Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

US v China: is this the new cold war?
FT ^ | February 20, 2014 10:52 pm | Geoff Dyer

Posted on 02/21/2014 10:47:07 PM PST by Zhang Fei

(snip)

China does not have a grand ­imperial plan to invade its neighbours, in the way the Soviets did. But in any country with a ­rapidly growing military – one that is flexing its muscles and is involved in a score of unresolved territorial disputes – there is always the risk that its leaders might be tempted by some sort of military solution, the lure of a quick win that would reorder the regional balance. If China and its neighbours all believe that the US has a credible plan for a conflict, this both deters any eventual Chinese adventurism and reduces the risk that anxious Asians will start their own arms races with Beijing. Or, as TX Hammes, the American military historian, puts it: “We need to make sure no one in the Chinese military is ­whispering in their leaders’ ears: ‘If you listen to me, we can be in Paris in just two weeks.’”

(snip)

In early 2012, the Pentagon released a document called “Joint Operational Access Concept” (known in the building as Joac). In the event of a ­conflict, the paper says, the US should “attack the enemy’s cyber and space” capabilities. At the same time, it should attack the enemy’s anti-access forces “in depth”. The clear implication of this advice is that, if war ever were to break out, the US should plan to launch extensive bombing raids across mainland China. China’s “anti-navy” of missile bases and surveillance equipment is based at facilities spread across the country, including in many built-up areas. The basic idea behind AirSea Battle leads to a fairly uncompromising conclusion that, in the early stages of a conflict with Beijing, the US should destroy dozens of military sites. It is the navy’s version of “shock and awe” for 21st-century Asia.

(Excerpt) Read more at ft.com ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: china; japan; korea; philippines; vietnam
FT columnist puts out a spiel hawking his new book. I think the plan Dyer refers to might cover a situation where China takes off the gloves and hits American bases in Asia, in which case, Uncle Sam would clearly be reacting proportionately by striking Chinese mainland bases. Still, it's an intriguing look at a what-if scenario. My personal guess is that any clash would be limited to theater assets in order to avoid escalation. But you never know. China's intervention during the Korean War was a massive undeclared sneak attack that dwarfed Pearl Harbor.
1 posted on 02/21/2014 10:47:07 PM PST by Zhang Fei
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Except they sell us critical stuff and in return they lend us $$$/.


2 posted on 02/21/2014 10:50:54 PM PST by sickoflibs (Obama : 'Any path to US citizenship for illegals HERE is a special path to it ')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Red China never stopped being at war with the USA and has always regarded us as their number-one enemy. They are taking the principle of “breaking your enemy’s resistance without fighting”, as outlined in Sun Tzu’s treatise, as their main way forward—and all the libs in DC are giving them every opening, too.


3 posted on 02/21/2014 10:52:14 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sickoflibs
Except they sell us critical stuff and in return they lend us $$$/.

We can get it elsewhere and we don't need their loans.

4 posted on 02/21/2014 10:52:15 PM PST by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

I’ll start taking the PDRChina seriously as a threat when they start reworking their logistics to allow themselves to become a threat.

As it is, they can build ships, boast about numbers of this, that and the other, but they have little to no ability to sustain operations outside their own borders.

Personally, I put the EU higher on the threat list. Although, they have much the same issue with little to no logistical sustainability.


5 posted on 02/21/2014 11:03:22 PM PST by Grimmy (equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
RE :”Except they sell us critical stuff and in return they lend us $$$/.
....
We can get it elsewhere and we don't need their loans. “

Yes we do, US appetite for spending and not raising taxes to pay for it demands a huge supply of borrowed $$$.

6 posted on 02/21/2014 11:06:16 PM PST by sickoflibs (Obama : 'Any path to US citizenship for illegals HERE is a special path to it ')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
Red China never stopped being at war with the USA and has always regarded us as their number-one enemy. They are taking the principle of “breaking your enemy’s resistance without fighting”, as outlined in Sun Tzu’s treatise, as their main way forward—and all the libs in DC are giving them every opening, too.

I don't think it's aimed specifically at the US. And it's not even Marxist-Leninist. Taiwan's Nationalist Party - the one that fled the mainland to fight a last stand before Truman decided to use the 7th Fleet to keep China from invading - claims to be the sole legitimate ruler of China. Its Chinese map includes all of the disputed territories China is claiming, as well as Mongolia and Siberia. China has traditionally thought of itself as the rightful center of all under heaven, and the rest of the world as its rightful vassal states, to be absorbed as provinces at China's convenience.

