Governor Palin and the Difference between Responsive Leadership and Reactionary Politics

Vice President Biden has come under fire for awful comments he made regarding the Chinese’s one child policy while in China on Sunday (emphasis added):

“But as I was talking to some of your leaders, you share a similar concern here in China,” he continued. “You have no safety net. Your policy has been one which I fully understand – I’m not second-guessing – of one child per family. The result being that you’re in a position where one wage earner will be taking care of four retired people. Not sustainable.”

Vice President Biden condoned the horrific policies of the China government that allow only one child per family which has subsequently resulted in forced abortions, including sex-selective abortions, human rights violations, fines, and loss of jobs. These comments have engendered responses from the declared Presidential candidates. Governor Romney called China’s policy “gruesome and barbaric” while asserting that Biden acquiesced. Governor Perry criticized Biden for “moral indifference”.

This “one child” policy is decades old, and the Obama administration is more than two and a half years old. Where were these men on human rights abuses and the Obama administration indifference prior to this presidential election, when their comments could score political points? As we highlighted during the Chinese President’s visit to the US in January, Governor Palin has been at the forefront of highlighting international human rights and the Obama administration’s negligence in addressing these abuses, not because it would score her political points, but because of her principled support for human dignity and the sanctity of life. In September of 2009, during her a speech in the Chinese region of Hong Kong, Governor Palin boldly, yet diplomatically, criticized China for their injustices and disrespect for human liberties (emphasis added):

Think about it. How many books and articles have been written about the dangers of India’s rise? Almost as large as China – and soon to be more populous – virtually no one worries about the security implications of India becoming a great power – just as a century ago the then-preeminent power, Great Britain, worried little about the rise of America to great power status. My point is that the more politically open and just China is, the more Chinese citizens of every ethnicity will settle disputes in courts rather than on the streets. The more open it is, the less we will be concerned about its military build-up and intentions. The more transparent China is, the more likely it is they we will find a true and lasting friendship based on shared values as well as interests.

I am not talking about some U.S.-led “democracy crusade.” We cannot impose our values on other counties. Nor should we seek to. But the ideas of freedom, liberty and respect for human rights are not U.S. ideas, they are much more than that. They are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and many other international covenants and treaties. They apply to citizens in Shanghai as much as they do to citizens in Johannesburg or Jakarta. And demands for liberty in China are Chinese, not American, demands. Just last year, many brave Chinese signed Charter 08, a Chinese document modeled on the great Czech statesman Vlacav Havel’s Charter 77. Charter 08 would not be unfamiliar to our Founding Fathers and was endorsed by Havel himself. No, we need not convince the Chinese people that they have inalienable rights. They are calling for those rights themselves. But we do have to worry about a China where the government suppresses the liberties its people hold dear.

In May of 2010, Governor Palin hammered the Obama administration’s State Department for essentially apologizing to the Chinese for Arizona’s immigration law, when it was China who was one engaged in true human rights violations, including their population control measures (emphasis added):

The absolute low point of this campaign came last Friday, when a U.S. State Department delegation met with Chinese negotiators to discuss human rights. Apparently, our State Department felt it necessary to make their Chinese guests feel less bad about their own record of human rights abuses by repeatedly atoning for American “sins” – including, it seems, the Arizona immigration/pro-border security law. Asked if Arizona came up at all during the meeting, Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner answered:

“We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session, and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination, and that these are issues very much being debated in our own society.”

Note that he said “We brought it up” – not the Chinese, but the U.S. State Department’s own delegation. Instead of grilling the Chinese about their appalling record on human rights, the State Department continued the unbelievable apology tour by raising “early and often” Arizona’s decision to secure our border.

Arizona’s law, which just mirrors the federal law, simply allows the police to ask those whom they have already stopped for some form of identification like a driver’s license. By what absurd stretch of the imagination is that the moral equivalent of China’s lack of freedoms, population controls (including forced abortions), censorship, and arbitrary detentions?

