Jerusalem News (11 February, 2015, 22 Shevet, 5775)
- 1. China's secret plan to topple the US as the world's superpower by Larry Getlen
- 2. Robbery called motive in Chumney murders by Lee Morrison
- 3. Vladimir Putin: 17 Things You Didn't Know About Russia's President by Maureen Mackey
- 4. Sisi: 'Muslim Brotherhood is the Origin of all Islamic Extremism' by Lori Lowenthal Marcus
- 5. Statement by PM Netanyahu: we do have today a profound disagreement with the U.S. administration over offer that would enable Iran to threaten Israel's survival
1. China's secret plan to topple the US as the world's superpower
By Larry Getlen
February 8, 2015 | 6:00am
In 1995, Michael Pillsbury, an expert on China who has worked with every US president since Nixon and has, he writes, 'arguably had more access to China's military and intelligence establishment than any other Westerner,' was reading an article written by 'three of China's preeminent military experts' about 'new technologies that would contribute to the defeat of the United States.'
It was in this article that Pillsbury first saw the term 'Assassin's Mace,' which refers to a weapon from Chinese folklore that guarantees a small combatant victory over a larger, more powerful opponent.
The article described goals including 'electromagnetic combat superiority' that would allow for 'naval victory,' and 'tactical laser weapons' that would 'be used first in anti-missile defense systems.' They also discussed jamming and destroying radar and various communications systems, and the use of computer viruses.
In time, Pillsbury began seeing the term 'Assassin's Mace' with regularity in Chinese documents.
'In the military context,' he writes, 'Assassin's Mace refers to a set of asymmetric weapons that allow an inferior power to defeat a seemingly superior adversary by striking at an enemy's weakest point.'
At first, Pillsbury writes, he considered these statements aspirational. But as US intelligence analysts translated documents over time, he came to see otherwise. The Assassin's Mace, he came to believe, was part of a cunning and much broader strategy, a 100-year-long effort to overtake the US as the world's superpower.
The point of Assassin's Mace, which, Pillsbury learned, the Chinese were already spending billions of dollars to develop, was to 'make a generational leap in military capabilities that can trump the conventional forces of Western powers,' but to do so incrementally, so that by the time they achieved their goal, it would be too late for the US to respond to, much less reverse.
In a sense, the new book 'The Hundred-Year Marathon' is Pillsbury's mea culpa. He readily admits that, as a key influencer of US government policy toward China for the past four decades, he had long been one of many in the federal government pushing the US toward full cooperation with China, including heavy financial and technological support, under the belief that the country was headed in a more democratic, free-market direction.
'Looking back, it was painful that I was so gullible,' he writes.
Pillsbury notes that he and many other China experts were taught early on to view China as 'a helpless victim of Western imperialists' and that as such, assistance should be provided almost unquestioningly.
Now, he says, he has come to consider this view, which he now believes came about as a result of intentional deception and misdirection on the part of the Chinese, as 'the most systemic, significant and dangerous intelligence failure in American history.'
'We believed that American aid to a fragile China whose leaders thought like us would help China become a democratic and peaceful power without ambitions of . . . global dominance,' he writes.
'We underestimated the influence of China's hawks. Every one of the assumptions behind that belief was wrong, dangerously so.'
'For decades,' Pillsbury adds, 'the US government has freely handed over sensitive information, technology, military know-how, intelligence and expert advice to the Chinese. Indeed, so much has been provided for so long that . . . there is no full accounting. And what we haven't given the Chinese, they've stolen.'
Pillsbury now believes that since the time of Mao Zedong, China has been engaged in an effort to establish China as the world's premier superpower by 2049, the 100th anniversary of the Communist Revolution.
The reason this has been so little known, he says, is that the Chinese consider physical battles just one minor aspect of warfare. China's main weapon, he says, is deception, the constant appearance of achieving less than they really have and needing our help more than they actually do.
Pillsbury believes China has strategically positioned itself as a nation in great need of our help since the 1960s, noting that contrary to popular belief, President Richard Nixon's opening to China in the '70s was initiated by China, not the US.
As Deng Xiaoping came to greater power in China in the late 1970s, America rejoiced, believing him a reform-minded moderate. Pillsbury, though, says that behind the scenes, he was far more hard-line.
Believing that China had erred in following the Soviet economic model and that the country had 'failed to extract all they could' from the Soviet relationship, 'Deng would not make the same mistake with the Americans.'
