Select Page

China Manipulates Biden – Will Stopping Attacking U.S. with Fentanyl if Biden Forgets about Uyghurs

China Manipulates Biden – Will Stopping Attacking U.S. with Fentanyl if Biden Forgets about Uyghurs

In a move that has drawn sharp criticism and raised ethical concerns, President Joe Biden is reportedly on the brink of making a distressing concession that deeply undermines global human rights advocacy. According to reports, the Biden administration is considering lifting sanctions on a Chinese police unit known for its severe repression of the Uyghur Muslim minority. This decision, part of an agreement with Chinese President Xi Jinping, is ostensibly aimed at securing China’s assistance in curbing the fentanyl crisis devastating the United States. However, it represents a harrowing compromise on fundamental human rights principles.

This controversial decision is expected to be formalized during the upcoming meeting between Biden and Xi at the Asia-Pacific Economic Co-operation summit in San Francisco. The U.S. has pressed China to intensify its crackdown on fentanyl exporters, crucial for stemming the tide of this lethal drug into the U.S. through Mexico.

But everyone familiar with China knows that there would be no fentanyl without implicit approval from the Chinese Communist Party. This has only been allowed (and indeed encouraged) because it served a political purpose.

And now it has.

In a reciprocal but deeply troubling move, Beijing has sought the lifting of U.S. sanctions on China’s forensic police institute, an entity implicated in conducting mass surveillance and human rights abuses against the Uyghurs in Xinjiang province.

The sanctions, imposed by the Trump administration in May 2020, were a response to the institute’s involvement in “human rights violations and abuses… against Uyghurs and other minorities in Xinjiang.” The potential reversal of these sanctions by the Biden administration signals a distressing retreat from the U.S.’s commitment to human rights, a cornerstone of its foreign policy values. This proposed trade-off between drug policy cooperation and overlooking egregious human rights violations is a stark deviation from the U.S.’s traditional role as a defender of global human rights.

The news of this agreement, though not yet officially confirmed by the White House, is already sparking a significant backlash. Human rights advocates are likely to view this as a grave betrayal, arguing that the U.S. should not, under any circumstances, compromise on human rights issues for concessions in other areas, however pressing they may be.

This decision comes at a time when the Biden administration has taken proactive steps in the fight against the fentanyl crisis. Earlier this month, the U.S. Treasury sanctioned several individuals and businesses in China linked to the fentanyl trade. Yet, the potential lifting of sanctions on a body accused of severe human rights abuses casts a dark shadow over these efforts, raising questions about the moral integrity and priorities of U.S. foreign policy.

The summit is also expected to touch on other critical issues, such as military communications and technology competition. However, the overshadowing issue remains the potential agreement that could see a major human rights concession in exchange for cooperation on drug trafficking.

As we have mentioned in previous articles, this meeting is the worst possible for the United States with the incompetent and compromised Biden on our side of the table. It will get worse before these meetings are over.

About The Author

4 Comments

  1. Dan tyree

    The Chicoms will talk retard joe into surrendering America if they spend to much time together

  2. frank stetson

    Often, the raggedy right blames MSM as being biased against them. Poor victims….. Perhaps it’s because Danial Oliver is a right-wing journalistic nightmare. He would be tossed upon submission of his first article in any journalism business for incompetence.

    Here’s his sources for his current POS. In Journalism 101, everything that is not an established fact must be sourced. Single sourced stories are to be avoided, and the number of sources depends on the story and the facts. Each newsroom and editorial staff with have slightly different “rules.” The more sensitive, the greater the complexity, the more sources. Two sources are a minimum. Anonymous sources are OK, if noted as to type of source. Anonymous sourced stories are less reliable than those attributed to names. Twitter feeds from unknown people are not a source, that’s a rumor….. or the basis of knowledge and truth for Marjorie Taylor Greene. Not for journalists.

    So here we go quoting the depth and detail that Oliver went to in composing this story:

    “In a move that has drawn sharp criticism and raised ethical concerns” from who?

    “According to reports,” you got Reports? Reports from who, and it must be plural.

    “the Biden administration is considering” so you admit this is a maybe

    “However, it represents a harrowing compromise on fundamental human rights principles.” Why? How? Source?
    “This controversial decision” that is a rumor from unknown places

    “Everyone familiar with China knows that there would be no fentanyl without implicit approval from the Chinese Communist Party.” OK, we can call that an established fact. That’s a first…..and this is the SOLE fact that Oliver launches this entire story on.

    “This has only been allowed (and indeed encouraged) because it served a political purpose.” And back to guessing without any sources….

    “In a reciprocal but deeply troubling move,” by who? Oliver?

    “The sanctions, imposed by the Trump administration in May 2020, were a response to the institute’s involvement in “human rights violations and abuses… against Uyghurs and other minorities in Xinjiang.” Did they work?

    “The potential reversal of these sanctions by the Biden administration signals a distressing retreat from the U.S.’s commitment to human rights, a cornerstone of its foreign policy values.” Not if they didn’t work…..

    “This proposed trade-off between drug policy cooperation and overlooking egregious human rights violations is a stark deviation from the U.S.’s traditional role as a defender of global human rights.” At this point you have to figure it’s pure Oliver, there are no other sources and this fool is concluding that saving the Uyghurs is more important than stopping fentanyl overdoses in the USA to MAGA….. Gotta love a China lover, when it suits his personal, political purposes to rail on Democrats…….