Since the turfing of Mao's hand-picked protege, Hua Guofeng, in 1979, and the move to end central economic planning, China has been moving unstoppably towards parity in GDP per capita with the West, much like the Japanese several decades ago. The question is what it will do with its newfound wealth. Man does not live by bread alone. Here's to hoping that they don't emulate the Germans, who, despite being the richest country in Europe just prior to WWII, nonetheless decided they needed lebensraum.

7 posted on 02/21/2014 11:07:21 PM PST by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Socialist Autocrat’s program of fundamental transformation has essentially been completed. Irredeemably debt laden and leaderless America is no longer a force of global influence to be taken seriously.


8 posted on 02/21/2014 11:13:29 PM PST by Elsiejay (in)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Grimmy
I’ll start taking the PDRChina seriously as a threat when they start reworking their logistics to allow themselves to become a threat. As it is, they can build ships, boast about numbers of this, that and the other, but they have little to no ability to sustain operations outside their own borders.

Are you a China watcher on the hardware side? I know there are people whose hobby is to keep track of more glamorous things like war planes, warships, artillery, tanks, and so on, but few who actually look at logistics. I'm sure there are pros who look at logistics, but hobbyists go for the glitz. Jeff Head has been tracking China's carrier development for a good long time, but I don't think I've seen anything about logistics.

9 posted on 02/21/2014 11:14:04 PM PST by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Watching PDRChina used to be a job of mine, way back when. But, I’ve got no access to any real info and haven’t for decades.

The logistics is the thing to watch, though, imo.


10 posted on 02/21/2014 11:25:48 PM PST by Grimmy (equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

More to the point than “watch logistics”, watch for large movements of troops within their own borders, and large fleet movements.

They’ll need work sorting out the log train and that’s done with large scale exercises.

Now, keep in mind I don’t watch careful so they might have already begun the process.


11 posted on 02/21/2014 11:33:20 PM PST by Grimmy (equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
Insofar as it’s not aimed specifically at the US, it was always aimed at the rest of the planet. The CPC is just as ardent about converting the world to communism as Islamists are about converting the world to Islam; they do take the second-last paragraph of the Communist Manifesto literally, where it says “(t)he workers have nothing to lose but their chains; they have a world to win”.

As for Taiwan, they’ve been growing closer to Red China of late. Even though he is Kuomintang, Ma Ying-Jeou is quite friendly to Beijing.
12 posted on 02/21/2014 11:36:43 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Grimmy

There will come a time when China will turn on us, and bite off the hand that feeds them. It will come quick. When it does, they will not be alone—they will have a peck of allies who wish to hitch their fate to the red Dragon. Few will be on “our side” in this conflict—we will see who our real friends are at that day. First will come the economic attack, watch our dollar plunge. Then the cyber attack, then the assassinations of key leaders in the media and politics (Rush, Hanity, Cruz, Levin etc...) Then will come the push, for us to withdraw from Asia. The next attack will be from space—with demonstartions on our telecommunications network. Only after this will they start to sink ships and bomb bases, Then threaten our cities. Will we fight back or fold up? I beleieve this world war is one we will lose—and along with it Hawaii and Alaska, Guam, and Samoa. I hope I am wrong!


13 posted on 02/22/2014 3:13:21 AM PST by Forward the Light Brigade (Into the Jaws of H*ll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai

Only greedy idiots ever thought otherwise.


14 posted on 02/22/2014 3:32:38 AM PST by freedomfiter2 (Brutal acts of commission and yawning acts of omission both strengthen the hand of the devil.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

The Chinese will have to cope with Vietnam Cambodia Laos before they move along. All of those ethnic groups hate each other and all hate the Chinese. Asian quagmire for the Chinese


15 posted on 02/22/2014 3:37:31 AM PST by Jimmy Valentine (DemocRATS - when they speak, they lie; when they are silent, they are stealing the American Dream)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jeff Head

mark to you


16 posted on 02/22/2014 5:01:03 AM PST by Former Proud Canadian (Cruz/Palin 2016)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Hey, this is my country and I’m not at war with China! Why the hell do our leaders want a war with china?


17 posted on 02/22/2014 6:50:03 AM PST by ThePatriotsFlag ("There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide." - Thomas Jefferson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Chinese society is built on one thing, which is different from American society, and this is very important for Americans to understand:

Chinese are above all, conscious of themselves as a race, and conscious of their race’s relationship (and relative status) to other races.

