Major Issue and Need Change of Mindset

In the last issue [Ref.1], I mentioned that I always thought for a long time that the best approach to U.S.-China Relationship is for the U.S. and China as the world’s most important countries to work collaboratively to address the many critical problems facing the world, problems like poverty, diseases, unemployment, lack of education, disarmament, climate change, and nuclear arms race. Unfortunately, instead of living together to try to improve the world, the U.S. is creating confrontations and adopting a foreign policy toward China that is so antagonistic that can easily escalate into wars.

Let’s look at some of the key issues in the U.S.-China relationship, such as South China Sea, Taiwan, and Xinjiang.

South China Sea Issue

We will first consider the South China Sea issue. A major partner/ally of the U.S. in the South China Sea is the Philippines government. A brief history of the Philippines can be found in Ref. 2. Phillipines was a Spanish colony and takes its name from Philip II, who was king of Spain during the Spanish colonization of the islands in the 16th century, and was under Spanish rule for 333 years and then became a colony of the U.S. for another 48 years from 1899 to 1946 [Ref. 3].  The Philippines government actually has no legal jurisdiction on any of the contested areas in the South China Sea.

On the other hand, China claims sovereignty over the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands (the two major islands in the South China Sea) dating back at least several hundred years, and Chinese fishermen have also been fishing around these islands for also hundreds of years. See, e.g., Ref. 4 for Chinese exploration of the South China Sea areas, as well as many other areas of the world. These islands have been marked as part of China in various maps.  For example, even textbooks approved by the Indonesian government in the 1940s and 1950s recognized these islands as belonging to China.  In 1946 after WWII ended and Japan returned Taiwan to China, China sent four military ships, accompanied by an American naval ship, to Taiping Island (the largest island of the Spratly Islands, also known as Itu Aba Island) and several other islands in the South China Sea to take back the control of these islands from Japan.  The Philippines has also deliberately grounded (since 1999) a Philippine naval ship (actually a former U.S. naval vessel) called the Sierra Madre (on a “disputed” island between the Philappines and China in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. This tries to add credence to Philippine’s claim to these South China Sea islands.

The U.S. is also conducting joint military operation practices with countries such as Philippines, Japan, and Australia, all while openly criticizing the legal actions of land reclamation of islands under China’s sovereignty. Similar land reclamation activities have also been done by Vietnam.  The U.S. has also complained about China setting up an oil exploration rig near one of her islands, but the U.S. has never said anything negative about similar, earlier, and larger-scale actions by Vietnam who has been extracting oil from various oil rigs and making millions of dollars every year.  Furthermore, in 1956, North Vietnam had also declared that the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands are historically Chinese territory.

It is clear that the U.S. is not playing fairly in the so-called South China Sea dispute. Although the U.S. has no role to play in this area, it has for no good reason at all obviously thrown its support to so-called allies like the Philippines, Vietnam, and even Japan who caused so much pain and suffering to the people all over the world during WWII, especially including launching the unwarranted aerial attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941.

Taiwan Issue

Now we discuss the issue of Taiwan. In a sense, this issue is really trivial if you follow the history of China and the U.S.-relationship with respect to Taiwan, but in reality, because the U.S. is not acknowledging history and wants to rewrite history, this issue could trigger the next world war and another nuclear war.

Historically, Taiwan has been a part of China for many centuries and universally so recognized by the world. The island of Taiwan was ceded to Japan after Japan won the first Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895. After WWII ended, Japan was supposed to relinquish all territories in the Pacific which she has seized or occupied since the beginning of the first World War in 1914, and that all the territories Japan has stolen from the Chinese, such as Manchuria, Formosa (another name for Taiwan), and the Pescadores (a group of small islands just off the western coast ot Taiwan), shall be restored to the Republic of China. This agreement was clearly stated in several major international declarations.

The 1943 Cairo Declaration [5]:

In particular, it was so stated in the November 26, 1943 Cairo Declaration by President Franklin Roosevelt of the U.S., Prime Minister Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom, and Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China. The declaration developed ideas from the 1941 Atlantic Charter, which was issued by the Allies of WWII to set goals for the post-war order. The Cairo Declaration also stated that following the war, Manchuria, Taiwan, and the Pescadores Islands would be returned to China.

The 1945 Potsdam Declaration [6]:

On July 26, 1945, the Allied Powers represented by President Franklin Roosevelt of the U.S., Prime Minister Winston Churchill of the United Kingdom and Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek of the Republic of China issued the Potsdam Declaration that offered an unconditional surrender of Japan to WWII and reiterated the 1943 Cairo Declaration that all territories that Japan seized or occupied from the Chinese, including the island of Taiwan, should be returned to China.

The 1945 Japanese Instrument of Surrender [7]:

On September 2, 1945, representatives from the Japanese government and Allied forces aboard the USS Missouri in Tokyo Bay signed the Japanese Instrument of Surrender, which ended World War II and also reiterated the Potsdam Declaration that the island of Taiwan should be returned to China.

Xinjiang Issue

Now we discuss the issue of Xinjiang. For several years, the U.S. has made many negative remarks on Xinjiang with respect to China’s treatment of the Uyghurs minority and imposed many sanctions on Chinese products from Xinjiang. Recently the UN has released a report by the UN Special Rapporteur Professor Alena Douhan on 5/17/2024 [Ref. 9] that “states should lift sanctions against China and also take strong action to curb sanction over-compliance by businesses and other actors under their jurisdistion. She also emphasized that “decline in business activities and the significant loss of global markets either due to unilateral sanctions per se or due to over-compliance with such measures by foreign businesses and entities have led to job losses with consequent disruptions in social protection schemes, by disproportionatly affecting the most vulnerable, particularly in labour-intensive sectors, including women, older persons, and all those in informal employment.” The U.N. Special Rapporteur is warning that such unitateral sanctions can do irreparable harms to many people and companies.

There have been numerous commentaries by very knowledgeable foreigners [Refs 11-13] who have lived and worked in China for many years criticizing the U.S. sanctions against Xinjiang and who have voiced opinions similar to the comments of the UN Special Rapporteur Professor Alena Douhan. The UN Special Rappoteur Dunhan will present her Xinjiang report to the Human Rights Council of the UN in September 2024.

