightly than America has dealt with racism and its evil.

Baldwin exposes the hypocrisy of American democracy, the moral bankruptcy of racial hierarchy, and the failure of American institutions to live up to the values expressed in the American Constitution. The founders argue “all men are created equal” while history shows human equality has never been achieved in America. Baldwin clearly explains America’s failures but is decidedly vague on how those failures can be corrected. He clearly disagrees with the Nation of Islam’s belief in Black self-determination through separation of the races but is ambiguous about organized movements to correct discrimination.

Racist rally in America.

Baldwin explains how white liberals are too complacent, conservatives too cruel, Black separatists to fatalistic, and American institutions too dishonest to forthrightly deal with human inequality. His foundational belief is that a fight for civil rights, and continued arguments for equality are essential requirements for America to achieve the goals that are stated and implied by the Constitution.

“The Fire Next Time” signals a warning to America.

“The Fire Next Time” signals a political and prophetic warning. The continued existence of Baldwin’s observations about racial inequality are compounded by the rising gap between rich and poor and gender inequality in the 21st century. If America refuses to confront inequality, there will be a national reckoning that will be violent and unavoidable.

RUSSIA’S LEADERS

To Mark Galeotti, Putin is a pragmatic ruler who reminds Russians of their history of Tsarist control and leadership. Time will tell whether Russia’s citizens become discontented with war, lost lives, and victims (some of which are Russian Ukrainians) who choose to live in Ukraine.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

A Short History of Russia (How the World’s Largest Country Invented Itself, from the Pagans to Putin)

Author: Mark Galeotti

Narration by: Mark Galeatti

Mark Galeotti (Author, British historian, writer, honorary professor at UCL’s School of East European Studies.)

“A Short History of Russia” notes that Russia has historically felt insecure about its identity as a part of the European community. Galeotti notes Russia has no natural borders and no single ethnic core. Reaching back in history, the author notes the royal history of Russia’s Tsars (men and women who have descended from royalty). The 1917 Russian revolution turned Russia’s monarchy into a communist autocracy that leads to the eventual ascension of Putin. Putin becomes leader of a reconstituted Russia that reminds one of Russia’s Tsars. Galeatti argues Putin’s Russia considers itself part of the European continent despite its Mongol history that profoundly reshaped Russia’s political culture.

Mongols are an East Asian ethnic group which originated in Mongolia and China.

Galeotti argues Russia has always aspired to be a major influence and power in Europe. Their history of centralized authority and territorial expansion is characteristic of Russia’s desire to be a dominant part of European culture. Despite Russia’s cultural intent to be part of Europe, it drives to have its own identity as a continental influencer rather than conforming culture. The rise of communism, and much later, Putin is founded on Russia’s history of hierarchal leadership and cultural belief.

Tsarist Russia.

Galeotti paints a picture of Tsarist Russia that becomes a model for the rise of autocratic communism. Russian Tsars emphasized centralized control of the country. The Tsars were suspicious of citizen influence or control of the country. They set the table for rule from above because of the lack of any civil organization. Russia had a cultural background for the creation of an autocratic state. The effect of that background set the table for Stalin and today’s Vladmir Putin. Stalin establishes his rule through the use of a secret service to assure loyalty to its leader, Joseph Stalin. Stalin uses that secret service to eliminate rivals to his power. In the interregnum between Stalin and Putin, Mikhail Gorbachev attempts to reform the communist party to an openness for change through his personal effort and a home-fore initiative from party leaders, workers, and managers. Gorbachev fails for many reasons; not the least of which is the terrorist and murderous experience of Stalin’s leadership. But, Gorbachov’s is also because of his failure to gain party support and the consequent departure of many states that chose to leave the U.S.S.R.

Mikhail Gorbachev (Pres. of the Soviet Union 1990-1991, General Secy. of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union from 1985 to 1991.)

Gorbachev takes control of the Russian government with the intent of restructuring weaknesses that had grown in the directionless vacuum created by the death of Stalin. Boris Yeltsin interferes with Gorbachev’s effort when he becomes President of the Russian Federation in 1991. Yelsin complicated Gorbachev’s reform by looking to a young KGB officer named Vladimir Putin to join the administration. Yeltsin’s alcoholism compounded growing disorganization of the Russian government. Gorbachev loses control of the communist party and the balance of personal interests between factions of the U.S.S.R., in part, because of Yeltsin’s interference and mismanagement.

Chernobyl nuclear disaster in Ukraine.

Chernobyl becomes a symbol of what is going wrong with centralized government control. Putin’s steely determination reminds Russians of a leader who could stabilize what remained of the Russian empire after the Baltic states and Ukraine left the Union. The ideas of perestroika and glasnost interfered with the U.S.S.R.’s imperialist system of government. However, public discontent with Gorbchev’s rule renewed public interest in Tsarist style control of government like that which is implied, if not recommended by former KBG agent, Vladimir Putin.

Boris Yeltsin (1931-2007, President of Russia 1990-1991.)