We have only ever seen China as a country when the Chinese people have been relatively lower status to our own.

That is (rapidly) changing.

When it does, we will see a side to Chinese and wonder where in the world it came from.

It has been there all the time. Chinese just hide that side of themselves, culturally.

America really needs to COMPETE with China.

Stop sending our manufacturing there. Stop buying everything from there.

We need to balance our budget, and bring back American jobs.

Now.


18 posted on 02/22/2014 6:56:58 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ( http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html#2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

I just realized this is a long, very well researched and (quite) informative article, which is also highlighted now at the very top of the Drudgereport.

Quite long, in fact.

The author is a former Beijing bureau chief, for the FT.

Top left corner post, on Drudgereport right now.

Enthused bump.


19 posted on 02/22/2014 7:48:07 AM PST by Cringing Negativism Network ( http://www.census.gov/foreign-trade/balance/c5700.html#2013)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

The problem as I imagine it is from an odd angle, a *lack* of central control over outlying military commanders who in many ways are more warlords than generals. This is, of course, a poor description at best.

There is a paradox with civilian authority over a military, that unless they are former career military, they have a cultural disconnect from what a military is and does. But it is also a two way street, that military commanders are often naive about political realities.

How this works out in China is the great enigma.


20 posted on 02/22/2014 9:38:05 AM PST by yefragetuwrabrumuy (WoT News: Rantburg.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
"China does not have a grand ­imperial plan to invade its neighbours, in the way the Soviets did."

Obfuscation propaganda with false comparisons: "grand imperial plan," "the way the Soviets did." Chinese military leaders have plans. They keep information about their plans and much of their more important hardware (e.g., ICBMs on mobiles) to themselves, and they've made some advances over the past 15 years or so. They are very polite, yes, while being seen as impolite in some ways by some westerners.

But politiness is a strategic posture. Race, culture and nationalism are important to them, and they are educated about old historical scores to settle. The elements of both tactical and social surprise are perceived as important strategic assets.


21 posted on 02/22/2014 11:02:33 AM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cringing Negativism Network

Remember that the Financial Times is a British publication, and that the EU has more economic business with China than we do. It was said that much of the AIG funny money went to China.


22 posted on 02/22/2014 11:07:10 AM PST by familyop (We Baby Boomers are croaking in an avalanche of corruption smelled around the planet.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Insofar as it’s not aimed specifically at the US, it was always aimed at the rest of the planet. The CPC is just as ardent about converting the world to communism as Islamists are about converting the world to Islam; they do take the second-last paragraph of the Communist Manifesto literally, where it says “(t)he workers have nothing to lose but their chains; they have a world to win”.

Everything I've read indicates that as an economic philosophy in China, Marxism-Leninism is a dead letter. Private property is the rule in the big cities and farmers in the sticks are hanging around only so as not to forfeit their rights when titles to village land are finally parceled out, so they can cash out. The end of communism as a practical philosophy combined with the return of traditional Chinese hauteur are why the Chinese threat is increasing in leaps and bounds. The threat is more akin to Imperial Japan than that of messianic Soviet Communism.

Throughout its long history, China has had its own mission civilisatrice, its version of the White Man's Burden, long before the European version came into being. The danger is that as it grows more prosperous, China will cast about for ways to re-attain the kind of gloire that Napoleon referred to when he said "a soldier will fight long and hard for a bit of colored ribbon". Every Chinese dynasty, once it established itself on a firm economic footing after the chaos (massacre, famine, pestilence, et al) of dynastic change, has pursued its version of Manifest Destiny (again, millennia before the American version came into being). The current dynasty is long past the subsistence phase, economically-speaking, and can now look towards foreign adventures as a source of recreation and prestige, and possible profit, both national and personal.

23 posted on 02/22/2014 3:27:21 PM PST by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
I don’t see that Marxism-Leninism has died in China, because the CPC certainly has not relinquished power, and their requirements of foreign firms is still within certain guidelines that advantage the state. This is called enabling the party; if the USA had a similar relationship with the USSR, they would be in a similar condition and would never have fallen.