This is not the only time that Governor Palin has made principled policy statements that were later echoed by announced, campaigning presidential candidates. Last week during an interview with Lou Dobbs, Governor Palin was asked about Governor Perry’s comments on the Federal Reserve, to which Governor Palin replied (emphasis added):

[Perry] called it like he saw it and I always respect people for doing so.What Governor Perry is voicing concern about is something I wrote about on Facebook pages about ten months ago, this quantitative easing or monetizing our debt, essentially printing money out of thin air, which will eventually devalue our dollar and, I think, lead to inflation, in order to make it look like our debt isn’t as bad as it really is, and Governor Perry was voicing great concerns that many of us share. He just used some more candid terms, I think, than some of us would have used.

Again, Governor Palin was principled and politically prescient enough to speak on the effects of quantitative easing as early as November of 2010, long before Governor Perry made such comments during the nascence of his presidential campaign. She made statements on Facebook and during a speech in Arizona warning of the inflationary impact of quantitative easing because it was important for our country to be aware, not because it had potential to score political points or provide red meat for potential supporters.

Governor Palin’s prescience and principled stances are not only a matter of rhetoric, but of record. During her time as Governor, she cut spending 9.5% and vetoed hundreds of millions of dollars in spending, not because times were tough, but because she wanted to keep government small and solvent. She reformed Alaska’s pension system and used surplus dollars to help pay down underfunded pensions, which reduced Alaska’s liabilities by 34.6 % to help provide analysts at Moody’s with enough confidence to later upgrade Alaska’s credit rating to AAA. This were not politically expedient decisions (she actually came under fire from lawmakers and unions for these decisions), nor were they done because of fiscal emergency, they were done because they were the right things to do for the short and long term fiscal health of Alaska. These are the kinds of rhetoric and record that distinguish a responsive leader like Governor Palin from the reactionary politicians like Governors Perry and Romney.

Crossposted here and here.

Governor Palin ahead of the Curve on Rare Earth Metals

Ed Morrissey has a post up at HotAir today discussing China’s hoarding of rare earth metals. Rare earth metals are needed for green energies such as the batteries in electric cars and in CFL light bulbs that will be mandated in the coming years, as well as in the cell phones and other technologies. Morrissey writes:

Elements required for critical components such as lithium batteries for electric cars cannot be found in massive quantities within the US, and a number of the rare-earth elements needed for these components are mainly found in China — which can be fairly described as an economic competitor of the US at the very least. Today’s report from the Financial Times should drive that point home and send up red flags on “green” mandates, both literally and figuratively:

EPrices of some rare earth metals have doubled in just three weeks amid heavy stockpiling in China that has raised fears over global supplies.

China produces more than 90 per cent of the world’s rare earths, 17 elements used in hybrid cars, fluorescent lights and many high-tech applications. …

Japan and the US, the world’s biggest importers of rare earths, have repeatedly voiced concerns to China, while complaints from industrial users of rare earths have been growing. Last year, China cut their exports by 40 per cent and temporarily banned exports to Japan during a political dispute.

This news is something that Governor Palin warned about in October 2010 Facebook post where she wrote (emphasis mine):

Some of the countries we’re now reliant upon and will soon be beholden to can easily use energy and mineral supplies as a weapon against us.

The solution? Simply, please don’t elect politicians who cast votes that lock up our plentiful supplies. Please consider the case of China bending us over a barrel as it develops rare earth minerals while we ban mining. Please consider Venezuela and Russia and Saudi Arabia and Brazil (as we subsidize their off-shore drilling) and all other energy-producing countries as the Left locks up ANWR, NPR-A, and other American lands that are teeming with our own needed energy supplies.

“Drill, baby, drill and mine, baby, mine.” Yep, the mantra may be mocked by the Democrats, but serious consequences ensue when we let the Left make us rely on foreign countries to feed us energy. The joke is on us if they win.

