Appearing Wednesday on the Fox News Channel, network senior judicial analyst Andrew Napolitano said he will “defend to the death” Twitter’s right to fact check President Donald Trump.
(Read more from “Andrew Napolitano: I’ll ‘Defend to the Death’ Twitter’s Right to Fact Check Trump (VIDEO)” HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
By The Blaze. The second day of protests in Minneapolis over the death of a black man, George Floyd — who died after a white police officer held him down with a knee to his neck for several minutes during detainment — erupted into looting and vandalism, and a man who appeared to be a Trump supporter was beaten by activists.
Reporter Karen Scullin of KMSP-TV was at the scene of the demonstration for several hours on Wednesday, and live-tweeted what she witnessed. She noted that the crowd continued to build throughout the day despite the official protest not starting until 5:00 p.m.
Scullin wrote that protestors were trying to break into the Minneapolis Police Department’s 3rd precinct, and officers fired rubber bullets in an effort to push back the crowd which she described at that time to be “not huge but very vocal and angry.” . . .
Protesters destroying a car that says Trump on it. Driver out walking around
— Karen Scullin FOX9 (@kscullinfox9) May 27, 2020
Scullin included footage of looting and acts of vandalism before reporting, “protestors destroying a car that says Trump on it. Driver out walking around. After taking a few punches he was helped to his smashed up vehicle and drove off with people still throwing things.” (Read more from “Man With ‘Trump’ on His Car ATTACKED by Protesters” HERE)
_____________________________________________________
Video: Protesters Shut Down Los Angeles Freeway Over George Floyd’s Death
By Breitbart. Protesters on Wednesday shut down traffic on the 101 Freeway near Union Station as demonstrators took to downtown Los Angeles over the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis, according to local reports.
Some of the protesters could be seen on video hitting the windows and hood of a CHP cruiser as it attempted to slowly drive away from the crowd. As the cruiser accelerated, a few protesters could be seen on the hood of the vehicle.
protesters confronting CHP cruisers on the 101 freeway in Downtown Los Angeles. The protester who falls off the moving vehicle was taken by ambulance and later seen with head bandages, standing and talking to authorities. #GeorgeFloyd #losangeles #BlackLivesMatters pic.twitter.com/pksGL0mu8G
— MarlaTellez (@MarlaTellez) May 28, 2020
(Read more from “Video: Protesters Shut Down Los Angeles Freeway Over George Floyd’s Death” HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
Could nearly half the population not already infected with SARS-CoV-2 be immune to it from having already contracted other forms of coronavirus in recent years?
That is one implication of a major study conducted by over a dozen researchers from several microbiology and immunology institutions in the U.S.
The purveyors of panic are warning of a second wave of the virus and that even if we are correct in asserting that the general fatality rate is extremely low for most people, it will still result in millions of deaths worldwide if we need 70 percent of the population to get the virus in order to achieve herd immunity. Putting aside the fact that their strategy of lockdown doesn’t provide a solution to this hypothetical problem either, even as it kills more people from the collateral damage, there is now promising evidence that more people might already be immune to the virus.
The study is built upon the principle that T cells play a central role in destroying viruses and providing immunity. Not only were these cells discovered in all the blood samples of confirmed recovered COVID-19 patients, but they were also found in 6 of the 11 blood samples from 2015-2018, before those individual donors could possibly have contracted the virus.
Until now, the assumption was that only those with IgG or IgM antibodies can be immune because they are the ones who have already contracted the disease. However, this study examined the cellular defenses that are created in the body and have been proven to serve as a defense against SARS-CoV-2, then discovered them among 40%-60% of their samples not infected with SARS-CoV-2.
In order to prove the efficacy of these T cells developed in the recovered population, the researchers exposed immune cells from 10 recovered patients to the virus. They found those cells effectively fight the virus. 100% of the samples of 20 donors contained “helper” T cells, known as CD4+, and 70 percent contained killer T cells, known as CD8+, which directly kill the viral cells. Then they discovered “SARS-CoV-2−reactive CD4+ T cells in ∼40-60% of unexposed individuals, suggesting cross-reactive T cell recognition between circulating ‘common cold’ coronaviruses and SARS-CoV-2.”
The hypothesis is that numerous common colds are forms of coronavirus and that a significant percentage of the population that has already contracted those forms of coronavirus have cross-immunity to COVID-19. It’s unclear to what degree these people are immune, but it might help explain why some people in certain areas react so violently to COVID-19, whereas so many others are asymptomatic. In other words, it’s possible that people with cross-immunity could still catch the virus, but their reaction to it will either never present symptoms or present very mildly due to the pre-existing T cells working for them.
