Taking a Principled Stance with Your Biggest Creditor
… when your biggest creditor has no principles. From UPI.
China, already outraged over U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, Tuesday warned of damage to bilateral ties if U.S. leaders met with the Dalai Lama.
President Barack Obama plans to meet with the Dalai Lama when the Tibetan spiritual leader visits the United States but no date has been set.
Speaking to reporters in Beijing, Zhu Weiqun, executive vice minister for the Chinese Communist Party’s Central Committee, said the United States would violate international rules by meeting the Tibetan Buddhist monk, Xinhua reported.
Saying such a move would be both irrational and harmful, Zhu said, “If a country decides to do so, we will take necessary measures to help them realize this.”
Is he referencing the $789 billion (as of November) in US Treasury securities that his country holds?
Of course, President Obama is doing the right thing by selling arms to a democracy and by meeting with a religious/spiritual leader. But the President is also proposing a trillion and a half dollars in new spending and two trillion in additional deficits, on top of current spending and deficits. Setting aside for a moment that such an absurd level of spending is completely inadviseable in its own regard, if Congress approves anything like it, the money will need to be borrowed from some place. But if we tick off our biggest lender by doing the right thing, will they still loan us the money we want?
Put it another way. Hasn’t our spending reached a patently unacceptable level when we have to ask ourselves: can we afford to stand on principle?