America is already beholden to China due to our massive debt. Now, we are beholden to them because of our self-imposed green initiatives that have handcuffed us on multiple levels. President Obama’s plans to make us energy independent using green technologies cannot even be achieved when China is our main source of rare earth metals. We have the opportunity to drill for traditional and proven sources of energy that are just below our feet, yet the federal government is handcuffing oil and gas rich states and coastal areas. Just last week, the Obama administration expressed opposition to a bill that would increase oil and gas development in Alaska. This only makes us more dependent on foreign countries to provide needed resources for both green and traditional energies, not to mention material needed for communication technology such as cell phones. Governor Palin is both right and prescient once again.

Update: The Alaska Dispatch reports that Alaska has large quantities of rare earth elements, and the US House is proposing legislation aimed at developing these resources:

The cost of dysprosium oxide, used in magnets, lasers and nuclear reactors, for example, has risen to about $1,470 a kilogram from $700 to $740 at the start of the month.

Enter Alaska. A mine at Bokan Mountain near Ketchikan, to name just one, is thought to be one of the three largest sources of REEs [rare earth elements] in the U.S., probably the largest for dysprosium.

All told, Bokan Mountain is thought to hold about 3.8 million tons of REEs. As U.S. Sen. Lisa Murkowski put it, "more than enough to break China's stranglehold on the market and protect America's access to the rare earths that are vital to the production of cutting-edge technologies in this country."

Alaska Department of Natural Resources Commissioner Dan Sullivan recently delivered to a U.S. House subcommittee last week in testimony on a couple of pieces of legislation aimed at finding and developing REEs. Read Alaska Dispatch coverage of his testimony here. And more coverage on REEs here, and here.

Crossposted here, here, and here.

President Obama and Governor Palin on China's Human Rights Abuses

Yesterday, President Obama hosted Chinese President Hu (or as the White House website stated, "President Chu") for a state dinner. Earlier in the day, the two leaders met and held a joint press conference. During the press conference, China's human rights abuses became the focus of discussion. CNS News reports:

“And I want to suggest that there has been an evolution in China over the last 30 years since the first normalization of relations between the United States and China,” Obama said. “And my expectation is that 30 years from now we will have seen further evolution and further change.”

Obama did not specify any specific areas where he believed China has progressed in expanding freedom for its people.

While President Obama states that he has been "very candid" with President Hu about China's human rights abuses in private, his public remarks about China's human rights abuses were non-substantive and non-specific:

“China has a different political system than we do,” Obama said. “China is at a different stage of development than we are. We come from very different cultures with very different histories. But, as I’ve said before and I repeated to President Hu, we have some core views as Americans about the universality of certain rights--freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly--that we think are very important and that transcend cultures.”

Additionally, while he states that there has been "evolution" in how China handles human rights, his own state department reports evidence to the contrary. The most recent U.S. State Department report released last spring says in part (emphasis mine):

The government's human rights record remained poor and worsened in some areas. During the year the government increased the severe cultural and religious repression of ethnic minorities in the Xinjiang Uighur Autonomous Region (XUAR).Tibetan areas remained under tight government controls. The detention and harassment of human rights activists increased, and public interest lawyers and law firms that took on cases deemed sensitive by the government faced harassment, disbarment and closure. The government limited freedom of speech and controlled the Internet and Internet access. Abuses peaked around high-profile events, such as the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square uprising, the 50th anniversary of the Tibetan uprising, and the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People's Republic of China.

While President Obama has chosen to not speak out strongly against China's human rights' abuses, Governor Palin has been bold in her defense of the abused and persecuted in China. Even speaking in the Chinese region of Hong Kong in August of 2009, Governor Palin was bold, yet diplomatic in her criticism of the action of the Chinese government (emphasis mine):

Think about it. How many books and articles have been written about the dangers of India’s rise? Almost as large as China – and soon to be more populous – virtually no one worries about the security implications of India becoming a great power – just as a century ago the then-preeminent power, Great Britain, worried little about the rise of America to great power status. My point is that the more politically open and just China is, the more Chinese citizens of every ethnicity will settle disputes in courts rather than on the streets. The more open it is, the less we will be concerned about its military build-up and intentions. The more transparent China is, the more likely it is they we will find a true and lasting friendship based on shared values as well as interests.

