【Editor's Note】This article is authorized by the author Qiao Xinsheng and reproduced from the public account "Qiao Xinsheng". On January 24, 2022, the U.S. Secretary of State spoke at a forum in which he talked about Sino-US relations, arguing that there is both confrontation and cooperation between China and the United States, but there are more and more elements of confrontation. The U.S. secretary of state blamed China for this phenomenon, stressing that China has become completely different, becoming more assertive and aggressive.
For China, the US Secretary of State's speech is a special praise for China. In the past, China was obscure and quiet, and the United States was condescending and aggressive. Now the United States realizes that China has "become more confident" and "more aggressive" "to a large extent", which cannot but be said to be an important sign of changes in Sino-US relations.
There is a debate in Chinese academic circles, especially in China's international strategic circles, about the analysis of the stage of development of Sino-US relations. Some scholars believe that Sino-US relations have entered a state of confrontation, but some scholars believe that the United States is still in the initiative and aggressive toward China.
The U.S. secretary of state's speech was the opposite, arguing that China was aggressive. On the one hand, this shows that the United States is trying to blame China for the deterioration of Sino-US relations; on the other hand, it also shows that the United States is somewhat helpless in the face of a confident China.
The U.S. Secretary of State believes that the United States should return to international organizations as soon as possible to prevent China from playing a leading role in international organizations. He quoted an old Chinese saying, emphasizing that "man is a knife trick, I am a fish meat", emphasizing that the present and the future must grasp the "initiative".
This marks a substantial change in the U.S. view of China. The US secretary of state's speech even contained an element of "inferiority", believing that China was "aggressive" towards the United States. Considering that the United States, which totals 350,000 tons of warships, is holding large-scale military exercises near the South China Sea, the U.S. secretary of state's speech is ironic.
On how to deal with China, the US Secretary of State elaborated on the position of the US Democratic administration. It is wrong to think that China and the United States are "decoupled." The United States wants to strive for the initiative, strengthen investment internally, and consolidate alliance relations externally. In other words, the United States is likely to adopt a boycott strategy for a long time to maintain the hegemonic position of the United States.
China pays great attention to the domestic and foreign policy of the United States, but it does not feel terrible. The reason for this is that the US Secretary of State's boycott policy has in fact failed.
The U.S. secretary of state believes that if the United States deals with it alone, it can only account for 20 to 25 percent of the world's output value, but if it joins forces with strategic allies in Europe and Asia to deal with China, it can account for 40 to 50 percent of the world's gross domestic product, a force that "makes it difficult for China to ignore."
It cannot but be said that the US Secretary of State is a professional diplomat who has been very thoughtful in handling international affairs. But, facing Russia alone, on the Ukraine issue, the United States has lost ground and is caught in a dilemma. If it unites other countries against China, how will the United States allocate its own resources and strive for "initiative"?
Some scholars in China believe that the United States will not fight on both sides to solve the Russian problem and rely more on the United States' European strategic allies. The United States is likely to go shirtless and unite with strategic allies such as Japan in East Asia to launch an attack on China. In other words, the United States ming xiu boardwalk, secretly crossing Chen Cang. On the surface, it is aggressive and creates tension on the Ukraine issue, but secretly, in the Asia-Pacific region, the spearhead is directly aimed at China.
It cannot be said that these scholars are chasing the wind and shadows. The United States has indeed deployed heavy troops in the Asia-Pacific region, and the spearhead is directly aimed at China. However, as people have seen, the strategic deployment of the United States in the Asia-Pacific region cannot affect China's modernization process. The reason for this is that the United States has never won a victory in challenging China in the Asia-Pacific region, and if it continues to provoke, it will still not be able to change the fate of defeat.
In the 1950s, the War on the Korean Peninsula was not won by the United States. In the 1960s, the United States was defeated in the Vietnam War. If the United States wants to fight another modernization war in the Asia-Pacific region, the United States will end in utter defeat. Because of this, the danger of the US Secretary of State's Asia-Pacific policy is that it does not measure up to its own strength.
It is undeniable that the United States has the most powerful military power in the world, and the United States has no match for war destruction. But the problem is that the United States can provoke conflicts and even wage wars, but the United States has no possibility of victory. It is relatively easy for the United States to withdraw from the battlefield, but it will become extremely unlikely that the United States will dominate the war. The reason for this is that the war waged by the United States in the Asia-Pacific region is an unjust war, while the war in which the countries of the Asia-Pacific region defend their homeland is a just war. The U.S. Secretary of State has no doubt that a just war will inevitably be won.
The focus of the international community is on the South China Sea and the Taiwan Strait. Some scholars in China have analyzed that the United States is likely to bluff in the South China Sea, and the focus of attention is still on the Taiwan region. This analysis makes a lot of sense.