Galeotti believes Gorbachev’s perestroika and glasnost recommendations reveal deep structural weaknesses that are magnified by Boris Yeltsin’s incompetence. However, Galeotti argues Putin is not a master strategist nor a villain. Putin is characterized as an opportunist who takes control of Russia in ways that were experienced during Tsarist and later Stalinist rule. He reinstitutes personal networks of government control by rewarding those who comply with his rule while hollowing out leaders and institutions that interfere with his power. Putin makes himself a modern Tsar by governing with a circle of loyalists. Loyalty to Putin is the cornerstone of his governance. Putin manipulates the fragility of Russian bureaucracies meant to improve the lives of Russian citizens while endorsing the greed of the wealthy. Control and loyalty become more important than effectiveness or efficiency. Loyalty to Putin is the mark of value in his administration.

Putin clearly takes the side of autocratic rulers because of his belief in control of circumstances and belief in loyalty to those in charge.

Putin in Syria supports its dictator, Bashar al-Assad, who flees to Russia when deposed.

Bashar al-Assad (Rose to power in Syria in 2000 having inherited his position as Syria’s ruler from his father. As a fellow autocrat, he is fully supported by Putin.)

Galeotti notes Putin is not omnipotent but is a leader whom Russians are familiar with from past history. Centralization of power has been a hallmark of Russia’s growth with a desire for Russia to be identified as a powerful and important part of Europe. To the author, Putin is a pragmatic ruler who reminds Russians of their history of Tsarist control and leadership. Time will tell whether Russia’s citizens become discontented with Putin’s aggression, the Ukrainian war, war’s lost lives, and its victims (many of which are Russian Ukrainians).

DEMOCRACY’S STRENGTH

History has shown the greatness of both parties of American government. One takes pride in the fact that American democracy corrects the errors of incompetent Presidents.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

The Fourth Turning is Here (What the Seasons of History Tell Us About How and When This Crisis Will End)

Author: Neil Howe

Narration by: Neil Howe

Neil Howe (American author, historian, economist, and consultant.)

Neil Howe argues the United States is in the middle of a crisis. He views political polarization is as great today as it was during the American Revolution, the Civil War, and the Great Depression. He suggests society has broken into two “mega-identities” that is evident in the news of the day. He sees a red and blue American society with a distinct part of society being rural/suburban, evangelical or traditionalist, nationalist, anti-elite, and distrustful of institutions. The other side is urban/metropolitan, secular and pluralist, cosmopolitan, and pro-institution with a trust in expertise. (In fairness to the author, this reviewer did not listen to Howe’s entire book.)

Generational beliefs.

Howe goes on to suggest there is a generational quality to these two camps. Boomers are those born between 1943 and 1960 (my generation). Generation X born from 1961-1981, Millennials (1982-2004), and Generation Z (2005-to the present). The problem with this broad categorization of Americans is that one can see themselves in each generations view of American government and society. Americans are both Red and Blue, believe strongly in the equality of human beings, are skeptical of absolutes, and believe in common good and the importance of government. Americans are relatively free human beings who will ultimately make the right decision to preserve the health and well-being of democratic society.

Is immigration an American crisis or a discouraged opportunity?

Howe argues today’s America is at a once-in-a-century crisis. He suggests American governance has become too polarized and that institutions of government are decaying in ways that are diminishing the economic prosperity and influence of democracy in the world. Polarization is not new to America. One who has reached a Boomer’s age remembers political polarization from the excesses of America during Vietnam. The mistakes and lies of the Johnson administration are not unlike the lies of Donald Trump. Democrat’s support of Johnson’s Great Society created too many programs like urban renewal and anti-poverty that remind one of Republican’s support of Trump’s overzealous deregulation of environmental protection, finance of projects to aggrandize his reputation, and welfare policies that penalize the poor. Both Johnson and Trump show poor management of their major policy initiatives. The social and political consequence of their mismanagement has damaged America’s economy and influence in the world. Both Johnson and Trump represent what can go wrong in a democracy but is eventually corrected by elections of future leaders founded on the principles of the Constitution.

There are differences and similarities between Johnson and Trump. The obvious difference is the parties to which they belong. Johnson creates bureaucratic sprawl and economic waste by expanding government services while Trump creates bureaucratic ineptitude through fragmentation from arbitrary firing of government employees. Both Presidents believe they are benefiting American society while they made decisions that damaged the economy and diminished the value of democratic governance. The extent of their damage during these two Presidents did and will take time to repair but the structure of America’s government assures democracy’s recovery.

History has shown the greatness of both parties of American government.

Lincoln is elected to take the giant step needed to put America back on the path of human equality and opportunity. Franklin Roosevelt saved America from economic collapse. Just as Lincoln is not survived by a President who reinforces equality of Americans, the same will likely be true for the next President after Trump. But, as Martin Luther King said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice”. One takes pride in the fact that American democracy corrects the errors of incompetent Presidents.

A WRITER’S JUDGEMENT

“There is Simply Too Much to Think About” is a time-consuming read with a depth of understanding about writing that gives one “…Too Much to Think About” because of its author’s humbling intelligence. The fundamental point Bellow makes is that art is as important as science for the advance of society.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

There Is Simply too Much to Think About (Collected Nonfiction)

Author: Saul Bellow

Narration by: Malcolm Hillgartner

Saul Bellow (Author, Canadian-American novelist who has been awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature, and the Pulitzer Prize.)