'He saw that the real way for China to make progress in the Marathon was to obtain knowledge and skills from the United States,' Pillsbury writes. 'In other words, China would come from behind and win the marathon by stealthily drawing most of its energy from the complacent American front-runner.'
Following a Warring States philosophy of tricking your opponent into doing your work for you, Deng knew that technology would be the driver for building the Chinese economy and 'believed that the only way China could pass the United States as an economic power was through massive scientific and technological development. An essential shortcut would be to take what the Americans already had.'
Meeting with President Carter in 1978, Deng arranged for what would become 19,000 Chinese science students to study here, and Deng and Carter reached an agreement for the US to provide China with 'the greatest outpouring of American scientific and technological expertise in history.'
Under President Reagan, for whom Pillsbury served as a foreign policy advisor, the Pentagon agreed to 'sell advanced air, ground, naval and missile technology to the Chinese to transform the People's Liberation Army into a world-class fighting force,' later including 'nuclear cooperation and development . . . to expand China's military and civilian nuclear programs.' Reagan also assisted in China's development of industries such as 'intelligent robotics, artificial intelligence, biotechnology, lasers, supercomputers, space technology and manned spaceflight.'
'Before long,' Pillsbury writes, 'the Chinese had made significant progress on more than 10,000 projects, all heavily dependent on Western assistance and all crucial to China's Marathon strategy.' Similar assistance has continued to this day.
All along, Pillsbury writes, China secretly continued to view us as a tyrant, so much so that 'starting in 1990, Chinese textbooks were rewritten to depict the United States as a hegemon that, for more than 150 years, had tried to stifle China's rise and destroy the soul of Chinese civilization.'
In time, Pillsbury would come to believe that, despite a great amount of American assistance to China over the years, the Chinese people never saw or read anything positive about America.
Two days after 9/11, Pillsbury writes, 'two [Chinese] colonels were interviewed for a Chinese Communist Party newspaper and said of the attacks that they could be 'favorable to China' and were proof that America was vulnerable to attack through nontraditional methods.'
Looking ahead, Pillsbury quotes a RAND Corporation study as saying that China will have 'more than $1 trillion' to spend on their military through 2030. This 'paints a picture of near parity, if not outright Chinese military superiority, by mid-century.'
The Warring States strategy advises the underdog to keep its intentions secret until sufficient power against the hegemon is both strong and irreversible. Then, it should show its teeth.
Pillsbury says that China's rapid economic rise has led to the beginnings of this stage. He cites how in 2009, when President Obama attended a climate change summit in Copenhagen, there was 'a significant shift in the public tone of Chinese officials' that included 'uncharacteristic rudeness,' including the organization of a secret meeting with other countries about blocking US initiatives that excluded the president. (He and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Pillsbury says, crashed the meeting.)
During visits to the country over the past three years, Pillsbury says he has seen a stark shift in China's attitude toward the US. Chinese scholars he's known for decades, he says, have long denied any sort of 'Chinese-led world order.' Now, they are showing a sudden brash willingness to admit to what Pillsbury believes is China's true intent. 'The hard truth,' Pillsbury writes, 'is that China's leaders see America as an enemy in a global struggle they plan on winning.'
2. Robbery called motive in Chumney murders
by Lee Morrison
TimesReporter.com staff writer
Posted Feb. 9, 2015 at 11:01 PM
Authorities say that 'the motive was clearly robbery, and nobody else was involved' when an elderly Strasburg couple were abducted from their home and later killed.
'The motive was clearly robbery,' Tuscarawas County Sheriff's Chief Deputy Orvis Campbell said about the break-in at the home of Doyle, 88, and Lillian Chumney, 79.
'They chose the Chumneys on the assumption that they had money, but they got little cash from the home.
They also stole several items from the house, and some of those have been recovered, but we're awaiting a meeting with the family for confirmation regarding those items.'
Campbell said Monday that suspect Robert R. 'Bobby' Clark, 29, who has resided in Barnhill and Dennison, will be returned to the county by personnel from the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.
Clark was captured early Thursday near Kingman, Arizona, by deputies with the Mohave County Sheriff's Office.
Clark, who has been charged with murder, will be housed in the Tuscarawas County Jail in New Philadelphia. Trials for Clark and Jeffery Stewart, 21, of Barnhill, will be held in Coshocton County, but there is more space in the Tuscarawas County jail. The two men will not be allowed any contact in jail.
Stewart was arrested Jan. 31. He is charged with murder in connection with the deaths of the Chumneys. He is being held in Tuscarawas County jail in lieu of $2 million bond. He waived his preliminary court hearing.
It was Clark who targeted the Chumneys for robbery, Campbell said, adding that Clark and Stewart were the only ones involved.
Campbell and Coshocton County Sheriff's Detective Tom Couts flew to Arizona and interviewed Clark late Thursday night. Campbell said that during the more than one-and-a-half-hour interview, 'Clark completely confessed. He didn't show any remorse. He gave some explanations. There were some discrepancies in his statements, but he confessed to all of the (legal) elements of planning to kill the Chumneys.'
Investigators have said the Chumneys were abducted late Jan. 20 or early Jan. 21 from their home on Bodmer Avenue in Strasburg.
Campbell said that the couple were driven from Strasburg to the remote township road in Coshocton County near Bakersville, where they were shot with a .25-caliber handgun.
Their remains were found Jan. 22 in their burned car, which was the first date the car had been reported seen at that location, Campbell explained.
Clark also is a suspect in armed robberies in West Virginia, South Carolina and Georgia that occurred during the weekend of Jan. 31-Feb. 1.
3. Vladimir Putin: 17 Things You Didn't Know About Russia's President
By Maureen Mackey
Here are some things most people don't know about Putin:
1. Putin, 62, is divorced from his wife, Lyudmila Putin, 57, a linguist and former flight attendant whom he married in July 1983
2. Putin has two daughters, Maria (born in 1985) and Katerina (born in 1986), both rarely seen in public. They reportedly attended German-language secondary schools and St. Petersburg State University.
3. Then again, many journalists in Putin's Russia have died horrible, excruciating deaths. 'A free press seems to mean pitifully little to [Putin]. You investigate? You report? You die, unavenged,' wrote Peter Preston in The Guardian.
4. Putin was born October 7, 1952, in St. Petersburg, or Leningrad as it was then known. 'I come from an ordinary family,' Putin himself has written. 'I lived as an average, normal person.' Putin's mother, Maria, was a factory worker and his father, Vladimir, wounded in World War II, worked a laborer on train cars. Putin's older brother died as a child.
5. In the years following the Siege of Leningrad, which nearly killed his mother, the family was forced to move to a vermin-infested communal building. Putin spent hours chasing rats with a stick in the stairwell. Four adults and two children squeezed into a single 200-square-foot room on the fifth floor with no hot water, bathtub or toilet.
6. In the 1930s Putin's father was drafted into the Soviet Navy, serving on a submarine fleet and later, the front lines against Germany in World War II. Putin himself has said, 'My father had been assigned to a demolitions battalion [and was] engaged in sabotage behind German lines.' In one operation, Putin's father blew up a munitions depot before the group ran out of food. The Germans ultimately cornered them.
7. 'They had almost no chance of surviving,' said Putin. 'Only a few people, including my father, managed to break out. Then the chase was on.' Putin said his father jumped into a swamp and 'breathed through a hollow reed until the dogs passed by. Only four of 28 men survived.' Returning to combat, Putin's father nearly had his legs blown off by a German grenade. He was disabled the rest of his life.
8. Putin was greatly influenced by his paternal grandfather, Spiridon Ivanovich Putin, a skilled cook who worked for Lenin, then Stalin.... Spiridon, reportedly trained by the NKVD (the KGB's predecessor), died when Putin was 13.
9. Putin grew up a troublemaker. 'He was a schoolyard punk prone to violence,' says Katusa. A poor student, Putin was even hauled before a neighborhood 'comrades' court' for acts of petty delinquency.
10. At age 12 he started boxing and moved on to judo, karate and sambo, a Soviet martial art. Sports gave Putin a focus and helped him compensate for his slight 5'7" frame.
11. But 'even that was not enough for maintaining my status, so to speak, for very long,' Putin has said. 'I realized I also needed to study well.' When he, interested by now in the spying life, learned law school was a key entry path for the KGB, his life took a decisive turn.
12. Putin enrolled at Leningrad State University in 1970, earning his law degree five years later. At age 22 he was recruited into the KGB, and for the next 16 years worked as a self-described 'specialist in human relations.'
13. Fluent in German and able to pass for Nordic, Putin was posted to Dresden in the German Democratic Republic (East Germany) in 1985 and spent five years undercover. He was promoted several times. 'He was expert at reading and manipulating people and was unfazed by violence,' writes Katusa. 'These were indispensable qualities for anyone out to make his way to the top of the Russian political pile.'
14. When the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, Putin's undercover days were over. He returned to university, and in his doctoral thesis argued that Russia's economic success would ultimately depend on exploiting its energy resources. He then entered politics and rose meteorically.
