A Set of Interesting Historical Parallels

-- by Robert M. Liu

(1) Doomsday predictions:

Recently, I heard a left-wing intellectual draw a parallel between Adolf Hitler and George W. Bush on a radio talk show.

The man had written a book entitled "Future Tense" or something like that to convince the public that the world is falling apart, because the re-elected Bush is like Hitler, because with a weak currency now America is about to trigger World War Three -- just like Germany after World War One was about to trigger World War Two.

The author predicts that the U.S. military will be defeated by the Iraqi terrorist insurgents and will be forced to withdraw from Iraq and that the war will lead to unsustainably high budget deficits causing the U.S. dollar to fall through the floor. That sounds excessively pessimistic.

Fortunately, the Free World is not dominated by such pessimistic views. It has witnessed much worse times in the past and survived. My first reaction to the author's comments was: What a bunch of left-wing demagoguery from such a well-educated man!

With gold trading above $430 per ounce, the U.S. dollar's weakness is obvious. But against other major currencies, it is still where it was many years ago. For instance, the British pound used to be worth two U.S. dollars; the Canadian dollar used to be worth one U.S. dollar. Today, these two currencies are still below their historical levels.

It is alarmist to say that the U.S. dollar will fall like the German mark after World War I. The U.S. economy now grows at an annual rate of about 4% and has created 2.3 million payroll jobs since August 2003. Household surveys indicate many Americans are working as self-employed persons. Their numbers are not included in the payrolls figures. This means that despite the heavy job losses in the manufacturing sector, the employment picture is not as bleak as the political left wants us to believe.

With steady GDP growth and job creation, U.S. federal tax revenues are on the rise. This would cause budget deficits to shrink, provided that discretionary spending is kept under control. In the meantime, the Federal Reserve is prepared to raise its benchmark short-term Fed Funds target rate to the extent necessary to pull excess liquidity out of the banking system, which in turn would curb U.S. dollar weakness in due course.

Now that the diversion of anti-war rhetoric from John Kerry and his left-wing allies has been reduced to a level where it is a nuisance rather than a threat to America's war effort in Iraq, the Bush Administration must be very focused on winning the remaining battles there. It is possible that the U.S. military will crush the Iraqi insurgency sooner than expected, thereby keeping the war's budgetary impact at a sustainable level.

(2) An ancient theory on historical parallels:

I disagree with the parallel drawn by the aforesaid author between Hitler and Bush, because I use a different theory as a basis for drawing historical parallels. I was born in Shanghai, China, a country with a 5000-year history of civilization and a mystic culture which has brought about some inexplicable ancient theories about human behavior and history.

One of such ancient theories goes: The winds and waters of the land revolve in 60-year cycles. In the Chinese language, the term "winds and waters" means "fortunes". Translated into modern political science lingo, this ancient Chinese saying suggests that the geopolitical conditions of the world revolve in 60-year cycles, inducing similar events and historical figures to re-emerge at 60- year intervals. Simply put, today's global geopolitical conditions are similar to those of 60 years ago.

Call it voodoo if you like. I just want to point out that the Chinese lunar calendar which was created thousands of years ago according to the moon's movements repeats itself in 60-year cycles and that certain similar events have indeed recurred in history at 60-year intervals. Below I will draw some parallels between certain historical events and figures that have emerged 60 years apart:

(3) Adolf Hitler and Osama bin Laden:

Hitler had a strong interest in art. He once tried to enter an art school to study the art of painting but was denied admission. He was recommended to enter an architecture school, which required proof that he had completed his secondary school education. As he could not provide such proof, he failed to enter the architecture school too. Still, he managed to teach himself how to draw houses and buildings.

After World War I ended in 1918, Hitler became a fanatic nationalist filled with hatred of the Western democracies which had defeated Germany. A well-educated man by the name of Dr. Joseph P. Goebbels later joined Hitler's fanatic nationalist organization and eventually became his propaganda minister. Goebbels was a believer in Communism with strong anti-capitalist leanings.

In the 1920s, as Adolf Hitler received considerable financial support from the rich industrial class, which was looking for him to fight the left-wing Communist movement in Germany, Hitler's gangsterism movement, the National Socialist German Workers Party (Nazi), quickly grew in strength.

Hitler seized political power in 1933 and began his war preparations. By 1938, he was ready to annex Czechoslovakia. In order to appease Hitler, Great Britain under Neville Chamberlain and France signed an agreement with Hitler at Munich, allowing him to annex Czechoslovakia's Sudetenland. Hitler annexed the entire Czechoslovakia. On September 1, 1939, German troops invaded Poland. WWII broke out, but it was in 1938 that WWII became inevitable.

In 1941, Hitler's fascist partner, Japan, attacked the U.S. naval base at Pearl Harbor, killing three thousand people, triggering U.S. participation in WWII.

Now, take a look at Osama bin Laden's profile: Bin Laden studied in an architecture school and has a good knowledge of building structures.

After the former Soviet Union invaded Afghanistan, a Muslim country, in 1979, Bin Laden became a fanatic nationalist filled with hatred of non-Muslim infidels. He went to Afghanistan to fight the Soviet Red Army, where he was joined by a well-educated man, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, who had a long anti-Western history and became Bin Laden's top lieutenant and propaganda chief.

In the 1980s, as Bin Laden received financial and material support from Saudi Arabia's rich guys as well as perhaps from the CIA when he was fighting the Soviets, his organization began to grow. However, by the early 1990s, it became known that Bin Laden's fanatic Islamic nationalist organization (a movement of gangsterism) was involved in anti-U.S. terrorist activities.

In 1998, Bin Laden declared war on the U.S. and his al Qaeda terror network bombed two U.S. embassies in Africa. In retrospect, that was actually the beginning of the global war between the Western world and Islamic terrorism.

If former president Bill Clinton had adopted a doctrine of preemption in 1998, toppling the Taliban regime and wiping out Bin Laden's terrorist training camps in Afghanistan, the course of history would have been different. Unfortunately, Clinton did not have the guts. He was weak and wrong. His feeble reaction failed to deter Bin Laden.

On September 11, 2001, a Hamburg-based al Qaeda terrorist cell attacked the U.S., killing three thousand innocent people. One of the planes hijacked by the terrorists crashed into the Pentagon, destroying the one corner that housed the U.S. Navy Command Center. Why did the U.S. Navy have to suffer an attack in 2001 as it did in 1941? Coincidence or fate? I have no explanation, but the interval between these two similar incidents was 60 years.

Toward the end of 1944, Hitler was hiding in Berlin's Chancellory bunker, directing his remnant armies, some of which existed only in his imagination, while Dr. Goebbels continued with his propaganda warfare, which was nothing more than bluffing.

Now, toward the end of 2004 ( i.e. 60 years after 1944), Bin Laden is hiding somewhere, pretending he still commands international terror networks capable of attacking any country of his choosing, suggesting that if the American people elect a government that adopts a Swedish-type policy, he would spare the United States. Meanwhile, his propaganda chief, Dr. Zawahiri, continues with his propaganda bluffing warfare.

Although a Bin Laden video-tape appeared on Arabic-language al Jazeera TV network shortly before the November 2, 2004, U.S. presidential election, indicating he is neither dead nor in poor health, Bin Laden clearly dare not produce such video-tapes on a more frequent basis, because to do so would leave traces, placing himself in danger of being caught.

I would like to draw a parallel between Adolf Hitler and Osama bin Laden, between Dr. Joseph P. Goebbels and Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri. Hence, I guess these two men's days may be numbered. It is possible that at some point in 2005 U.S. or allied forces may launch a strike along the Afghan- Pakistani border, during which, Bin Laden and Dr. Zawahiri are killed, or captured, or forced to kill themselves -- just like Hitler and Goebbels were forced to commit suicide in 1945.