I do not know what constitutes “everything” in the scope of what you have read, but this Newsmax article seems to not be included among it.
Here is the second paragraph of Hu Jintao’s speech as printed in the Jan. 2, 2008, China Daily:
Marxism–Leninism reveals the universal laws governing the development of history of human society. It analyzes the contradictions inherent in the capitalist system that it is incapable of resolving internally and shows that socialist society will inevitably replace capitalist society and ultimately develop into communist society. …
The belief that China is not just after war, but is after a new world, a global China, may inspire some Chinese. According to Marxism–Leninism, China’s world war will not be fought to enslave or exterminate enemies, but to liberate them (hence “the People’s Liberation Army”), to make them part of a new world—a global Chinese paradise. […]

(F)rom China, I have recently heard “The International.” Marxism-Leninism is fully alive for domestic consumption in China together with its “International” so full of military globalism, ruthless bigotry, and self-righteous fanaticism. …

24 posted on 02/22/2014 4:55:49 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
I do not know what constitutes “everything” in the scope of what you have read, but this Newsmax article seems to not be included among it.Here is the second paragraph of Hu Jintao’s speech as printed in the Jan. 2, 2008, China Daily:
Marxism–Leninism reveals the universal laws governing the development of history of human society. It analyzes the contradictions inherent in the capitalist system that it is incapable of resolving internally and shows that socialist society will inevitably replace capitalist society and ultimately develop into communist society. …

We have a more Marxist economy than China. A Chinese family that doesn't work is one that doesn't eat. The welfare state is well-nigh non-existent there.

The party brass need to continue talking up the rhetoric of communism because it's the foundation of their right to rule. The moment the Party formally repudiates Marxism on a de jure (as opposed to merely de facto) basis is the day the Chinese hoi polloi start asking what all that suffering was about and start demanding an accounting, starting with trials for living members of the cohort of party members with blood on their hands. Upon which the Party faces a potential Ceausescu moment, complete with the mass killings of ancien regime members characteristic of Chinese dynastic transitions.

Marxism-Leninism has nothing to do with trade barriers. The Japanese and Koreans have more barriers to American goods than the Chinese. On a per capita basis, Japan and Korea run bigger trade surpluses with the US, in spite of the fact that the Chinese have incomes 1/7 and 1/4 of the Japanese and Korean numbers, respectively. American auto manufacturers own 1/3 of the Chinese market. They are a rounding error in the Japanese one, and a nit in the Korean* one. Most American manufacturers are relatively satisfied with their access to the Chinese market relative to Japan and South Korea, whose governments protect their keiretsu and chaebol conglomerates with the fervor of a lioness defending her cubs. Walmart is the 3rd largest retailer in China. It's an also-ran in Japan, and non-existent in Korea, despite a game attempt at overcoming Korean barriers.

* For a while, the Korean government directed its tax department to obtain lists of buyers of American cars from dealers in order to run tax audits on them. This was merely the tip of the iceberg. The Korean government systematically persecuted Lone Star Funds, a US private equity player that rescued a Korean bank, and attempted to make them cough up their profits. On a commercial basis, the Japanese and the Koreans are hard asses whose relationship with the US is probably worse than the least amicable of the European countries. The only reason these people give us the time of the day is because we give them a free ride on defense and let them nickel and dime us on trade. If they weren't treaty allies, I'd say they're right on the border between friend and enemy.

As a long-time watcher of the full spectrum of American policy relationships, my impression that our only true friends (as opposed to mere allies who show up cup in hand when they're in trouble) are the ABCA members and the nations of Western Europe. The rest are just hangers-on.

25 posted on 02/22/2014 8:30:15 PM PST by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei
Funny you paraphrase 2 Thessalonians 3:10 with respect to what is required of Chinese families. That was always part and parcel of Marxism-Leninism, even written into the USSR’s constitution in Article 12:
In the U.S.S.R., work is a duty and a matter of honor for every able-bodied citizen, in accordance with the principle: “He who does not work, neither shall he eat.”

The principle applied in the U.S.S.R. is that of socialism: “From each according to his ability; to each according to his work.” …
Therefore, such is not a repudiation of Marxism-Leninism even in practice.
26 posted on 02/22/2014 8:37:43 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Funny you paraphrase 2 Thessalonians 3:10 with respect to what is required of Chinese families. That was always part and parcel of Marxism-Leninism, even written into the USSR’s constitution in Article 12:
In the U.S.S.R., work is a duty and a matter of honor for every able-bodied citizen, in accordance with the principle: “He who does not work, neither shall he eat.”

The principle applied in the U.S.S.R. is that of socialism: “From each according to his ability; to each according to his work.” …
Therefore, such is not a repudiation of Marxism-Leninism even in practice.

In theory. In practice, Chinese workers used to be assigned no show jobs, and they spent the day running errands and reading newspapers. This is why they were so unproductive. Anyone who was overly productive took the risk of being branded a capitalist roader, and persecuted.

