U.S. Seeks Bigger China Role in I.M.F.

The United States is seeking to increase the power of China and other countries within the International Monetary Fund to reflect their growing weight on the world economic stage, an effort that is being resisted by some European countries whose voices could be weakened within the organization.

This bears emphasis:

China is a particular focus of American interests because of the Bush administration's uneasy relationship with the Beijing government and its desire for China to become a "stakeholder" in the international system, as American officials put it.

China has, from the highest level on down, from their Premier to our President...told us in no uncertain terms that this is not the relationship we have or that China seeks. This is more confabulatory Bush-Wishful-Thinking trying to "make it so" by just handing them the keys.

The United States argues that China has been using its vast foreign exchange reserves, earned from trade surpluses with the United States, to intervene in the markets and keep its currency artificially low to increase its exports, contributing to the loss of American manufacturing jobs.

Didn't the Administration just this May, go out of it's way to deny this very FACTUAL REALITY... [Further damaging its credibility] in former Secretary of the Treasury John Snow's ruling ...all so as to avoid a LEGALLY mandatory retaliatory action???

This sudden admission of the contradictory reality by the Administration just three months later doesn't look like the Administration really cares too much about responsibility. No reverence or adherence to law, anyways. Their trade ideology and...appears to be much more important than little things like telling the honest facts (especially when it matters) , their reputation and credibility, and oh, yeah, the U.S. taxpayers and citizens and workers they are supposed to be protecting.

Critics of the Bush administration in Congress are calling on it to rebuff China's demand for more power at the I.M.F. until Beijing revalues its currency in relation to the dollar.
But Mr. Adams and other American officials say that rather than limit China's influence at the I.M.F., they want to increase its role there and make the lending institution a more aggressive monitor of currency manipulation by member nations.
"I would argue that by re-engineering the I.M.F. and giving China a bigger voice," Mr. Adams said, "China will have a greater sense of responsibility for the institution's mission."

Psychotic. This is simply psychotic policy. Certifiable, Some appropos web definitions describe the administration's likely mental state on these issues :

Psychotic. In the technical sense this term refers to a groups of severe mental illness where the person has periods of loses contact with reality. In a less formal manner, it is used to refer to the condition of having lost contact with reality. The person experiences severe impairment in his/her ability to function. All areas of a person's life are usually effected. Common symptoms: Hallucinations, delusions, withdrawal, impairment of intellectual function, lose of personal care skills. home.earthlink.net/~krwenger/mhjargon.htm
Psychosis is a psychiatric classification for a mental state in which the perception of reality is distorted. Persons experiencing a psychotic episode may experience hallucinations (often auditory or visual hallucinations), hold paranoid or delusional beliefs, experience personality changes and exhibit disorganized thinking (see thought disorder). ... en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychotic

So, here are two more asylum-candidates:

Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson

Timothy D. Adams, a Treasury under secretary,
Beijing should have increased responsibility....

If wishes were fishes...

The more I read about China, the more I believe than the opening of our relationship with them should have gone a lot more slowly. What is the thinking here? If China plays a bigger role in the IMF, will some of that money it has be diverted away from its military buildup? I don't know. On a pure trade basis, we sell sell them technologically advanced items and they sell trinkets, tchotchkes, and toys. As a libertarian I really wan't to see less control on business, but the comservative side tells me that the bigger picture should be looked at. Many thought that if China were exposed to the West, that more democracy would follow. Apparently that's not what is happening. Corporations salivated over trillions of potential dollars without any thought to what China would do or where it would go with its new found wealth...and where would the state of American security would wind up.

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.