(4) Joseph Stalin and Saddam Hussein:

The 1917 Bolshevik Revolution in Russia brought Lenin to power. But soon Joseph Stalin took control and began his bloody purges which continued throughout the 1920s and 1930s. On August 23, 1939, Joseph Stalin entered into the German-Soviet Non-Aggression Pact with Nazi Germany, which enabled Hitler to invade Poland on September 1, 1939, and then attack France and Britain in spring of 1940.

Saddam Hussein seized power in the late 1970s (i.e. 60 years after the Bolshevik Revolution in Russia) and began his bloody purges which continued throughout the 1980s and 1990s. His Baath Socialist Party was a Stalinist political organization. Besides, according to the CIA, Saddam Hussein had a non-aggression pact with al Qaeda, which enabled Bin Laden to attack U.S. and allied interests in Africa, the Middle East, and elsewhere.

I would like to draw a parallel between Joseph Stalin and Saddam Hussein. I believe the U.S.-led coalition in Iraq is facing a well-organized, Communist-type, Stalinist underground resistence movement full of tricks and wiles, such as disinformation designed to discredit the U.S.-led coalition and the interim Iraqi government, assassinations, kidnappings, intimidations, sabotages, ambushes, hit-and-run skirmishes, retreat-and-come-back gimmicks, infiltrations of the interim Iraqi government's various units etc. All these are classic tactics from Stalinist textbooks.

Now, having infiltrated the entire Iraqi society, the Baathist (Stalinist) insurgents from the former regime's military political commissar cadre, intelligence-security apparatus, and Fedayeen Militia (i.e. well-trained Baathist functionaries who participated in slaughtering hundreds of thousands of Iraqi civilians during Saddam Hussein's reign of terror) continue to control part of the Iraqi population through ideological indoctrination and terrorist intimidation.

In my judgement, Abu al-Zarqawi's terrorist group, which recently executed 49 unarmed Iraqi soldiers in a manner reminiscent of how the former regime murdered civilians, was in Saddam Hussein's employ all along. Zarqawi was Saddam Hussein's point man to coordinate terrorist activities with al Qaeda and was part of Saddam Hussein's terror-intelligence apparatus. When the Taliban regime fell, he fled Afghanistan and is now part of the Baathist terror insurgency movement.

The underground Baathists are hiding among the Iraqi people. They lurk in the dark, watching the interim Iraqi government's movements, and have apparently infiltrated some of the interim Iraqi government's units. In sharp contrast, the U.S.-led coalition and the interim Iraqi government are operating in the light.

Thus, the insurgents can see the operations of the U.S.-led coalition and the interim Iraqi government and understand where the interim Iraqi government's vulnerabilities are, whereas the U.S.-led coalition and the interim Iraqi government cannot see the insurgents. This is where the difficulty lies.

As the Communists used to say before they seized power in China, "The people are the sea; the underground Communists are like fish swimming in the water."

This saying is a reminder that to some extent, the underground Baathists depend on the assistance of local Iraqi people. Therefore, it would be reasonable to believe that local Iraqi people know something about the insurgents' activities -- they may very well hold Useful Intelligence Information about the insurgents' hideouts and weapons caches.

In order to expose the underground Baathists, the U.S.-led coalition and the interim Iraqi government need an effective intelligence gathering system that would enable local Iraqi informants to report all sorts of suspicious activities through informants' hotline numbers in exchange for financial rewards. Such a system should ensure that local informants receive secret code names, that their identities remain confidential, and that financial rewards will be transferred to informants' secret bank accounts.

Intelligence is a business which should be driven by money and market forces (i.e. supply and demand), as well as of course moral principles. But where human nature is concerned, monetary incentives are always more effective than moral teachings in encouraging informants to provide Useful Intelligence Information to the proper authorities.

Where there is demand, there is supply. The creation of a market for Useful Intelligence Information in Iraq would encourage local Iraqi people (including those close to the insurgents) to get into the informant business on a freelance basis. In a poor country like Iraq, people in need of money may voluntarily infiltrate the insurgency movement, get Useful Intelligence Information and sell it to a reliable buyer.

And if more and more Iraqi informants choose to meet the coalition's demand for Useful Intelligence Information in exchange for a few bucks by calling informants' hotline numbers, the fish (i.e. the underground Baathists) will find it difficult to swim in the water (i.e. the Iraqi people).