    “although not confirmed by the White House,” meaning Oliver is guessing without able to list sources, but…. He’s “already sparking a significant backlash. Human rights advocates” which he can’t name “are likely,” not certain though “to view this as a grave betrayal, arguing that the U.S. should not, under any circumstances, compromise on human rights issues for concessions in other areas, however pressing they may be.” Well, that’s some certainty in an assumption about unknown advocates that may be thinking about something, somewhere. Thank GOD Oliver knows.

    “However, the overshadowing issue remains the potential agreement that could see a major human rights concession in exchange for cooperation on drug trafficking.” Again, Oliver has not explored whether the Trump sanctions had any effect. I mean think about it, Trump sanctioned a company, and maybe a region in China. Does anyone think that stopped anything? He did not sanction the country…..just one organization in the country. Can you say proxy purchase? Like I said, Oliver has not stated whether the sanctions did anything.

    And then the close: “this meeting is the worst possible for the United States with the incompetent and compromised Biden on our side of the table. It will get worse before these meetings are over” which is either Oliver’s grand conclusion based on his partisan hack personal opinion or some stupid source yet to be named.

    Whatever happened at the meeting, and I will uncover the truth, Oliver has reached his conclusion based on conjecture founded in rumor from sources he can not name. Even in a general sense. He just believes that you will believe anything he says. They have struck an agreement, it may include some human rights aspects, but I have not found the detail yet that I can source.

    Oliver would be tossed from any MSM newsroom, not for his beliefs, but for his poor work that falls well below the guidelines of journalism 101. He is a hack.

  3. Tom

    Good point about the Trump 2020 sanctions. If they worked then great, and we need to keep them on. If they did not work then Biden is a genius for getting something for nothing. The Uighur law calls for sanctions on Xinjiang’s Communist Party secretary, Chen Quanguo, who is also a member of the powerful Politburo, for “gross human rights violations”. It also calls on US companies with operations in Xinjiang to take steps to ensure their supply chains are free from forced labour.

    The issue seems to be there are no measures to determine if the sanctions are working. All DHS says is ” Together with our interagency partners, we will continue to engage companies to remind them of U.S. legal obligations which prohibit importing goods to the United States that are made with forced labor.

    We are rallying our allies and partners to make global supply chains free from the use of forced labor, to speak out against atrocities in Xinjiang, and to join us in calling on the government of the PRC to immediately end atrocities and human rights abuses, including forced labor.

    For more information on implementation of the Act, see: https://www.dhs.gov/uflpa.”

    I think the key words here are “remind” and “rely”. I do not see that there are any enforcement words in these comments. Another article says, “…the new law requires regular monitoring of the situation in the region by U.S. government bodies for the application of sanctions. ” Well it appears that DHS has gotten that job from the previous article I read but all they seem to be doing is encouraging and relying, sort of like cheerleaders with red-white-and blue pom poms.

    Now a third article says, “…Washington’s action freezes any U.S. assets of the company and officials; generally prohibits Americans from dealing with them; and bars Sun Jinlong and Peng Jiarui from traveling to the United States. A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, described the company as a “a secretive, paramilitary organization that performs a variety of functions under the direct control” of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

    So if anything, there is probably little monitoring and no monitors of effectiveness, lots of pom pom activity, and frozen assets which is what Xi would be after. So essentially Biden may be buying cooperation from China by using China’s frozen assets. That may be a good thing if it stops the fentanyl from coming in. Here is the best I could find on the issue but it says nothing like what Oliver implies, see info and full article from : *https://www.china-briefing.com/news/us-china-meeting-productive-talks-lead-to-cooperation-in-key-areas/*

    “Cooperation on counternarcotics

    Although few details have been released on each item, the meeting resulted in commitments to improve cooperation in several important areas.

    One of these is an agreement to step up bilateral cooperation to counter the “evolving” trade and manufacturing of illegal drugs, in particular fentanyl, a synthetic opiate that is at the center of the US’ domestic opioid epidemic.

    The issue of the fentanyl trade, and the trade in equipment and materials enabling its manufacture, has become a major area of contention between the two countries in recent years. The US alleges that much of the illegal supply of fentanyl into the US is directly or indirectly enabled by China, and has sanctioned several Chinese companies and individuals for their alleged involvement. China has repeatedly denied these claims.

    China and the US have previously collaborated on counternarcotics work. In 2019, China took a major step in preventing the flow of fentanyl from China into the US by regulating a wide range of fentanyl substances. However, according to Biden, the trade has “evolved” to chemical ingredients and pill presses used for the production of fentanyl.

    However, in August 2022, cooperation was suspended in retaliation to then-Speaker of the House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taipei.

    To this end, the two sides agreed to set up a working group “for ongoing communication and law enforcement coordination on counternarcotics issues”, per the White House readout. Biden stated that this cooperation will help to advance the US’ efforts to “counter the evolving threat of illicit synthetic drugs and to reduce the diversion of precursor chemicals and pill presses to drug cartels”.

    In a press briefing after the meeting, Biden hailed the latest development, stating that it will “save lives”.

    So most likely this congressional act has been a difficult thing to enforce so Biden does not mind giving it up as a pony show in return for something real. But this is just my guess.”

    So my guess is that Oliver’s AI went nuts and found someone’s comment in an opinion blog and not actually proven substantiated facts. AI cannot distinguish between the two which was Larry main point with that Jets to Ukraine article about nine months ago.

    • Frank stetson

      Got it. But on the article. Shouldn’t been submitted. Editors should have sent it back.

      Just substandard journalism.

  1. There you go again raking up stories about obscure democrats who are of small consequence in the larger American political…