Conclusion and New Perspective on U.S.-China Relationship

The issues that we have discussed in this artilce, whether it is the South China Sea issue, the Taiwan issue, or the Xinjiang issue are also so much intertwined with the internal politics of the U.S. because both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have adopted in the past 5-10 years such discrminatory practices against China. It is time for them to see the world in a new light that such policies are wrong, and do great harms to the econimic and political benefits of the U.S. government and the American people.

If the U.S. government and the American people can acknowledge and make this major mental change, i.e., the U.S. does not always have to be the single dominant player in a unipolar world, but one of the major players in a multipolar world, then the U.S. can become a major player economically and politically. It can still become a major player in many markets, including the electric vehicle market. At the same time, it is also contributing to what the world needs from a global environmental perspective.

These issues are also so much intertwined with the internal politics of the U.S. because both the Democratic Party and the Republican Party have adopted in the last few years such discrminatory practices against China. It is time for them to see the world in a new light that such policies are wrong, and do great harms to the econimic and political benefits of the U.S. government and the American people. It is urgent that the American government and people can change this perspective on China, because the trajectory of the U.S.-China relationship leads directly to conflicts, wars, and more and more instabilities in all parts of the world, while the world needs to work together to address these problems. At the same time, the world is also facing more and more enviromental problems that without a concerted effort by the world working together to solve these problems, it may be too late to save the world from this sinking ship and save humanity.

If the U.S. government and the American people can acknowledge and make this major mental change, it can regain its important role as a vital player economically and politically. It can still become a major player in many markets, including the electric vehicle market. At the same time, it is also contributing to what the world needs from an environmental perspective.

—————————————–

References

[1] D. M. Tow, “A New Post on U.S.- China Relationship (June 2024): https://www.dontow.com/2024/06/a-new-post-on-u-s-china-relationship/

[2] See, e.g., “History of the Philippines,” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Philippines.

[3] See, e.g., “The Philippines: Facts and History,” https://www.thoughtco.com/the-philippines-facts-and-history-195655, including the Philiappino-American war that ended when Spain ceded the archipelago islands of the Philippines to the U.S. in the 1898 Treaty of Paris.

[4] The famous Chinese navigator Zheng He and his large fleet of ships sailed all over Asia and many other parts of the world between 1405 and 1433 during the Ming Dynasty (1368-1644), sailing through the South China Sea many times on their way to India, Africa, and other places. See, e.g., Louise Levathes, When China Ruled the Seas, Open Road Distribution, 2014.

[5] See, e.g., “The 1943 Cairo Declaration“: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1943_Cairo_Declaration.

[6] See, e.g., “The Potsdam Declaration”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration.

[7] See, e.g., “September 2, 1945 Japanese Instrument of Surrender”: https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/surrender-of-japan

[8] See, e.g., National Archives, Surrender of Japan (1945): https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/surrender-of-japan

[9] “China: UN expert says unilateral sanctions must not be used as foreign policy tool and means of economic coercion,” UN Special Rapporteur Professor Alena Douhan, May 17, 2024: https://www.ohchr.org/en/press-releases/2024/05/china-un-expert-says-unilateral-sanctions-must-not-be-used-foreign-policy. The Special Rapporteur will present her Xinjiang visit report to the Human Rights Council of the UN in September 2024.

[10] Numerous commentaries by very knowledgeable foreigners who have lived and worked in China for many years have criticized the U.S. sanctions against Xinjiang and who have voiced opinions similar to the comments of the UN Special Rapporteur Professor Alena Douhan. See, e.g., Refs 11-13.

[11] Jerry Grey and his wife Ann, who have lived and worked in China during the last 20 years, including visiting Xinjiang several times and who have cycled across China including Xinjiang: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-jlUy2DR8TQ.

[12] An interview by Cyrus Janssen with Fernando Munoz Bernal and Noel Lee who visited Xinjiang in 2021 in “What It’s Really Like to Travel to Xinjiang, China?”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t8qnr8DXZOc. Cyrus Janssen is an American businessman who has lived and worked in China for about 10 years, and has gone back and visited China several times. Fernando Munez Bernal from Columbia (sometimes under the heading “Alex from Reporterly Media & Travel” has also other video broadcasts of his travels in many parts of China.

[13] Daniel Dumbrill, a Canadian businessman who has lived in China for many years and visited Xinjiang in 2021 in “Xinjiang Genocide: An Except from the ‘Genocide’ Panel”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mH-0l_zToN4. He has also many video broadcasts of his visits to China, which you can find in the web.

Recently we learned of a recently approved strategy named Nuclear Employment Guidance [1] that focuses on using nuclear weapons on China, as well as Russia and North Korea. The proposed strategy is supposed to prepare a hightened sense of security against a potential nuclear attack by the three countries of China, Russia, and North Korea.. China has been brought to the table of nuclear threats to the U.S.

One cannot criticize China for building up its military capability, including developing its nuclear arsenal so that if neessary, it can defend itself against potential enemies. If you look at the actions of China with respect to its military deployment, it has been extremely fair. Independent of the critical comments of the U.S., China is not using its military strength to bully other countries. It is really stretching the point, although completely consistent with what the U.S. governmwnt has been doing in the last 5-10 years, in adopting an extremely hostile attitude targeting and criticizing China, adopting all kinds of economic sanctions against China, and always demonizing China. The image publicized by the U.S. government and populated in the U.S. and world media on China is unwarranted and mostly fabricated. It is so contrary to the experience of the thousands of foreigners who have lived and worked in China for many years [Ref. 2]. As a matter of fact, one wonders why China is not doing more to counter the hostility and attitude toward China.

It is time for the U.S. government and the American people to reorient its attitude and image of China. The Chinese government and people have made great improvements in China, basically eliminating adverse poverty in China, and at the same time it has also helped many other countries to improve their standards of living, e.g, via the Belt and Road Initiative. It is time for the U.S. government to recognize the multipolar world, instead of focusing on the unipoloar world. It is time for the U.S. to remove all economic sanctions against China. Not only that these sanctions do not work, they do not hold back China, they also keep the U.S. from getting its fare share of economic benefits. These sanctions are counter protective,, they hurt China, they hurt the U.S., and they also hurt the rest of the world.

