The schoolmaster’s work is a masterpiece!
The broadcast continues this Saturday night at 20 00, so don’t forget to make your reservations, friends.
Friendly reminder
Recently at the request of readers to reissue the grief series, did not use the way to push, interested friends please go to the home page to see for themselves.
Regarding the direction of the U.S.-China relationship, in August 2022, with a sense of the historic changes in the U.S.-China relationship, the lieutenant wrote a You want to break, I’ll break, you want to fight, I’ll fight We’re repositioning the U.S.-China relationship , a sort of updated outlook on the U.S.-China relationship.
Screenshot of the article
More than two years have passed, and the development of the situation has confirmed the lieutenant’s prediction that China-US relations are facing the biggest challenge since the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States.
If we continue to enlarge the time scale, the intensity of this challenge may even exceed the period of anti-U.S.-Aid for Korea, which is recognized as the most hostile period in Sino-U.S. relations.
Looking at Sino-U.S. relations since the reform and opening up, they have roughly gone through three stages.
First, the honeymoon period at the beginning of reform and opening up
During this phase, China needed the United States to share the pressure from the Soviet Union and to integrate into the U.S.-led international trading system in order to develop its economy, and the United States needed to draw China in to deal with the Soviet Union and also wanted to integrate China into the international trading system in order to expand its market.
At the strategic level, the interests of both sides were highly aligned, resulting in a rare honeymoon period.
For China, this honeymoon period was even better than the US-China alliance during the Chiang Kai-shek era.
Because the Sino-US alliance back then was in fact an unequal relationship of personal dependence, which is also the most common diplomatic pattern between the US and other allies Collecting little brothers under the banner of alliance.
But after the reform and opening up of China and the United States relations, based on the principle of independence and autonomy of new China has always adhered to the principle of diplomacy, the relationship between the two sides is equal.
Secondly, from the early 1990s to the recent period of ups and downs
With the collapse of the Soviet Union and the steady rise of China’s comprehensive national power, the U.S. began to adjust its policy toward China from one based on cooperation to one based on containment and suppression.
China, on the other hand, adhered to the strategy of biding its time and keeping its relations with China as normal as possible, while at the same time increasing its efforts of reform and opening up and integrating itself more deeply into the world, including the United States.
During this period, China-U.S. relations had many ups and downs. However, on the whole, the main tone of the United States is to draw in and differentiate amidst containment and suppression, while China’s main tone is to hold back, restrain, and keep the bottom line while counterattacking moderately.
Third, the period of confrontation that has recently begun
Still, it is difficult to accurately define the turning point of a developing strategic trend before the dust settles.
For the third phase of Sino-US relations, if we must find a starting point, the schoolmaster thinks that the March 2021 Sino-US talks in Anchorage would be more appropriate.
Having said that, a couple more explanations. Some people say that the landmark event of the change in Sino-U.S. relations is the South China Sea standoff in 2016. This viewpoint, the school lieutenant reserves its opinion for the time being.
There are two reasons One is that the South China Sea standoff has not been officially endorsed by China and the United States so far The second is that this is a military game, which only represents the turnaround of the ratio of military power between China and the United States in the South China Sea, but cannot represent the turnaround of the diplomatic strategy of China and the United States.
The context of the era of the Anchorage talks is that China-US relations have just experienced a severe shock from Trump’s first term, and there are strong positive expectations for China-US relations in Biden’s term, both in the domestic policymaking circles and among international observers.
But the paranoia and arrogance of the U.S. side is as icy as the wind and snow of an Anchorage winter.
The extremely rude U.S. side did not even provide the Chinese side with a meal
Zelensky’s visit to the U.S. was also canceled for lunch, but it was an impromptu decision, while Anchorage was a deliberate move by the U.S. side
In the face of the arrogant, domineering and unbeatable U.S. side, the Chinese side left behind two famous quotes.
One is that we think too well of you and the second is that you are not qualified to say in front of China that you talk to China from a position of strength.
As a member of the Political Bureau of the Central Committee and director of the Central Foreign Affairs Office, Yang Jiechi, who has always been gentle and courteous, has uncharacteristically spoken such words on behalf of China, which can at least illustrate two issues.
