The author seems to very fascinated with Soong Ching-ling. If its just for the fact that she was the only one that died a pauper, then I am afraid the author may be missing something here. The book also disregard in total Soong May-ling's contribution to that of modern China and the fact that the ultimate failure of Chiang Kai-shek to crush the Communist has as much to do with the apathy of the Western political powers as with his own imcompetence. I am by no means an admirer of Chiang Kai-shek but as for Soong May-ling, one should also look at the contribution she made to China in her long and ardous fight against the Japanese in terms of raising much needed funds as well as other forms of support. By going on a witch hunt against every one except for Soong Ai-ling, I am of the impression that the author is trying to make the latter look good when the fact is she is very much a traitor to modern China. Of course, the problems with China began with Sun Yat-sen's invitation to the Soviet Union to help in structuring China's political as well as governmental structure. Michael Borodin very aptly took the opportunity to set up the Communist Party in China in 1921 and for a country as big and as populous as China, it is most difficult if not impossible to run. So, with all those illusions of equality for all as preached by the Communists, what do you think the peasants and the idealistic students will be drawn to. History has proven that Communism remains just an idealistic myth. The author failed to recognise that Soong Ching-ling is a traitor by allowing herself to be used by the Soviets in its propanganda war against China and then by allowing them to betrayed her and the country she claims she loves. She alone brought more shame to China than anyone else with the exception of maybe Mao Tse-tung and Chao En-lai.