Lilly and Scowcroft Were Wrong in 1989. Let’s Not Be Wrong in 2023
A Lifeline to China is a Mistake.
Brent Scowcroft was a great American, as was Lawrence Eagleburger. Both served our country well throughout their lives. Except once.
June 4th, 1989, the Communist Party of China unleashed a slaughter and then round-up of activists and students who had bravely demanded a more democratic China. Less than 6 weeks later, while bodies of students were still in Beijing morgues, Scowcroft and Eagleburger, encouraged by James Lilly, and of course with the full backing of then President George H. Bush, undertook a secret mission to Beijing to let the butchers know, “we’ve got your back”.
Alternative historical timelines are somewhat useless, however, judgments about the actions of government officials are open to scrutiny, and I am more than willing to argue that the olive branch along with the tarp, to cover the bodies of the Tiananmen students, delivered by Mr. Eagleburger and Mr. Scowcroft, was a mistake. China was on the ropes, the Soviet Union was going down fast, and what could have been the end of the Communist Party, or at least a serious shake-up, was an opportunity missed for reasons that really don’t add up, other than then President Bush, and policy hands like Ambassador James Lilly, thought stability in China was preferred over change. A move where the only recorded beneficiary was the Carlyle Group.
We are now at that crossroads again, and once again, we have the engagement crowd telling us that it’s much better for us for to let the Party of Xi escape, with our assistance, rather than face the music of the last nine years of economic mismanagement.
Whether it’s slithering Hank Greenberg, Kissinger, or even our newest US China policy maker, Australian Ambassador to the US Kevin Rudd, the bail out China brigade is out in full force.
I disagree.
Unless the engagement fellows have figured out a way to increase the Chinese birth rate, solve the problems of communism, and found some path for the Communist Party to allow an investment that is not a gift, then we are wasting our time.
Xi put them in this mess, and it’s his mess to sort. The idea that we need some type of Marshall Plan to help the Communist Party save itself, so they don’t turn into bad guys and invade the rest of Asia is sadly lacking an understanding of exactly what totalitarians have done throughout history.
I’m not advocating to isolate, or to even cut off trade with China, but if they want to trade, then they can trade like adults, and not always based on the premise that the United States and the European Union are their supplicants.
It’s been the common thread from the China hands for the last 30 years that China is a place that only changes on its own, and we, the West, can only watch and encourage them to go in the better direction. Sounds right to me. Xi made the mud, let him, on his own, clean it up.
Bail out China? Are you f-ing kidding me? De-risk, de-couple, invest in friendly Pacific countries, and maximize military investment to partners in the region. Keep up the pressure and let the Chinese people take down their dictators.
The U.S. has made no end of foreign policy blunders in China; from provoking Japan to help defend China in WW2, to deprioritizing support for the Nationalists during WW2 in favor of other theaters (thus allowing the PRC to more or less sit the war out and come out of it with forces intact and backing from the USSR), to the one discussed above, to supporting the PRC entry in to the WTO trade regime. The smart play now is to disengage from the PRC economically in an orderly way, straighten out our own economic house which has many looming problems, and strengthen our Navy ASAP.