I am not talking about some U.S.-led “democracy crusade.” We cannot impose our values on other counties. Nor should we seek to. But the ideas of freedom, liberty and respect for human rights are not U.S. ideas, they are much more than that. They are enshrined in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and many other international covenants and treaties. They apply to citizens in Shanghai as much as they do to citizens in Johannesburg or Jakarta. And demands for liberty in China are Chinese, not American, demands. Just last year, many brave Chinese signed Charter 08, a Chinese document modeled on the great Czech statesman Vlacav Havel’s Charter 77. Charter 08 would not be unfamiliar to our Founding Fathers and was endorsed by Havel himself. No, we need not convince the Chinese people that they have inalienable rights. They are calling for those rights themselves. But we do have to worry about a China where the government suppresses the liberties its people hold dear.

While both President Obama and Governor Palin recognize the universality of freedom, Governor Palin is the one who is willing to call out the suppression of the Chinese government, even while in China. President Obama, on the other hand, couched his language as to be conciliatory to a government who Governor Palin would later point out engages in " population controls (including forced abortions), censorship, and arbitrary detentions?" This current passive acceptance of China's actions is further supported by assertive action as well. During this past summer, Governor Palin had strong criticism for the Obama administration actively seeking to China's approval in the federal government's opposition to Arizona's border security laws:

The absolute low point of this campaign came last Friday, when a U.S. State Department delegation met with Chinese negotiators to discuss human rights. Apparently, our State Department felt it necessary to make their Chinese guests feel less bad about their own record of human rights abuses by repeatedly atoning for American “sins” – including, it seems, the Arizona immigration/pro-border security law. Asked if Arizona came up at all during the meeting, Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner answered:

“We brought it up early and often. It was mentioned in the first session, and as a troubling trend in our society and an indication that we have to deal with issues of discrimination or potential discrimination, and that these are issues very much being debated in our own society.”

Note that he said “We brought it up” – not the Chinese, but the U.S. State Department’s own delegation. Instead of grilling the Chinese about their appalling record on human rights, the State Department continued the unbelievable apology tour by raising “early and often” Arizona’s decision to secure our border.

Governor Palin pointedly highlighted the horrible, hypocritical actions of the Obama administration. Not only did the Obama administration's State Department not appropriately address China's human rights' abuse, they also willingly insulted one of their own states for defending its border and accused them of being discriminatory. Governor Palin goes on to say:

Arizona’s law, which just mirrors the federal law, simply allows the police to ask those whom they have already stopped for some form of identification like a driver’s license. By what absurd stretch of the imagination is that the moral equivalent of China’s lack of freedoms, population controls (including forced abortions), censorship, and arbitrary detentions?

There is no comparison between the human rights violations in China and the language of the Arizona border security bill that originally allowed police to ask for identification if an individual had already been stopped for other reasons. Governor Palin was right to point out yet another stop on President Obama's perpetual apology tour. She was also right to diplomatically address China's human rights abuses. President Obama has chosen to engage in hollow rhetoric rather than diplomatic criticism. So yet another contrast between President Obama and Governor Palin is further revealed. America is a superpower (yes, whether the President likes it or not), and with that, the President has the opportunity to encourage and challenge other nations to treat their citizens with respect and to allow them to maintain their inalienable right of liberty. As Governor Palin said this is not a "U.S. led democracy crusade" or imposing American values, it is simply encouraging the spread of freedom. President Obama would do well to emulate Governor Palin's message.

Crossposted here, here, here, and here.