因为有你，川渝更美好 | Because of you, Sichuan & Chongqing will be better… :]

adapted from Wikipedia

extracted from guardian.co.uk

Taiwan
——

11. (C) The Deputy Secretary asked MM Lee for his assessment of Taiwan. MM Lee said former President Chen Shui-bian had left Taiwan in a weak economic position, which had enabled President Ma Ying-Jeou to come to power with his pledge to strengthen the economy through means including expanding the three links with China. In Beijing, former President Jiang Zemin was wedded to his eight-point approach, but President Hu Jintao was more flexible. Jiang wanted to show he was a great man by solving the Taiwan issue in his lifetime, but Hu is more patient and does not have any fixed timeline. In Chinese domestic politics, Hu had wanted Vice Premier Li Keqiang from the Communist Youth League to emerge as his successor, not Vice President Xi Jinping, but Hu did his calculations and accepted Xi when it became clear that Xi had the necessary backing from the rest of the leadership. Similarly, on Taiwan, Hu will be pragmatic. It does not matter to Hu if it takes 10 years or 20 or 30. The key is building links with Taiwan. As in the case of Hong Kong, if necessary the tap could be turned off, he said.

12. (C) In this context, MM Lee said, Hu could live with Ma’s positions on the ‘92 consensus and on not addressing the reunification issue during his term in office. What mattered to Hu was that Taiwan not seek independence. If that happened, China has 1,000 missiles and is building its capacity to hold the U.S. fleet at a distance. The implicit question for Taiwan’s leaders is if that is what they want, MM Lee said.

13. (C) MM Lee stated that the alternative is Mainland investment in Taiwan stocks and property. The Mainland has already assured Hong Kong that it will help out economically. The Mainland has not said this to Taiwan, but the Mainland’s Taiwan Affairs Director, Wang Yi, did urge Chinese companies to invest in Taiwan. In four years Taiwan’s economy will pick up and Ma will win re-election. The DPP lacks strong potential candidates. Su Zhen-chang is promising, but seems unlikely to be able to win. Meanwhile, even the traditionally DPP-supporting farmers in Taiwan’s South need China’s market for vegetables and other products. Taiwan’s continued participation in the World Health Assembly depends on Beijing. Beijing’s calculation seems to be to prevent Taiwan independence in the near term, then bring Taiwan “back to China,” even if it takes 40 or 50 years. MM Lee said he is looking forward to visiting Fujian Province, where preparations are underway for a new southern economic area linked with Taiwan.

中文译文（由本人翻译，转载请务必注明出处）：

台湾
——

11. (C) 副国务卿史坦伯格（Steinberg）请李资政评估台湾的局势。李资政表示，前总统陈水扁把台湾的经济陷入薄弱的局面，而这也使马英九通过保证与大陆扩大三通等方面的合作来强化台湾经济，成功夺取政权。在北京，前主席江泽民和他的“江八点”方针绑在一起，但胡锦涛主席比较灵活。江希望在他有生之年解决台湾问题来显示他是一位伟大领袖，但胡比较有耐心，并不寻求在他有生之年解决台湾问题。在中国国内政治中，胡希望来自共青团的副总理李克强成为他的接班人，而不是副主席习近平。不过胡算了算账，发现习拥有党内其他人给予的必要支持，最终接受了习作为接班人。同样的，在台湾问题上，胡是比较实际的。对于胡来说，花10年、20年、30年都不是问题。关键是与台湾发展关系。至于香港，必要的话，这个水龙头会被关闭。

12. (C) 在这个背景下，李资政说，胡可能在他的任期内，对马的“九二共识”默认，并不触及同一问题。胡最关切的，就是台湾不要寻求独立。如果台湾宣布独立，中国有1000枚导弹，而且还在增加数量来防止远处的美国舰队靠近。李资政说，台湾领导人无疑需要面对的问题就是，这是否是他们所要的。

13. (C) 李资政表示，另一解决方案是陆企赴台投资股市和房地产。大陆已向香港保证，它将会在经济上帮助香港。尽管大陆尚未对台湾这样表态，但国台办主任王毅有鼓励陆企赴台投资。4年后台湾的经济会好转，马英九会连任。民进党缺乏强势的候选人。苏贞昌很有前途，但好像不会赢得选举。同时，连传统上支持民进党的台湾南部的农民都需要将蔬菜销往大陆市场。台湾是否能持续参与世界卫生组织，取决于北京。北京的计划似乎是在近期防止台湾独立，并让台湾“回归祖国”，哪怕是四五十年后。李资政说他很希望访问福建省，那里正在建设一个新的和台湾相连的南方经济区。

Audio clip: Adobe Flash Player (version 9 or above) is required to play this audio clip. Download the latest version here. You also need to have JavaScript enabled in your browser.

Tentera Singapura – Singapore Armed Forces March

9月5日，我和好友骆建宇到今年的新加坡陆军开放日参观。主办方在Boon Lay巴士转换站设有免费巴士接送，我们从那里上车前往Pasir Laba军营。

近年来，新加坡武装部队一直在朝“第三代武装部队”(3rd Generation Army)转型。今年，新加坡武装部队又统一更换了军装。新式数码迷彩由新加坡国防科技部门自主研制，据说可以“救士兵一命”，因为它不仅用途很多，而且图案也为士兵在丛林里的隐藏提供了有利条件。

Appearances can be deceiving.

我对新式迷彩的隐藏效果是深有体会的。早在7月下旬我们学校组织前往见习军官学校(Officer Cadet School)参观时，一位身着新式迷彩军服的士兵藏在树丛中；另一位士兵则挑战我们班的同学，看有谁能辨认出他藏在哪里。结果全班二十来人硬是无一人辨认出了他的位置。由此可见，这种新式迷彩军服的隐藏效果有多么好。

这次参观陆军开放日，我和骆建宇都带了相机拍照，后来再把自己拍的照片发给了对方。以下是我们二人共同拍摄的照片，经过我精挑细选后上传到网上供大家欣赏。为了达到震撼的效果，我还对一些图片进行了后期编辑，希望大家喜欢。为了方便大家看图，请点击小图查看大图幻灯，并使用电脑键盘上的左右方位键换片。

这次陆军开放日活动实在是太丰富了，我们从早上10点一直参观到下午5、6点左右，都没有机会去战斗世界(Battle World)去体验一下实战，因为排队的人实在是太多了，连站在那里的士兵都劝我们别排队受罪。此外，由于长时间行走在烈日下，我的胳膊和脸都被晒坏了，虽然没脱皮，但直到今天情况才有所好转，因此我也不便再去Pasir Laba Camp排队体验实战了。

不过没关系，既然我在新加坡已经有过很多次实弹与模拟实弹射击的经验，而且今年7月底我在见习军官学校也亲身体参与了一次简短的突击战，所以虽然错过了这次机会，也不是很遗憾。

除了照片，我还拍了一些视频供大家欣赏，大家可以在下面的播放列表中播放。我在播放列表中增添了两个新加坡陆军在电视上投放的广告，播放列表里排在最后的开放日那个广告里有战斗世界的一点片段，供大家欣赏。如果你现在不在中国，可以点YouTube的链接，这样不仅画质很清晰，而且音质也比较好。

我本来想用高清摄像机记录这些精彩画面，但现在还没购买高清摄像设备，技术条件很受限，只能用我的数码相机拍摄视频，大家就只好将就一下了。下一次新加坡武装部队举办开放日时，我应该就能给大家带来高清视听享受了。

电视广告似乎是新加坡武装部队品牌营销的一部分，而这无疑是一种富有创意的招募士官的方式。也许有些观众会认为新加坡武装部队的电视广告拍的有点夸张，但观众如果亲自到新加坡陆军开放日参观了的话，就会发现新加坡军方并没有在宣传上夸大其词，还能感受到新加坡武装部队超强的战斗力。

这又让我想起了前段时间看到一位台湾网友@wenli在网上贴出的一张台湾空军招募海报，看了让人忍俊不禁：台湾空军竟“登陆月球”，连“陆军军官学校”也被搬到了月球上。台湾军方很明显就是在打肿脸充胖子，而这种不务实的宣传又能达到什么效果呢？实事求是才是硬道理。

点击观看视频：
2009新加坡陆军开放日(CCTV) | Army Open House 2009 (YouTube)

By Doug Bandow, For The Straits Times
(Adapted from The Straits Times Interactive, July 14, 2008)

DETERRENCE: A US aircraft carrier, with planes packed on its deck, on a mission to monitor the Taiwan Strait when tensions between Taipei and Beijing were high in 2005. — ST FILE PHOTO

THE United States accounts for roughly half of the world’s military spending, enjoys the largest and most productive economy, plays a leading role in every international organisation, and is allied with every major industrialised state – save China and Russia.

The world will inevitably change, but Washington will control its own destiny for many more years. You wouldn’t know that, however, listening to the Bush administration and its hawkish supporters. In their view America is a weak and pitiful giant, threatened by evil-doers around the globe.

Particularly worrisome is China. Mr Lev Navrozov of NewsMax warns that ‘China’s war with the US will be won (before Americans understand) what is going on’.

The Claremont Institute’s Mark Helprin complains that Beijing is building up its military while the American ’story is evident without relief throughout our diminished air echelons, shrinking fleets, damaged and depleted stocks, and ground forces turned from preparation for heavy battle to the work of a gendarmerie’.

Earlier this year the Pentagon pointed to China’s improved intercontinental missiles, ‘continued development of advanced cruise missiles, medium-range ballistic missiles, anti-ship missiles’, and more as signs of Beijing’s military ambitions.

The warning that the Chinese are 10 feet tall mirrors similar claims regarding the Soviet Union. Yet the People’s Republic of China faces a multitude of economic, political and social challenges.

SEEKING THE UPPER HAND
Hawkish US policymakers fear Chinese parity far more than Chinese superiority.

Parity would prevent the US from imposing its will on China. Thus, proposals for a massive US military build-up have nothing to do with protecting America.

Indeed, the country remains poor, with a per capita GDP of about US$2,100 (S$2,800), and is hardly poised to win an arms race.

Nevertheless, Washington is being filled with cries for a significant military build-up. Mr Helprin argues: ‘Were we to allot the average of 5.7 per cent of GNP that we devoted annually to defence in peace time from 1940 to 2000, we would have as a matter of course US$800 billion each year with which to develop and sustain armies and fleets.’

In that case America would police the world ‘not with 280 ships but a thousand; not eleven carriers, or nine, but 40, not 183 F-22s, but a thousand; and so on’.

Apparently he believes China to be more dangerous than the Soviet Union, which was capable of destroying the American homeland, overrunning America’s allies and contesting control of the world’s oceans.

Yet consider the numbers 11 and 0. Those are the number of carriers possessed by America and the People’s Republic of China (PRC), respectively. Indeed, estimates of the PRC’s total defence spending tap out at US$100 billion annually, one-fifth what the Bush administration proposes spending next year.

What the PRC appears to be most interested in is deterrence. China is modernising its nuclear force, threatening US carriers, testing anti-satellite weapons, and developing asymmetric warfare capabilities. None of these give it much offensive power against the US.

China may extend its reach beyond its own shores and the Taiwan Strait, but will remain far short of an ability to project force globally for some time to come.

Moreover, what of America’s friends and allies? Japan still has a larger economy than China and could do far more to defend itself and the region. India has been informally countering Chinese influence in South-east Asia and has a growing nuclear capability.

South Korea, Australia, and several Asean states also could help constrain Chinese geo-political ambitions. Not one of these states wants war with China, but all have an incentive to assert their own interests. Indeed, the PRC is surrounded by countries with which it has been in conflict in the not too distant past.

To threaten the US, China would have to create a force capable of destroying America’s nuclear deterrent, controlling US airspace and invading American territory. That is well beyond the PRC’s obvious capabilities and apparent intentions.

Actually, hawkish US policymakers fear Chinese parity far more than Chinese superiority. For parity would prevent America from imposing its will on China. Thus, proposals for a massive US military build-up have nothing to do with protecting America.

Admiral Timothy Keating, the top US commander in Asia, complained that some of China’s weapons ‘could be characterised as having, amongst perhaps other purposes, an ability to restrict movement in and around certain areas’, especially in the Taiwan Strait, should the PRC attack Taiwan.

Put bluntly, Washington needs dozens of carrier groups not to prevent an attack on America, but to ensure that America can attack China. This is a fool’s errand.

The economic and political costs of attempting to maintain global military hegemony will only rise. And just as Americans would be unlikely to supinely accept an attempt by a potentially antagonistic power to maintain perpetual military hegemony, China too is unlikely to accept an American attempt to do the same.

Defending America, not running the world, is the primary responsibility of the US government.

A more humble foreign policy also is likely to yield greater national security for America and its friends and allies throughout Asia.

The writer is the Robert A. Taft Fellow at the American Conservative Defence Alliance. He was a special assistant to former US president Ronald Reagan.