This is a daunting book by an accomplished novelist who explains what makes reading fiction and nonfiction worth one’s time and attention. The range of subjects Bellow covers is immense. He not only writes about literature but politics, philosophy, Jewish identity, American culture, history, and other subjects that overwhelm a reader/listener. Bellow suggests good nonfiction and fiction are about characters who write about life that makes them important enough to have meaning to readers and purpose for writers. A writer creates an understanding of characters in the context of a society in which they live. A good writer’s attention is given to the contradictions and complexity of living life. What Bellow means by nonfiction writers is those who witness life unfolding and relate that understanding from a perspective which may or may not resonate or at least be understood by a reader.

Though Bellow mentions few female authors, he shows strong opinions about famous male authors.

Bellow offers a tour of twentieth century writers he believes are examples of good nonfiction writers. He notes Ralph Ellison, Phillip Roth, and J.D. Salinger as examples of great nonfiction writers. At the same time, Bellow explains how deeply his life feeds into his writing. He reveals his own strengths and weaknesses. He acknowledges being drawn into trendy ideas of others that gloss over truth and mislead readers with contradictions. Like all human beings, Bellow can be misled by second-hand assertions about historic events and characters that lack verifiable truth. The result may be misrepresentation and sometimes cruel judgements about private lives and the history of humanity. Written misrepresentations reveal as much about the writer as the subject.

Ralph Ellison (Author of “Invisible Man”)

Bellow offers some warnings to readers of both good and bad writers. He suggests a reader should be careful about reading too much into writer’s characters or experience in a story. One thinks of Ellison’s “Invisible Man” and how it reshaped many readers understanding of race and identity. Ellison is not writing a protest novel. It is about social invisibility, Black identity, politics, and the meaning of life. Phillip Roth’s Colman Silk is accused of racism and forced to retire but he is not a racist. He is obviously falsely accused because he is secretly African American passing as white. Truth of a story is revealed in detail created by good writing.

Though not having personally read Bellow’s books, he notes that his writing is largely based on episodes from his own life.

Being born in a Montreal Jewish slum and raised as an immigrant in Chicago he experiences discrimination as a baby born in a Montreal slum and as an immigrant on Chicago streets. The working-class environment of Chicago streets gave Bellow a level of freedom and exposure to life as just another young boy finding his way in life. He could measure himself against more diverse life experiences in Chicago without losing his Jewish identity. As an immigrant, it added to his identity and broadened his understanding of life as a human being. He became streetwise in responding to the world.

The experience of life.

Bellow clearly illustrates a personal belief and understanding about life. He is an obvious master of American language. His intellect and curiosity are overwhelming. There is an emotional and moral seriousness that is sometimes funny and at others quite confrontational. He masterfully turns lived experience into art. There is a level of overconfidence in his judgement and personal contradictions crop up in his writing. On the one hand he distrusts ideology but writes a highly ideological view of writing. He defends the importance of art but criticizes culture. He lauds intellectual independence while insisting on his own beliefs. He is a bit combative toward academics, critics, and seems somewhat dismissive or impatient with those who struggle with his opinions. The title of Bellow’s book says it all–“There is Simply Too Much to Think About”.

Bellow believes the arts are the essential ingredient of what Martin Luther King’s quote depends upon.

Bellow is very judgmental about the writers he reviews in his “…Much to Think About” book. His greatest praise goes to Ralph Ellison, Phillip Roth, James Joyce, and Franz Kafka. His sharpest criticism is of Updike, Hemmingway, T.S. Eliot, Salinger, and James Baldwin. Updike is called too polished, Hemingway too emotionally shallow, Eliot too culturally conservative, Salinger too mystical, and Baldwin too damaged by ethnic prejudice. Despite his criticism, Bellow finds their works have power and meaning implying they are worth reading. Most who recognize or have read some or all of these authors will likely find them worth the time and effort to read them and come to their own conclusions.

THE MIDDLE WAY

As every American, particularly white people of conscience know, ethnic minorities are faced with hardship, violence, and social discrimination until ruling majorities realize that all human beings are entitled to equality of opportunity in the society in which they live.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Voice for the Voiceless (Over Seven Decades of Struggle with China for My Land and My People.)

Author: Dalai Lama

Narration by: Edoardo Ballerini

Dalai Lama (Author, born in 1935 is presently 91 years old. He is the spirtual head of Tibetan Buddhism.)

“Voice for the Voiceless” is the wish of every minority in the world. State supremacy over the individual in communism sharply contrasts with democracy in degrees of un-freedom revealed by what a citizen can be and do. Competition and descent, suppression of minority voices, control of information, collective identity, and human rights are insisted upon by communist leadership according to “Voice of the Voiceless” by the Dalai Lama.

American government checks and balances.

In a democratic government, there are multiple societally expressed interests like legal protection for dissent, creation of non-government organizations, guarantee of free speech, and institutional checks and balance on the power of its leaders. It is not that America or any democracy is perfect in its makeup but in the China that the Dalai Lama describes, communism is designed to prevent any form of opposition to its leadership. In the Dalai Lama’s view, no compassion exists in China’s government.

The infamous and unidentified “tank man” who stood in the way of the Tiananmen Square crackdown.

The most prominent historical evidence of a lack of government compassion is shown by the Tiananmen Square massacre during the Deng administration. The Dalai Lama’s opinion is reinforced by a Chinese guide who closes the doors of a private meeting room in which several Americans are informed of China’s reaction to the Tiananmen massacre. Chinese students and citizens who demonstrated at Tiananmen Square were asking for communist party reform, a reasonable level of leadership accountability, and elimination of corrupt Chinese government leaders.

In today’s China, President Xi consistently supports authoritarian rulers’ right to rule without interference from outside interests.

The Dalai Lama writes “Voice for the Voiceless” to challenge China’s political system which denies rule of Tibet by the Dalai Lama as its head of state. His demand reminds one of histories of displacement of native tribal leaders in America in the 17th and 18th centuries. Recognizing the fates of proud native leaders in America, the Dalai Lama (who has been exiled to India since the 1950s) is asking the communist government to allow him to be the leader of his “tribe” in Tibet. In America, more than two hundred years passed before genuine recognition and opportunity were seriously offered America’s natives. It has taken nearly 200 years for America to offer equal opportunity for tribal natives to pursue their interests as recognized ethnic minorities. What the Dali Lama wishes for Tibetan people in China is in many ways the experience of minorities in a democracy, let alone a communist autocracy.

Mary Annette Pember offers a firsthand, intergenerational perspective of America’s effort to assimilate native inhabitants of America.

Natives of America grew together as common ancestors that could choose life in a system of government that came to understand the importance of tribal self-determination. Natives of America had land rights, and a concept of cultural difference; accompanied by jurisdictional authority to pursue economic development as a distinct ethnic minority. The Dalai Lama clearly shows Tibetan people have a similar ethnic origin and desire for freedom and self-determination. Only time and ethnic solidarity offer hope for them to realize their goals.

Barbara Demick gives listeners a picture of Tibet with a darkness that rivals the narrative she creates for North Korea in “Nothing to Envy”.

Communist China is not America. However, the Dalai Lama appears to want a level of independence to protect a Tibetan way of life for Buddhists to preserve their cultural identity and language without violent resistance by the Chinese system of government. This is a reminder of native American’s struggle in democratic America. The Dalai Lama seems only to wish for human and religious freedom, not nation-state hegemonic control. He notes Tibetans have no institutional power, no representation in the Chinese government, and no legal way to challenge state’ government policies.

Mao Zedong (1893-1976) Father of the Peoples Republic of China)

The Dali Lama’s book surprisingly notes the initial relationship with Chinese communism that proposed a “Seventeen-Point Agreement” which offered a framework for Tibet to have the recognition requested by the Tibetan culture. However, the tenor of the “…Agreement” is violated with Tibet being occupied by Mao’s government. Mao orders his administration to keep the Dalai Lama from fleeing and pressured Tibetan leaders to negotiate subservience to the Chinese Communist Party. Mao’s goal is to unify Tibet with China, not provide Tibetan autonomy within the structure of Chinese suzerainty. There was to be no self-determination of Tibetans, no interest in preserving Tibetan institutions, no role for the Dalai Lama, and no Tibetan’ autonomy. Mao demanded integration, not reconciliation.

The book “Being Peace” is a layman’s introduction to Buddhist belief.

As the Dalai Lama grew to understand what Mao and future leaders of the CCP really wanted, he chose to leave Tibet in the late 1950s. He exiled himself to India, the origin of Buddhism’s creation. Buddhism teaches liberation from suffering through compassion, wisdom, and meditation. These were not a part of the Communist ideals of Mao or his successors. The core belief of communism is that truth comes from the party whereas Buddhist believe truth is from inner realization. Every Buddhist is a sentient being that has compassion for individual suffering while a CCP member subordinates their feelings to the needs of the state and national unity. All religions are a potential threat to state control which is the basis and practice of communism and, to a lesser extent, all forms of government.

The Potala Palace in Lhasa, Tibet is the historic residence of the Dalai Lamas.

The Dalai Lama represents a threat to communism because he is a global moral figure, a symbol of Tibetan identity, and a spiritual authority independent of the state. Buddhist belief in inner freedom, compassion, and spiritual autonomy directly conflict with the ideals of communism because of its belief in the collective rather than the individual. An interesting irony in that communism is a form of government that endorses a collective concept. Of course, a communist collective is external to one’s inner self while Buddhism believes a collective is formed through an inner understanding of the self. China insists on centralized government authority, conformity to its edicts, and personal identification with the state’s government. One’s heart goes out to the Tibetan people and the discrimination they are suffering. Only time offers hope for their future.

COLD WAR ORIGINS

Hannah Lucinda Smith’s “Hinterlands” is an eye opener for the uniformed but it’s a bit of a slog for non-historians to absorb.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Hinterlands (The New Cold War Brewing at the Peripheries of the West.)

