Why Did Hillary Deny History So Desperately?
Published in Nanfang Daily
(China) on 29 July 2011
by Jin Zishan (link to original)
(China) on 29 July 2011
by Jin Zishan (link to original)
Translated from
by Liangzi He.
Edited by Derek Ha.
It is surprising that Hillary went so far as to deny history, just like a calf abandoning its mother after drinking her milk.
At the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum, Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State, gave a speech about the current tension over the South China Sea, asking "all parties to clarify their claims in the South China Sea in terms consistent with customary international law" and saying that "claims to maritime space in the South China Sea should be derived solely from legitimate claims to land features." She said that some countries' claims on territories in the region are exaggerated and that many countries prefer to rationalize their claims based on historical precedents rather than topography.
Hillary’s arguments are totally untenable. The South China Sea has long been within China’s territory, which means it has an owner. If the so-called clarification of claims based on international law is aimed at land that is already owned, then the world will descend into chaos. Does this mean that the current American territories need to be divided again?
The statement on topography is even more absurd. Alaska, a U.S. state, is separated from America’s mainland by a big country, Canada; it does not seem like America’s territory no matter how you look at it. In addition, Hawaii, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Wake Island, Howland Island, Baker Island, etc., are all in the center of the Pacific Ocean, near Asia or connected to Asian countries thousands of miles away from America’s mainland. If we look at topography, how can these lands be part of America’s territory?
Therefore, when it comes to determining ownership of a piece of land, we should first examine historical facts and the sovereign country’s consistent, long-term attitude toward it, excluding unfair treaties. Putting aside history while talking about facts is like someone suddenly becoming old without being born and growing up.
Why then, did Hillary go so far as to deny history?
It is said that the U.S. has no history. It has only been a little more than 230 years from the founding of the U.S.; compared to the long history of human society, America’s history is truly short. It is not America’s fault that it does not have a long history, but it should not ignore other countries' histories and deny other countries land that has long been in their territories.
The founding of America began with a group of outsiders crossing the sea. After Columbus’ discovery of the New World, colonists from Europe entered the already-owned land of North America, massacred, displaced, raided and enslaved local aboriginal “Indians,” violently occupying their homeland. By rashly undermining history, was Hillary trying to cover up the brutal history of colonization and plundering?
It is obvious that making such a strange speech about territory is not aimed at helping weak countries. Undermining other countries’ legitimate ownership of land encourages so-called weak countries that are savagely trying to steal land. America holds unipolar power; its hegemonic attitude and behavior has not spread to other countries until recently. Indulging the so-called weak countries’ wild ambitions is, in fact, America’s attempt to support the "reasonableness" of plundering land and resources.
The U.S. is the big brother of the world, and its status cannot be challenged. Creating obstacles, stirring up trouble and, best of all, conspiring with others to attack a country are moves aimed at containing any emerging countries that try to compete with the U.S. Especially when it comes to developing countries that advocate peace, differing concepts can be like sand thrown in the eyes of America. If a country like this rises up, the U.S. is afraid that it may deny America’s history of colonialism and plundering and challenge its hegemony.
Subverting history arises from a desire to get rid of memory. Clinton and Lewinsky’s scandal is in the past, completely covered up by dust, sparing us a lot of trouble.
Unfortunately, history cannot be obliterated; what existed still exists, especially historical facts and viewpoints that are still held by people today. What can truly save us from trouble is laying down the burden [Editor's Note: this refers to the burden of trying to conceal history] and calmly confronting it head-on.
At the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) Regional Forum, Hillary Clinton, the U.S. Secretary of State, gave a speech about the current tension over the South China Sea, asking "all parties to clarify their claims in the South China Sea in terms consistent with customary international law" and saying that "claims to maritime space in the South China Sea should be derived solely from legitimate claims to land features." She said that some countries' claims on territories in the region are exaggerated and that many countries prefer to rationalize their claims based on historical precedents rather than topography.
Hillary’s arguments are totally untenable. The South China Sea has long been within China’s territory, which means it has an owner. If the so-called clarification of claims based on international law is aimed at land that is already owned, then the world will descend into chaos. Does this mean that the current American territories need to be divided again?
The statement on topography is even more absurd. Alaska, a U.S. state, is separated from America’s mainland by a big country, Canada; it does not seem like America’s territory no matter how you look at it. In addition, Hawaii, the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Wake Island, Howland Island, Baker Island, etc., are all in the center of the Pacific Ocean, near Asia or connected to Asian countries thousands of miles away from America’s mainland. If we look at topography, how can these lands be part of America’s territory?
Therefore, when it comes to determining ownership of a piece of land, we should first examine historical facts and the sovereign country’s consistent, long-term attitude toward it, excluding unfair treaties. Putting aside history while talking about facts is like someone suddenly becoming old without being born and growing up.
Why then, did Hillary go so far as to deny history?
It is said that the U.S. has no history. It has only been a little more than 230 years from the founding of the U.S.; compared to the long history of human society, America’s history is truly short. It is not America’s fault that it does not have a long history, but it should not ignore other countries' histories and deny other countries land that has long been in their territories.
The founding of America began with a group of outsiders crossing the sea. After Columbus’ discovery of the New World, colonists from Europe entered the already-owned land of North America, massacred, displaced, raided and enslaved local aboriginal “Indians,” violently occupying their homeland. By rashly undermining history, was Hillary trying to cover up the brutal history of colonization and plundering?
It is obvious that making such a strange speech about territory is not aimed at helping weak countries. Undermining other countries’ legitimate ownership of land encourages so-called weak countries that are savagely trying to steal land. America holds unipolar power; its hegemonic attitude and behavior has not spread to other countries until recently. Indulging the so-called weak countries’ wild ambitions is, in fact, America’s attempt to support the "reasonableness" of plundering land and resources.
The U.S. is the big brother of the world, and its status cannot be challenged. Creating obstacles, stirring up trouble and, best of all, conspiring with others to attack a country are moves aimed at containing any emerging countries that try to compete with the U.S. Especially when it comes to developing countries that advocate peace, differing concepts can be like sand thrown in the eyes of America. If a country like this rises up, the U.S. is afraid that it may deny America’s history of colonialism and plundering and challenge its hegemony.
Subverting history arises from a desire to get rid of memory. Clinton and Lewinsky’s scandal is in the past, completely covered up by dust, sparing us a lot of trouble.
Unfortunately, history cannot be obliterated; what existed still exists, especially historical facts and viewpoints that are still held by people today. What can truly save us from trouble is laying down the burden [Editor's Note: this refers to the burden of trying to conceal history] and calmly confronting it head-on.