The South China Sea region is calm and calm. Although there are territorial disputes between the countries bordering the South China Sea and China, no country dares to openly provoke and encroach on China's territorial sovereignty. China has told its neighbors in the South China Sea to shelve the controversy and develop it together. On the basis of the Declaration on Conduct in the South China Sea, we will formulate a code of conduct in the South China Sea and jointly safeguard peace and stability in the South China Sea. The United States has found nothing in the South China Sea to stir up trouble and stir up dissension, except to consume a large amount of military resources. The United States will certainly focus its attention on the long-term investment in the Taiwan region of China, because the United States has a large number of military and commercial interests in the Taiwan region. Taiwan has become a strategic fortress of the United States, with antennas lined up on the island of Taiwan, and the United States has deployed a large number of communications equipment and testing equipment in the Taiwan region. On the one hand, the United States has let the ruling authorities of Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party act as pawns and become cannon fodder for the United States; on the other hand, it has also demanded that the ruling authorities of Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party buy a large number of US weapons. The Practice of the United States in raising running dogs and at the same time requiring lackeys to buy weapons may go down in history. The ruling authorities of Taiwan's Democratic Party have drawn up the so-called "special defense budget" again and again, paid protection fees to the United States, and tried to win the support of the United States at critical moments. However, the United States will absolutely not take risks for the sake of the ruling authorities of Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party, and will absolutely not fight a modernization war with China without a chance of victory. History has proven, and will continue to prove, that in east Asia, the United States has no chance of winning in a military conflict with China.
Chinese mainland's principles and policies toward Taiwan remain unchanged. On the one hand, it is necessary to strengthen ties with Taiwan compatriots and Taiwan enterprises and promote the early realization of comprehensive economic and cultural integration between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. On the other hand, in view of the Taiwan independence elements, we should practice a high-pressure posture, resolutely oppose independence, establish a broad patriotic united front, and strive to realize the complete reunification of the country at the lowest cost.
The US military deployment in the Asia-Pacific region is more of a symbolic move, which cannot change the situation on both sides of the Taiwan Strait or China's modernization process in the slightest.
A series of U.S. diplomatic tactics about China, including the so-called boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics, will become a stain on U.S. diplomacy. The United States' own democracy and human rights are very bad, but it is pointing fingers at China. Now that the United States is resisting China in the international community in its own extremely irresponsible way, what the United States has done will go down in history in a special way.
China and the United States are two cars running on the road. China and the United States can develop in parallel, but it is unlikely that China and the United States will be able to carry out fruitful cooperation in the short term. The author previously believed that China and the United States will enter the stage of stalemate and will enter the stage of strategic reconciliation in the future. Some scholars have disputed this, arguing that a comprehensive reconciliation between China and the United States is unlikely. There is some truth to this view. The United States is a country that advocates force and worships the strong. If China has absolute power and confronts it on some major issues, then the United States will definitely change its relations with China, or at least the way it deals with China.
The U.S. secretary of state has joined forces to try to build a strategic alliance against China. However, whether in Europe or Asia, the purpose of the United States has not been achieved. The United States had hoped to unite more countries around the United States by convening democratic conferences. However, many Arab countries were excluded, and the United States lost its strategic ally to the Arab countries in the Middle East. After the United States hastily withdrawn its troops from Afghanistan, it tried to break into a wedge in Central Asia, where civil unrest broke out in Kazakhstan, the largest country in the region, and the situation was critical. The President of Kazakhstan, who immediately requested the support of the Collective Security Treaty Organization(STO), quickly brought the situation under control. The President of Kazakhstan issued an order to resolve all recalcitrant militants on the spot. The decisive action of the President of Kazakhstan led to the failure of the color revolution launched by the United States and non-governmental organizations supported by the United States Department of State in Kazakhstan.
China is willing to live in peace with the United States and is willing to form a new type of major-country relationship on the basis of mutual respect. However, the US Democratic Government has not made sufficient ideological preparations, and under the chaotic political environment in the United States and under the pressure of the US Republican Party, the US Democratic Government has not dared to achieve strategic reconciliation with China. So don't expect a substantial change in U.S.-China relations during the term of the Democratic president of the United States. China should be fully prepared to prevent a rapid deterioration in Sino-US relations during the first term of the Democratic president of the United States.
The most important reason for the complete loss of control of Sino-US relations may be the Taiwan issue. If the United States continues to arm Taiwan and the ruling authorities of Taiwan's Democratic Progressive Party go farther and farther down the road to Taiwan's independence, then the Chinese mainland will be forced to take action to control the Taiwan region and completely change the long-term state of separation between the two sides of the strait with a rapid and unconcealed momentum. If the United States and Japan dare to intervene in Taiwan affairs, grossly interfere in China's internal affairs, and cause major damage to China, then the Chinese People's Liberation Army will completely destroy the US military strongholds in East Asia with a thunderous momentum. Don't expect Chinese people to swallow the bitter fruit, and don't expect China to be indecisive in dealing with the Taiwan issue.
The confrontation between China and the United States is likely to last a long time. Previously, I pointed out that the three main indicators for the improvement of Sino-US relations are the settlement of the Taiwan issue and the realization of China's reunification; China's GROSS DOMESTIC PRODUCT has caught up with and surpassed that of the United States; and China's military strength and national cohesion have increased significantly. It now appears that China's GDP has caught up with and surpassed that of the United States in terms of purchasing power parity. China's military strength in the west coast of the Pacific Is comparable to that of the United States, and China has obvious location advantages. The settlement of the Taiwan issue is just around the corner. If the United States does not change course as soon as possible and takes the initiative to reconcile with China, then after China realizes the complete reunification of the country, the United States will lose more.