Over to you, Hu...

Is this The China Blog or The Anti-China Blog? I wonder. I found Mr Bill Powell is propregating the neocon ideology. The six-party agreement was not "alleged". It was a real agreement. Obviously, neocon John Bolton was the first to oppose it on CNN. But president Bush, Secretary Rice, Ambassador Hill have all said that it was a good step. It suddenly became an "alleged" agreement once under Mr. Bill Powell's pen.

Although many americans oppose another war in the middle east with Iran becasue of the Iraq disaster. Neocons clearly seek another war in order to distract American people from the Iraq failure. Curiously, Mr. Bill Powell found that it was not necessary to mention all these in his search for more wars.

Like previously dealing with North Korea, Bush would offer a few more 30 or 60 day grace periods for Iran to be compliance with the Security Council's demand if he and his European allies are not ready for next step. I doubt if they have a solid plan against Iran. Let’s wait with our eyes open to see how Bush will respond to Tehran’s indifference. Tough sanctions against Iran most likely won’t happen within a month or two.

As to Beijing’s and Moscow’s attitudes to the sanctions on Iran’s nukes, I don’t take the statements at face value. That’s just part of the politics, part of their strategies. Beijing has been unusually quiet on Taiwan recent turmoil and there will be NPC and CPPCC to be held in March. I speculate Beijing’s motive behind the statement is looking for a payback from Bush’s administration, kind of the concession on Taiwan Strait’s control, so they could revise the Constitution in details to remove barriers to liberating Taiwan, if it is necessary.

Wow, so an agreement that all parties involved agreed was actually an agreement suddenly becomes "alleged", while that which is in fact mere allegation- Iran's supposed nuclear weapons programme- is presented as fact despite the fact that no proof that Iran is doing anything more than what it is legally entitled to (develop a civilian nuclear power programme, in case you need to be reminded) has yet to be offered. I know you write for Time, and the facts are of only secondary importance, but don't you think you're taking this a bit too far?

Who cares about neocons (Jeesh, there is a word-brush to paint with), the bottom line is that Iran wants nukes and has said so themselves. So the two countries (Russia and China) with the most direct influence with Iran need to prove themselves as World players.

If Iran proceeds against the UN initiatives (Yes, the UN, not the US) countries in the region will be driven to act in their own self interests, further destabilizing the Middle East region.

There is a big picture here, leave the agendas and whitewashing behind, and support the UN (not the US) in its attempts to keep Iran from proceeding in its drive for nuclear weapons.

Meanwhile, back in the real world:

When has Iran said it wanted nukes? It has stated repeatedly that it wants civilian nuclear power (electricity generation for civilian purposes) and that it does not want nuclear weapons. There is a world of difference between the two goals. Only the US and EU governments have insisted Iran wants nuclear weapons.

Sure, nobody, certainly not myself, trusts the Iranian government, but even the IAEA (the UN agency responsible for such matters) will not state that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons.

FREE TIBET!!!

Meanwhile, back in the real world:

When has Iran said it wanted nukes? It has stated repeatedly that it wants civilian nuclear power (electricity generation for civilian purposes) and that it does not want nuclear weapons. There is a world of difference between the two goals. Only the US and EU governments have insisted Iran wants nuclear weapons.

Sure, nobody, certainly not myself, trusts the Iranian government, but even the IAEA (the UN agency responsible for such matters) will not state that Iran is trying to build nuclear weapons.

死ね

I thought the fact that he lives in China would give him a different perspective as others who does not have the experience, now it seems he still lives in his anti-China fantasy. BTW, how much active role the UN can still play in keeping the world peaceful.

http://www.pbs.org/frontlineworld/stories/iran403/thestory.html

Why would living in China mean that your perspective would change to a China way of thinking? That makes no sense. Only if you are a Chinese citizen are you required to tow the party line.

不管如何,做为一个中国人,我很高兴在这听到中国的声音.

to the last anonymous
Bush said Iraq has weapons of mass destruction, so said CIA and.... And all the people believed!
Did you find it?
Reporters like u always invent thing to make your boss happy.

I think people just don't understand the difference between a nuclear enrichment program, and a nuclear power plant. But that is OK. The more ignorant our enemies are, the safer we are.

Oh, by the way, should the title of this post be "Over to Hu". Shorter...

I think the Chinese and Russian governments, especially their military people, know quite well that Iranian nuclear weapon is more a Chinese and Russian problem than a US problem. Iran still don't have the weapon platform to get their nuclear bombs to the US yet. Not the range. Not the accuracy. And not the anti-anti-missle capability. But Iran has good capability to send their bombs to Russia to help their Islamic brothers.

Iran can develop tactical nuclear weapons too. But US can avoid them by not getting close to Iran. China and Russia do not have that option. They are right in the neighbourhood.

So, I don't think the US is too eager to resolve this problem with Iran, and will defer to China and Russia to talk nicely to their neighbour.

You know, according to Oriental wisedom, Iran represents a perfect opportunity for us Chinese to pay back, so to say, all the double-faced strategies/betrayals the US `bestows' upon us in the Taiwan issue: Yeah, WE are committed to one China, but we are also bound by the Taiwan Relation Act; yeah, we made a commitment not to supply arms according to the Shanghai Communicaque, but our arms are really for defensive purposes only; yeah, we oppose Taiwan Independence, but we are actively encouraging a US-Japan-Taiwan Alliance which blatantly cites Taiwan as its security cancern;......& the list goes on.

So, who does the US try to fool? If we ordinary Chinese don't buy this deceit, do you think our enlightened leaders like Hu & Wen will be doped? I would like this author, or for this matter, all these Western correspondents to try to grasp some Chinese language skill & try reading the popular Chinese blogs to assess the general Chinese sentiments: you will be utterly surprised to learn that, the majority of patriotic Chinese would even go as far as asking Hu to send in Chinese troops disguised as volunteers/mercenaries to fight alongside the Iranians should Iran be invaded! So, please do not misread the situation!

If I were Hu, I would have:
.yeah, go along with the sanction but just ensure the sanction never really bites
.try delay the sanction deadline, if possible, drag it as long as it starts to wear out the West
.doing business as usual, sign up more oil contracts,better still grap them from existing Japanese/British/French/German concessions
.supply our J-10 fighters, anti-aircraft missiles, radar/sattelites jamming devices, better still station military advisors to teach the Iranians how to use these weapons effectively
.establish the Khomenie trail (remember the famed Ho Chi Min trail?),chanelling arms & other vital supplies covertly (learn from the CIA)from Xinjiang through Pakistan to Iran; hopefully the Russians will do likewise from her southern border
.more tricks up our sleeve? Better not or else I will be charged with leaking State secrets!

Welcome to Iran, cowboy Bush! History will remember the Battle of Iran as the beginning of the end of US hegemony/dominance; & with it the end of Caucasian supremacy after an over-extended period of 500 years! Welcome to the new era of multi-polarism,equality of races!

LEE Wee Shing: If China do exactly as you proposed, would China be any better than the US morally and ethically ? Or, are you saying that if US cheats and lies, US is bad, but China is a good member of the international community if China cheats and lies ? There must be some Oriental wisdom in what you are proposing.

Response to `wisdome' :

Assuming we are living in an `ideal' world, then, of course without a shred of doubt, these assymmetrical counter measures are absolutely rotten to the core. But, if you are dealing with some devils, much the same as what we encountered during the last 200 years, we only regret not to have been harsher, deadlier, brutal & you-name-it.....

The West's history is a continuous history of hypocracies, conquests, subjucations, slaughter, destructions of other weaker civilisations. Throw out those much-trumpeted bullshits of `human rights, freedom, rule-of-law, democracy' : these principles merely apply internally to their own kinds & never always do across national/racial boundaries! The hard selling of these principles are merely foreign-policy/strategic/subversive attempts to hook-wink/trap unsuspecting peoples/nations not of their own kind (I must admit, though, that these traits are actually noble & benign in their original/puritanical forms). We must thus congratulate our enlightened Hu & Co for their seemingly intelligent/focused counter punch--a `harmonious world'.

China needs oil from Iran, so China does not dare to offend Iran. If US can share more oil to China, China really stand together with US.