I am writing to share with you my new article, “Russia, Iran and China in Latin America,” just published by the American Foreign Policy Committee in their e-journal “Defense Dossier.” The work comparatively examines the activities of the three extra-regional actors in Latin America and the Caribbean, including ways in which commercial and governmental initiatives by each compliment (and occasionally conflict or compete with) each other. I emphasize that each actor presents a different type of challenge to US interests in the region, on a different time-scale.
Syria: President Bashar Asad Monday called for a battle against Wahhabism, the political and religious theology embraced by the Saudi Arabian government that backs the Sunni uprising against his regime.
“President Assad said that extremists and Wahhabi thought distort the real Islam, which is tolerant,” state news agency SANA reported. He underlined the role of men of religion in fighting against Wahhabi thought, which is foreign to our societies, according to Asad.
Wahhabism is an ultra-conservative Muslim tradition, which is predominant in Saudi Arabia and whose intolerant precepts govern Saudi religious, civilian and political life. It is a sect of Sunni Islam, whose leaders profess has no sects.
I am writing to pass along to you a story from Argentina which, in addition to the story itself, says much about the nature of Chinese engagement in the region, including how the Chinese approach to pursuing business and political objectives in the region differs from that of the US.
For me, the story below illustrates well the nuances, contradictions and complexity of Chinese engagement in the region: here, it is not the Chinese who are behaving badly, but rather, their partners. The Chinese are powerfully exercising influence, yet using informal channels and indirect pressures, rather than public conditions and demands. The Chinese are both attempting to “save face” for their partner, and yet also indirectly show their ire when they themselves ‘lose face.” And finally, a reminder that the dynamics of the China-Latin America engagement is a story of PEOPLE, and not just countries and faceless companies.
Given the amount of confusion that has existed about the role of external actors in Venezuela, the article seeks to present the key facts and data regarding Chinese loans, oil investment and other support to the Venezuelan petroleum sector, in the context of Indian and Russian activities in the sector as well. I would like to offer my sincere thanks to a number of experts in the Venezuelan petroleum, financial, and other sectors who shared their knowledge and dedicated the time so that I could get the story right.
Dr. Evan Ellis is a professor of national security studies, modeling, gaming and simulation with the Center for Hemispheric Defense Studies at the National Defense University, with a research focus on Latin America's relationships with external actors, including China, Russia and Iran, as well as work on populism in the Andes, transnational criminal organizations and gangs in Mexico and Central America, energy security, and non-traditional national security topics. Dr. Ellis has published over 50 works, including the 2009 book China in Latin America: The Whats and Wherefores, as well as articles in national security, finance, and technical journals.
The front door is covered with official pronouncements of “the China Dream” and blustery demands of hegemony, but the back door is choked with members of the financial/political Elite fleeing China and taking their wealth with them.The first thing to understand about China is there is always a front door and a back door to everything. The front door is what's presented to the outside world; the back door is for everything that doesn't fit the PR image created by the front door.
The front door presents positive “face,” the back door is for everything that would “lose face,” so it's hidden and never discussed, except in private, and only with trusted family or friends.
Click on Image to Enlarge
A friend who once worked for the Chinese government recently returned home after several years absence, and found that all her bosses had moved to the West: Australia, Canada, etc. These were typical officials: their base salary was low but they managed to buy multiple homes, support mistresses, have upscale autos, and so on.
In a word, ill-gotten wealth. There are tens of thousands of these beneficiaries of China's boom in credit and corruption, and they have all either fled (with their ill-gotten wealth) to the West or “safe-haven” East (Singapore, for example). Those who haven't fled yet have passports to a safe haven, and cash and homes overseas awaiting their arrival.
It is common knowledge that the offspring of top officials all have passports and homes awaiting them in the West.
That every one of your political bosses has left China is an astounding revelation into the mindset of those who have benefited most from China's boom: they obviously fear that some upheaval could strip away their ill-gotten wealth, otherwise, why not simply move to some wealthy enclave in China?
China: On 12 November, the Third plenary meeting of the 18 Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party concluded its four days of deliberations and issued a communique.
Many analysts and commentators have published their views of the meaning and implications of the many topics covered in the communique. The more superficial have focused on language in the communique that discusses reform and market economics.
One fine commentary from the University of Sydney, Australia, notes that the key theme is continuity of the policies that have helped transform the Chinese economy since 1978. The argument is that the leaders and managers of the second largest economy cannot risk dramatic changes and are more interested in maintaining steady growth.
Observers looking for political changes or reforms will find none in the guidance issued by the Third Plenum. Economic changes concern allocation of resources and economic growth strategies. Social changes in urban-rural relations in Chinese society promise to be the most important innovations, provided economic growth remains steady.
Excerpts from the communique follow [along with analytic commentary]:
