- The Washington Times - Monday, November 14, 2011



By Brett M. Decker and William C. Triplett II

Regnery, $27.95, 256 pages

Reviewed by Tony Blankley

A just-released book, “Bowing to Beijing” by Brett M. Decker and William C. Triplett II, will change forever the way you think about China - even if, like me, you already have the deepest worries about the Chinese threat. As I opened the book, I was expecting to find many useful examples of Chinese military and industrial efforts to get the better of the United States and the West.

Indeed, there are 100 pages of examples of the most remorseless Chinese successes at stealing the military and industrial secrets of the West and converting them into a growing menace - soon to be a leviathan - bent on domination and defeat of America. The authors itemize the sheer unprecedented magnitude of this effort. But the opening chapters deal with human rights abuses, and my first thought as I started reading was that I wanted to get right to the military and industrial examples.

But the authors were right to lead with 50 pages itemizing in grisly detail Chinese human rights abuses - for the profound reason that after reading those first 50 pages, the reader will be impassioned to resist Chinese domination not only on behalf of American interests, but for the sake of humanity.

Many people think America is in decline and mentally acquiesce to the thought that the rise of China is inevitable. Those 50 pages will stiffen your resolve to be part of the struggle never to let such a malignancy spread to the rest of the world - let alone to America. One of the authors, Brett M. Decker, is a friend - and I have never been more proud of his (and his co-author’s) accomplishment of providing such a deep moral vision in this carefully factual book.

In an astounding narrative, Brett and Mr. Triplett have refuted the growing authoritarian temptation for too many privileged people around the world, expressed by Thomas L. Friedman, senior New York Times foreign-policy columnist, who wrote recently: “One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages. That one party can just impose the politically difficult but critically important policies needed to move a society forward in the 21st century.”

The authors do not mention Mr. Friedman. In those first 50 pages, they focus their compelling narrative on a strictly factual expose of the moral horror being brought down on the Chinese people by their ever-more-powerful leadership.

The authors carefully delineate the reversal in the past decade of the previous, modest Chinese movement toward rule of law and a small hint at decency. It had been the hope of everyone from Richard Nixon and Henry Kissinger onward that as China came into the world and embraced capitalism, it would become “a modern, progressive society that [would] eventually bring the communist state in line with the rest of the civilized world.” That was the moral foundation for “engaging” with China. It also was a convenient rationalization for trying to make a fortune in the vast Chinese market.

But, grimly, the authors explicate the sad fact that the engagement was a false dawn. In the past decade, it has gotten worse and worse as the Chinese leadership has consolidated its power. Oligarchic “princelings” - the 200 to 300 descendants of the founders of the Communist Party - have gained a stranglehold on both the business and the government of China. They are using the incomprehensibly vast power that comes with that total control to buy off the business class, exploit the working class and peasants and prepare China to replace America as the world’s dominant nation.

Once you have read the searing first 50 pages of this book, the hope that China is becoming a “decent,” liberal society is no longer morally available to you. I mention Mr. Friedman because of his claim that Chinese leaders are a “reasonably enlightened group of people.” The authors’ narrative shows Mr. Friedman’s words to be not merely fatuous but uniquely immoral.

Story Continues →