It is time not only to abandon the Nuclear Employment Guidance strategy putting China as the main nuclear threat. It is time for the U.S. and the world to focus their energy to work on the many important problems facing the world. It is time to see in what ways China can work collaborately with the U.S. to solve the many complex problems facing the world.

Let’s focus our attention on another important problem facing the U.S. This is related to two American astronauts who are currently stranded in the International Space Station (ISS).

Important U.S. Space Program

The U.S. has a very important space program called Starliner with two astronaults (Butch Wilmore and Suni Williams) who are temporarily stranded in space. The 15-foot-wide Boeing-made space capsule Starliner was launched, atop an Atlas V rocket, on June 6, 2024. But the spaceship has encountered some problems, including three helium leaks, including one leak that was known before flight, and two new ones after the spaceship was launched. Besides these leaks, the crew also had to troubleshoot failed control thrusters, though the crew was able to successfully dock the Starliner spaceship with the International Space Station (ISS). Being a Boeing-made spaceship, the Starliner was thought to provide a new way to get crews to and from the ISS. Witmore and Williams’ mission was supposed to last a mere eight days when they would test out aspects of Starliner and see how it operates with a human crew in space. However, due to complications experienced with Starliner, the two astronaults have to stay in the ISS much longer (Ref. 3).

With the technical problems facing the Starliner, NASA has been thinking of finding another method to bring the two stranded astronaults home to earth. So one method is to use the SpaceX, which is a private spaceflight company founded by Elon Musk. But SpaceX also has experienced failures and problems. A Falcon 9 rocket to launch SpaceX exploded on the launch pad in 2016, and in July a Falcon 9 rocket experienced a liquid oxygen leak and deployed its satellites in the wrong orbit. However, SpaceX also has more than 300 successful Falcon 9 flights to its credit.

NASA says that there is no rush to bring Wilmore and Williams home. The current plan is to launch another SpaceX to the ISS and bring Witmore and Williams home to earth. This is currrently scheduled for February 2025.

A Potential U.S.-China Collaborated Space Venture

Just for contingency planning, if the above plan to bring home Wilmore and Williams runs into more problems in the future, since China also has a space program (Tiangong space station) which is planning a national record 100 orbital launches in 2024. (Refs. 4 and 5). It would be a great collaborative effort for the U.S. and China to jointly launch a spaceship to the ISS to bring home the two U.S. astronauts Butch Whilmore and Suni Williams. Although China has many tasks for its space program (that is why it is planning about a 100 space launches in the next year or so), it should be a great effort for the U.S. and China to collaborrate on this highly valuable humanitarian effort. Who knows what could follow, and the icy relationship between the U.S. and China could thaw and give rise to more fruitful joint ventures to improve the world.

References

[1] David E. Sanger, “Biden Approved Secret Nuclear Strategy Refocusing on Chinese Threat,” the New York Times, 8/20/2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/20/us/politics/biden-nuclear-china-russia.html.

[2] See, video broadcasts by various foreigners who have lived and worked in China for many years, e.g., from American Cyrus Jannsen, Australian/British Jerry Grey, Columbian Fernando Munez Bernal, and many others. Their video broadcasts on China can easily be found in the web.

[3] See, e.g., Marcia Dunn, “Who are the two NASA astronauts stranded at the Intenational Space Station?”, https://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/national-international/who-are-the-two-nasa-astronauts-stranded-at-the-international-space-station/3370766/?os=..&ref=app#:~:text=The%20two%20astronauts%20who%20will%20spend%20extra%20time,and%20when%20%E2%80%94%20they%20would%20return%20to%20Earth.

[4] Astronauts Stranded in Space: How They’ll Be Rescued in 2025″, CNET, Sept. 5, 2024: https://www.cnet.com/science/astronauts-stranded-in-space-how-theyll-be-rescued-in-2025/.

[5] Andrew Jones, Space News, “China’s 2024 space plans include 100 launches and moon sample return mission,” February 26, 2024: https://spacenews.com/chinas-2024-space-plans-include-100-launches-and-moon-sample-return-mission/.

Almost a year ago on September 16, 2023, I suffered a stroke affecting my left leg and left arm. Although it was not from a major stroke, it did affect my mobility and my stability, affecting the distance I could walk, the amount of time I could spend doing Taiji, and the time to take a break before I can continue. I want to give an update on the progress in the recovering process, especailly during the last 3 months. Let me summarize the results so far.

Current Situation

• After about 6 months of physical therapy (from Sept 2023 to beginning of March 2024) at the Riverview Medical Center in Red Bank, it was decided to take a break from the physical therapy treatment to see how my body would perform
• I also had acupuncture treatment by a local acupuncturist for about two months in this 6 month period.  Usually the acupuncture treatment should commence within 20 days of the stroke.  Since my acupunctural treatment didn’t begin until more than a month after my stroke, we were not expecting a lot of progress from this treatment.
• After the physical therapy (PT) ended in March 2024, I did continue to do some of the  PT exercises at home, but not extensively until around June/July 2024.
• Because I have Sleep Apnea, which occasinally causes me to stop breathing temporarily during my sleep. To solve this problem I have to use a CPAP (Continuous Positive Airway Pressure) machine with a mask to push air into my lungs during my sleep. About 10 years ago, doctors invented a method to replace the CPAP machine to automatically move air into a patient’s lungs. Inspire Surgery inserts a small battery in the patient’s chest to provide power to operate automatically a very tiny hook inserted in the patient’s throat area to make the patient’s tongue to open up to allow air to go down the passage way into the lungs. On 6/27/2024, I had this Inspire Surgery done by the pulmonologist Dr. Vishaal Patel.
• To allow time for my body to recover from this Inspire Surgery, the results of my Inspire Surgery was activated on 8/7/2024 by my regular pulmonologist Dr. Adrian Pristas. So now this automatic device has been implemented and activated in my body.  I will wait till the next couple of months to see whether the Inspire device in my body will operate efficiently and as designed.  I plan to update this information in my next update in Dec. 2024.

In the meantime, I want to give an update on an assessment of the results of my Physical Therapy (PT) exercises (such as walking on threadmills, various stretching exercises) I have been doing at home in the last couple of months.

Status Update

1. The PT exercises on the threadmill have definitely increased my stamina so that I can maintain the threadmill exercises for up to 30 minutes at a time.  However, I still drag my left foot on the ground, especially after I get a little tired.  I have to constantly remind me to raise my left foot (especially the front part of my left foot) to be above the ground. I should keep this in mind even if I need to slow down the exercise.
2. To increase my bending and stretching, I need to do more stretching of raising my left or right foot while lying on the floor on my tummy and raising the left foot or right foot backward and up toward the front.
3. I need to do more of all kinds of stretching to make me more flexible.
4. I need to do more pushups to restore some of the strengths that I have lost.
5. I need to do more of the Taiji exercises to restore my flexibility, my stability, and my stamina.

I don’t know how much of my previous flexibility, stability, strengths, and stamina I can restore in the next 6-12 months, but I am looking forward to making progress.

In the last several months I have also been doing Sleep Therapy (ST) exercises once a week to increase my memory. ST provides exercises that try to associate various other entities (e.g., activities, names of projects or people that may be related to the current names). Sometimes, I have the tendency of temporarily forgetting the names of people I see and whose names I used to know. Such loss of memory may be just due to age. We will take a pause from my ST after I return from the Asia trip.

It also ended my career as a Taiji teacher, since it was not fair to my students not being able to do the techniques I was teaching. However, I also know that the best ways to recover from this fallback is to make use of Taiji to gradually built back my stamina and to recover the Taiji techniques I have forgotten or unable to perform.

I am also to undergo Inspire surgery on 6/27/2024 to replace the CPAP (Continuous Positive Airway Pressure) machine I use when I go to bed to help me breathe and to minimize the possibility of short durations of stop breathing. The Inspire surgery also places a placemaker in my chest, and it does minor surgery in the throat to allow the lifting of my tongue to allow air to pass down the throat down to the lungs.  The placemaker has a small battery that needs to be replaced every 10 years, requiring a minor surgery.

This article marks the beginning of this come back. I do not know how well I can recover. I should have a better idea of this reovery process about a year from now.

In the meantime, let me jog down my current limitations. They will serve as metrics to help me guage my recovery:

• When I walk, my left leg has a tendancy to scrape the floor.  I need to lift that left leg higher so that my left leg is completely off the floor when I walk.
• Similarly, I need to bring my right leg up higher to take a step forward.  So that in each step I am bringing my body upward and forward so that each step involves an upward and forward motion.
• I need to do this on every step until I want to end this process.

I am sure that I will be adding more steps in this table as I proceed with the recovery process.

This talk “Quantum Physics: Path from Mysteries to Reality?” that I gave on 6/13/2024 at the Holmdel Library in Holmdel, New Jersey at the former Bell Labs building (new called Bell Works) can be considered as part of that celebration marking the contributions of Quantum Physics to the world. Bell Labs was the site where several great discoveries related to Quantum Physics were discovered in the 20th century that helped to revolutionize the world.

The Powerpoint viewgraphs shown at this talk is the content of this article.

The flyer for the 6/13/2024 Holmdel Library seminar is shown below:

An earlier version of this talk was given by me on 12/8/2022 at the INK Fellowship. For a while it was sometimes mentioned that the 12/8/2022 talk was not recorded. It was recorded, but the recording was not widely presented until now. This recording can be summarized by various comments in the most recent 6/13/2024 talk. The 12/8/2022 recording is presented now mostly for historical purposes.

Instead of living together to try to improve the world, why would the U.S. try to create confrontations and adopt a foreign policy toward China that is so antagonistic that can easily escalate into wars? If U.S. and China work together to address the world’s major problems, then the U.S. would not be able to control the world and dictate their so-called rule-based order for the world to follow. Instead of creating a world with multi-modality, the U.S. wants to create a single modality world with the U.S. in the center and in control of that modality.  This answers a lot of questions, such as the U.S.’s position toward Taiwan, and why the U.S. wants to turn back the clock more than half a century.  It also answers the question why the U.S. government is adopting such a demonic eye toward its American citizens who are Chinese Americans who also want the best for the U.S. 

There is no reason for the U.S. to turn back its position that Taiwan has been part of China for several hundred years. There is no reason to believe a country like Japan who has looked upon Taiwan with a luscious eye to be part of Japan, and who has tried to keep others to think that way. Is the U.S.’s words worth anything?

Part of the U.S. strategy toward China is to use its allies (e.g., Philippino troops or Japanese or other troops) to fight its proxy wars against China. The Philippines has a deliberately grounded (since 1999) a Philippine naval ship (actually a former U.S. naval vessel) called the Sierra Madre (on a disputed island between the Philappines and China in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. However, most of the press coverage on incidents like these are very much pro-Western (or pro-U.S.); so it is difficult to find an objective analysis of incidents like this.

Similarly the U.S. has imposed many large sanctions against Xinjiang products, even though the U.N. Special Rapporteur Alena Douhan) has recently (5/17/2024) stated that “states should lift sanctions against China and also take strong action to curb sanction over-compliance by businesses and other actors under their jurisdistion. She also emphasized that “decline in business activities and the significant loss of global markets either due to unilateral sanctions per se or due to over-compliance with such measures by foreign businesses and entities have led to job losses with consequent disruptions in social protection schemes, by disproportionatly affecting the most vulnerable, particularly in labour-intensive sectors, including women, older persons, and all those in informal employment.” The U.N. Special Rapporteur is warning that such unitateral sanctions can do irreparable harms to many people and companies.

The U.S. is also imposing large tariffs on electric vehicles from China, although the details are still being worked out. See, e.g., “A US-China EV trade war threatens Biden’s clean-car agenda” May 14, 2024 (https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-china-ev-trade-war-threatens-bidens-clean-car-agenda-2024-05-14/), or “Biden Calls Chinese Electric Vehicles a Security Threat” (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/29/us/politics/biden-chinese-electric-vehicles.html). The real reason behind these actions by the U.S. is because the Chinese-made electric vehicles are so much less expansive than U.S. made electric vehicles, even though the reason given by the U.S. is that the China-made electric vehicles pose a security threat to the U.S. The U.S. is not concerned about climate-change impacts from non-electric vehicles and the impacts of the higher costs on the American economy.

Again because the U.S.’s position so much dominates the press coverage around the world, it is difficult for others to get a fair and objective coverage of their situation. We want to urge the importance of the U.S.’s to adopt a valid and impartial assessment of its policies because it has large implications affecting people all over the world.

1. Mechanical Laws of Motion
2. Law of Gravitation
3. Thermodynamics
4. Electrodynamics (or Theory of Electricity and Magnetism)
5. Theory of Relativity (both Special Theory and General Theory)
6. Theory of the Nucleus and the Atoms
7. Quantum Physics
8. Quantum Electrodynamics (QED)
9. Discovery of the Weak Force and Formulation of the Electroweak Force
10. Modern Building Blocks of Matter
11. Standard Model of Particle Physics
12. Bell’s Theorem and Experimental Confirmation of Quantum Physics

However, as pointed out in that Dec. 2023 article, we also wrote ”that in spite of all the discoveries in the last half century, there are still several major mysteries”:

• Dark matter: Dark matter is matter in our universe which cannot be seen, because they don’t interact electromagnetically, and they don’t interact through the strong force and maybe also through the weak force, but they interact through the gravitational force. Ordinary matter make up only about 5% of the universe, but dark matter consist of about 27%.
• Dark energy: Dark energy is a theoretical repulsive force that counteracts gravity and causes the universe to expand at an accelerating rate, and it makes up 68% of our universe.
• Matter-antimatter asymmetry: Almost all of the matter we see in the universe is made up of matter, but matter and antimatter should have been created in equal amounts when the original universe is made up of energy.

Therefore, major discoveries are waiting to be discovered to answer these questions. Perhaps, this means that the greatest discoveries may still be waiting to be discovered.
We have no illusion that these discoveries will be easy to be discovered. Furthermore, even with the support of AI, it may not be discovered without creative thinkers and deep knowledge of what transpired in the minds of the great physicists during the last several hundreds of years. Nevertheless, we believe that AI could help us in solving some of the mysteries facing us, perhaps even in the three mysteries just mentioned.

We believe that this faith is not just based on wishful thinking, but it is based on what went on with respect to some of the things that happened related to some of the great discoveries in the last 75 years. This was pointed out in the earlier article “Some Thoughts on AI and Frontiers of Science” (posted in the June 2023 issue of this website), which we will repeat here to serve as lead ins to the current discusssion of AI and unsolved puzzles of physics.

Examples of Possible Leads as Input to AI-Enabled Computers: We probably can discuss for hours on the definition of creativity and wouldn’t be able to come to agreement on its definition and whether computers can exhibit that. However, let’s not talk in abstract, and actually look at some of the discoveries in the last 50-100 years that were considered to be major discoveries. In particular, consider the field of high energy physics (or elementary particle physics). In my opinion, some of those discoveries could have come from computers with suitable questions or inputs from a knowledgeable researcher or a team of knowledgeable researchers, then with the help of AI-capable computer(s), some leads suggested to the computer could enable the computer and/or researcher(s) to make the new discovery. Here are a few examples:

• For the asymptotic freedom theory (leading to Quantum Chromodynamics or QCD, the current theory of strong interactions of quarks and gluons) of Yang-Mills gauge theory from the work of Politzer, and Gross and Wilczek in 1972-1973 that resulted in their 2004 Nobel Prize in Physics, it turned out that two-three years earlier Anthony Zee investigated several theories for this asymptotic freedom property. Unfortunately for him, one of the few theories that he didn’t investigate was Yang-Mills gauge theory. If he did, he probably would have discovered it. So if someone in 1970-1971 had fed this information to an AI-enabled computer and asked the computer the question what other theories they could have investigated for this property, the computer might have suggested Yang-Mills gauge theory for investigation and then the researcher would have discovered it.
• Even parity violation of Lee and Yang for their 1956 work with respect to weak interactions. If someone had fed the information to a smart computer that there were strong experimental data to support conservation of parity in strong and electromagnetic interactions, and had asked a smart computer to search for evidence of conservation of parity in weak interactions, the computer would have answered that there was not much evidence, and they could have proposed non-conservation of parity in weak interactions before Lee and Yang, which was what Lee and Yang did.
• Even on the question of the expansion of the universe originally discovered by Hubble in the 1920s (Hubble didn’t get the Nobel Prize in Physics because at that time astronomy was not considered part of physics) and the more recent accelerated expansion discovery of the universe by Perlmutter/Schmidt/Riess (Nobel Prize in Physics in 2011), a computer with the right inputs and the right questions could have discovered or led to discover that.
• Three-degree cosmic background radiation that got Penzias and Wilson of Bell Labs their 1978 Nobel Prize in Physics for their work in the mid-1960s could have been discovered by a smart computer with the right questions and inputs, instead of the accidental discovery of Penzias and Wilson (at first, they were uncertain what they discovered), even though at that time a group at Princeton was looking for that kind of astrological evidence). But they didn’t have smart computers with AI in the early-mid 1960s. If there were, more groups might have looked into this area of research around the time of discovery of Penzias and Wilson.

This is not taking away any credit from the people who achieved these past achievements, because they deserve all the credits that they received.

I think if we work on it, we could come up with many other new ideas or discoveries not only in physics, but also in other fields, that could have been made or led researchers to by computers with AI, as long as appropriate questions and relevant data are input to the AI-enabled computers. Of course, this may be an iterative process, meaning there could be going back and forth with the AI-enabled computers before a meaningful new idea or discovery will emerge, or before a new idea that could lead to a new discovery will emerge.

We have actually tried this approach with the basic version of ChatGPT (https://chat.openai.com/) by asking the question why there is so much matter over anti-matter in our current observed universe. However, the current responses are not much meaningful and far from leading us to more worthwhile research areas to pursue further research.

We welcome comments from our readers. Perhaps we are too naive to believe that such a simple approach could lead to fruitful research. Perhaps we need to feed the AI-enabled computers with more meaningful questions to probe so that the AI-enabled computers can come up with more meaningful ideas that can lead us to do more meaningful research and lead to new discoveries.

This caused my friend to ask “are there some simple techniques that could have helped an elderly person to respond in an unexpected emergency situation similar to what her mom encountered several years ago.

This led me to write the following article “Some simple techniques to remember and to respond in times of emergencies.”

The most talked about martial arts stance is the “horse stance,” as shown in the first photo below.  However. In terms of stability, that is not necessarily the most important stance, which is the stance as shown in the second picture below (the Chinese characters “Taiji Wild Horse Shakes Its Mane” refers to the name of that stance):

To go from the first photo (the horse stance) to the 2nd photo (wild horse shakes its mane), you make the following shifts:

1. You shift from looking at the front by looking at your left
2. You move your left foot over to your left from your right foot by about half-a-shoulder to a whole-shoulder-width
3. Your left foot from the knee down should be straight
4. Your right foot should be about one step behind your left foot with your weight evenly distributed between your right foot and your left foot
5. Your body should be upright mostly over your left foot

Note that with this stance, your body weight is supported by both feet.  With your two feet separated by about a shoulder width, you are able to withstand a minor push to try to get you off balance or cause you to fall.  Furthermore, both of your hands can be used to block or defend yourself, or to use them to grab or hold on something, or even to counter attack if the occasion warrants it.

A similar stance (a mirror image of the second photo above) can also be used by looking to your right, instead of looking at your left.  Then instead of having your left leg vertical from the left knee downward, you have your right leg vertical from your right knee downward.

The above bodily arrangement is typical of Taiji in the sense that you don’t place your two feet along the same straight line, but your two feet are separated by a shoulder width which provides stability from being pushed.  Your bodily weight is firmly supported by your two feet.  Your hands are free to be used to grab hold of something, to defend yourself, or even to counterattack. 

I think with such simple adjustments, an elderly person, as well as anyone else, can be mentally prepared to handle similar unexpected emergency situation.  Of course, the person has to be properly trained so that when such an emergency occurs, the response should be automatic, instead of needing to remember what you might have learned in the past, thus leading to panicking.

Of course, due to her senior age and no previous experience or training, it is possible that such a technique might not have worked for my friend’s mom.  But for someone younger and with training in Taiji, the above technique could have avoided that terrible incident.

I have raised this comment/question for a long time.  It finally dawned on me why it has not happened.  The reason is because the U.S. wants a unipolar world with the U.S. being the center of that unipolar world, and the U.S. sees that China is the main challenger keeping the world from changing from a unipolar world to a multipolar world.  Instead of looking at the world to see what is good for the world, the U.S. sees what is good for the U.S. even it is not achievable.

Now with this new perspective, we can understand why the U.S. is adopting that policy, i.e., a policy that is not good for the world.  Instead of living together to try to improve the world, why would the U.S. try to create confrontations and adopt a foreign policy toward China that is so antagonistic that can easily escalate into wars? If U.S. and China work together to address the world’s major problems, then the U.S. would not be able to control the world and dictate their so-called rule-based order for the world to follow. Instead of creating a world with multi-modality, the U.S. wants to create a single modality world with the U.S. in the center and in control of that modality.  

This answers a lot of questions, such as the U.S.’s position toward Taiwan, and why the U.S. wants to turn back the clock more than half a century.  It also answers the question why the U.S. government is adopting such a demonic eye toward its American citizens who are Chinese Americans who also want the best for the U.S.  It also helps to understand the recent U.S. government’s policy toward companies like TikTok.

In future issues of this website, we will elaborate on the consequences of this attitude of the U.S., and why that policy should change.

This chapter will discuss several important “issues” between the U.S. and China.  We will recall and analyze history and see what history has to say about these issues.

The first issue is Taiwan:  Every one knows that Taiwan has been a province of China.  After China was defeated by Japan in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895), China, besides being required to pay to Japan an extremely large indemnity to Japan, also ceded Taiwan to Japan.  After WWII ended with the defeat of Japan, all parties agreed that Japan should give up the territories stolen from China (including Taiwan) and returned them to China.  This was consistent with the 1943 Cairo Declaration [1], the 1945 Potsdam Declaration [2], and the September 2,1945 Japanese Instrument of Surrender [3].  After recalling this part of history regarding Taiwan, the issue of Taiwan should be closed, and Taiwan should be part of China.

Another issue is Diaoyu Islands (or Senkaku Islands):  Most of the people of the world probably have never heard of these islands.  The Diaoyu Islands are a small set of unoccupied islands off the northern part of Taiwan in the East China Sea.  They have been part of China (part of Taiwan) for several hundred years (dating back to as early as 1403).  Since near the end of the 19^th century, Japan has also claimed that these islands are part of the Ryukyu Islands (or Okinawa), as part of Japan’s attempt to steal the Diaoyu Islands from Taiwan.  More information on the background history of the Diaoyu Islands can be found in Chapter 19 “Experiencing the Worldwide Diaoyu Islands Students Movement” and the details will not be repeated here. 

The reason that the Diaoyu Islands is often cited as an issue involving also the U.S. is because the U.S. claims that the U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty should also be applicable to the Diaoyu Islands even though the official position of the U.S. government is that the territorial sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands is still to be determined, thus  showing that these two positions [(1) that the Diaoyu Islands should be covered under the U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty, and (2) the territorial sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands is still to be determined] are internally inconsistent. Therefore, it is not necessary for us to discuss again this issue besides pointing to Chapter 19 for the details.  Thus, after recalling history regarding the Diaoyu Islands, the issue of the Diaoyu Islands should also be closed, and the Diaoyu Islands should be part of China, and the U.S. has no justification to claim that the U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty should be applicable to the Diaoyu Islands.

Another issue is the dispute over the South China Sea Islands:  Although one may often hear claims that China is doing a lot of illegal things in the South China Sea (in particular, the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands) such as stealing territories belonging to other countries, or building artificial islands, or blocking traffic over the international sea or air in the South China Sea area.  Often these people will bring in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to make accusations against China.

In particular, several years ago (around 2016), Philippines was involved in a case with the Arbitral Tribunal (AT) declaring that all of the islands in the Paracel or the Spratly area are rocks, and not islands that can sustain human habitation or economic life of their own under UNCLOS.  Although the Arbitral Tribunal (AT) is also under UNCLOS, it is clearly stated in UNCLOS that the AT should not rule in cases where the parties have territorial sovereignty/historical rights.  For China since historically China does own the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands [see, e.g., Ref. 4 and Ref. 5 for that part of history], from the very beginning, China declared in writing that it would not participate and not abide by the decision of the AT because this dispute involves territorial sovereignty/historical rights, which should not be arbitrated under the Arbitral Tribunal.

Furthermore, Taiping Island (the largest island of the Spratly Islands) is 0.9 mile in length and ¼ mile in width with an area of 110 acres and has a hospital and an airport.  It has fresh water, can grow vegetables, can support livestock, as well as the habitation of people permanently living there.  This is contrary to Philippines’ claim that these islands cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own.

The U.S. has often stated that China’s activities in the South China Sea have violated UNCLOS which was signed in 1994.  One of the accusations is that China has built landfills on some of these islands.  First of all, UNCLOS does not forbid building various facilities, including docks and airstrips, on the islands that a country has sovereignty over if those islands are not always submerged under water all the time.  Of course, we have all heard of the famous Palm Islands in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, which involve massive landfills to build the large islands with residential, business, and entertainment skyscrapers.  But has the U.S., or anyone else, made protests on what Dubai has done?

Once again, history shows us that there is a lot of purposedly spread misinformation (another example of abuse of world power) creating a false image of China.  Thus, after recalling and analyzing history, the issue of the South China Sea Islands is also closed, and China is not doing anything illegal.

Recent talk on a rising power like China will inevitably have a conflict with the established power like the U.S.: Recently there is some talk whether a rising power like China will inevitably have a conflict with the established power like the U.S. that will lead to war.  We and others have analyzed this issue and the conclusion is a definite no. [6].  Interested readers can read the two articles mentioned in [6] for more details.  Basically the story is between Athens, a then rising power, and Sparta, the then established power.  Initially there might not have been a serious conflict between Athens and Sparta. But the conflict became serious when Athens became an imperial power with influence over many cities along both sides of the Aegean Sea. Furthermore, in the case of China and the U.S., the conflict is not due to China’s economic rise, but it is due’s to the U.S.’s economic decline. The U.S. should then take actions to correct its own economic decline, and should not blame China for something due to their own shortcoming.

In his book, Allison discussed how order was decided, or how does one decide whether one can keep your adversary in line. A rule that is often used is a “Two-Power Standard” announced in 1889 as the general method to maintain Britain’s naval primacy, that is to keep Britain on the top of the order hierarchy is to maintain a fleet of battleships equal to the numbers deployed by its next two competitors combined since naval supremacy was key to the battlefield in the past, including the 19th century and first part of the 20th century. This was a rule used by the British to ensure that the British had enough military power to help to enforce its rule-based order. This was used by Winston Churchill in his various positions as the British Secretary of state for War, Secretary of State for the Colonies, Prime Minister, as well as other positions. Similarly, it was also used by other countries in planning for conflicts or wars with potential adversaries.

In the imperialistic world, it was your military might that settled conflicts. The question of fairness was of secondary importance. In our current world with nuclear powers that can lead to the destruction of the whole world and end civilization as the world knows, we should not rely on the “Two-Power Standard” to keep your potential rival in its place and to maintain your rule-based order.

Why does the U.S. government continue to carry on a mass media campaign to demonize China and create a phobia in the public against China and the Chinese? It is especially important to ask this question when the U.S. and China are the two most important economic and political powers in the world, and as we have previously mentioned, it is crucially important for the U.S. and China to work cooperatively to address the many difficult global problems. 

There are many differences between U.S. and China, e.g., their histories, how the governments operate, the way freedom and people’s wishes are expressed and reflected in the government, how government policies are formed and carried out, the country’s strategic alliances with other countries, the conduct of foreign policies and treatment of other governments and countries. These differences could easily lead to conflicts between the U.S. government and the Chinese government, especially when the differences lead to different political orientations. However, such differences should not lead to the two countries getting to diametrically opposite opposing corners. For example, China’s Bell and Road Initiative (BRI) could help a democratic government that is based on free elections and also an autocratic government whose family basically controls the whole country. It could help to improve the livelihood of the people of both countries, and therefore, it should not lead to their foreign policies on China that are diametrically opposite to each other.

Why is the relationship between U.S. and China keep on getting more antagonistic when a better relationship can benefit the American people, the Chinese people, as well as the other people of the world? Why is that relationship moving toward more confrontations and even war?

To understand the answer to that question, one needs to take an unbiased assessment of the history of the U.S. and especially what it has done in its foreign policy toward other countries in the last 75 years, since the end of WWII.

The U.S. government always presents itself as a government that is democratic, respects human rights, treats other countries with peaceful intention, and helps to solve world problems. That is the image that the U.S. government and the U.S. mass media depict itself. In reality, the U.S. government doesn’t act that way. It is not a democratic government working for the benefits of all its people; it treats its citizens differently depending on race, sex, place of origin, wealth, social and political status, etc.; it involves in many wars and instigates numerous regime changes in many countries.

Just look at how the government of the U.S. behaves when former President Donald Trump has been charged in four criminal cases, including 44 federal charges and 47 state charges, all of them felonies.  In Washington, D.C., he faces four felony counts for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. In Georgia, he faces 13 felony counts for his election interference in that state. In New York, he faces 34 felony counts in connection with hush money payments to a porn star. And in Florida, he faces 40 felony counts for hoarding classified documents after he left office and impeding the government’s efforts to retrieve them. [7] Numerous mass shootings and killings of innocent people, including children, occur frequently in the U.S., to the tune of 686 mass shootings incidents in 2021. [8]  U.S. Americans’ trust in their government has consistently fallen in the past 20 years and now fewer than two-in-ten Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right. [9] At the same time when the U.S. government has consistently trying to demonize China, and President Biden has as recently as November 2023 called President Xi Jingping a dictator. [10]

Furthermore, in many respects the U.S. government behaves contrary to what a democratic government is supposed to behave.  Not only that it often doesn’t get involved in solving various world problems. It sometimes drops out of critical agreements (e.g., Paris Agreement on Climate Change) and criticizes or even sabotages other countries’ contributions.”  The U.S. really needs to look inward at itself to have a real assessment of its government, its political leaders, and its actions and attitudes toward other countries and people.  Hopefully after such as assessment, the U.S. would look at the world differently and treat other countries and people differently and with more respect.

The conclusion is that the U.S. is not the same as what the U.S. government depicts itself.  I will now discuss the real conflict between the U.S. and China, and why that relationship is getting worse with more confrontations and possibly leading to war. 

The Real Conflict Between U.S. and China:  In the last 40+ years, China has transformed itself from a very poor and backward country into the world’s second largest economy, lifted most of its huge population out of poverty, became basically the factory of the world, became the world’s third largest nuclear power, and has the world’s second strongest military, and can compete with the best of the world in science, engineering, bio-medicine, space explorations, and new patents, as well as gaining influences in world affairs. What is best for the world is for China and the U.S. to work cooperatively to address and solve the many difficult problems facing humanity. If the world’s two richest economies and the most powerful countries cannot work cooperatively, at least we hope that they don’t try to sabotage each other. Unfortunately, it seems that one country, the U.S., has been working hard to do just that.

Why? Instead of living together to try to improve the world, why would the U.S. try to create confrontations that can escalate into wars? If U.S. and China work together to address the world’s problems, then the U.S. would not be able to control the world and dictate their so-called rule-based order for the world to follow. Instead of creating a world with multi-modality, the U.S. wants to create a single modality world with the U.S. in the center and in control of that modality.

This may be surprising to many people, but it is consistent with U.S. policy in how it has been treating the rest of the world in the past century. Unlike the image that the U.S. government has been presenting to the world that it is a democratic and benevolent country trying to do the best for all the people of the world, unfortunately, that image has been repeatedly shown to be false, as illustrated by the large number of regime change activities engaged by the U.S. [11] [12] [13]

Some of the activities of the U.S. government have been so evil that it is almost unimaginable. An example of that is what the U.S. did in the Marshall Islands in the Pacific, using island natives as guinea pigs to see the effects of nuclear radiations. [14]

Unfortunately, we have to face reality because the U.S. is not willing to give up its power to dominate the world, the U.S. is willing to create conflicts with China, even leading to a war between the world’s two most powerful military powers, possibly leading to a world war with the use of nuclear weapons. This is the essence of the real conflict between the U.S. and China.

In future releases of this website, we will discuss in more details how the world can address this issue. An important component must have the U.S seriously look inward at herself and figure out how it can improve herself, including its government structure and whether its government leaders are working to improve the welfare of the American people, or improve their own livelihoods or stay in power, and whether the U.S. treats other  countries and people fairly and with respect.  Another major component is to mobilize the pro-peace/anti-war movements of the world into a unified and formidable force.

References for Chapter 36

[1]    See, e.g., “The 1943 Cairo Declaration”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1943_Cairo_Declaration.

[2]    See, e.g., “Potsdam Declaration”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potsdam_Declaration.

[3] See, e.g., “National Archives: Surrender of Japan (1945)”: https://www.aarchives.gov/milestone-documents/surrender-of-japan.

[4]    For the history of the South China Sea islands like the Paracel Islands (西沙群島) and Spratly Islands (南沙群島), please read Chapter 34 “South China Sea Dispute:  Abuse of World Power,” the contents of that chapter was also published by the author in China-US Focus, September 15, 2016.  The link for the English version is: http://www.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/south-china-sea-dispute-abuse-of-world-power/.  The link for the Chinese version is: http://cn.chinausfocus.com/foreign-policy/20160915/8681.html

[5]   “Some Thoughts on South China Sea Dispute”:  https://www.dontow.com/2015/12/some-thoughts-on-south-china-sea-dispute/.

[6] Recently there is some talk whether a rising power like China will inevitably have a conflict with the established power like the U.S. that will lead to war.  Graham Allison, Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?, Mariner Books, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston-New York, 2018.  We and others have analyzed this issue and the conclusion is a definite no.  See “Review of ‘Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides’s Trap?’”:  https://www.dontow.com/2023/06/review-of-destined-for-war-can-america-and-china-escape-thucydidess-trap/.  See also Alan Freeman, “Is war between China and US inevitable?”, video broadcast by Thinkers Forum: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=STi5J6ppjvk, April 16, 2023. See in particular, the (5:10-6:50) segment of this video showing the map of Athen’s imperial power and Athen’s many potential partners and allies in the Aegean Sea.

[7]    “Breaking down the 91 charges Trump faces in his four indictments,” by Derek Hawkins and Nick Mourtoupalas, The Washington Post, August 23, 2023.

[8]    “Mass Shootings in the U.S.,” An Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund Analysis, November 2023 was last updated. 

[9]    Pew Research Center “Public Trust in Government:  1958-2023,” September 19, 2023.

[10]  After President Biden’s remark that his most recent discussion with President Xi Jingping on November 17, 2023 was one of the most interesting and productive discussions that they have had, President Biden then made the comment that Xi Jingping is a dictator.

[11] Overthrow: America’s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq by Stephen Kinzer, Times Books, Henry Holt and Company, LLC, New York, 2006. This is a book by veteran New York Times writer who reported from over 50 countries and served as the paper’s bureau chief in Turkey, Germany and Nicaragua.

[12]  United States involvement in regime change: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change#1991%E2%80%93present:_Post-Cold_War.

[13] “The U.S. tried to change other countries’ governments 72 times during the Cold War,” Lindsey L. O’Rourke, The Washington Post, December 23, 2016: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/monkey-cage/wp/2016/12/23/the-cia-says-russia-hacked-the-u-s-election-here-are-6-things-to-learn-from-cold-war-attempts-to-change-regimes/. According to the author, of the 72 times, 60 were covert operations and 6 were overt operations. And among the 60 covert operations, only 20 successfully brought the U.S.-backed government to power, and 40 failed.

[14] The Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and Australia is part of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands under the administrative control of the U.S. after WWII. It was here that the U.S. tested nuclear weapons 67 times between 1946 and 1958. There are several documentaries on Marshall Islands and the sufferings experienced by the Marshall Islands natives from the numerous nuclear bomb testings there. The best one is probably the one made in 2011 by Adam Jonas Horowitz:  “Nuclear Savage:  The Islands of Secret Project 4.1.”  You can see a 7-minute summary of this documentary for free at https://vimeo.com/30869044