China Law Blog

This is probably one of the areas where experience, if anything, matters. Obama's criticism is clearly uninformed while Hillary's careful comments demonstrate she has some knowledge that China is in fact making considerable reform efforts. While they both may be said to be appeasing voters, Obama's history of reckless commentary if anything should hinder his ability to "work with the Chinese government". Obama, if elected will not be as cooperative as his idealistic fan base seems to believe.

China is bad, pure and simple and Obama is right to take a stick to the Underverse. There are 150 other countries we can outsource to. What's worse is that our wonderful corporations have worked to make the GFW and the PLA much stronger.

Tim,

Judging from the article linked in the entry, Obama and Clinton said essentially the same thing: that the Bush administration hasn't done enough to ensure that China plays by the rules. Whether you agree with that statement or not, I fail to see where Ms. Clinton showed experience where Mr. Obama did not.

As for "reckless commentary," are you referring to the instance where Mr. Obama said he would send US bombing raids into Pakistan if intelligence showed that OBL was in the region? The main criticism of this statement is based on the supposition that Pakistan is an ally in the war on terrorism. Some ally Musharraf has turned out to be; he paid off extremists instead of actually bringing them to justice. Oh yeah, there was also the part where he suspended the constitution, beat up all those lawyers and jailed some judges to boot. Gosh, I hope the Clinton dynasty will keep up good relations with this character! Even if it means forgoing a chance to kill OBL!

Mr. Obama may lack a long resume, but I'll take that over Clintonian baggage any day.

Not only that, but two other things. First, Jagdish Bagwati, the towering economist, just had a commentary in the Financial Times (I think) saying that Obama's policies were good news for free marketers. That's quite an affirmation.

Second, there is a draft policy document out there among the Dems, out of one of the progressive think tanks, that is also calling for a saner China and Taiwan policy. Further, Obama's right-hand man, Dennis MacDonough, has a background in Asian affairs, especially East Asia.

It should also be noted, now that McCain has sewn up the Rethug nomination, that Randy Shriver and Dan Blumenthal, both longtime Taiwan advocates, are close to McCain.

Bottom line: all of the candidates may be taking more critical stands, and certainly more nuanced and informed stands, than the current Bush Administration policy, which is essentially Do Whatever Beijing Wants. Given the declining US position in Asia and the incompetence and negligence of the Bush Administration (which has ceded much diplomacy to the US Navy!), the next president could hardly help but appear to be taking a tougher line, the current one is so spineless and disordered.

Michael

Whoever will be the president of the US, with the time goes on, he/she will tend to the current policy, simply for trading can improve the condition of both sides.