■"NATO Chief Worries About China," by Sandra I. Erwin and Harold Kennedy, National Defense, December 2005, p. 10.

Jim Jones, USMC 4-star head of European Command, is a smart guy, but he comes off a bit clueless in this piece (then again, you never know how they quote you, as I have learned time and time again Ö).

Still, this bit points out the strangely lopsided, actually asymmetric way that the Pentagon tends to argue regarding China. I mean, why do military generals think it's their job to talk about China's economic penetration of global markets as if it's something they can do ANYTHING about?

Jones says "It's beyond question that China is the most aggressive country economically in Africa."

Hmm, "aggressive" is an interesting choice of words for a general who's country just invaded the world's second-biggest oil reserve. So China is pushing hard for economic relations with sleazy dictatorships like Saudi Arab--uh, no, that would be the U.S. China has to make do with skimpy Sudan.

Oh well, when you're going to go sleazy, do it big time.

Jones oddly enough digs his own hole by quoting an African diplomat thusly: "We love the United States. You're always telling us what we should do. Now, China is giving us the things that you say we need."

Such as . . . . free scholarships, and lotsa aid and infrastructural investment.

Jones says, "It's something we have to worry about."

Hmmm.

Or maybe we just locate the labor where the problem is, general?

If this is the level of strategic thinking, then we're not even on the game board.