Saturday, March 09, 2002

[China] In the red Mar 6th 2002 China ... the government can celebrate continued rapid economic growth despite the global slowdown. But maintaining a breakneck pace of expansion is putting a huge strain on the nation’s finances "[new budget] ... called for 7% growth in 2002, only slightly lower than last year despite the global economic slowdown and weak demand at home. Getting there will require yet another year of massive government spending that will push the budget deficit up to a record $37 billion ... [to] stave off worrying signs of deflation, by boosting demand and make up for the slowing growth of China’s export sector." " ... government debt amounted to 16.3% of GDP in 2001 and the budget deficit a mere 2.7%. But these figures are misleading. ... [these] figures do not include bonds issued by the state-owned asset- management companies and bonds issued by the state-owned “policy” banks. Nor do they take into account non-performing loans in the state banking system or pension liabilities—both of which amount to colossal sums." "Many officials believe that 7% growth is the minimum needed to create enough jobs to prevent serious social unrest. ... The livelihoods of millions could be damaged when China opens it markets to cheaper agricultural imports ... " "the leadership was 'paying close attention to some long-standing, hidden financial risks' and trying to eliminate them. Progress is worryingly slow." ... [more] 1:35:59 PM    comment  []

March 10, 2002 Secret Plan Outlines the Unthinkable  A secret policy review of the nation’s nuclear policy puts forth chilling new contingencies for nuclear war. "The Bush administration, in a secret policy review completed early this year, has ordered the Pentagon to draft contingency plans for the use of nuclear weapons against at least seven countries, naming not only Russia and the 'axis of evil'--Iraq, Iran, and North Korea--but also China, Libya and Syria. In addition, the U.S. Defense Department has been told to prepare for the possibility that nuclear weapons may be required in some future Arab- Israeli crisis. And, it is to develop plans for using nuclear weapons to retaliate against chemical or biological attacks, as well as 'surprising military developments' of an unspecified nature. These and a host of other directives, including calls for developing bunker- busting mini-nukes and nuclear weapons that reduce collateral damage, are contained in a still-classified document called the Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), which was delivered to Congress on Jan. 8." "But the NPR ... myopically ignores the political, moral and military implications--short-term and long--of crossing the nuclear threshold. Under what circumstances ... they 'could be employed against targets able to withstand nonnuclear attack,' or in retaliation for the use of nuclear, biological, or chemical weapons, or 'in the event of surprising military developments.'" "The second important insight ... is the extent to which the Bush administration's strategic planners were shaken by last September's terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. ... the final study is striking for its single-minded reaction to those tragedies." " ... the Bush administration's faith in old-fashioned deterrence is gone. It no longer takes a superpower to pose a dire threat to Americans. ... The classified text ... is shot through with a worldview transformed by Sept. 11." "In recent months, when Bush administration officials talked about the implications of Sept. 11 for long-term military policy, they have often focused on "homeland defense" and the need for an anti-missile shield. In truth, what has evolved since last year's terror attacks is an integrated, significantly expanded planning doctrine for nuclear wars." ... [more] March 9, 2002 U.S. Works Up Plan for Using Nuclear Arms  Military: Administration, in a secret report, calls for a strategy against at least seven nations: China, Russia, Iraq, Iran, North Korea, Libya and Syria. "Some predicted the disclosure would set off strong reactions from governments of the target countries. "'This is dynamite ... I can imagine what these countries are going to be saying at the U.N' ...  such moves could dangerously destabilize the world by encouraging other countries to believe that they, too, should develop weapons. ... 'This clearly makes nuclear weapons a tool for fighting a war, rather than deterring them' ... " ... [more] 10:29:47 AM    comment  []