Given that the U.S.-led coalition has been able to repeatedly take out terrorist hideouts and safe houses in Fallujah in recent weeks, such a market for Useful Intelligence Information may have already been created in Iraq, and many Iraqis may have already got into the informant business.

(5) Winston Churchill and Tony Blair:

I have heard people in the media say that British prime minister Tony Blair is one of George W. Bush's staunchest allies because he wants to be the Winston Churchill of our time. So, why not draw a parallel between Blair and Britain's great wartime statesman of 60 years ago, Winston Churchill? I would. Unlike his critics, Tony Blair certainly knows which way history's wheel is turning -- as great statesmen always do.

If anything, Prime Minister Blair seems to have better luck in politics than Winston Churchill who lost the election in 1945. By all appearances, he is going to win his third term in 2005. But again, 60 years back from 2005, it was a Labor politician like Blair who won the election.

(6) General De Gaulle and French President Chirac:

In the 1940s when France was under the occupation of Nazi Germany, General De Gaulle was the leader of the French resistence, though he himself was not based in France and did not have considerable resources to contribute to the Anglo-American war efforts to liberate France. But once the allied forces landed in Normandy and liberated France, De Gaulle turned up in Paris as the heroic leader of all of France.

Nor did General De Gaulle offer much cooperation to President Roosevelt. That put British Prime Minister Churchill who had a close relationship with FDR in a difficult position. Consequently, both FDR and Churchill regarded this non-team-player De Gaulle as a big mischief-maker.

Now, let's take a look at French President Chirac. How much cooperation has Chirac offered to the Bush-Cheney Administration in the past few years when the U.S. and the U.K. were preparing to get rid of Saddam Hussein? Apart from a bunch of words -- highly critical words -- French President Chirac has offered very little help -- just like General De Gaulle of 60 years ago.

So, is there a historical parallel between De Gaulle and Chirac? Probably. De Gaulle resigned in 1946 as French president when domestic politics turned sour against him. What will happen to Chirac in the next two years? My guess is that Chirac may be out of power by 2007. But let's see.

(7) Harry Truman and George W. Bush:

Shortly after the September 11, 2001, tragedy, an idea occurred to me: If this is the Pearl Harbor of our time, then, there should be a historical parallel between the Roosevelt Administration and the Bush-Cheney Administration. In a private message to a friend of mine, I predicted that the Bush-Cheney Administration would be re-elected in 2004 just like the Roosevelt Administration was re-elected in 1944.

(Though it should be mentioned here that before Harry Truman became Roosevelt's vice president after the 1944 election, Henry A. Wallace was the VP. Truman proved to be a much tougher war-time leader.)

Now that Bush has been re-elected, should we draw a parallel between Franklin D. Roosevelt and George W. Bush? I wouldn't. I would draw a parallel between Harry Truman and George W. Bush. I would also draw a parallel between FDR and Dick Cheney. FDR of 60 years ago had a health problem. Cheney has a heart condition and may not run for president in 2008. Sixty years ago, FDR was a real tough cookie with grim facial expressions. Now, is there anybody who would call Cheney a soft cookie?

In 1945, Truman dropped two atomic bombs on Japan to finish World War II. I guess in 2005 George W. Bush may use some lethal weapons to clinch a decisive victory in the global war on terror, which in turn would stimulate U.S. consumer spending and economic growth, triggering a strong bull run in the stock market.

I would like to predict that the Dow Jones Industrial Average has much further to go, that is, upward, and that America will enjoy a long period of unprecedented economic prosperity from 2005 onward -- just as it enjoyed a long period of unprecedented prosperity after the end of World War II.

Better days are ahead of us. As I mentioned in a previous article (posted several months before the November 2, 2004, presidential election), I see Uncle Sam sit on the momentous spot of a historical cycle where America is poised to rise to its moment of glory -- just as it was in 1944. The re-election of George W. Bush may be a sign that some of my predictions will come true .

[November 12, 2004]