Before reading this article, please click "Follow", which is not only convenient for you to discuss and share, but also can bring you a different sense of participation, thank you for your support!
In April 2024, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken made a surprise visit to China, during which he directly accused China of supporting the Russian military industry, claiming that Chinese-made equipment and parts were used in Russia's military operations.
The remarks sparked a flurry of diplomatic fluctuations.
In the face of such accusations, China has given a resolute and clear response, reiterating that it maintains absolute neutrality in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and that its position on Russia and Ukraine is not biased.
After Blinken concluded his visit, he returned to the United States and immediately took a new diplomatic action.
He launched an initiative to the World Health Organization, suggesting that at the 2024 World Health Assembly, Taiwan should be invited to participate as an observer.
This move clearly violates the "one-China principle" that has long been recognized by the international community.
This is not the first time that Blinken has tried to change the policy of international organizations toward Taiwan, and this one is even more significant, even trying to get other countries to support Taiwan's membership in the United Nations.
From the WHO to the United Nations to arms sales to Taiwan, the United States has tried to maintain "one China" in words through a series of diplomatic measures, but in fact it is promoting the concrete implementation of the Taiwan Relations Act, and the duality of its Taiwan policy has been undoubtedly exposed.
In this series of diplomatic maneuvers, the U.S. strategy is complex and nuanced, aiming to reap benefits from both ends of the spectrum by strengthening its international stance while maintaining its international stance.
China's resolute response and U.S. diplomacy demonstrate the ongoing rivalry between the two countries on the international stage, as well as the complex interweaving of power and strategy in the global political landscape.
On the international stage, the United States maintains the one-China principle and maintains ties with Chinese mainland, but on the Taiwan issue, the United States has shifted its attitude to supporting Taiwan independence forces, notably supporting the regimes of Tsai Ing-wen and Lai Ching-de.
The duality of this policy reveals that the United States is using Taiwan as a strategic tool to contain Chinese mainland, making Taiwan a key factor in its China policy.
With Lai Ching-te on the verge of becoming Taiwan's leader, Blinken has publicly supported Taiwan's entry into the WHO.
This is not only a political statement, but also further aggravates tensions in the Taiwan Strait.
In the face of such actions by the United States, Chinese mainland has responded firmly.
The spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs stressed the adherence to the one-China principle, solemnly pointed out that the US move seriously violated the spirit of the Sino-US joint communiqué on the establishment of diplomatic relations, and expressed solemn dissatisfaction with the US strategy.
At the strategic level, China has not sat idly by, but has formed an effective counterweight to U.S. actions by strengthening military cooperation with geopolitical adversaries such as Cuba.
This strategy demonstrates China's reciprocal response in international politics to ensure that its sovereignty and national interests are not violated.
Through these complex and changeable actions, the strategic game between China and the United States has become increasingly obvious.
Every action reflects the sensitivity and decisiveness of both sides in safeguarding their own interests, and the Taiwan issue has clearly become a key chess piece in this great power political game.
These developments are not only a test of the policies and strategies of both sides, but also add more uncertainty to the future direction of international relations.