Jon Chait’s Blinders

Whatever the merits or drawbacks of Pres. Obama’s choice for National Intelligence Council Chairman of Charles Freeman, I find this line of criticism offered by Jon Chait and others to be foolishly naive and ideological.

Chait condemns Freeman as ideological and extreme for writing:

“[T]he truly unforgivable mistake of the Chinese authorities was the failure to intervene on a timely basis to nip the demonstrations in the bud, rather than — as would have been both wise and efficacious — to intervene with force when all other measures had failed to restore domestic tranquility to Beijing and other major urban centers in China. In this optic, the Politburo’s response to the mob scene at ‘Tian’anmen’ stands as a monument to overly cautious behavior on the part of the leadership, not as an example of rash action. . . .

“I do not believe it is acceptable for any country to allow the heart of its national capital to be occupied by dissidents intent on disrupting the normal functions of government, however appealing to foreigners their propaganda may be. Such folk, whether they represent a veterans’ ‘Bonus Army’ or a ’student uprising’ on behalf of ‘the goddess of democracy’ should expect to be displaced with despatch [sic] from the ground they occupy.”

One can make a reasonable argument for the rights of peoples to congregate in protest. One cannot make a reasonable argument that it is wrong for governments to value stability and enforce the laws of the land. Had the Chinese authorities shut down the demonstrations by arresting leaders and moving troops in to disperse others via tear gas and other non-lethal methods, countless lives would have been saved.

Chait’s ideological blinders do not allow him to comprehend this. What a pity he and the others who have this problem are taken seriously.

Ending Burma’s Disconnect

Madame Secretary acknowledges reality:

“Clearly, the path we have taken in imposing sanctions hasn’t influenced the Burmese junta,” she said, adding that the route taken by Burma’s neighbors of “reaching out and trying to engage them has not influenced them, either.”

The best possible policy the US could pursue at this point would be to connect Burma to American products, ideas and influence, rather than ceding them completely over to India, China and Thailand. While the generals skillfully play off their neighbors over gas and other resource exploitation contracts, America is shut out in the cold with little to show for it.

Pointing our fingers and chanting “Bad, Bad” is not going to dissuade the junta’s behavior nor convince its neighbors to change course.

A more engaged America can find ways to finesse the worst aspects of Burma’s misrule (the rampant drug trade, the hazardous health pandemic incubation policies, increased instability from conflicts within and around its borders) while profitably (in an advancement of national interest sense) exploiting suspicions among its neighbors about each other’s intentions to the hilt.

Che’s Singular Contribution To The World

I have written before about the need for America to move beyond the Cold War and be pragmatic in its dealings with Cuba.

(Che was a tyrannical bastard but he had one great idea…. H/T Dr. Bulldog & Ronin)

Dave Schuler talks about China’s plan to provide an estimated $123 billion universal health care system for its citizens. Ezra Klein discusses how Chinese leaders see the plan as a way to induce consumption and economic dynamism. Chris Albon offers a link to an article about Cuba’s education of thousands of foreign students in the medical fields and its expeditionary medical efforts.

If you can ignore the the socialist drivel that appears throughout, the author offers some keen insights into a new project Cuba has conceived with its Venezuelan allies to train medical students in the latter country.

Each of the these new university programs dispenses with the traditional university campus and creates a “medical university without walls.” In the new system, there is regular classroom instruction at community polyclinics and diagnostic clinics, and this is supplemented by a great deal of participation and observation with family medicine specialists as they attend to patients in nearby Barrio Adentro offices.

……

Cubans, with the help of Venezuela, are currently educating more doctors, about 70,000 in all, than all the medical schools in the United States, which typically have somewhere between 64,000 to 68,000 students enrolled in their programs.

A good argument could be made that this is the first area America and Cuba can work together in, sharing resources in an effort to train medical personnel from participating nations and then reaping the benefits years later with more dedicated staff in “Seam” and “Gap” states alike.  Cuba already does an admirable job training future medical professionals, including a few Americans.
A wise use of dwindling foreign aid funds would be a public/private sector effort to dramatically expand this effort. No shortage exists of qualified instructors in Cuba, let alone America. Doctors, nurses, dentists and other qualified medical personnel could be trained, developing indigenous skill sets in parts of the world sorely lacking them. Conditions would apply, with at least a binding contract to render health services in their home country or another non-Core nation for at least 8 years.

China was mentioned earlier because while they have the fiscal capacity to create such a program, it is perhaps iffy whether they have the professional capacity. A Cuba-US program of this sort could work with the Chinese (and the Indians, amongst others) to provide this expansive medical diplomacy.

*In my time in Miami, I heard many bitter complaints and attacks on Cuban society from exiles. Alone among most present subjects, the quality of the Cuban medical schools were praised. They were well-regarded, unlike most professionals and institutions in Cuba.