China says no space arms race (because it's about Iranian oil!)
Mood:
hug me
Topic: peace
SAM posted on the very scary demo of space military capacity by China by referring to the 'coincidence' of escalation of US military in the Persian Gulf with carrier USS Stenner mid January widely seen as a menacing of Iran, and China's oil dependence on Iran, here:
Saturday, 20 January 2007
China space missile warning to USA to protect their Iranian oil supply Mood: 
blue Topic: peace There is reportage from China Daily, Reuters, AP and The Australian referenced there.
What is strange with coverage of the latter up until yesterday at least is plenty of discussion of 'a space arms race' and importance of 'US military satellites'. But no mention of USS Stenner's recent menacing of Iran and China's need to defend its investment in Iranian oil in the US$ tens of billions.
This writer has no doubt that coincidences like that don't just happen. This story last Sunday ran in the Fairfax Sydney SunHerald p42 sourced to one Chris Buckley in Beijing
"China plays down fears/Missile test wasn't meant to spark arms race in space: Beijing"
referencing a Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman who neither confirmed or denied the test itself but reitereated the principle of peace in space, and this:
"David Wright, of the Union of Concerned Scientists in Massachusetts, said the satellite pulverised by China could have broken into nearly 40,000 fragments from one to 10 centimetres wide - about half of which would stay in orbit for more than a decade."
SAM's editor says anyone who thinks this is all coincidence is is being duped by the Murdoch press: China are warning the USA off damaging their interests in Iran, and the newswires are carrying ongoing frictions between the USA and Iran eg
- the latter getting selective over who can obtain access from the IAEA nuke inspectors in the UN, and
- the US detaining Iranian diplomats in Iraq,
and on and on the power wrestle goes:
via google to Reuters here and New York Times
..............................................
Postscript #1
A local earth sister reader with an experienced world view of the peace movement writes in response to this topic string:
"Wow! Tom!!!!!!!
Maybe this is how [China] willstop the US from attacking Iran - to annex it to their bases on either side. Have you seen the maps of many US bases in both Iraq and Afghanistan? - none in Iran! psychic hugs - to help you over come the "blue" mood."
Postscript #2
This power struggle for political and military ascendancy in the Middle East between Iran and the USA is also revealed here within the hawks and doves of the USA administration, via this BBC story of then Secretary of State Powell trying unsuccessfully to promote diplomacy between the 2 countries in 2003:
Washington 'snubbed Iran offer' 18th Jan 2007 at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/6274147.stm
[worth quoting in full given the disaster in Iraq now:]
"Iran offered the US a package of concessions in 2003, but it was rejected, a senior former US official has told the BBC's Newsnight programme. Tehran proposed ending support for Lebanese and Palestinian militant groups and helping to stabilise Iraq following the US-led invasion.
Offers, including making its nuclear programme more transparent, were conditional on the US ending hostility.
But Vice-President Dick Cheney's office rejected the plan, the official said.
The offers came in a letter, seen by Newsnight, which was unsigned but which the US state department apparently believed to have been approved by the highest authorities.
In return for its concessions, Tehran asked Washington to end its hostility, to end sanctions, and to disband the Iranian rebel group the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq and repatriate its members.
 |  But as soon as it got to the White House, the old mantra of 'We don't talk to evil'... reasserted itself 
|
Former Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein had allowed the rebel group to base itself in Iraq, putting it under US power after the invasion. One of the then Secretary of State Colin Powell's top aides told the BBC the state department was keen on the plan - but was over-ruled.
"We thought it was a very propitious moment to do that," Lawrence Wilkerson told Newsnight.
"But as soon as it got to the White House, and as soon as it got to the Vice-President's office, the old mantra of 'We don't talk to evil'... reasserted itself."
Observers say the Iranian offer as outlined nearly four years ago corresponds pretty closely to what Washington is demanding from Tehran now.
Since that time, Lebanese guerrilla group Hezbollah inflicted significant military losses on the major US ally in the region, Israel, in the 2006 conflict and is now claiming increased political power in Lebanon.
Palestinian militant group Hamas won power in parliamentary elections a year ago, opening a new chapter of conflict in Gaza and the West Bank.
The UN Security Council has imposed sanctions on Iran following its refusal to suspend its uranium enrichment programme.
Iran denies US accusations that its nuclear programme is designed to produce weapons. "
Posted by editor
at 1:02 PM EADT
Updated: Wednesday, 24 January 2007 11:25 AM EADT
chatty
accident prone
on fire
incredulous
rushed
down
happy
special
bright