15. In 1999 Boris Yeltsin selected Putin to be prime minister 'with prospects.'
16. Putin almost always acts militarily from calculation, not reaction. 'He carefully weighs the costs and risks of acting against the likely benefit to the homeland'. ' Nevertheless,' warns Katusa ominously, 'it is best not to poke him in the eye.'
17. Putin likes The Beatles. His favorite Beatle is Paul McCartney, and his favorite Beatles tune is 'Yesterday.'
4. Sisi: 'Muslim Brotherhood is the Origin of all Islamic Extremism'
by Lori Lowenthal Marcus
Published: February 9th, 2015
In a particularly pointed interview conducted with Egyptian President Abdel Fatah al-Sisi by German journalists, Sisi called for a 'reformation' of Islam, said that ISIS and all other Islamic extremists descended from the Muslim Brotherhood, and agreed that true Muslims must take action against the extremists who are hurting other Muslims as well as insulting Allah.
The interview appeared on Monday, Feb. 9 in Der Spiegel.
Sisi was asked about his recent talk at Egypt's al-Azhar University in which he called for a kind of reformation in Islam. He explained that there is a problem now because while 'the Koran represents the absolute truth,' there are differing interpretations of it. Sisi proposed at the Azhar conference that 'wrong and distorted ideas' be removed from the religious discourse.
The subject of the conference was 'freedom of choice,' and Sisi said 'the right to choose a particular faith, whether Christian, Jewish or Muslim is an inherent part of our religion.'
In addition to simply removing the false interpretations of Islam, Sisi agreed that Muslims must take action against those who falsely interpret their religion, in other words, they must be willing to confront those extremists who are distorting Islam.
While Sisi was prepared to go where a few, but only a few, other Muslim leaders dared to go on this topic, he was more than open to the softball pitch by the German journalists when they asked whether ISIS or the Muslim Brotherhood was the greater threat.
... He said that the two terrorist groups are essentially the same, they 'share the same ideology.' However, as far as Sisi is concerned, the Muslim Brotherhood spawned all the other current Islamic extremist groups, including ISIS.
The Egyptian president tied the Muslim Brotherhood's fundamentalist belief that terrorists ascend to paradise when they die as martyrs as the progenitor for modern Islamic terrorism.
5. Statement by PM Netanyahu:
we do have today a profound disagreement with the U.S. administration over offer that would enable Iran to threaten Israel's survival
Statement by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu (Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser) Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, today (Tuesday, 10 February 2015), issued the following statement:
"First, on behalf of the people of Israel, I wish to send condolences to President Obama, the American people and the family of Kayla Mueller. We stand with you. Israel's survival is not a partisan issue, not in Israel nor in the United States. This doesn't mean that from time to time Israeli governments have not had serious disagreements with American administrations over the best way to achieve the security of Israel. Israel's first Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, declared Israel's independence in the face of strong opposition from US Secretary of State George Marshall. Likewise, Prime Minister Eshkol's decisions at the start of the Six Day War, Prime Minister Begin's decision regarding the nuclear reactor in Iraq, and Prime Minister Sharon's decisions to press ahead with Operation Defensive Shield; these were all strongly opposed at the time by American administrations. Disagreements over Israel's security have occurred between prime ministers in Israel from the left and from the right and American presidents from both parties.
None of these disagreements led to a rupture in the relationship between Israel and the United States.
In fact, over time, our relationship grew stronger.
But we do have today a profound disagreement with the United States administration and the rest of the P5+1 over the offer that has been made to Iran. This offer would enable Iran to threaten Israel's survival. This is a regime, Iran, that is openly committed to Israel's destruction. It would be able, under this deal, to break out to a nuclear weapon in a short time, and within a few years, to have the industrial capability to produce many nuclear bombs for the goal of our destruction.
This is not a personal disagreement between President Obama and me.
I deeply appreciate all that he has done for Israel in many fields.
Equally, I know that the President appreciates my responsibility, my foremost responsibility, to protect and defend the security of Israel.
I am going to the United States not because I seek a confrontation with the President, but because I must fulfill my obligation to speak up on a matter that affects the very survival of my country. I intend to speak about this issue before the March 24th deadline and I intend to speak in the US Congress because Congress might have an important role on a nuclear deal with Iran. Thank you."
Source: IMRA - Independent Media Review and Analysis Since 1992 providing news and analysis on the Middle East with a focus on Arab-Israeli relations Website: www.imra.org.il