A New Role of Congress in the U.S.-China Relations

Democrats are eager to change courses or turn the page even before President Bush leaves the White House office. From Armenia to Columbia, from Iraq to China, Democrats dominated Congress tried to distance itself from the executive branch's position. Weakened by failed domestic and international policies, the Bush's administration is a lame duck, silenced or overwhelmed by the Democratic congressional leaders as well as presidential candidates including John McCain. Leaving presidential campaign aside, an assertive congress apparently is determined to challenge the president's policies. On the one hand, Democrats want to benefit from their political dissidence in the time of important elections, but on the other hand, both parties also want to reestablish the power of Congress in the policy making process so that whoever the next president is, he or she would have to succumb to the will of the Congress. Congress has been deprived of its power since 9/11 and in the name of national security or war on terror. Many believe that the American enterprise has been hijacked by the wealth, contractors and their lobbyists. Losing support in the Congress, even some Republicans have to cave in to the rising demand of the American working class now. Therefore, the Republican neo-conservatist adventurism is converting into blunt human rightist opportunism. Nancy Pelosi is just the one who represents this "change" in the U.S. policy towards China and the world. When they talk about the corruption in Washington D.C., as if they were not part of it, they only accuse the Republicans as being influenced by the lobbyists, but actually, many in the Congress have their own agenda, inserted by lobbyists from other countries or interest groups. In this case, Pelosi is the one heavily bought by the Tibetan lobbyists who as it turns out, have been working over the Congress for two decades.
Yes, the Democrats reformed the Congress and make it harder for companies to influence it, but on the other hand, the so called grass roots are empowered to do the same thing, only under the name of being more democratic. These GR groups includes human rights groups, environmental groups, and trade unions (and of course more big companies). The policy outcome? do your own math. The imaginable disastrous scenario would be a weak new president, either battered by inner party primary or disputable domestic and foreign policy, bullied and incapacitated by the Congress. The disordered American foreign policy would flood the public with biased images and reinforced ideologies, reducing policy options and closing room for diplomatic maneuver. It is particularly harmful to the delicate relations between the U.S. and China in a time of geopolitical transformation, making unexpected conflict much more likely.
We have to call for both sides to act quickly in order to avoid such prospect and at the same time hope for a new president who carries the firm mandate of the American people and understands the complexity of the issue at hand.

Remember Dr. King

No word is better than his own word:

Hatred paralyzes life; love releases it. Hatred confuses life; love harmonizes it. Hatred darkens life; love illuminates it.

Returning violence for violence multiplies violence, adding deeper darkness to a night already devoid of stars... Hate cannot drive out hate: only love can do that.

(nationalism is a source of hatred, but also a source of power for those who want to use it.)


All progress is precarious, and the solution of one problem brings us face to face with another problem.

(a solution to economic growth may bring us social problem that lives longer than the temporary economic benefits)

I submit to you that if a man hasn't discovered something he will die for, he isn't fit to live.

(the only thing that some Chinese today will die for is money, but that's still short of fit to live)

Nothing in all the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.

(Western misreading and misrepresenting of the East is a real danger that leads to the clash of civilizations. For some, that's a crisis, but for others, that's maybe an opportunity. )

Our scientific power has outrun our spiritual power. We have guided missiles and misguided men.

(for the first time perhaps, our spiritual power has outrun our scientific power when we want to save the environment, but we don't have a controllable nuclear fusion.)

抓住机遇，改进政策，促进西藏开放

时下西藏问题引爆了东西文化冲突，从政府到媒体，从官方到草根，从国内到国际，大家各执一词、互不相让。但正如我前文所述，藏独势力和人权组织计算失误，直接导致其表面上达到意图，实际上损失惨重的效果。其中最关键的失误就是反华势力低估了藏人的暴力倾向和中国政府的克制力。去过藏区的人都知道，藏族人虽然笃信佛教，但实际上比较野蛮暴力（决非贬义，如蒙古、维族、彝族等少数民族历史上就比汉族崇尚武力）。藏独组织利用了一些流氓无产者搞暴力，本以为会被残酷镇压，搞得血流成河，但实际上因为奥运的缘故，政府早已有所防备，也不会轻易动武。西方媒体借政府驱逐记者的失误，大肆宣扬所谓镇压，在没有事实支持的情况下随意杜撰，最终弄巧成拙，偷鸡蚀米，在中国公众中的公信力骤降，现在只能以中国“草根”也受政府控制（民族主义洗脑）的低级说辞来躲避排山倒海的讨伐浪潮。
现在的形势对中国政府来说是一次纠错的机会。目前，世界华人的同情在政府一边，反华势力拿3.14要挟中国的筹码逐渐丧失，但是西藏问题无法消除，这个议题还会延烧。为什么不能借机承认一些政策失误，改进政策，推动更大规模的开放呢？这样不但显示诚意，博取西藏民心，也能的更多同情和广泛的支持，还提供给打击反华势力的中国“草根”以有力的背书。最终能够显示领导层的审时度势、与时俱进和推进和谐社会的决心。
一方面，使政府依法办事，打击暴徒。但更重要的是检讨政策，促进融合。外交上可以和达赖恢复谈判，展现诚意，邀请他来奥运会等等。对内可以做以下几件事：
1、更新领导层，培养吸收年轻藏人走上领导岗位。
2、扩大藏族学生名额，各地高校都应安排藏族学生就学并提供优惠。
3、规定进藏干部必须通过藏语考试，达到日常会话能力。
4、规定国企、私营企业的藏族员工比例，招工时不要求汉语，如有必要，国家提供职工汉语培训，由国家、企业共同负担学费。
5、规定藏区企业藏人出资比例，对藏族和其他少数民族企业提供低息贷款。
6、开放外资在特定领域投资，主要向环保、旅游倾斜。特别允许海外藏人回国投资，给与税收优惠。

这些类似美国“affirmative action”的政策改进，奥运之前都可以完成，核心就是把民族问题当经济发展问题来解决，借鉴一些西方的经验，也柔和一些中国的特色。相信如果能够及时出台，就不但不会失分，反而会得分。如果一味追究西方媒体责任，强调3.14当天的暴乱性质，而回避问题，拒绝改进，则会丧失主动，从而使西藏问题未来更加复杂化、国际化、暴力化。