Obama Will Speak Less of U.S. Leadership When He Gets to China

U.S. foreign policy as expressed by Obama is sometimes hard to make sense of.

First, U.S. bankers screw up the whole world economy.

The Chinese government jumps to the rescue. China heavily spends its reserves to employ its citizens building what the country needs in schools, health care, bridges and roads and other infrastructure thus even sparking the recovery of the out-of-control capitalist nations unable to restrain the greed and foolishness of their private bankers who manage to set their governments' policies and actions or inaction.

United States Government, on the other hand, borrows and prints money mostly for refinancing the financiers who screwed up the world economy, while putting very few of its unemployed citizens to building some of the many things the country needs.

(Appears that the Chinese, not the Americans, believe in following the basic idea of President Roosevelt's New Deal socialist solution to a great depression.)

Then U.S. President Obama arrives in Asia to vow a "full U.S. role in Asia." Does he mean a full U.S. government role? Hard to imagine, for a full government role even in the U.S. is anathema to private capitalist investments and Obama says he believes in capitalism, even if the nation has to go broke, temporarily (temporarily, he hopes).

One supposes that his meant-to-be-reassuring statement intends to say that the financiers of Wall Street are going to play a "full role" helped, encouraged and facilitated by Obama policies. (because presently in the U.S., it is only the capitalist financiers that currently have money to spend.)

There were many more non-sequiturs in Obama's less than candid remarks at Suntory Hall, Tokyo on November 14, 2009.

He praised Japanese "assistance for the people of Afghanistan and Pakistan ... in providing additional commitments to international development efforts there." High flown words for a disastrous and deadly U.S. policy of war without end in sight.

In Asia, Obama noted, "Dictatorships have become democracies." (People have not forgotten that dictatorships that in the Philippines and Indonesia were American backed.) Their "economies have given way to open markets", (Recognized as good for the global interests of capitalists.) "Living standards have risen while poverty has plummeted." (An exaggeration for the millions who live on less than $2 a day)

Perhaps the President's most frightening words were: "And even as American troops are engaged in two wars around the world, our commitment to Japan's security and to Asian security is unshakable, and it can be seen in our deployments throughout the region �" above all, through our young men and women in uniform."

He addressed the enmity promoted, often quite openly, in the U.S. Congress and media.
" I know there are many who question how the United States perceives China's emergence." "As with any nation, America will approach China with a focus on our interests." Ouch! More elegant would have been "with a focus on mutual interests and fairness and understanding.'

Obama showed appreciation for China toeing a U.S. line: "China has promoted security and stability in Afghanistan and Pakistan." but the choice of words are preposterous given the present state of agony of the two countries suffering U.S. attack.

"So the United States does not seek to contain China," Well, obviously, saying this does not make it so, and Obama goes on to stress that the U.S. will continue to strongly criticize the Chinese:

"United States will never waver in speaking up for the fundamental values �" and that includes respect for the religion and cultures of all people." (With the oft heard exception of atheist communist culture of three Asian nations.) "Because support for human rights and human dignity is ingrained in America." The timing of the President bragging is awkward, for the news is filled with the wholesale killing of suspected insurgents against U.S. invasions and occupations along with by-standing non-combatant women and children, and seizure without charge or Habeas corpus, rendition and torture, often even within U.S. territory,

"But we can move these discussions forward" (about life in China but never in America) "in a spirit of partnership rather than rancor." As if it is not known that the U.S. has never cared about human rights in non-communist cooperating U.S. satellite nations.

"We must strengthen our economic recovery, and pursue growth that is both balanced and sustained." Is the "We" here meant to somehow include Asian help for the U.S. pursuit of efforts to alter the imbalanced growth of private capital over citizens needs in America?