How to deal with Global Goons, subtitled “Sticking it to China”

China01We can identify some very distinct “Global Goons”, eh? The U.S. is one given its rampaging tendency toward spying on everyone. Russia is another, embarking on a thuggish adventurism in the Ukraine. China for sure is one, claiming seas that belong distinctly and fairly to other nations.

Those are the major goons, I suppose. Maybe we should include stateless “Muslim Extremists” in the group, or even Israel. Israel has little sense of diplomacy. Certainly North Korea is a goon. Other nations are regional goons and there are too many of them to list. I am completely ignorant about the goons of Africa, for instance.

For the Philippines, two goons are important:

  • The United States, which walks with heavy foot and heavy club, but is not otherwise engaged in stealing much from the Philippines. I suppose it steals some measure of sovereignty from those who are not confident about the Philippine ability to take care of her own business.
  • China, which is engaged in the outright theft of seas belonging to the Philippines. China seems fully oblivious to any measure of law, reason or fairness. Associated with the theft is a constant flow of criticisms, threats and insults aimed by Chinese officials at Philippine government.

China is in bitter engagement with Japan, the Philippines and Viet Nam over rocks in the seas. Add Malaysia to the picture, too. Malaysia is on the cusp of outright friction and got a whiff of China’s thuggish approach regarding Malaysia’s handling of the disappearance of a jet liner. Australia joined the fray the other day, siding with the U.S. on the matter of Chinese destabilization of Asia (Inquirer article).  China is also getting some push-back from Hong Kong and Taiwan, whose peoples are not all inclined to roll over and be seduced by Chinese posturing (Inquirer article).

That posturing, after all, is not unlike the comical Charlie Chan shenanigans, or even the three stooges. China seems earnestly to believe the rest of the world is comprised of fools, unable to measure up to the high qualities of Chinese intellect and power. Her diplomatic approach oozes condescension and racism. Chinese leaders apparently believe that the suppression of thought that works within China will also work outside.

There is a ripe level of hubris emanating from Beijing.

If you read any of the Inquirer discussion threads dealing with China, the Philippines, and the U.S., you can easily recognize the military staff from the Chinese high-tech operation center in Shanghai who participate in debate. They are out to sow online discord between the U.S. and Philippines, and even within the Philippines on any initiative critical of China. These Chinese military goons also seek to weaken and undermine Filipino loyalties to President Aquino’s law-based approach to dispute resolution. Insults are the language these trolls speak.

There might also be some American NSA freaks out and about, too, but I have not identified any of them. They must not be as strident or obvious as the Chinese. And I’m not one . . . honest . . .

I’m rather of the belief that we see only one part of China’s internal workings. It may appear that the nation is unified, but I can’t help but believe there are some rational people within the governing committee who disagree with the current expansion initiatives. There MUST be intelligent Chinese of influence who see that China is working against her own best interests by creating a frenzy of anger toward China across Asia. These rational people are just outweighed and overpowered right now by the brash military leadership . . . and probably by a deep sense of self preservation. Justice in China depends on who is in charge of the execution squads.

It is the attitude of the heavy-handed military leaders that is the “gooniness” that China is projecting right now.

Well, it seems to me that a little push-back might help boost the rational peoples’ case.

The existing approach has to be proved dangerous to China.

The more trouble pushed at China, the better.

The more hornets in Chinese bonnets, the better.

Indeed, every time a Chinese military leader goes into a apoplectic fit about something Mr. Aquino or Mr. Hagel (U.S. Defense Chief) says, we should score a point for our side. When Japan gets in a good dig, we should cheer.

Indeed, indeed, the more sea-based conflicts China can be connived into making, the more outrage will be directed at China from around the world.

I rather think the Philippines should send weekly resupply missions to its rusty boat, or undertake other acts aimed at proving China to be the world’s most outrageous thug.

  • The ITLOS filing is good.
  • EDCA is good.
  • Push-back remarks are good (like Viet Nam’s “China is slandering us” remark).
  • Hauling the Chinese ambassador in for a dressing down is good.

There is no need to be overly diplomatic or restrained. That is a sign of weakness to the bent military minds that rule China’s roost.

Man, stick it to China.

Marginalize those strutting military peacocks.

Yank their feathers, you dig?

Speak to them in their own language.


Must Read addendum on the matter of discord within China: “Tales of Army Discord Show Tiananmen Square in a New Light


21 Responses to “How to deal with Global Goons, subtitled “Sticking it to China””
  1. J says:

    This is exactly what my colleague at The Observers advocates. The Philippines must demonstrate boldness in order to show the hawks in China that their bullying has its costs.

    “China is in bitter engagement with Japan, the Philippines and Viet Nam over rocks in the seas. Add Malaysia to the picture, too. Malaysia is on the cusp of outright friction and got a whiff of China’s thuggish approach regarding Malaysia’s handling of the disappearance of a jet liner. Australia joined the fray the other day, siding with the U.S. on the matter of Chinese destabilization of Asia (Inquirer article). China is also getting some push-back from Hong Kong and Taiwan, whose peoples are not all inclined to roll over and be seduced by Chinese posturing (Inquirer article).”

    — You might want to add Indonesia as well.

    • Joe America says:

      Yes, it is clear that China is not interested in dialogue, and any effort at being forthright and polite is met with insult. Forget it.

      Consider Indonesia added. Thanks.

  2. It’s true & I agree.. but the issue in here is Power! Communist (Gov’t)Party and Democratic (Gov’t) Party.. According to the studies almost 60% occupied by blood Chinese & worked and Owned establishment in our land. Most of them are ranked in Local and National position. . As a Filipino how can we unite to fight this goons if we are the part of this system and they used to it.? As a part of communist group & a part of the chinese group, now who can fight now the goons? Do you think they fight for us? We are now manipulating by the goons, even the America and China (I am sorry to tell this).

    Look! what happened in Vietnamese? We cannot condemned them, because they learned from the past & their History..When & how Filipino People learned from this?
    (We misplaced our Indigenous people which they have a right to develop their own & nobody manipulating them-another issue maybe you’ll discuss soon). Thank you!

    • Joe America says:

      The internal goons and the international goons, eh? I know you are passionate about indigenous people and the matter of how to incorporate them into the mainstream of economic decision-making and economic gains. Indeed it is worth a blog. One thing I do know is that we are unlikely to go backward and the dominance of the ethnically mixed ruling elite is probably here to stay. Opening paths to progress for indigenous people is probably what is needed, and achievable.

  3. janice says:

    the logic of the PRC govt is beyond me. proclaiming they want peace but refuses peaceful arbitration and releases statements like they can be the US’s enemy. they really have a serious lack of proper diplomacy and they seem to have lots of “lose screws”.

    it’s like theyre trying too pull off a bad quality and pirated version on japanese 1930s facism

    • Joe America says:

      Me, too. That’s why I conclude they must believe we are fools, to so blatantly steal and insult and demand “bilateral resolution to disputes” whole failing to initiate in any talks or to participate in an arbitration hearing, which is AIMED at preserving peace in dispute situations. The Chinese officials blow smoke and throw mud and act incensed that anyone would be so “uppity” as to object. “Uppity” is a term that was applied in America by whites to blacks when blacks would protest racially discriminatory treatment. China views all of its neighboring states as “uppity”.

      It does smack of Japanese 1930’s fascism.

  4. JM says:

    I was in Anvaya a few days ago and I heard some people who were about to go kayaking joking around. One guy is saying that they should visit Scarborough shoal. The other guy said the chinese would bombard them with water. It made me realize that there is at least some level of awareness regarding the Chinese behavior. I don’t think it’s enough though. When we lost Scarborough, it was like a normal day in the Philippines. When the Chinese put up an oil rig within Vietnam EEZ, the Vietnamese destroyed Chinese companies. Maybe burning/stealing corporate properties (including non-chinese) is a bit too much BUT I was hoping for at least some signs of concern and nationalism. What would it take for us to wake up?

    I highly recommend Anvaya btw, the food is excellent (probably the best filipino dishes I’ve ever tasted) and the staff are very accommodating. I was always full. lol

    • Joe America says:

      Ah, I was rummaging around looking for a good domestic vacation spot, and will add Anvaya to the rummage list. Thanks for that recommendation.

      I agree, the Philippines and Filipinos might want to get a little more testy (and unified) about China without going crazy about it.

  5. manuel buencamino says:

    Keeping the communist party in power is the context and rationale of all of China’s actions and policies. The party does first what it thinks will keep it in power, every other consideration is a far second.

    China is a huge country, like America and Russia when it was still the USSR. Like the old USSR, China is multi ethnic, multi lingual, and multi cultural. The party is the only common denominator in that country besides the majority Han people.

    The China Sea disputes viewed in Beijing from a strategic economic and military perspective is also driven by the old “all politics is local” maxim.

    Millions in the southeast China coast rely on those disputed waters for their livelihoods and economic well-being. (That’s why Taiwan becoming a part of China is also vital from a local perspective, specially in terms of fishing etc.) Notice that the most belligerent voices regarding the disputed territories come from southeast China.

    Beijing has to keep southeast China happy. It cannot afford to add unrest in southeast China to the unrest in its western muslim areas and in Tibet. It cannot afford to give an impression of vulnerability anywhere. It has to appear strong everywhere to keep the far west and Tibet from thinking they can break away.

    Then there is growing discontent in the wide unequal distribution of wealth throughout the country, an inequality tilted heavily in favor of communist party members, both local and national, and their cronies. Thus there is a crackdown on corruption etc. meant to appease the public but at the same time it is tearing the party apart. Happy people vs unhappy party members. Communist leadership is walking a tightrope on the crackdown.

    So the belligerence exhibited by Beijing (through its military goons as you say) is not only an announcement that China has arrived and will take its place at the table, it also serves as a distraction from domestic problems brought about by corruption and wealth inequality; as a demonstration of determination and capability to stand up to any threats internal and external; as proof that the leadership will protect the interests of the people in the southeast coast; and as a means to forestall democratization (external threats being the traditional method of governments including the US towards gaining more power for itself).

    The communist party’s foreign policy will change when it resolves its domestic problems. I don’t know if democratization is the answer because the US and western Europe are democracies and look at how they behave, they speak softly but they hold on to their big stick, anyway. That’s their schtick. Thucydides’ power politics still rules. 🙂

    • Joe America says:

      Ahahahaha, I suppose in the partisan, polarized west, the new slogan is walk headily and carry a big schtick.

      Thank you for the elaborate and interesting overview of the China condition today. I suppose what I am proposing is a little nudging to get China to figure out a different path than beating up and stealing from its neighbors – and the creation of artificial global enemies to hold its domestic turmoil to some patriotic flagpole of non-dissent.

      Democrazy of the western style is indeed proving to be flawed when money and its associated partisan advertising is allowed to outweigh simple voting based on earnest argument. The US is dumbing down mighty fast, it seems to me.

      • manuel buencamino says:

        What bothers me is what we will do when the ITLOS rules in our favor.

        How are we going to enforce its ruling, when China refused to participate in the procedure in the first place? Do we attack Chinese vessels who enter without permission? What do we do if China retaliates when we attack private chinese fishing vessels, oil rigs, “unarmed” coast guard ships?

        Do we ask the UN to send an expeditionary force to act as sherrif?

        What about the US, it is not even a signatory to UNCLOS, how can it act on our behalf? (A wiki entry says “Although the United States now recognizes the UNCLOS as a codification of customary international law, it has not ratified it.)

        Would Chinese presence in those areas after a favorable ruling by ITLOS be seen by the US as an invasion of our territory and thus falling under the MDT?

        A bully must bully otherwise it cannot bully anyone. Locke’s rationale was no one is invincible hence the need for a hegemon to keep life from becoming nasty, brutish, and short. Then again life could turn nasty, brutish, and too long under an evil hegemon.

        Anyway, my take from Locke is if we know the vulnerability of our opponent we can bring him down no matter his size. So how do we go about probing his weakness so that when we strike we get a good hit?

        • Joe America says:

          Tough questions for sure, and it is hard to guess what the U.S. would do. Walden Bello wrote an excellent piece about the matter a couple of months ago and pointed out China’s vulnerability operating 800 miles from home. I can only write fiction, but if it were up to me, I’d implement a four-pronged strategy: (1) diplomatic (speaking pointedly), (2) harder (mutual engagement) defensive alliances with Viet Nam, South Korea, and Japan, (3) economic, like banning Chinese mining in the Philippines or bringing OFW’s home from Hong Kong, and (4) convert (secret, but I know what I’d do).

        • janice says:

          the UN I believe cannot enforce it strictly. But it benefits the Philippines and its allies when this goes worse (confrontation). if China attacks, they cannot legally justify it.

          should china decide to take the area by force, I hope the Security council decides to remove china off the permanent 5

        • bud f. says:

          Organize a large flotilla of unarmed Philippine fishing boats and block the entry to all disouted territoies. Have a mass fishing day while they are at it; see how the Chinese would react. If they start dousing the vessels with water cannons, bring in fast movers and fire back with PAINT GUNS with the objective of damaging the Chinese vessels with paint, thus having to bring their ships home for a new paint job, effectively taking them out of the picture – temporarily of course. Do this a few times and it would cost the Chinese a good few bucks, hehehe…just a thought.

          • Joe America says:

            Ah, I like your thinking, bud f. I think the Vietnamese are doing similar, even more aggressive things, like dropping fishing nets into the water to foul the propellers of the Chinese vessels. I do think this kind of thing should be done only after the ITLOS arbitration case is completed. Here are a couple of my prior blogs dealing with the notion that the Philippines is not helpless, and Chinese ships are vulnerable, being so far from home. I very much like the paint idea, I must say. Use yellow paint, of course . . .



            • bud f. says:

              hahaha, YELLOW PAINT and fishing nets – BRILLIANT!!! Yes anything to peacefully disrupt these thugs to the point hopefully they seriously rethink their behavior hurt their pocket books. The PH and Vietnam are planning a joint sports based show of solidarity; with Vietnam sponsoring the first soccer game. They plan to invite other affected countries of the disputed territories. From the games, perhaps they could brain storm activities to show the Chinese we will not be initimidated by their uber military tactics.

  6. Lil says:


    You do realise America is responsible for that empowering that “Global Goon” right?

    Every time I learn a little more about early US-China relations, the more I think that this this relationship/partnership is nothing more than a band-aid on old wound. Unlike most old wounds however, this one just might continue to fester.

    Well, I hope I’m just being paranoid…

    • Joe America says:

      America has empowered many nations, but what they do with it is largely beyond her control. China was on an upward path for awhile, and was welcomed as a peaceful participant in global affairs, but the current leaders seem to have let success go to their heads.

      • Lil says:

        Oh I agree on the leaders’ mindset but I’m talking about US naivete regarding China/PRC.
        I remember that US-China relations were always on the downside before Nixon and the whole MFN status. Did the US honestly believe that PRC would remain a peaceful participant with the whole Taiwan crisis unresolved and the Party still being diametrically opposed to ‘perceived Western influences’

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: