The Two Faces of Gary Locke
Nominating Gary Locke to be the new ambassador to China is the Obama administration’s response to the huge federal deficit and high unemployment rate, as well as its effort to continue to push forward a policy of global supremacy.
Obama’s statement during his announcement of the nomination on March 9 has profound implications; he said: “As the grandson of Chinese immigrants ... Gary is the right person to continue this cooperation.” He also said, “I can’t think of anyone who is a better fit.* ... I can think of nobody who is more qualified than Gary Locke.”
There are many hidden meanings behind Locke’s nomination to be the new ambassador to China. On one hand, this reveals that the Obama administration has become aware of the importance of the U.S.–China partnership and trade in their bilateral relationship. The nomination will “help U.S. corporations to open foreign markets and create employment opportunities in the U.S.”* It also foretells Obama’s intentions to seek a second term. On the other hand, this reveals that the contest between China and the United States has gotten white-hot. To gain as much strategic benefit as possible, the U.S. government did not hesitate to use the opportunity of Locke’s Chinese identity to continue the shady business of feigning one thing while doing another — using deception, confusion, division and disintegration — to achieve the ultimate goal of “using a Chinese collaborator to subdue and restrict the Chinese.”*
As a descendant of ethnic Chinese, Gary Locke has undergone commendable struggle. Through his hard work, he rapidly jumped from being a porter to governor to secretary of commerce. He has very successfully assimilated into American high society, realizing his dream, the American dream.
However, Locke’s Chinese identity has not influenced his position as a “representative of American interests” in his involvement in the core issues of the U.S.–China relationship. In terms of the U.S. and China trade, Locke’s method has been to “use all measures necessary to knock down China’s trade barriers”* and “appeal to the WTO whenever talks fail.”* Anyone can clearly see that friction in the U.S.-China trade relationship “has not decreased since Locke became secretary of commerce.”* After all, an American citizen to the core, Locke swears loyalty to the United States government.
In the grand context of America pushing its policy of global supremacy, Locke’s service as ambassador to China will not bring any substantive improvements in the contest between China and the United States. On the contrary, there is a danger of the situation intensifying or even reaching heated levels. With Locke’s realization of the American dream, he has proven — and will continue to prove — that he is 100 percent American and is a part of American society. Locke’s involvement in China’s interests is nothing short of playing with fire, which can bring ruin and shame or even provoke a fatal disaster. Clearly, if Gary Locke does not fight with China, the two houses of Congress will fight with Gary Locke!
By choosing Gary Locke and pushing him to the forefront of the standoff with China, the Obama administration has created a wedge in the strategy contest between China and the U.S. The upper hand gained from “using a Chinese collaborator to subdue and restrict the Chinese”* is a convenient and major point. Regardless of what Locke does, this has destined the Obama administration to kill two birds with one stone or even many birds with one stone — and to win.
As for any longing for or misreading of Locke’s Chinese identity or background, it is at best the fantasy of a character in a great play and one’s own wishful thinking. There are many outspoken people in the wrong [supporting Locke], who should regard his appointment as ambassador to China more logically.
Gary Locke may represent the struggles of overseas Chinese, but he cannot represent the hearts of the many overseas Chinese who are still devoted to their Chinese roots. If Gary Locke takes into consideration affection for his flesh and blood, he will doom his American dream to failure; if Gary Locke goes 100 percent American, then he destines his American dream for glory.
Farewell, John Leighton Stuart; farewell, Gary Locke!**
*Editor’s note: These quotes, though accurately translated, could not be verified.
**Editor’s note: “Farewell, Leighton Stuart” was an article written by Mao Zedong in 1949 in response to the U.S. recalling its then-ambassador to China, John Leighton Stuart. Mao described him so: “John Leighton Stuart, who was born in China in 1876, was always a loyal agent of U.S. cultural aggression in China.”
Obama’s statement during his announcement of the nomination on March 9 has profound implications; he said: “As the grandson of Chinese immigrants ... Gary is the right person to continue this cooperation.” He also said, “I can’t think of anyone who is a better fit.* ... I can think of nobody who is more qualified than Gary Locke.”
There are many hidden meanings behind Locke’s nomination to be the new ambassador to China. On one hand, this reveals that the Obama administration has become aware of the importance of the U.S.–China partnership and trade in their bilateral relationship. The nomination will “help U.S. corporations to open foreign markets and create employment opportunities in the U.S.”* It also foretells Obama’s intentions to seek a second term. On the other hand, this reveals that the contest between China and the United States has gotten white-hot. To gain as much strategic benefit as possible, the U.S. government did not hesitate to use the opportunity of Locke’s Chinese identity to continue the shady business of feigning one thing while doing another — using deception, confusion, division and disintegration — to achieve the ultimate goal of “using a Chinese collaborator to subdue and restrict the Chinese.”*
As a descendant of ethnic Chinese, Gary Locke has undergone commendable struggle. Through his hard work, he rapidly jumped from being a porter to governor to secretary of commerce. He has very successfully assimilated into American high society, realizing his dream, the American dream.
However, Locke’s Chinese identity has not influenced his position as a “representative of American interests” in his involvement in the core issues of the U.S.–China relationship. In terms of the U.S. and China trade, Locke’s method has been to “use all measures necessary to knock down China’s trade barriers”* and “appeal to the WTO whenever talks fail.”* Anyone can clearly see that friction in the U.S.-China trade relationship “has not decreased since Locke became secretary of commerce.”* After all, an American citizen to the core, Locke swears loyalty to the United States government.
In the grand context of America pushing its policy of global supremacy, Locke’s service as ambassador to China will not bring any substantive improvements in the contest between China and the United States. On the contrary, there is a danger of the situation intensifying or even reaching heated levels. With Locke’s realization of the American dream, he has proven — and will continue to prove — that he is 100 percent American and is a part of American society. Locke’s involvement in China’s interests is nothing short of playing with fire, which can bring ruin and shame or even provoke a fatal disaster. Clearly, if Gary Locke does not fight with China, the two houses of Congress will fight with Gary Locke!
By choosing Gary Locke and pushing him to the forefront of the standoff with China, the Obama administration has created a wedge in the strategy contest between China and the U.S. The upper hand gained from “using a Chinese collaborator to subdue and restrict the Chinese”* is a convenient and major point. Regardless of what Locke does, this has destined the Obama administration to kill two birds with one stone or even many birds with one stone — and to win.
As for any longing for or misreading of Locke’s Chinese identity or background, it is at best the fantasy of a character in a great play and one’s own wishful thinking. There are many outspoken people in the wrong [supporting Locke], who should regard his appointment as ambassador to China more logically.
Gary Locke may represent the struggles of overseas Chinese, but he cannot represent the hearts of the many overseas Chinese who are still devoted to their Chinese roots. If Gary Locke takes into consideration affection for his flesh and blood, he will doom his American dream to failure; if Gary Locke goes 100 percent American, then he destines his American dream for glory.
Farewell, John Leighton Stuart; farewell, Gary Locke!**
*Editor’s note: These quotes, though accurately translated, could not be verified.
**Editor’s note: “Farewell, Leighton Stuart” was an article written by Mao Zedong in 1949 in response to the U.S. recalling its then-ambassador to China, John Leighton Stuart. Mao described him so: “John Leighton Stuart, who was born in China in 1876, was always a loyal agent of U.S. cultural aggression in China.”