First, for the Anchorage talks, although we hold the greatest sincerity in pursuit of the best results, we are also prepared for the worst.
The second is that we are repositioning ourselves for the future of U.S.-China relations.
On major diplomatic occasions, the U.S. and many Western and Third World countries can make wildly unpredictable statements, but China never does.
When Tiger Yang says something like this, it’s not just a whim, it’s a premeditated plan. If you say something, you’re bound to do something about it.
Chinese people always keep their word.
Since the Americans gave the Chinese delegation a cold winter in Anchorage, China has also given the United States a cold winter.
Biden has become the only sitting president who has not visited China since the establishment of diplomatic relations between the United States and China. There are certainly reasons as to whether or not Biden is willing to come, and there are of course reasons as to whether or not we are willing to receive him.
Blinken, who was a big talker in Anchorage, never got an invitation to visit China, and although he later had the cheek to make the trip reluctantly, he was forced to hand over the lead in exchanges with China to Sullivan after China’s cold shoulder.
This scene reminds the lieutenant of when the Eight-Power Allied Forces and Japan appointed Li Hongzhang to negotiate.
Regardless of Li Hongzhang’s historical positioning, for China, even their own negotiating envoys must be designated by the other side, which is absolutely a huge humiliation.
The old Li Hongzhang was the epitome of China at that time.
Although we did not designate Sullivan to replace Blinken, but was able to force the U.S. to change, already belongs to a major diplomatic victory. And the reason why China, which has always been modest and tolerant and has maintained a high degree of courtesy to small countries, suddenly became so tough is that it was already disappointed to the extreme with the Biden administration’s policy toward China.
In addition to diplomacy, in the field of trade and economic cooperation, the United States said to strengthen the Sino-US dialogue, but actually took a precise decoupling broken chain action, in the chip and other high-tech areas of China to carry out a precision strike, once triggered the public know buyers colonial Rengren and other kneeling collective cranial orgasm, a variety of surrender theory, quick kneeling theory, the theory of inevitable defeat are endless.
But China has never been at the mercy of the knee-jerkers, and the counterattacks are getting stronger and stronger, and the stance is getting tougher and tougher.
It can be said that throughout Biden’s term, China and the United States, in addition to the official face-off, other things that need to be done to face-off.
China-U.S. relations, from what is often referred to as a fight but not a break, has entered the stage of a break but not a declaration.
The reason why the two sides tacitly did not formally flip-flop, one of the important reasons is that no one is willing to take the responsibility for the rupture of Sino-US relations, and no one wants to fight for more public opinion support.
Because the relationship between China and the United States is the stabilizer of today’s world.
As long as the U.S. and China do not formally tear their faces off, the international order can barely be maintained. Once China and the United States formally rupture or even towards hostility, the international order will usher in a sea change, all countries outside of China and the United States will face a difficult choice of sides.
Although China has never forced other countries to choose sides, as long as they do not follow the United States hostile to China on the line, but the United States will not allow small countries to ride the wall.
Because according to the United States has always been the logic of the robber barons, neutrality is to side with China.
Because no one wants to bear the responsibility of destroying Sino-US relations, destroying the world order, and becoming the target of criticism by international public opinion, although both sides know that China and the United States are heading towards confrontation is a historical trend, but both sides are only doing not saying.
But with the second election of Trump, this situation has been broken.
The Biden administration’s disguise can still deceive international public opinion, especially for some self-deceiving Western apparatchiks, international colonialists, to provide a reason to turn black and white and plant evidence against China.
But the king of understanding, who has completely released himself, has already taken the initiative to snatch the hat for undermining the international order.
As long as King Knowles wears MAGA’s little red hat, the wrath of America’s allies will be focused on him.
As the saying goes, if you can’t take it, you can’t take it. Even the European pigs are ready to start their own European army, so how can we just sit back and watch the moment pass?
So, on March 4th, in the face of a New York Times reporter’s question about the Trump administration using fentanyl as an excuse to raise tariffs on Chinese products, Foreign Ministry spokesman Lin Jian responded sternly that if the U.S. side has any designs on a tariff war, a trade war, or any other kind of war, China will go all the way.
The foreign ministry’s response can only be considered clinical, but right after that, the Chinese embassy in the U.S., which is specifically responsible for day-to-day affairs with the U.S., tweeted If the U.S. wants a war, whether it’s a tariff war, a trade war, or any other kind of war, we’re ready to fight it to the end.
The verbal statement by the foreign ministry spokesman, the official announcement by the Chinese embassy in the U.S., the core meaning, in a word, is that if you want to fight, I will fight!
If the previous Sino-US relationship was broken but not declared, then now is the official declaration. At least, from China’s point of view, we are no longer willing to cooperate with the U.S. play.
Regarding U.S.-China relations, China’s top leaders have repeatedly stated that the Pacific Ocean is a vast expanse that can accommodate the United States and China, as well as other countries.
In other words, with regard to China-U.S. relations, we always have good intentions to maintain the stability of China-U.S. relations, and thus the stability of the global order.
If the United States were half as calm and objective as China, the relationship would not be in such a state.
But history has long proved that whenever Americans are reasonable, it is because you have convinced them.
In the Korean battlefield, the volunteer army convinced the United States, so by the time of the Vietnam War, China said it would not allow the 17th parallel to be crossed, and even if the war was lost, the U.S. army would not dare to cross the minefield.
It is only with the improvement of Sino-US relations, in order to better integrate into the international trade system, to the United States, we are mainly to hold back.
Bide our time for more than 40 years, so the Americans have forgotten that, in addition to forbearance and restraint, rationality and generosity, the Chinese people also have a bloody side.
The sleeping lion is awakened is not terrible, the blood of the sleeping lion is awakened is terrible.
Unfortunately, the serious schizophrenia of the United States, in other aspects are very different, but in the anti-China aspects of the same lineage of the King of the Yin understand the King tossed again and again, and finally re-inspired the blood of the Chinese people.
Chinese people have never been warlike, but Chinese people are not afraid of war and do not avoid war!
If the United States really want to step on China’s red line dance, we absolutely do not begrudge the Americans again than the Korean War Vietnam War more miserable defeat.
Conclusion
Just as I asserted in my article two years ago, “If you want to break it off, I will break it off; if you want to fight it, I will fight it”, we are now repositioning the US-China relationship. Repositioning the US-China relationship is both a practical necessity and an inevitable way to achieve this.
Our desire to maintain stability in U.S.-China relations is based on two main points.
One is to safeguard our own interests
China’s economic take-off after the reform and opening up was made possible by the globalization system led by the United States.
Although there are many unfair and unreasonable aspects in this system, we are just a benign builder and reformer, and we only want to improve this system, not to overthrow it completely.
The second is to safeguard the interests of all mankind, especially the weak and small countries.
In the animal world as well as in human society, it is the strong who establish and maintain order.
Under such an order, the interests of the weak will inevitably be usurped by the strong, but the order provided by the strong is also the foundation for the survival of the weak.
Or rather, order is where the weak’s greatest interests lie.
This is what the Old Testament says: “The rise of the people is painful to the people, and the fall of the people is painful to the people”.
Any time the old order collapses and a new order is established, it is the weak at the bottom of the ecological chain who pay the price.
If the old order is not so rotten and corrupt that it has gone to the extreme, to the weak, reform and reformation are always the best options.
But for the strong, who do not belong to the old order, the greatest benefit is to rebuild the new order.
We do not want to completely reconstruct the international order, because that will make all mankind, especially the people of weak and small countries, such as the Ukrainians, the Pakistanis and the Syrians, pay a terrible price.
But if the United States insists on overthrowing the order it has established, who else but China can bear the responsibility of rebuilding a new world order?
The great aspirations of the sages to establish a heart for heaven and earth, to establish a life for the people, to succeed the great sages of the past, and to open up peace for all generations were originally directed at the Chinese nation.
However, in today’s globalized world, it is not only in line with our ancestors’ intention of not forgetting the common people, but also the responsibility and obligation given to the Chinese nation by history to extend it to the whole of mankind.
Leave a Reply