Today, the harder you work, the more you make. Horatio Alger used to write about rags to riches stories. China today is a veritable flood of Horatio Alger stories. A communist country could not have generated domestic motor vehicle sales of 18m per year (10x India's number). Through Chinese expats stateside, I've become acquainted with the stories of a number of ordinary, non-Party member, Chinese, who have transitioned from transporting a veritable mountain of goods using Rube Goldberg carriers on bicycles to vans over the course of 20 years, and individuals who went from the children of farmers to owners of auto repair facilities and other small businesses. Another acquaintance tells of a cousin, who's completely unconnected to anyone noteworthy, who just landed a bank job paying $2,500 a month despite having graduated from the equivalent of the University of Podunkville.

The naysayers about China's newly-capitalist economy are missing the forest for trees. The Federal government says it has immigration controls, but has somehow avoided raiding businesses that employ illegals and imposing the fines that were mandated during Reagan's amnesty over a period of 30 years. China is formally a Communist country, but has passed laws legalizing the private ownership of land, homes, capital equipment, government and company bonds, stocks and released hundreds of millions of workers from their work units to find work in the private (or public) sector on their own. China is a capitalist country in all but name. The no-show government work unit jobs of the past are history, but private sector jobs are plentiful and open to all comers, which is why Chinese salaries are now higher than Mexican levels. Employers in China, domestic and foreign, are getting value for their money, and are raising salaries to get the best talent.

Bottom line is that today's China is a dictatorship, but it is not a communist one, except in name. The danger from China comes not from its extinct communist ideology, but the resurgence of traditional ideas about China's (central) place in the world, ideas from which Imperial Japan drew its inspiration, but with Japan in the place of China as world hegemon. Where Japan tried to swallow all of the Pacific in a single gulp, the Chinese have traditionally opted for incremental expansion.

27 posted on 02/22/2014 10:28:00 PM PST by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

Nope, they’re still communistic. They don’t allow unregulated exercise of religion, they are still dogmatically committed to the abolition of the family, and even increase of personal wealth in relation to volume of work does not really contravene Marxism-Leninism. And altogether, they are still committed to spreading communism worldwide; fits right with the “central kingdom” doctrine.


28 posted on 02/22/2014 10:33:54 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Olog-hai
Nope, they’re still communistic. They don’t allow unregulated exercise of religion, they are still dogmatically committed to the abolition of the family, and even increase of personal wealth in relation to volume of work does not really contravene Marxism-Leninism. And altogether, they are still committed to spreading communism worldwide; fits right with the “central kingdom” doctrine.

Unregulated exercise of religion has never been a feature of the Chinese state. It has acted repeatedly to proscribe rebellious faiths, over the millenia. During the mid-19th century Taiping Rebellion, Christian rebels were killed to the last man, woman and child, culminating in the massacre of 200,000 at Nanking, a massacre that horrified Charles "Chinese" Gordon (played by Charlton Heston in "Khartoum"), who was to mount a doomed effort in the Sudan, 20 years on, against the self-proclaimed Mahdi. During the Chinese invasion of Yunnan around 20 years later, 70,000 Muslims were hacked to pieces. The 1900 Boxer Rebellion saw the dismemberment of 40,000 Chinese Christians on orders from the Chinese royals. This was before the Nationalist Party even existed, let alone the Communist one.

As to China being committed to world revolution, that depends on what you mean by "committed". A (subsequently imprisoned for disclosing "state secrets") party member disclosed, about 10 years ago, the fact that China had spent $10b over decades, from the 40's through the 70's, back when $10b was real money, on communist insurgencies overseas. This was during an era when tens of millions of Chinese starved to death. After Vietnam invaded Cambodia to destroy the Khmer Rouge, China's client, in 1979, China ended funding to foreign communist insurgencies - which promptly collapsed - in exchange for normalized relations with the non-communist countries in Southeast Asia that had previously limited trade and diplomatic ties due to China's material support and training for domestic communist movements.

29 posted on 02/22/2014 11:27:34 PM PST by Zhang Fei (Let us pray that peace be now restored to the world and that God will preserve it always.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Zhang Fei

That only seems to show a parallel with Imperial Russia, who themselves were repressive before the transition to Bolshevik rule. The USSR did not have the advantages that Nixon handed willy-nilly to communist China, however; although Putin these days is reasserting them, but in his image.


30 posted on 02/22/2014 11:44:01 PM PST by Olog-hai
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson