Although spats between Beijing and Washington over such issues as trade imbalances, the valuation of China’s currency, and sanctions against Iran and North Korea might be fading, a new set of squabbles arises immediately afterwards, with tensions building and mounting in recent weeks over events in the Yellow Sea and the South China Sea, and with the signs that the US is trying to meddle and dominate issues involving China.

What irritates China more is, in addition to Hillary Clinton’s aggressive diplomacy at an ASEAN Regional Forum meeting in Hanoi, where she blatantly asserted US has “national interest” in the South China Sea, that Pentagon said Friday the USS Washington is heading for the Yellow Sea for the United States and South Korean naval and air units joint military exercises. To this, the Chinese public responds angrily, accusing Washington of needlessly escalating tensions in the region, although the government is still edging its way in the diplomatic barbs being exchanged between the two powers.

Obama administration, however, is experimenting a new, more insidious but very risky diplomatic strategy in the region, where it has for long played hegemonic power, to contain an emerging great power— Drifting from confrontation to confrontation with a rising China, as Washington is now doing. This will bring about the doomed fallout. In a not very long American history, perhaps, the only bitter lesson to the super war machine is taught by China—-which has never rewarded it with a single chance to declare a complete victory on whatever occasions.

The U.S. decision to include an aircraft carrier in the exercise is considered especially provocative, and some Chinese suspect that Washington is sending a “strong message” about American power to China as well as North Korea. And that the US carrier maneuvered to its former foe Vietnam arouses wild speculations about whether the US is bent on building up a NATO in Asian version.

Indeed, the physically existent NATO may be unlikely to come into being, but psychologically, the US is coaxing and coercing China’s neighbors to join in its galaxy. It is understandable that some SE Asian countries cannot be fully disarmed at the sight of the rise of a giant neighbor, and it is also reasonable that they take shelter from a mighty ally, in that the American preeminence in the region is not only seen by its densely scattered military bases, but its close-knit economic ties with these countries.

However, the US is by no means all-mighty. Being parasitic to or heavily reliant on the super power would inevitably deal a disastrous blow to the national interests of the involved Asian countries. On the other hand, China and its Asian neighbors, albeit intriguing against each other at times, have their respective interests overlapping and hence would go through thick and thin together. And geopolitically, China’s neighboring countries cannot afford the side effects resulted from face-off with China.

Relations between China and the United States have become decidedly testy in recent days and the US is anxious to find its proxies in the region by inciting their discontent with China and pulling them to the American side.

Like a contemptible wretch making trouble, these mean and petty actions taken by the so-called super power would fail to help it get the desired fruit—to effectively counterbalance China in Asia. What China needs to do is just to beef up its confidence in handling the frictions with its neighbors, and through this, to elevate its political credibility and authority in the region.

And to prove China offers to cooperate rather than confront.

The articles in this column represent the author’s views only. They do not necessarily represent the opinion of DarkGovernment.

Rare Earth Elements

Most people have no idea what rare earth elements are, but a wide array of the technologies that we use every single day are dependent on them.  Without rare earth elements, we would have no hybrid car batteries, flat screen televisions, cell phones or iPods.  Without rare earth elements, the entire “green economy” would not be able to function, because almost all emerging green technologies use them.  Not only that, but rare earth elements are used by the U.S. military in radar systems, missile-guidance systems, satellites and aircraft electronics.  Without rare earth elements, the U.S. military (and militaries all over the globe) would not be able to function.  There are 17 key rare earth elements that we rely on every day.  But there is a huge problem.  China owns more than 85 percent of the known global reserves of rare earth elements.  Right now, the rest of the world is absolutely dependent on China’s exports of these metals.  Without these Chinese exports, the western world would quickly run out of these precious resources.  But in just a few years, the rapidly expanding Chinese economy will gobble up the entire domestic production of Chinese rare earth elements.  So what will the rest of the world do at that point?

This is a major problem that you aren’t hearing a lot about in the mainstream news.

But analysts are now predicting that by 2012 this could be a tremendous crisis.

So exactly what are rare earth elements?

Well, rare earth elements are a group of 17 relatively rare chemical elements that you can find on the periodic table.  These rare metals have names you may not be familiar with such as lanthanum, cerium, tantalum, neodymium and europium.  As mentioned above, they are used in products that we use every day such as laptop computers, iPhones, magnets, catalytic converters, night vision goggles and wind turbines.  These metals are not well known, but they are absolutely crucial to our way of life.

So what is going to happen when we start running out of them?

According to The Independent, the move towards “green technology” will cause a dramatic increase in demand for rare earth metals in the years ahead.  In fact, it is being projected that the world will need 200,000 tons of rare earth elements by the year 2014.

But analysts fear that China may drop exports of rare earth elements to exactly zero tons by 2012.

Can anyone else see a problem forming?

Last summer, one leaked report indicated that Chinese authorities were already considering a complete export ban of the most critical of the rare earth elements.

But while we may speculate when the complete ban is coming, the truth is that China has already moved to dramatically cut back exports of the metals.

China recently announced that they have cut export quotas for rare earth elements by 72 percent for the second half of 2010.  The U.S. government reacted quite angrily to this news and warned that this could potentially cause a trade war.

TechNewsDaily recently quoted W. David Menzie, chief of the international minerals section at the U.S. Geological Survey, regarding the coming shortage of rare earth elements….

“Countries and companies that have or plan to develop industries that need rare earth minerals to make products are concerned about China’s growing consumption, which they fear will eliminate China’s exports of rare earths.”

So what needs to be done?

Well, nations and corporations that use rare earth elements need to start weaning themselves off the supply coming from China.

But there is a huge problem.

That cannot be done overnight.

According to a recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office, building an independent U.S. supply chain for rare earth elements could take up to 15 years.

So what in the world will we do until then?

That is a very good question.

The truth is that those running the U.S. government are just not very good at thinking strategically.

The U.S. Government Accountability Office report mentioned above lists Mountain Pass, California as perhaps the largest non-Chinese rare earth deposit in the world.

But it almost fell into Chinese hands unnoticed.

You see, the mine in Mountain Pass is owned by Unocal, and in 2005 a Chinese bid for Unocal almost succeeded.

Yes, the Chinese were trying to strengthen their monopoly on rare earth elements and it almost worked.

Not that they don’t have the rest of the world in a very difficult situation already.

The truth is that if China cut off the export of all rare earth elements to the rest of the world tomorrow, it would throw the global economy into absolute chaos.

That is a lot of power for China to have.

Let’s just hope they don’t use it any time soon.

[Via: Theeconomiccollapseblog]

Polluting factories in rural communities are forming a deadly toxic cocktail for villagers, leading to surging rates of cancer

Zheng Gumei thought she was down with a cold until the doctor told her to wait outside the room so he could talk to her son alone.

NATO is considering the use of military force against enemies who launch cyber attacks on its member states.

The move follows a series of Russian-linked hacking against Nato members and warnings from intelligence services of the growing threat from China.

A team of Nato experts led by Madeleine Albright, the former US secretary of state, has warned that the next attack on a Nato country “may well come down a fibre-optic cable”.

A report by Albright’s group said that a cyber attack on the critical infrastructure of a Nato country could equate to an armed attack, justifying retaliation.

“A large-scale attack on Nato’s command and control systems or energy grids could possibly lead to collective defence measures under article 5,” the experts said.

Article 5 is the cornerstone of the 1949 Nato charter, laying down that “an armed attack” against one or more Nato countries “shall be considered an attack against them all”.

It was the clause in the charter that was invoked following the September 11 attacks to justify the removal of the Taliban regime in Afghanistan.

Nato is now considering how severe the attack would have to be to justify retaliation, what military force could be used and what targets would be attacked.

The organisation’s lawyers say that because the effect of a cyber attack can be similar to an armed assault, there is no need to redraft existing treaties.

Eneken Tikk, a lawyer at Nato’s cyber defence centre in Estonia, said it would be enough to invoke the mutual defence clause “if, for example, a cyber attack on a country’s power networks or critical infrastructure resulted in casualties and destruction comparable to a military attack”.

Nato heads of government are expected to discuss the potential use of military force in response to cyber attacks at a summit in Lisbon in November that will debate the alliance’s future. General Keith Alexander, head of the newly created US cyber command, said last week there was a need for “clear rules of engagement that say what we can stop”.

The concerns follow warnings from intelligence services across Europe that computer-launched attacks from Russia and China are a mounting threat. Russian hackers have been blamed for an attack against Estonia in April and May of 2007 which crippled government, media and banking communications and internet sites.

They also attacked Georgian computer systems during the August 2008 invasion of the country, bringing down air defence networks and telecommunications systems belonging to the president, the government and banks.

Alexander disclosed last week that a 2008 attack on the Pentagon’s systems, believed to have been mounted by the Chinese, successfully broke through into classified areas.

Britain’s Joint Intelligence Committee cautioned last year that Chinese-made parts in the BT phone network could be used to bring down systems running the country’s power and food supplies.

Some experts have warned that it is often hard to establish government involvement. Many Russian attacks, for example, have been blamed on the Russian mafia. The Kremlin has consistently refused to sign an international treaty banning internet crime.

BEIJING: Taiwanese technology giant Foxconn on Wednesday confirmed the death of another employee but denied he died of exhaustion following a spate of suicides at its Chinese plants.

Yan Li, 27, died on Friday after working the night shift for more than a month at a Foxconn plant in the southern Chinese city of Shenzhen, China Labor Watch said, citing Yan’s sister, and adding that he was killed by exhaustion.

“We have reviewed this matter and while we cannot speculate the specific cause of death, we have found nothing to support any allegation that it was work-related,” a spokesman for Foxconn said in a statement.

“We have met with Mrs Yan and expressed our condolences and as a compassionate gesture have provided a level of support to assist her at this very difficult time.”

Foxconn, which makes a range of top-selling products including Apple iPhones, Dell computers and Nokia mobile phones, said earlier Wednesday it was raising the pay of its Chinese assembly line workers by 30 percent.

Ten workers at the giant Foxconn plant in Shenzhen have fallen to their deaths in apparent suicides this year. An 11th worker died at another factory in northern China.

The deaths have raised questions about the conditions for millions of factory workers in China, especially at Foxconn, where the activists say long hours, low pay and high pressure are the norm.

Apple chief executive Steve Jobs on Tuesday defended conditions at Foxconn, saying it was “not a sweatshop”.

“You go in this place and it’s a factory but, my gosh, they’ve got restaurants and movie theatres and hospitals and swimming pools. For a factory, it’s pretty nice,” Jobs said during an All Things Digital conference in the southern California coastal town of Rancho Palos Verdes.
[Via:IT]