The authors note that more time and cell numbers are needed to study identification of the cross-reactive chains of cells.
A similar T cell study published April 22 by German immunologist Andreas Thiel found that 34% of 68 blood samples from people not infected with SARS-CoV-2 hosted helper T cells that nevertheless recognized the novel coronavirus.
The authors of the newer study posit that the concept of “crossreactive memory T cell responses might have been one factor contributing to the lesser severity of the H1N1 flu pandemic.” There is still no way of proving whether those T cells discovered in non-infected individuals are definitively effective in warding off the virus or blunting its symptoms, but the theory might explain some enigmatic behaviors of this virus.
On the one hand, this virus seems to be extremely contagious and transmissible. On the other hand, it appears to have been around for a while, possibly in December, and didn’t kill too many people until super-spreading events in March.
On the one hand, the virus seems to kill a lot of vulnerable people for several weeks. But then it peaks after six weeks or so and nearly disappears a month or so later. We’ve seen the same curve in every country, almost as if it hits a brick wall and then runs out of steam.
But why is that the case? Most antibody tests show no more than 10%-15% of the population contain antibodies in a given area – 25% in the most extreme case of New York City. Why would the virus not continue cutting through the population like butter, as it did the first number of people who contracted the virus? The theory of a more ubiquitous cross-immunity from other coronaviruses would answer those questions and explain that invisible brick wall.
A theory of partial immunity, at least from helper T cells (if not killer T cells) could also explain why, on the one hand, once the virus gets into prisons, most test positive for it, but on the other hand, nearly all of them seem asymptomatic. The outcome of prisons as a fully confined and defined population could be a harbinger of what would theoretically happen if the entire world were exposed to the virus after it had already targeted the most vulnerable population. It’s possible that upwards of 95% would be asymptomatic, just like we are seeing in prisons.
Perhaps, it could also explain why there appears to be a massive gap in severity of the virus in Asia vs. Western countries. Asian countries are regularly exposed to coronaviruses.
Professor Karol Sikora, founder of University of Buckingham Medical Schools, has a short video explaining in layman’s terms the significance of this T cell study and cross-immunity.
The virus is being tamed more successfully than many thought possible. How?
We have more cellular immunity (T cells) than estimated.
Lots of recovered people simply don’t have antibodies, but also many have residual immunity from old viruses (colds etc).
This is significant. pic.twitter.com/AaanJCDeX7
— Professor Karol Sikora (@ProfKarolSikora) May 22, 2020
Sunetra Gupta, professor of theoretical epidemiology at the University of Oxford, is also a strong believer in the likelihood of cross-immunity. “We may also be able to fend off the virus with pre-existing responses against other coronaviruses, which I think is very likely to play a role in protection, specifically against severity of the disease,” said Professor Gupta in a recent interview with a British media outlet.
“In almost every context we’ve seen the epidemic grow, turn around and die away — almost like clockwork. Different countries have had different lockdown policies, and yet what we’ve observed is almost a uniform pattern of behavior which is highly consistent with the SIR model. To me that suggests that much of the driving force here was due to the build-up of immunity.”
Stanford professor of epidemiology John P.A. Ioannidis has also posited the existence of cross-immunity and the idea that many people’s bodies are using innate cellular immunity to ward off the virus.
This theory might also explain why Sweden believes it reached herd immunity with just 20 percent infected and why some studies suggest a similar ratio could be achieved elsewhere.
To be clear, these are all unproven theories at this point. But if our government and media were willing to run with unproven theories of doom and gloom even as the facts on the ground refuted them, shouldn’t they at least examine some good news when the fact pattern of the virus itself seems to harmonize with the theory?
Why are American politicians immune to good news as if it were the plague? (For more from the author of “Bombshell Study: Could Half the Uninfected Population Already Be Partially Immune?” please click HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announced Wednesday that Hong Kong is officially no longer autonomous from China following Beijing’s decision to impose a new national security law that outlaws “foreign interference” and pro-democracy demonstrations in the city.
“Beijing’s disastrous decision [to impose the law] is only the latest in a series of actions that fundamentally undermine Hong Kong’s autonomy and freedoms and China’s own promises to the Hong Kong people under the Sino-British Joint Declaration, a U.N.-filed international treaty,” Pompeo said in a statement.
“No reasonable person can assert today that Hong Kong maintains a high degree of autonomy from China, given facts on the ground,” he added.
BREAKING: Secretary of State Mike Pompeo announces Hong Kong is no longer autonomous from China.
THIS IS HUGE pic.twitter.com/AI9LjHCmNa
— Caleb Hull (@CalebJHull) May 27, 2020
Pompeo noted that it is the State Department’s responsibility under the Hong Kong Policy Act to assess the territory’s autonomy and that, given the latest developments, he certified to Congress the department’s position.
Today, I reported to Congress that Hong Kong is no longer autonomous from China, given facts on the ground. The United States stands with the people of Hong Kong.
— Secretary Pompeo (@SecPompeo) May 27, 2020
(Read more from “Secretary of State Pompeo Officially Declares That Hong Kong Is No Longer Autonomous” HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer addressed the issue of her husband attempting to use his position to get their personal boat prepped and in the water prior to Memorial day so they could enjoy the holiday. The Michigan governor said her husband was joking when he told the boat storage operator he was the husband of the governor and asked if that would move him up in the line of requests.
Additionally Governor Whitmer highlights how the citizens of Michigan are victimizing her; including scary men who have surrounded her home while carrying “automatic weapons.” Whitmer says the COVID-19 virus has created an undue hardship on her and her family, and she is burdened by hurt feelings and wounded sensibilities. Whitmer personifies what happens when left-wing moonbats are allowed to gain political power.
Additionally (below), Whitmer denies reports that her family violated her own stay-home orders and traveled to their second home. She insists her husband only traveled to their second home to rake leaves by moonlight for one, or, well, maybe two days… or something.
On a positive note. Whitmer will never be Biden’s VP selection. Whitmer carries a personality trait found in many moonbats; every time she opens her mouth she is becomes even more unlikeable. (For more from the author of “Comrade Crazy – Governor Whitmer Claims She Is Being Victimized by Citizens of Michigan (VIDEO)” please click HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
Not quite two weeks ago, Judge Emmet Sullivan threw open the doors of his federal courtroom to the swamp when he invited third parties to pontificate on the propriety of the Department of Justice’s motion to dismiss the criminal charges against Michael Flynn. The next day Sullivan went further: He appointed a former federal judge, John Gleeson, as an amicus curiae, or friend of the court, to argue that the government’s motion to dismiss should be denied.
Judge Sullivan’s selection of Gleeson as amicus curiae gave away the game. The same day Sullivan named Gleeson as amicus curiae, an op-ed by Gleeson and two cohorts ran in the Washington Post declaring the government’s decision to dismiss the charge against Flynn “reeks of improper political influence.”
The Washington Post cloaked Gleeson and his co-authors, David O’Neil and Marshall Miller, with an aura of impartiality and authority by highlighting their past service in the Department of Justice: “John Gleeson served as a U.S. district judge for the Eastern District of New York and chief of the Criminal Division in the U.S. Attorney’s Office in that district. David O’Neil served as the acting assistant attorney general for the Justice Department’s Criminal Division and assistant U.S. attorney in the Southern District of New York. Marshall Miller served as the highest-ranking career official in the Criminal Division and as chief of the Criminal Division for the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District.” . . .
Already the anti-Trump Protect Democracy Project has submitted an amicus curiae brief to Judge Sullivan. That brief rehashes many of the political talking points left-leaning pundits and politicians have been peddling since Trump took office, then argues that in seeking to dismiss the criminal charge against Flynn, Trump and Barr have “flouted” the principle that the DOJ’s investigatory and prosecutorial powers should “be exercised free from partisan consideration.”
The irony couldn’t be richer. The Obama administration targeted Flynn because the glow of Orange Man Bad reached the retired general’s orbit. But, according to Protect Democracy, it is the Trump administration’s DOJ that is playing politics with prosecutions! (Read more from “It’s Not the Trump Administration Politicizing Flynn’s Case, It’s Judge Sullivan” HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
Oh my, acting DNI Ric Grenell was/is buckets of brutally honest awesome.
In a departing letter to SSCI Vice-Chair Mark Warner, Grenell responds to a Warner inquiry demanding justification for his blitz of sunlight and naming of unmaskers.
Specifically pointing to the release of names that unmasked Trump administration officials Grenell notes “the decision to declassify the names of individuals who sough to unmask the identity of General Flynn poses absolutely no risk of compromise of either sources or methods.” Grenell also tells Warner, “cherry picking certain documents for release while attacking the release of others that don’t fit your political narrative is part of the problem the American people have with Washington DC politicians.”
The Daily Caller has compiled a partial list of Grenell’s accomplishments to include:
— Directed the IC to change the way they protect the identities of U.S. citizens contained within intelligence reporting
— Completed the IC review of 53 transcripts from the House Intelligence Committee’s investigation into alleged Russian collusion in the 2016 election and made the transcripts publicly available
— Declassified previously redacted footnotes from the Justice Department Inspector General’s report into the origins of the Russian collusion investigation
— Declassified a list of government officials who requested the unmasking of National Security Advisor Michael Flynn
— Replaced FBI with ODNI as the primary group responsible for briefing presidential campaigns on information derived from national intelligence
— Declassified former national security adviser Susan Rice’s email to herself regarding a January 2016 Oval Office where progress on the Russia investigation was discussed
— Declassified additional transcripts in ODNI’s possession for potential public release by incoming DNI John Ratcliffe
And even that list doesn’t include the declassification of the Rosenstein/Mueller scope memos and several more important contributions during his tenure.
Grenell’s greatest contribution as DNI was personifying a belief that government, including the intelligence apparatus, works for the people; and as a direct result the intelligence apparatus has a responsibility to provide sunlight upon all aspects of their function that does not impede national security.
The way to keep politics out of intelligence matters is to keep as much of their activity as public as possible. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
I hope we see more of Ric Grenell in another capacity soon. (For more from the author of “Ric Grenell Hits Senator Mark Warner With Sunlight Hammer as He Exits Role as DNI” please click HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
Will the New York Times begin publishing the names of those who died from the man-made lockdowns alongside those who died from the God-made plague of coronavirus? Will it publish a state-by-state and country-by-country dashboard and demographic breakdown of those who lose their lives thanks to these unprecedented political decisions?
Four professors with backgrounds ranging from medicine to economics attempted to quantify the number of lives lost from the devastation of the lockdown itself – something our government failed to simulate when it embarked on this novel policy. Using health and labor data as well as various actuarial tables, they projected 65,000 lives lost per month of lockdown in the U.S. – greater than the loss from the virus. That number was calculated by dividing the estimated $1.1 trillion lost from economic productivity per month of lockdown by $17 million because the best estimates predict one life lost from suicide, alcohol or drug abuse, or stress-induced illnesses per $17 million lost.
“These financial losses have been falsely portrayed as purely economic,” wrote the four professors in The Hill on Monday. “To the contrary … we calculate that these policies will cause devastating non-economic consequences that will total millions of accumulated years of life lost in the United States, far beyond what the virus itself has caused.”
The four authors were Scott Atlas of Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, John Birge of the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, Ralph Keeney of Duke University, and Alexander Lipton of the Jerusalem Business School of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
The point the authors make, that lockdowns are destroying so many more cumulative years of life, is very poignant to the situation we find ourselves in. For every 1,000 lives lost to the virus, the corresponding 1,000 lives lost to the lockdown will destroy exponentially more “life years,” because the median age of those who die from the virus is 80, while the median age for deaths caused by the lockdown – those who die due to suicide, substance abuse, despair, and poverty – is much lower.
This point was accentuated by one commentator who compared the cumulative years of life lost to the virus from February 1 through May 13 to the years of life lost to fatalities from the flu and pneumonia over the same time.
Have you seen? pic.twitter.com/xjpOAvpb3f
— Gummi Bear (@gummibear737) May 16, 2020
As you can see, there were actually more life years lost due to flu and pneumonia, even though this was a mild flu season in most places and the time frame of reference here doesn’t include December and January, which include a large share of the annual flu deaths.
We have already seen that doctors in Northern California are reporting more than a year’s worth of suicides in just four weeks. Knox County, Tennessee, experienced nine suicides in just one 48-hour period in March. On the other hand, there have only been five COVID-19 deaths in Knox County over nine weeks! One can only imagine the number of suicides that will pile up if these draconian measures are continued indefinitely until there is a vaccine, as so many liberal politicians are advocating.
Also, the death toll of the economic consequences of the shutdown is just one piece of the pie. As the authors note, stroke patient evaluations are down 40 percent, nearly half of cancer patients have missed treatments, two-thirds to three-fourths of routine cancer screenings have been delayed, nearly 85 percent fewer living-donor transplants have occurred, and more than half of childhood vaccinations are not being performed. They estimate that the total years of lost life per month of shutdown from these missed treatments and diagnosis are 500,000! In total, they estimate that the lockdown, over its entire duration, has caused the loss of 1.5 million life years, as compared to 800,000 life years from the virus itself.
It is truly shocking that nobody in our government has even attempted to model the number of lives lost due to lockdown. The falsity behind the original virus models became apparent a few days into the lockdown. Any sane government would have weighed the collateral damage at that point and repudiated any severe lockdown absent clear evidence that it was necessary. European countries and the Israelis have realized this was a big mistake, but our politicians continue to double down on it.
Yoram Lass, former director-general of Israel’s Ministry of Health, said in an interview with online media outlet Spiked that nothing about this virus can “justify this destruction of people’s lives.”
“It is the first epidemic in history which is accompanied by another epidemic – the virus of the social networks,” said the Israeli scientist. “These new media have brainwashed entire populations. What you get is fear and anxiety, and an inability to look at real data. And therefore you have all the ingredients for monstrous hysteria.”
One would think that, with Israel’s low death rates, Israeli scientists would want to play up the success of the lockdown. But they realize what so many of us do, which is that the lockdowns were completely unnecessary and caused much more collateral damage. A prominent epidemiologist at Hebrew University concluded that once it was clear Israel’s health care system was not going to be overrun, there was no justification for the lockdown and that the damage it did to the country, which now faces 25 percent unemployment, outweighed any other consideration.
“We are not trying to minimize the number of people infected – the price of the lockdown is too catastrophic,” said Professor David Gershon, one of the Hebrew University researchers involved in their study. “The price of more than one million people unemployed is so crazy that to say we want to minimize the number of infected people is ridiculous.”
The sooner our government realizes that, the fewer lives we will continue to bleed. (For more from the author of “New Study: Lockdowns Destroy Nearly Twice as Many Years of Life as the Coronavirus” please click HERE)
Follow Joe Miller on Twitter HERE and Facebook HERE
Larry Sanger, the co-founder of Wikipedia, published a blog post this month declaring that the online encyclopedia’s “neutral point of view” policy is “dead” due to the rampant left-wing bias of the site. Noting the article on President Donald Trump, Sanger contrasted its extensive coverage of presidential scandals with the largely scandal-free article on former President Barack Obama.
Sanger also criticized Wikipedia’s coverage of religion and other controversial topics. After Fox News reported on his blog post, many Wikipedians ignored the bias Sanger identified and instead responded by attacking the conservative outlet as well as Sanger.
On May 14, Sanger published a blog piece titled “Wikipedia Is Badly Biased” and started by declaring Wikipedia’s “Neutral Point of View” policy dead. Having founded the online encyclopedia with Jimmy Wales and having been involved in the original drafting of the policy, Sanger offered particular insight into its development and its practice in recent years. On the current policy’s rejection of providing “equal validity” to different views, Sanger stated this went directly against the original policy’s intent and that “as journalists turn to opinion and activism, Wikipedia now touts controversial points of view on politics, religion, and science.”
Providing examples, Sanger noted former President Obama’s article excludes most notable scandals during his Administration, such as the bungled ATF Fast and Furious operation that armed Mexican cartels who killed a U.S. border agent or the targeting of Tea Party groups by the IRS. By contrast, Sanger pointed to Trump’s article containing overwhelmingly negative sections on the President regarding his “public profile” as well as investigations and impeachment. The sections critical of Trump and his presidency are nearly as long as those dealing with his presidency overall. He further criticized Wikipedia repeatedly saying Trump makes false statements rather than attributing such characterizations to sources.
Wikipedia’s coverage of other contentious political topics such as abortion were also criticized with Sanger singling out Wikipedia claiming abortion is “one of the safest procedures in medicine.” He pointed out how articles on legalization of drugs and gay adoption were focused on positives with little to no mention of criticisms. In the latter case, Sanger noted the section on “debate” about gay adoption only included arguments in favor rather than any against it. Sanger also criticized Wikipedia’s coverage of religion describing the article on Jesus as “a ‘liberal’ academic discussion” focused “on assorted difficulties and controversies” without explaining “traditional or orthodox views of those issues.” (Read more from “Wikipedia Neutral?” HERE)
By Ryan Morgan. Two Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) aircraft carriers are preparing to conduct a set of provocative war games in the contested South China Sea, near the Taiwan-claimed Pratas Islands, also known as the Dongsha Islands.
The Chinese aircraft carriers Liaoning and Shandong were finishing up combat readiness training in the Bohai Bay of the Yellow Sea ahead of a planned deployment near the Taiwanese territorial claims, The Daily Mail reported. The Pratas or Dongsha Islands are a series of three atolls off the coast of China and lying to the southwest of Taiwan.
The reports of China’s planned aggressive moves near Taiwan come shortly after Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi claimed, “political forces in the US are taking China-US relations hostage and pushing our two countries to the brink of a new Cold War.”
The war games near the Pratas Islands also come amid Chinese calls to reunify with Taiwan, raising concerns among some observers that the war games are a ploy to capture the islands.
The Japan-based Kyodo News reported on May 12, that the PLA is also planning to hold massive beach landing drills on the Chinese island province of Hainan in August, which could be used to simulate a beach landing on Taiwan’s Pratas Islands. (Read more about China’s attempt to threaten Taiwan HERE)
________________________________________
Xi Tells Military: Prepare for Worst-Case Scenarios
Edited by Divyanshu Dutta Roy. Chinese President Xi Jinping on Tuesday ordered the military to scale up the battle preparedness, visualising the worst-case scenarios and asked them to resolutely defend the country’s sovereignty. Though he did no mention any specific threat, his comments came amid a face-off between soldiers of India and China at the Line of Actual Control (LAC).
Xi, 66 who is also the General Secretary of the ruling Communist Party of China (CPC) and head of the two-million-strong military with prospects of lifelong tenure in power, made the remarks while attending a plenary meeting of the delegation of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and People’s Armed Police Force during the current parliament session being held in Beijing.
Xi ordered the military to think about worst-case scenarios, scale up training and battle preparedness, promptly and effectively deal with all sorts of complex situations and resolutely safeguard national sovereignty, security and development interests, state-run Xinhua news agency reported, without mentioning any specific issues that posed a threat to the country. (Read more about China’s efforts to threaten Taiwan, India and other nations HERE)
________________________________________
If Xi Attacks India, it May be His Last Mistake
By Michael Rubin. There have been at least four ‘incidents’ across the India-China line-of-control in recent weeks. While there were nearly 500 incidents in eastern Ladakh in 2019, the recent incidents are larger scale and better coordinated than what occurred in 2019 and before. The People’s Liberation Army has reinforced its positions in the Galwan Valley and Demochok in Ladakh. Lieutenant General (retired) Deependra Singh Hooda, India’s former Northern Army commander, wrote on May 24, 2020 that the decision and direction of China’s most recent aggressions appear originate in Beijing rather than with local commanders. China appears angered that India is developing its roads and logistical capabilities in the region. An analysis in India’s Economic Times theorizes that Chinese authorities seem to be repeating their 1962 playbook, not recognizing how much India has changed.
India is today ascendant. It does not face the same demographic nightmare that China now confronts due to decades of Beijing’s previous one-child policy. India’s conventional military has advanced substantially over the last half-century and it has, since 1974, also been a nuclear power. Despite all of India’s internal inefficiencies, bloated bureaucracy, and protectionism, its economy is in far greater shape than it was a half-century ago. The world has also changed. When China initially invaded Indian territory, President John F. Kennedy offered some arms, but it was too little too late, and his official neutrality likely encouraged Indian leaders to tilt even more toward the Soviet Union. Today, however, belief in a strong U.S.-India partnership is one of the few topics which still unites Democrats and Republicans on Capitol Hill and across administrations. It is not the stuff of hushed backroom diplomatic negotiations, but openly embraced.
China may believe intimidation and the sort of ‘salami-slicing’ in which it engages in the South China Sea will enable it to act without consequence against India, but India is not the Philippines, willing to roll over for a few yuan.
Or consider another analogy: When Russia invaded Georgia in 2008, the world wrung its hands and issued harsh condemnations, but did little more. When Russian leader Vladimir Putin ordered Russian forces into Ukraine, however, he found himself mired in a conflict which still continues both to send Russian soldiers and ‘contractors’ home in body bags and to drain Russian finances, both propping up annexed territories and proxy states, and subsidizing their war efforts. Xi may believe he can digest Hong Kong and crush its freedom spirit, but he will be wrong to believe that India is weak or that the United States—even under the Trump administration—would simply ignore his aggression. Instead, the United States would likely open the floodgates to provide any intelligence and weaponry which India would need to defend itself and bog down China in a morass of Xi’s own making. (Read more about the implications of China’s efforts to threaten Taiwan, India and other nations HERE)