I noticed an interesting story on slashdot about some hacking attacks potentially originating in the Chinese military... They link to a short article and a note by Bruce Schneier about the issue.

I have been worried for a long time about the apparent naivete of the U.S. government and military regarding the Chinese.

The Chinese government and military are extremely savvy so long as they are not blinded by their communist dogma. When it comes to trade, information, spying, and weapons technology, they understand the reality that those who play fair lose.

If you are a businessman, have no illusions that your papers and files are safe in your hotel room in China. There have been documented cases of government-sponsored spies following businessmen and bugging or entering their hotel rooms to scour their belongings for useful trade secrets and intellectual property.

We can see clearly that they are pursuing a strategy of mercantilism in trade, to our great disadvantage, thanks to the cluelessness of free-traders in Congress and the White House.

Who can doubt that the same issues exist with regard to sensitive military information? The Chinese sponsor students to come to the U.S. with the express goal sometimes of infiltrating research staffs and supplying tech info back to China. The same surely occurs with U.S. government and military employees, although the screening is more thorough.

In my opinion, the Chinese government would see hacking U.S. government or military sites as a requirement for successful international competition. Hopefully, the NSA and others like them are on top of the problem. I don't doubt, though, that they have gained access to lots of systems on the lower end of the confidentiality spectrum.

It needs to be impressed on people in government, military, and intelligence work, that the Chinese are playing one mean game of chess in everything they do vis-a-vis the U.S. Their sense of time spans centuries and millennia rather than decades. Any suspicious activity on their part needs to be treated with the greatest skepticism by our guys, rather than with apathy or giving them the benefit of the doubt...

I should note that I love the Chinese language and culture, and the country itself is extremely interesting. There is a great deal the West can learn from the Chinese. But international competition is cut-throat. I want my country to be aware of the capabilities and inclinations of all its potential competitors, in order that we not end up losing our shirts, or a lot more...

Japan Today - Chinese protestors pelt Japan Embassy, envoy's residence.

Ten to twenty thousand people protested in Beijing against the approval of Japanese textbooks that they believe fail to sufficiently address Japanese atrocities committed during Wold War II.

Japan clearly doesn't want to face up to what happened, the communist party clearly wants to fan the flames of nationalism and xenophobia, and the Chinese and Japanese people are both being done a disservice in the process...

Here is another interesting article at Japan Today about how the communist party's agenda is affecting popular sentiment in China.

It's always interesting and exciting for me to think about the future potential of China.

Gary Becker and Richard Posner speculate about its economic and political potential a bit on their blog. As I've been looking into their legal issues with intellectual property lately, I would like to note some things regarding the rule of law in China -- some posters on that blog have stated strongly pessimistic opinions about it.

An article in the New York Times by Thomas Friedman on a new phase of globalization. Related to his new book by the same name. (Free but you have to register)

This is something that everyone who is part of the knowledge-based economy should give a lot of thought to. As he says, the playing field is being levelled.

New Scientist
Fortune

This is thoroughly disheartening. Just when people are beginning to think of innovative ways to gather and coalesce intelligence information, politicians shut them down for a few seconds of media time.

This was one of the most interesting and bold experiments in intelligence that I've heard about, and it's been shut down for no good reason but misplaced moralizing.

Hillary, if you want to prevent innovation in intelligence techniques, go do it in a country we don't like.

Guardian Unlimited -- Japan emerges from its pacifist shell

I hope that Japan can slowly but increasingly assert itself militarily. Japan needs to rediscover its pride, but also reinvent the basis of that pride. It needs to be less racial and less egotistical than pre-WWII, but more assertive and more confident than the last 50 years. Japan has been laying low, trying not to express too much confidence about itself for too long. Japanese should be able to say they're proud to be Japanese without reproach...

At the same time, working out how that can be done practically will bring forth a host of issues. Can immigrants be proud to be Japanese? What does Japanese identity mean? Does it have to be racial? I don't think so, but changes like this will only come slowly, just like the progress in women's rights over the past 10 years or so...

It suddenly seems to me deeply ironic that the one thing I haven't been talking a lot about on this blog is the war, while it's the thing I'm certainly most preoccupied with lately...

I guess I felt like there wasn't much I could say. The war seems to be progressing well, and like building a bridge, it's a slow, carefully planned process. Unlike building a bridge, things can change quickly... Maybe it's actually more like building software. Except nobody really builds software like "engineers" yet. ;)

I think the war will be substantially finished in a week or two, and then the long process of establishing a functioning government will ensue. I'll bet that after people start getting their food and water, and see the baathists getting arrested, they'll be quite relieved to say the least. They're already showing signs of it, but may still be too apprehensive about reprisals from the remaining baathists.

The worst thing about this whole war, in my mind, is that Bush is such a dimwit. I wish that we could have gotten someone in there like Blair, someone who could have articulated with emotion his position. I'm afraid that Bush was the marketing campaign though, for Cheney's administration, which is what is really running the country anyway... It's too bad they couldn't just have a few different Presidents on hand for different audiences: the articulate one for those like me, and the current one for the masses... he's really just their spokesperson after all...

But I'm really optimistic now that once the government of Iraq is changed, once new institutions are set up, once there are free media, there will be a real revolution of thought in the middle east. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict must be solved soon, but if that can be achieved as well, then we're looking at a whole new middle east in 50 years... I'm hoping I'll be able to go see tons and tons of new archeological discoveries in Iraq with my future kids, and make a trek across all the greatest Shiite muslim shrines and mosques... ;)

The death of so many prominent journalists has been a blow I've felt though. Those guys really were tough. My respect for journalists has probably hit an alltime high, up from it's low after the death of Princess Diana.

In contrast with the first Gulf War, most media are reporting at least a little bit about headlines and stories in the Arab media as well. Most of them seem ridiculous, but not as ridiculous as the Iraqi information minister saying that U.S. troops are still nowhere near Baghdad... I wonder what he'll say after they take his building... ;)

It's nice to see the destruction of all of Saddam's narcissistic monuments and pictures. It satisfies the need for justice in us all, I think.

And it seems like Britain will really have pulled off an incredibly good move in supporting us. France is really getting hammered here -- people here are going to have a bad impression of them, justified or not, for a long time to come...

First of all, this is my 100th post! I'm pretty amazed that I've actually continued blogging this long... It may be some sort of testament to the addictiveness of it. ;)

I wanted to add my 2 cents to the question of what sort of footage of POWs would be a violation of the Geneva convention. It prohibits turning them into a so-called "public curiosity," i.e. a freak show...

Firstly, I don't think that is what the footage of Iraqi soldiers shown by U.S. stations is doing. The real point of this coverage is to show both the fact that some are surrendering, and the processes our forces are going though during the surrender. There is no freak show -- only generic footage of men walking with hands over their heads, or turning around, kneeling, and being handcuffed...

Secondly, some of the footage aired by Al Jazeera did turn the U.S. POWs into a public curiosity. It showed the dead bodies of soldiers in disarray, in close-up shots. This was too much. But the footage of the live soldiers is more on the borderline. I couldn't say definitively whether this bit was a violation or not, but probably not in my opinion...

Hopefully, both sides will reconsider this issue now, although I don't expect any better journalistic ethics to surface among the Iraqi state media...

Yes, everyone in the country has been glued to their TVs for days now.

I felt something very different in the first few days of the war -- a new optimism about the future, about how things are going to change for the better after this is all over. The daily display of U.S. soldiers' professionalism, focus, and honor is so impressive it's contagious. It's inspiring. I hope it rubs off on people. :)

I know a lot of people who read this blog disagree, but I honestly think that this is the right thing to do, and if we can be successful, it will be the beginning of a new age of progress for the middle east, and stability and confidence in U.S. and global markets. If we don't succeed (unlikely in my opinion), at least we tried.

I've also become somewhat weary of boring shaky camera footage. I think I'm going to try to watch less TV coverage -- 90% of it is footage of the back of another person or vehicle. 10% of it is incredible though, so what can you do?

Maybe I'll try to catch the latest from web and print media more...

There's a very interesting article at Salon about the self-described "human shields" going to Iraq to try to prevent or deter war.

I respect anyone who has the guts to do something like this. But I see a recurring theme here, one I've thought about many times in the past, and which the article makes clear: People with ideologies tend to lose their common sense sometimes -- lose sight of the realities of power in the world.

The article talks about how in 1990 Iraq kidnapped westerners and brought them to military targets in order to deter strikes to those locations. They talk in particular about one man's horrible experiences, and his opinion on the current voluntary human shields.

I think the tactic could be effective. But putting your life in the hands of Hussein and hoping for your wishes to be respected is losing sight of reality. Some people in the world have respect for principles, etc. Some only respect the laws of nature. I believe Hussein is one of the latter, and I'm truly saddened by the thought of what these individuals will most probably experience...

North Korea is threatening to pull out of the Korean War armistice.

It seems like they're trying to esclalate this thing just when the U.S. is about to get involved in Iraq. I don't know if they'd be bold enough to attack the South, even with the U.S. otherwise occupied, but they may keep pushing for things like this, just because no one can stop them right now.

If they still think like this, I don't know if it's realistic to expect the south's "Sunshine Policy" to work...

Here are my answers to the questions of the Cross-Blog Iraq Debate at The Truth Laid Bear. I have slowly gone from being anti-war to being pro-war in this instance, and these are the reasons why.

There seems to be a successor to the infamous "Patriot Act" in the works, and it's been leaked. There is a discussion on Slashdot, and Plastic as well, but the original story came from the Center for Public Integrity, which is probably down right now due to the massive traffic. There are other stories on it at the Philly Independent Media Center, and AlterNet.org.

Mirrors of the PDF file are here, here, and here.

Among the more disturbing sections are these, quoted from the Independent Media Center article:

Section 201, “Prohibition of Disclosure of Terrorism Investigation Detainee Information”: Safeguarding the dissemination of information related to national security has been a hallmark of Ashcroft’s first two years in office, and the Domestic Security Enhancement Act of 2003 follows in the footsteps of his October 2001 directive to carefully consider such interest when granting Freedom of Information Act requests. While the October memo simply encouraged FOIA officers to take national security, “protecting sensitive business information and, not least, preserving personal privacy” into account while deciding on requests, the proposed legislation would enhance the department’s ability to deny releasing material on suspected terrorists in government custody through FOIA.

Section 202, “Distribution of ‘Worst Case Scenario’ Information”: This would introduce new FOIA restrictions with regard to the Environmental Protection Agency. As provided for in the Clean Air Act, the EPA requires private companies that use potentially dangerous chemicals must produce a “worst case scenario” report detailing the effect that the release of these controlled substances would have on the surrounding community. Section 202 of this Act would, however, restrict FOIA requests to these reports, which the bill’s drafters refer to as “a roadmap for terrorists.” By reducing public access to “read-only” methods for only those persons “who live and work in the geographical area likely to be affected by a worst-case scenario,” this subtitle would obfuscate an established level of transparency between private industry and the public.

Section 301-306, “Terrorist Identification Database”: These sections would authorize creation of a DNA database on “suspected terrorists,” expansively defined to include association with suspected terrorist groups, and noncitizens suspected of certain crimes or of having supported any group designated as terrorist.

Section 312, “Appropriate Remedies with Respect to Law Enforcement Surveillance Activities”: This section would terminate all state law enforcement consent decrees before Sept. 11, 2001, not related to racial profiling or other civil rights violations, that limit such agencies from gathering information about individuals and organizations. The authors of this statute claim that these consent orders, which were passed as a result of police spying abuses, could impede current terrorism investigations. It would also place substantial restrictions on future court injunctions.

Section 405, “Presumption for Pretrial Detention in Cases Involving Terrorism”: While many people charged with drug offenses punishable by prison terms of 10 years or more are held before their trial without bail, this provision would create a comparable statute for those suspected of terrorist activity. The reasons for presumptively holding suspected terrorists before trial, the Justice Department summary memo states, are clear. “This presumption is warranted because of the unparalleled magnitude of the danger to the United States and its people posed by acts of terrorism, and because terrorism is typically engaged in by groups – many with international connections – that are often in a position to help their members flee or go into hiding.”

Section 501, “Expatriation of Terrorists”: This provision, the drafters say, would establish that an American citizen could be expatriated “if, with the intent to relinquish his nationality, he becomes a member of, or provides material support to, a group that the United Stated has designated as a ‘terrorist organization’.” But whereas a citizen formerly had to state his intent to relinquish his citizenship, the new law affirms that his intent can be “inferred from conduct.” Thus, engaging in the lawful activities of a group designated as a “terrorist organization” by the Attorney General could be presumptive grounds for expatriation.

A post on Monkey X informed me of something that should be receiving far more coverage in the media. A bill has been introduced by Reps. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and Ron Paul (R-TX) to repeal the "Iraq Use of Force Resolution" which gave Bush a priori consent to wage war in Iraq.

I hope that somehow more people become aware of this new bill, and support it firmly.

Although I am not against a war in Iraq, I am vehemently against any move on the part of congress towards becoming a rubber-stamp for the Executive branch. In cases dealing with war, especially, congress should never abrogate its power to check the President.

This article, being discussed here on Plastic, really got me thinking... Have you ever heard anything as disturbing as the term "Designated Free Speech Area?" This implies to me that everywhere outside this zone is designated for censorship...

So here's the story — Bill Neel decided he wanted to protest against Bush while the President made a speech to a carpenters' union. It turns out that the cops herded all the protesters into a baseball field, behind a fence, away from Bush's motorcade. Of course, people with pro-Bush signs were allowed to line the street right while the motorcade passed... Bill was arrested because he refused to stay in his 'designated' area.

Every time something like this happens, I think "Maybe this is it — maybe the country really is going to pot..." But then I remember all the horrible problems we've overcome in the past, and I think that the people of the U.S. will pull us out of this one too, eventually. This scene is deeply disturbing to me though. It's reminiscent of something that would happen in China. Hard-core pro-administration PR, supressing dissent in a not-so-subtle way... I'm just glad that we live in a country where this sort of thing produces an outcry from the citizens. :)

Joi Ito has posted an interesting story about the "Blueprint for Japan 2020." It sounds like there will be quite a few interesting ideas put forth in this document, but it makes me wonder what is really necessary to create change in Japan...

All such programs are probably helpful in some small way; one of course can't expect that isolated efforts can make a huge difference, but they are certainly worth attempting nonetheless.

But what interests me is the larger question: What will it take to really effect change in Japan? I think the answer is clear. It will take a slow, far-reaching change in the Japanese culture, and a concomitant change in Japanese consciousness, to bring it about.

I think we've been seeing signs over the past 6-8 years that Japanese culture is slowly changing, mostly under the unbearable economic pressure of this 10+ year stagnation. But how long will it take for those changes to really affect the consciousness of the man on the street, eventually causing him to break with long-held traditions and do something radical?

Japan has proven able to maintain a staggering amount of its indigenous culture through successive uphevals and massive societal change. The matted tangle of traditions must be slowly pulled apart now, until its strands begin popping, one by one, and we finally end up with a flexible web: able to react almost instantaneously to changes in the world; able to keep up with the ever-quickening pace of globalization.

I love to read the Economist. They almost always have quite in-depth articles on international relations, much longer pieces than you find in almost any other periodical...

I've been sort of put off lately by the lack of progress in Israel, but this is still a good article.

The really interesting article is here though. It's about the changing demographics between Europe and the U.S. This really makes you wonder where all these nations will be in 50 to 100 years. According to this article, it seems that the U.S. will only continue to strengthen, while Europe and most other nations will grow less populous and less influential.

I constantly wonder how long such a gross imbalance of power can be maintained. I've felt on numerous occasions since September 11, and even much earlier, that terrorism could cause the U.S. to lose its world-wide hegemony. I see one major aspect of this problem as the failure of the U.S. to heed the lessons of Taoism, which are made quite apparent the game of Go.

Can every last terrorist be kept out of the U.S.? Of course not. The U.S. is such a huge area that this would be impossible. But people still seem to think it's not only possible but necessary! Sometimes, as in Go, you need to face the reality that you must sacrifice something in order to gain security. The only way the U.S. can gain real security is by either obliterating all muslim countries, or by appeasing some of the extremists. And we know the former is ridiculous.

Chinese strategists know that by appeasing your enemy you can make them lazy, taking away their will to fight. Then, you can take advantage of the opportunity to extend your influence. It's not giving in, it's just being very very cunning.... A cunning I'm afraid is sorely lacking in the upper eschelons of the over-politicized U.S. defense establishment.

It's amazing. I lived in Japan during the peak years of the so-called 'Bubble Economy', from '86 to '89. I came to believe during that time that many aspects of Japanese culture and philosophy were superior to those in the U.S. I wasn't necessarily wrong, but I didn't see the whole picture either. Busy being assimilated by the economic juggernaut, I hadn't noticed the fact that America had superiority where it really counts — in its political and cultural system.

A recent story in the New York Times is titled "As Tokyo Loses Luster, Foreign Media Move On." A couple of choice excerpts:

In the last few months, newspapers closing their Tokyo bureaus included The Chicago Tribune, The Christian Science Monitor, The Independent of London, Dagens Nyheter of Sweden and Corriere della Sera of Italy.

Given the choice between covering a stalled Japan and a developing China that will probably overtake Japan economically by the middle of the century, editors choose the more dynamic country.

An even harsher note is struck in this opinion article from the same paper:

Japan is returning to its rightful place in the world, that of a middling country of vastly diminished and still declining importance in world affairs.

Apparently, it's not that hard to get a nuclear warhead. This is quite disturbing. Even though I found out later that this story is probably not genuine, I'm still sure it could have been true...

I remember how I used to think, growing up in Washington D.C. as a child, that when we got nuked we would be vaporized instantaneously, so it really wasn't all that bad... We wouldn't melt or die slowly and painfully like the people in West Virginia or North Carolina... I remember being dully afraid though. Like death was hanging over everyone...

Later in college, I happened through a history aisle in the library, and started looking at books about Reagan, Iran-Contra, and other Cold-War issues... I guess I must have been much more scared as a child than I thought, because I almost began to weep. My eyes welled up with emotion. I finally realized that the nuclear standoff was over, right then and there. What a world we live in, eh? ... What else is there to say?