A lame duck president? To suggest that this is Bill Clinton’s condition is to be unkind to handicapped fowl. Clinton and his colleagues seem to be on the brink of madness. The administration’s domestic policy moves are haunted by the ghosts of the impeachment process, while its foreign policy team stumbles like drunkards from pillar to post—from one manufactured crisis to another.
Take the latest debacle: With a single stroke of its diplomatic pen on February 25, China blocked the continued deployment of U.N. troops in Macedonia. The 1,100-member “peacekeeping” force has been in Macedonia since June 1993. The reason for China’s U.N. Security Council veto? The Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, invented after the Cold War by George Soros and his globalist State Department pals over Greece’s objections, recently took one billion dollars from Taiwan in return for diplomatic recognition. The Red Chinese promptly broke off diplomatic relations with Macedonia. Taiwan is worth much more to them.
And so, Washington ended up with another diplomatic egg on its face. The Chinese government effectively terminated the deployment of U.S. troops. The Clinton administration lamely declared that American troops may stay in Macedonia, but under a different flag— perhaps even the Stars and Stripes?
Michael New, the American soldier who refused to serve in Macedonia under the U.N. flag, is probably having a good chuckle right about now. It took the Red Chinese to get the U.N. blue out, and the American red, white, and blue in.
Not a bad turn of events, however bizarre. Except, of course, that foreign troops have no business in a sovereign country like Macedonia, especially since there has never been a war there and, therefore, no need for “peacekeepers.” In other words, the U.N. flag has always been a fig leaf covering the planned intervention in the neighboring Serbian province of Kosovo.
Now that China has stripped that fig leaf away, the whole world can see that the Macedonia deployment was merely a preamble to an eventual NATO occupation of Kosovo. The upcoming act of aggression against a sovereign country is not a spontaneous reaction of the Clinton administration to some made-for-TV massacre blamed on the Serbs, but part of a long-term strategy to tear this part of Serbia away.
Meanwhile, the Clinton administration’s desperate efforts to sell yet another war to the American people are occasionally producing absurd results. According to a CBS Radio news broadcast on February 25, “50 percent of Americans in a poll do not know where to find Kosovo on a map; 54 percent favor sending U.S. troops there.”
So what are we to conclude from this poll? That 54 percent of Americans favor shooting first and aiming later? That the other 46 percent of Americans would also send U.S. troops to Kosovo, if only they could find it on a map? That at least four percent of Americans would send U.S. troops anywhere, even if the place is not on any map? That pollsters cannot compute, but they can lie?
The New World Order types have never been too concerned about their mathematical deficiencies. Their solution to most problems seems to be, “If it doesn’t compute, change the rules until it does.” Sometimes this works, and sometimes it doesn’t, as in the case of Macedonia, where the best laid plans of mice and men seem to have been set back by Beijing.
The Clinton administration’s reaction was uncharacteristically swift. “One year after saying China had improved its human rights record, the Clinton administration today issued one of its harshest condemnations of Beijing to date, and described some of the most serious human rights violations in recent years,” the New York Times reported in a front page story on February 27.
Funny thing, this sudden discovery of Beijing’s multi-year human rights abuses, only one day after China’s Security Council veto. You don’t suppose the State Department’s report had something to do with Macedonia, do you? China’s action has made it all too clear who is really wagging the Clinton administration’s tail, and it raises an interesting question: Why don’t we “outsource” our entire foreign policy establishment to China? Based on what’s happened with Macedonia, at least, the U.S. taxpayers may be better off.
Fewer Americans would risk their lives in foreign adventures, and fewer taxpayers’ dollars would be spent on overseas deployments (e.g., two billion dollars per year on Bosnia, and perhaps another two billion dollars annually on the planned Kosovo force). And our national security wouldn’t be any more compromised than it is today, since our government officials, from Henry Kissinger onward, have been spilling the beans to the Chinese anyway.
The Chinese would also be better off, since they would not have to waste their money on buying U.S. politicians.
Finally, Americans’ prestige in the world would rise. With Beijing conducting our foreign policy, American officials would make fewer stupid statements, which make the rest of us seem like morons, too.
Leave a Reply