Author: Hannah Lucinda Smith

Narration by: Hannah Lucinda Smith

Hannah Lucinda Smith (Author, British journalist based in Istanbul, Turkey. Published in The Times, The Atlantic, Foreign Policy, and wrote “Erdogan Rising”, presumably about the President of Turkey.

Smith has written a complicated book about what she calls “a new cold war”. It is complicated because most people’s knowledge of some of the territories she writes about like Transnistria, Respublika Srpska, and Nagorno-Karabakh are not known by the general public. Of course, she would not have titled her book “Hinterlands” if it only addresses major nations or organizations like Russia, Turkey, China, the EU, NATO, or the U.S.

Today’s conflicts between Russia/Ukraine and America/Iran may turn into world conflagrations. The same might be said of the following countries that make up Smith’s “Hinterlands”. “Hinterlands” is a reminder that there are other conflicts, less well known, that have the same disastrous potential. Smith identifies six low-visibility conflicts that may rise to the level of the Russia/Ukraine and American/Iran wars or worse. They are as follows:

Nagorno‑Karbala

Nagorno-Karabakh became an independent nation between Azerbaijan and Armenia which is just south of Russia, north of Iran, and between Armenia and Azerbaijan.

Russia, Turkey, and Iran have dogs in Nagorno-Karabakh’s fight. Nagorno-Karabakh is mostly populated by ethnic Armenians who declared independence which is settled by a war that ended in 1994. The conflict is fed by interference from Russia, Turkey, and Iran that have their own agendas for the people who live in this territory. Russia plays the role of peacekeeper while ironically supplying arms to its citizens. Turkey is an ally of Azerbaijan that reluctantly allowed Nagorno/Karabakh’s independence. The author notes Iran has interest in the territory’s independence because of an Azeri ethnic population in Iran that is larger than the Armenian population in Nagorno Karabakh. Nagorno Karbakh’s independence creates a kind of jealousy about its ethnic independence versus a larger Azeri minority in the adjacent country of Iran. Of course, this is confusing because it seems more a concern for Iran’s leadership than Nagorno Karabakh’s independence from Azerbaijan. The threat seems that Iran may worry more about an independence drive by Azeri’s in Iranian territory because of the example set by the Azeri’ Armenians in Azerbaijan.

Respublika Srpska (Northern part of Bosnia and Herzegovina.)

Bosnia (Respublika Srpska)

Having traveled to the former Yugoslavia, the ravages of its dismantling may be seen in pockmarked buildings from battles that occurred during Yugoslavia’s dismantling. As Smith notes, there is a Serbian majority inside Bosnia. It identifies itself as Respublika Srpska (RS). This faction wants independence from Bosnia, but the Bosnia constitution forbids it. Russia supports the RS desire for independence. According to Smith, Russia is simply pursuing its desire to see the weakening of Western Institutions which RS’ independence would engender. The RS leader Milorad Dodik is pushing for a referendum for independence. The U.S. pushes for constitutional reform which in one sense puts U.S. on the fence rather than being for or against independence. Serbia supports RS ambitions. The EU is not unified in an opinion either for or against independence. Turkey supports Bosnia’s RS’ desire because of their Muslim religion and Erdojan’s hope for Putin’s continued economic support of Turkey. This seems resolvable but it has the makings for a hot war if independence is denied by Bosnia’s government. If independence is achieved, the concern will be for the minorities that choose to remain in a newly independent Serbian country. (As noted, this is an example of Smith’s complicated history.)

Kosovo.

Kosovo

The fight for independence is always a potential flashpoint for unrest that can widen into war between internal as well as outside nation-state interference. Outside interference can be based on economic, religious, or strategic interests of outside nation-state powers. Russia, Turkey, and Iran as immediate neighbors may call on any of these reasons to interfere and spark a wider confrontation and consequence in their region of interest.

Transnistria

Transnistria is a little-known de facto breakaway from Moldova that is not recognized by the international community.

Smith explains Transnistria is a region that broke away from Moldova when the USSR collapsed. Smith notes Russia protects its independence as a Russian client territory. She notes Russian troops are stationed in Transnistria while its existence is subsidized by the Russian government. It is a strategic foothold for Russia in their plan to takeover Ukraine. It is a conflict zone that remains a part of the nation of Moldova, under the control of Putin with Transnistria’s own government made up of a president, parliament, and military. It is a potential flashpoint in the Russian/Ukraine war.

Crimea / broader Ukraine conflict

Crimea annexation by Russia from the nation-state of Ukraine.

Crimea remains un unresolved border problem in Smith’s view of Soviet occupation. When the USSR dissolved, Crimea became a part of an independent Ukraine. Smith notes Russia has made immense financial investments in Crimea to lure its citizens to become a part of Putin’s Russia. Obviously, Crimea is a potential conflict in the making because of its former existence as a part of Ukraine. One wonders how Russian influence will affect Crimea’s interest in being a part of Russia or Ukraine in the future.

Turkey–Kurdish regions (Syria/Iraq)

There is concern about the influence of a Kurdish separatist movement that might spread from Syria and Iraq to Turkey.

Turkey has already created a military footprint in Syria and Iraq. Turkey has had several violent conflicts with the PKK, a Kurdish militant group that is classified as a terrorist organization that has caused thousands of deaths and conducted military operations in southeastern Turkey beginning in 2015 and continuing through 2016. That terrorism began long before the election of Erdogan. The Kurds seek their own nation-state, which was proposed back in 1920, after WWI. However, the disparate beliefs of Kurd’ factions make nation building and independence a tough objective to achieve. They allege a wish for autonomy, local democracy, pluralism, and decentralized governance whether living in Syria, Iraq, or Turkey. Of course, they are not the only ethnic group in each of these countries and the PKK’s objectives conflict with existing territorial governments. For various reasons ranging from different Kurdish beliefs to the existence of existing governments, the Kurds remain stateless and a threat to Syria’s, Iraq’s, and Turkey’s governments.

In the end reward is destroyed by the selfishness of each against the other.

Hannah Lucinda Smith’s “Hinterlands” is an eye opener for the uniformed but it’s a bit of a slog for non-historians to absorb.

MONEY’S VALUE

Ahamad suggests the public needs to oppose policies based on economic and political leaders’ singular judgements. Public input to government decision-making is an essential strength of democracy and the great weakness of autocracy.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

1873 (The Rothschilds, the First Great Depression, and the Making of the Modern World)

Author: Liaquat Ahamed

Narration by: George Newbern

Liaquat Ahamed (Author, American financial historian.)

Liaquat Ahamed’s book, “1873”, has been somewhat anxiously awaited for by the public because of his previous book “Lords of Finance” which reported central bankers’ roles in the Great Depression. Talk of depression swirls around the public today. What parallels are there between “1873” and the current world financial market? Liaquat Ahamed explains the impact of railroad expansion and world trade that exploded in the 19th century. He suggests that explosion seems parallel to today’s impact of transformative technology like A.I. which has shown potential for productivity increase around the world. That expectation magnifies the amount of capital being invested in a changing paradigm in society that Ahamad argues is similar while different from railroad introduction in the 19th century.

Globalization of information technology.

Globalization makes change more impactful today because of the world wide web and a potential for spreading useful and harmful information. Ahamed suggests the vast investment in railroads has parallels to communication technology’s introduction in today’s economy. The rush to create datacenters requires large capital investments with the creation of data centers that challenge today’s energy availability. Corruption became common in the 19th century with schemes designed to lure nations and investors into impractical investments. Ahamed recounts grifter’ pitches in the 19th century similar to crypto bubble makers of the 21st century. In the 19th century, mostly banks, governments, and wealthy risk takers were making foolish investment risks for hoped-for wealth. Today, crypto bubble makers reach into the pockets of the poor and middleclass.

Crypto investment.

As the public today becomes skeptical about tech investments, the banks of the 19th century belatedly turned skeptical about transportation system expansion. The growing malaise of recession turned into a depression in the 19th century. Ahamed argues today is similar to what caused the 19th century economy to slip into recession and depression. Ahamed suggests the political polarization occurring in the 19th century is evident in today’s political climate. The split between Trump supporters and detractors is widespread in America. Trump’s attacks on global cooperation seem similar to what occurred in the 19th century. Like the farmers of 1873, factions of America resent their loss of jobs and manufacturing income to other countries. The geopolitical shocks of the Ukraine war, America’s bombing of Iran, Russia’s Ukraine war, and growing tensions with China magnify inflation and create capital reallocations that harm respective economies and increase potential for world-wide financial collapse.

Ahamed’s book outlines similarities and differences between the past and present, foretelling a possible future.

Ahamed suggests that America needs to avoid a rigid monetary policy based on “who’s ox is gored”. Further, investment in technology needs to be reined in by reducing the hype about loss of jobs with a realistic judgement of employment impact and technologies’ benefits. Political and business leadership need more transparency and public oversight to improve societal decisions on technological investment. Investment opportunities need to be reasonably evaluated to avoid bubbles that distort capital flows. Ahamed suggests power brokers, whether private or public, need to avoid over reaction to inflation by being wary, but not overly punitive, toward investment in new technology.

Breadlines in the 1929 economic crash.

Ahamed offers several individual examples of con men who created hype-driven market manipulation that fueled 19th century fraud with over-optimism, and self-promotion based on new railroad building schemes. One listens to the methodology of these con men and will recall news articles today about technology fraudsters. Though only 3 to 4 percent of SpaceX shares are owned publicly, it reminds one of the over-optimism and self-promotion of Elon Musk. This is not to say Musk is a con man, but it reflects how over confidence in technology is similar to the over confidence in railway expansion in the 19th century. Additionally, search of the news of crypto scammers in the 21st century show there are three Thai suspects, 22 accused scammers in Palau, 82 accused scammers in Eswatini, and an astounding 15,260 suspects worldwide.

Truth is left to historians, and society’s judgement.

Liaquat Ahamed suggests the U.S. presidential elections are directly distorted by the financial crisis surrounding 1873. Ulysses Grant’s administration is undermined by the loss of public confidence in the federal government. The civil rights movement is stalled because northern voters were less willing to support federal intervention in the South. The Republican Party lost the political will to continue Reconstruction policies. Voters punished incumbents because of the economic crisis of the 1870s. Ahamed argues the economic collapse destabilized all governments and empowered reactionary forces that weakened government reforms. Conspiracy theories blossomed with scapegoating of all who had been elected to govern in the western world.

People are being arrested based on the color of their skin with the presumption that they are not citizens of America and are deported without legal recourse.

Today’s American government has stalled support of fundamental rights written in the Constitution. People are being arrested based on the color of their skin with the presumption that they are not citizens of America and should be deported. A majority of American voters elected a President who empowers the government to destabilize its relationship with former allies of democracy. Conspiracy theories abound on causes of global warming to support beliefs that it is a natural event that cannot be mitigated by reducing fossil fuel use and accelerating wind, water, and solar energy uses. Belief in a “deep state” conspiracy has created government and political distrust. QAnon like cabals have grown to spew allegations of secret wars being waged by special interests. Distrust of the United Nations is increasingly viewed as a body plotting to replace nation-state government. That view grows and feeds America’s “go it alone” belief as the only way to sustain democracy.

Where unemployment is created by new technology, America needs to support those who are displaced.

Despite Liaquat Ahamed’s argument that today’s America has similarities to America’s 19th century circumstances, he suggests there are reasons to believe 19th century mistakes can be avoided. Where unemployment is created by new technology, America needs to support those who are displaced. When faced with inflation and economic threat, rather than depending on singular leadership decisions, government should support flexible polices by the central banks of America. Public input to government decision-making is an essential strength of democracy. When public expertise is ignored, judgement is degraded and America becomes less democratic and more likely to fail.

Rothschild Family Tree

As one nears the end of Ahamed’s book, one wonders why the Rothchild’s are prominently noted in its subtitle. His point is that the Rothschilds were the only global financial institution that successfully survived the ups and downs of the banking industry in the 19th century. Their success influenced unjust anti-Semitic growth in the world. The Rothschilds embodied the tension between stability and speculation with their long-term stability as a lending institution. The Rothchild’s stability became a symbol of global finance that influenced political actions around the world. The price paid by the Rothchild families’ success fed the worst in human nature exemplified by the Holocaust of WWII.

No leader is infallible but those who listen and act on the basis of others expertise are more likely to make the right decisions. That is Ahamed’s solution to avoid economic depressions like those of 1873 and 1929. Proof of this opinion is in the financial crises of 2008 and the world’s recovery. This is not to argue that many citizens were not harmed and unfairly treated in the 2008 crisis, but the spread of a world economic collapse was avoided.

Türkiye

As a tourist to Turkey, one does not see an authoritarian’s impact on their society. Hansen lives in Istanbul for ten years to offer her insight to Erdoğan’s reorganization of Turkish society. Her experience reminds one of Trump’s authoritarianisms and its potential reaction to public discontent.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

From Life Itself (Turkey, Istanbul, and a Neighborhood in the Age of Erdoğan)

Author: Suzy Hansen

Narration by: Suzy Hansen

Suzy Hansen (American journalist and author.)

Suzy Hansen was born in New Jersey and earned a B.A. from the University of Pennsylvania. She became a journalist and moved to Istanbul in 2007 for ten years. The move is motivated by receiving a fellowship from the Institute of Current World Affairs. She is offered the fellowship to study and write about a two-year cultural immersion in a foreign society. “From Life Itself” is a compilation of her research and experiences in Istanbul that enlighten those who have visited Turkey but only as a tourist, not as an educated journalist.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of Turkey.

Hansen’s book is revelatory in explaining Turkey’s more recent history and the rise of its Prime Minister and current President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan who has been in office since 2003. The growth and reconstruction of Istanbul is part of Hansen’s history of Turkey. She interestingly explains her view of Erdogan’s rise to power and how the political system of Turkey’s capital has been shaped by history and the rise of Erdoğan.

President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan and Donald Trump are authoritarians.

Erdoğan is characterized by Hansen as a powerful authoritarian. That authority, in Hansen’s opinion, has led to corruption, questionable elections, and a reshaping of public institutions, public life, and the personal lives of Turkish citizens. Hansen suggests Erdoğan’s rule fits within the long history of Turkish autocracy. She reflects on Turkey’s political history of discrimination against non-Turkish residents from different cultures like Syria and other middle eastern countries.

Muhtar influence by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Hansen notes how village leaders, called muhtars, become sources of both cohesion and disruption of Turkish communities. They are elected by local villages or urban neighborhoods. These muhtars are information sources for newly arrived immigrants who transform communities. Muhtars aid newcomers to understand differences from their cultures and historic Turkish traditions. As immigration increases, tensions rise, immigrants are rounded up, abused, sometimes murdered, and forced to move to other neighborhoods or countries. Erdoğan’s authoritarianism reinforces a kind of fascism that rises from local Turkish citizens. Hansen argues local leadership corruption, questionable elections, and institutional leadership change are methods used by Erdoğan in his authoritarian rule.

Authoritarinism.

Reflecting on Turkey’s history, its Ottoman Empire precursors, and world history Hansen argues Erdoğan fits in with Turkey’s long experience of autocracy. The broader point made by Hansen is that authoritarianism is growing around the world. What Turkey’s citizens are experiencing today are happening in many parts of the world; i.e., including the United States. Her observations carry weight in light of changing immigration policy in America and the election of Donald Trump. Everyday life is changing in Turkey, just as it is in America. Democracy seems to be waning in the face of authoritarianism.

Public Health Agencies in America.

Hansen explains how local service organizations in Turkey are being politized or shut down by elimination or placement of government loyalists that control government and non-government institutions. (This seems similar to President Trump’s appointments at OAS, NSB, Dept. of Defense, Dept. of Education and various public health agency organizations in America.) These new appointments and reorganizations exacerbate social division. Newly appointed leaders by an authoritarian change original institutional purpose. Hansen argues Erdoğan is demographically reengineering Turkish society. Democracy is undermined by authoritarianism. Life becomes less free.

Hansen notes an attempted coup in Turkey in 2016 and the reaction of Erdoğan. Her experience reminds a life-long resident of America of Trump’s authoritarianism and its potential reaction to citizen discontent.

HISTORY LESSON

There is an irony in Higginbotham’s “Midnight in Chernobyl”. It is ironic to see what is happening in the 21st century with the revisionism of Presidents Trump and Putin. Their ideas of openness (glasnost) and system reform (perestroika) are a return to the past rather than the future.

Books of Interest
Website: chetyarbrough.blog

Midnight in Chernobyl (The Story of the World’s Greatest Nuclear Disaster)

Author: Adam Higginbotham

Narration by: Jacques Roy

Adam Higginbotham (Author, British journalist, contributing writer for The New Yorker, Wired, and The New York Times.)

Adam Higginbotham reminds reader/listeners of the terrifying consequences of nuclear power mistakes in “Midnight in Chernobyl”. Over 400,000 people are evacuated from the area of Pripyat, a carefully planned Soviet city of 50,000 people, near four nuclear reactors. One of four reactors explodes on April 26, 1986, at 1.23 A.M. There were actually two explosions. The first was a massive steam explosion while a second explosion blew a 1,000-ton concrete lid into the air. The core of the reactor is destroyed. The building surrounding the reactor blew apart and radioactive fuel and graphite filled the early morning night sky. Fires were ignited on the roof and surrounding structures.

Higginbotham explains the explosion occurs because of a safety test that is botched by the operators of the plant. The nuclear reactor is set into a low-power state that disables an automatic shutdown system. By setting the reactor into a low-power state, control rods lowered into the reactor cause cooling water displacement and a spike in radioactive activity. This is noted as a design flaw that Higgenbotham argues is known by Soviet leaders before the disaster. In less than a second, the reactor surges to more than 100 times its normal power level. This massive energy surge generates runaway fission that destroys the reactor in two explosions. Chernobyl becomes a highly radioactive death trap for workers and residents of the surrounding area.

The total number of people affected by the Chernobyl accident may never be known because of Soviet obfuscation and historical indeterminacies, but Higgenbotham suggests it reaches 5 to 8.4 million people living in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia. According to archival records, all residents of Pripyat are evacuated and an additional 300,000 are resettled. Twenty-eight people die within three months of the accident, 134 develop acute radiation syndrome. The estimate of cleanup workers is 600,000 made up of firefighters, soldiers, engineers, and volunteers.

As Higgenbotham ends his history, he notes a Russian worker’s death in the 21st century from leukemia. Was his death a consequence of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986? Who knows? The point is representative of the consequence of uncountable deaths that may be related to erasure of truth in any country.

The Chernobyl accident reaches 5 to 8.4 million people living in Belarus, Ukraine, and Russia.

Higginbotham argues Chernobyl is a proximate cause of the unraveling of the Soviet Union. He suggests it accelerates the collapse of Soviet authority. This is an interesting supposition. He argues that Soviet leadership believes their system of government had a level of technological and administrative capability that illustrates a level of competence and achievement that is superior to all other forms of governance. The Chernobyl disaster challenges that self-perception. Hierarchal state control fails to train and manage the complicated nuclear industry. A rigid managerial hierarchy hides incompetence. It also breeds corruption and bureaucratic paralysis with top-down management because of information obfuscation and concealment at lower management levels. Fear of criticism by leadership leads to distortion of the truth at lower levels of government. Higgenbotham’s interviews of Russian investigators of the disaster reveals the incompetent training of lower-level employees who operated the facility. Their inclination is to cover-up mistakes rather than reveal them to their direct reports.

The economic cost of the Chernobyl disaster exposes the USSR’s Communist Party’s failure as a system of government.

Presidents Gorbachev and Reagan signing the nuclear non-proliferation agreement.

Higgenbotham notes environmental movements, and Russian anti-nuclear activists grew to express anger with Moscow and its leaders. The disaster undermined Soviet scientific and technological belief in Russia’s superiority. In 1986 and 1987 speeches Gorbachev notes in a Politburo address that the Chernobyl meltdown is a harbinger of the Soviet Union’s need to change. In a 2006 speech Gorbachev speaks of the need for apparatchiks to tell truth to power, to reduce soviet secrecy, and accept glasnost and perestroika as solutions for improvement of Russian leadership.

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this:

Share this: