eastofethan

Remarks on the 10-year anniversary of the Falun Gong persecution, chaired by Edward McMillan-Scott, Foreign Press Association, London. UPDATE: See new post for somewhat revised figures.

Read the rest of this entry »

What really happened ten years ago, adapted from my recent talk at the European Parliament, Brussels.

As you probably picked up from my carping in the previous post, there are a couple of things on my mind. Such as this: The Iranians will have enough materials for two nuclear warheads (unclear what yield–25 kilotons, perhaps–the Jerusalem Post is referring to here) by the end of 2009. 

Without minimizing the implications of that, let’s point out  that no state, including America in the middle of an out-and-out war, has ever used a nuclear weapon, or even threatened to use one, without testing first. For the Iranians to fire a dud–or what’s usually called a fizzle, i.e. the trigger does not “ignite” the bomb material properly or the modifier does not allow for a chain reaction–at Israel…well, that would invite full-on, uninhibited, nuclear retaliation on the Iranian bunkers, command and control, and nuclear facilities. Never mind hitting Tehran, the Israelis will use a high exoatmospheric airburst producing a pulse that will knock out every electrical system, every computer, every vehicle, every toaster in Iran. (This can’t be done to Israel’s electrical grid without knocking out Amman, Damascus and Beirut as well–Israel is just too small). All this, and the Iranians haven’t even killed any Jews. That’s pretty suicidal right? So they have to test, right?

The twist: There is no way to test in secret. Even the Israeli test in the South Atlantic/Indian Ocean, the so-called Vela Incident, was picked up by observatories and sensor stations around the world, even back in 1979. So in 2009, the world will know. Israel will know. And there will be time, maybe very little time, but time, for the Israelis to attack the Iranian nuclear assets preemptively , using conventional and nuclear assets. World opinion will still condemn the Jews, yadda, yadda, but coming in the wake of an Iranian test, the Israelis will have a legitimate case.  

So let’s say that the Iranian leadership really is crazy and they go for an out of the blue strike without testing. IF the Iranian warheads work and IF the missles are reasonably accurate they could take out Tel-Aviv and Haifa (Jerusalem would bring too much collateral damage to the old city). But what the Iranians can’t do with two warheads of dubious reliability and accuracy is assume that they can decapitate Israel’s leadership, or even make the smallest dent on Israel’s nuclear assets.

For the sake of argument, let’s assume there are at least twenty Israeli warheads, all of which can be delivered on any Iranian target they choose, with high accuracy, CEPs of say, 50 yards, “cratering” and all that good stuff. The Iranians will have no ability to retaliate whatsoever (even if their centrifuge facilities were undamaged, it would take them six months to get another weapon together). So that’s pretty freaking suicidal too.

The Iranian war options here are basically non-options. This a prestige thing, and a deterrence thing (from a paranoid viewpoint) for the Iranians at this point. And of course, down the road, it could be something else entirely, particularly if they are confident enough in Hamas to deliver a low-yield nuclear weapon by short-range missile, that kind of thing. It’s the unconventional options that are the most worrying–and unfortunately, I bring no special insight into that discussion.

Yesterday I woke up to this (the news that the opposition leader of Venezuela had fled the country). Now the honest truth is that I pay little attention to Latin America. It’s not my expertise, so perhaps I’m wrong…but, well, anyway, in my pre-coffee, still REM-like state, I saw a sort of linkage. President Obama’s dreamy handshake with Hugo Chaves kept running through my mind, as did other images of opening gambits–a North Korean missile launch, planes flying homeward from a Kyrgiztan base, operating tables in China, Iranian centrifuges spinning away–the images of a hobbesian world outside my window. 

I’m not alone; here’s an excellent, beautifully-written piece by an Israeli. He’s somewhat politically divergent from my views, but carries similar concerns. 

Anyway, the first 100 days of the Obama Administration has left a few things to be concerned about: unchecked behavior of dictators in China, Russia, and Iran, the feeding of an unproductive Congressional and media obsession with Bush-the-bad and Obama-the-double-plus-good, an equally unproductive politicization of intelligence, and the possibility that deficit spending will frog-march the public into endless debt financing.

All these concerns came crashing in to my little apartment in London on a day in April to the point where I was waiting for the clocks to start striking thirteen, and the telescreen to start screeching at me to touch my toes…Seriously, keep in mind, that I’m a fifty-year-old guy and a keen enough observer. Balances shift back and forth like a pendulum–I know that. And I did not have this feeling during the Clinton years. If a force is created, so there will be a counterforce, always. Above all, I am an optimist about human nature. Given enough calories, and no lead in the pipes, enough of us will think straight.

Yet there were times in history where strawberry ices on the lawns would soon be replaced by craters and mud, where wolves were on the roads and life would never, ever, be the same: 1913, 1938, those sorts of years. Yesterday, I felt something odd; I felt that my usual optimism was like Anne Frank’s: Soft, fragile, inspiring, and ultimately, terribly wrong. 

I’ll try to avoid naval-gazing posts such as this in the future. But on the off-chance that we are in the equivalent of 1936, or perhaps even 1937, I want my premonition on the record.

Here’s a link to a New Republic article on British anti-semitism. Well worth reading.

I don’t much care for identity politics, particularly when I am a guest in another country, a country I respect and admire. But the fact remains that I am an American Jew (half-Jewish anyway, but that’s enough for some people), living in London with my family.

I send my kid to a British school, I eat British food, I have a couple of favorite pubs and I have two bona-fide British friends (OK, I cheated, one’s actually a Scotsman). I like London and I think the English have plenty to be proud of and I tell my son that the English are beloved cousins…And yes, the New Republic article is a coherent and accurate descrition of British culture today especially, let’s face it, among the left. You can say anything you want about Jews as long as you call them Israelis. It’s cowardly, it’s sanctified, it’s racism, and I feel it in the marrow of my bones.

But riddle me this: Should I take some comfort in the fact that native English people don’t just tend to dislike Jews, but Muslims too–and the French, and the Russians and yes, themselves a great part of the time? Or should this place–the left-wing aspects of this place to be precise–just give me the frigging creeps? These are not rhetorical questions by the way. They are real.

The most disturbing aspect in the response to my Weekly Standard article (China’s Gruesome Organ Harvest, November 2008) has been the complete silence of the House Christian community to the finding that Eastern Lightning (EL) are also being targeted.

When I wrote the piece I was aware that the House Church Christians do not want to be affiliated with EL, but I also thought that might change “at the edge of the operating table” so to speak.  

My book is about Falun Gong (FG), not EL. And no Buddhist organization that I know of considers FG to be real Buddhists. State Buddhist leaders in China took the lead in denouncing FG when the CCP started the crackdown. FG was accused of being an apocalyptic cult that makes people murder themselves (or their parents, or their children, etc.). That’s the mainland.

In Taiwan, few Buddhist leaders buy into any of that. They may not believe FG are “real” Buddhists in the strict sense of the word, but I know at least one key operative in the Taiwan/Tibet Exchange (run directly by the DL) who works very closely with FG on various political/human rights projects.    

I’m no expert on EL. I browsed the web and I read Matt Fourney’s Time article. (I know Matt pretty well, BTW and, as much as I respect his intellect, I also understand how–and why–he subtly toes the CCP line again and again). But I bought his basic argument here. I walked away from that article thinking that EL are terribly misguided. But truly dangerous? I will have to preserve some skepticism on that point given the absurd charges that have also been heaped on FG.

Ultimately however, I walk away from my current research simply marveling at what a scorched earth, what a toxic, radioactive environment for spiritual growth the CCP has created. By placing the harvesting evidence out there, I was simply raising the question that occurred to you: Who’s going to stand up for these people?

When it comes to EL: If a fellow soldier from a platoon does not obey orders and strays, should the platoon put themselves at risk in their efforts to rescue him? Perhaps not. But it’s also true that If EL needs to be “deprogrammed,” if they need to brought back into some connection with a more reasonable concept of Christianity then shouldn’t that take place in the meager churches of China in an atmosphere of forgiveness and love? The first act in that deprogramming, the meaningful step, would be the decision by China’s house church leaders–particularly those who are based in the states–to follow the steps I outlined: lobby for a ban on organ tourism, ask doctors to boycott medical conferences with China, and so on. Nothing should be decided on an operating table.

My gut tells me that last sentence alone should be the battle cry. But I’m sure that there is much about this that I don’t understand. What I do understand is this: I’m providing a service. If global Christianity decides to turn it’s back on EL, they should consider the potential consequences of that decision in full. My job is to make sure that they can’t say: “we didn’t know.”

I’m currently involved in the start-up of a documentary, based on the article that you just read called “Shalu, Part 1″; I will try to work in the issue of EL there as well. If any of your folks would like to talk to me about this–no commitment implied, just to look the issue over–that would be welcome.

Thanks for your thoughtful response,

Best,

Ethan