New York Times Leader

The lead article in today’s New York Times is titled, “Google May End Venture in China Over Censorship.” It describes a decision by the company to leave China after its software was hacked in an attempt to gain access to Gmail accounts belonging to Chinese human rights activists.

The decision by Google should be commended as an altruistic reaction to increasingly sophisticated attacks on its security systems and source code. It seems like the latest incidents were the straw that broke the camels back. Google had previously agreed to block searches for terms like Tiananmen Square massacre or the Dalai Lama.

According to the article, Google’s action represents one of the first times a respected international business left China. Their departure is especially powerful because they will be losing Internet ad revenues from about 300 million Chinese web users.

China may have anticipated problems as their country has been promoting an alternate search engine, Baidu. The article states that Baidu has been steadily gaining market share over Google.

Google had faced difficulties with the Chinese government in the past. It was forced to disable a function that lets the search engine suggest terms to its users. And at one point, nationwide access to Google and Gmail was blocked. 

Anyway, kudos to Google for doing the right thing.

The lead story in today’s New York Times is titled, “Deals Help China Expand Its Sway in Latin America.” It describes China’s business dealings with Venezuela, Ecuador and Brazil in return for securing natural resources such as oil far into the future.

The business transactions include support of $6 billion for a development fund in Venezuela, $1 billion for a hydro electric plant in Ecuador and $10 billion for Brazil’s national oil company.

The transactions also include using the Chinese currency as a reserve instead of the traditional U.S. dollars. As such, they are particularly troubling.

One reason for China’s intrusion into our backyard was cited as the neglect of the Bush administration for the past eight years. Typically, the Inter-American Development Bank provided economic support to the region, but its typical size of donations was far eclipsed by China.

A very disturbing remark came from David Rothkoopf, a Commerce Department official in the Clinton Administration. He said, “This is how the balance of power shifts quietly during times of crisis.”

So, while we are trying to convince ourselves of the economic link between China’s investments in the United States and the ultimate outcome of the current economic crisis — e.g., China wants us to recover because they are dependent on their investments in our nation — China is beginning to diversify and expand its influence elsewhere.

Another problem for the Obama administration to tackle …

Today’s lead article in The New York Times is titled, “China Vies to be World’s Leader in Electric Cars.” It describes China’s plan to become the world’s leader in all-electric vehicles, and some of its accomplishments and barriers in doing so.

This was a very interesting article. China’s goal to reduce pollution and global warming will be hindered because it gets three-quarters of its electricity from coal, the worst possible source. Also, replacing a gasoline car with an electric one only reduces greenhouse emissions by 19 percent.

There are economic barriers as well. The cost of an electric vehicle will be almost twice a gasoline vehicle, $30,000 versus $14,600, despite the Chinese government’s subsidy of $8,800 per vehicle.

There are some benefits. Most Chinese have a short commute so the 120-mile range of electric vehicles between charges is okay. And many are purchasing vehicles for the first time, so they won’t notice the comparative differences.

The most hopeful part of the article, in my opinion, involves raising the consciousness of U.S. citizens about the strides other countries are making regarding alternative transportation. Maybe, just as Sputnik helped us win the race to the moon, China’s program will spur research by U.S. carmakers, and American ingenuity will win in the end.

Today’s lead article in The New York Times was titled, “China’s Premier Seeks Guarantee from U.S. on Debt.” The article described the concern of the Chinese premier, Wen Jiabao, about the country’s $1 trillion of holdings in U.S. government debt.

This criticism follows remarks in January about the folly of America’s low savings and high rate of consumption.

However, we shouldn’t be concerned, paradoxically because the Chinese hold so much of our debt. If they tried to unload it all, the value of the Treasury notes would decrease precipitously, and China would sustain a big loss. The article concludes that the Chinese would have to hold their Treasury notes until maturity.

One of the apparent criticisms of U.S. policy, and by the Europeans as well, seems to be our emphasis on stimulus programs instead of stricter regulation of banks and other financial institutions.

While it’s nice to know that the Chinese, one of the world’s strongest economies, is bound to us in a circle of mutual dependency, it leaves us feeling very vulnerable as well. Americans are used to going it alone, to consider our own national security without relying on any other nation. An inability to do so suggests a decrease in our power and that’s troubling to many of us.

How can we serve as a beacon of light and a city on the hill, when we have to be careful what we say about other countries. For example, many policy experts believe that today’s Chinese criticism was a response to our earlier criticism of the way they manipulate their currency.

This is a fine mess that Mr. Bush has gotten us into.