【Editor's Note】This article is authorized by the author Shi Yongming, and the exclusive original publication of Qin'an Strategic Headline Number, reproduced from the "Clear Words of the Times", welcome everyone's attention.
When the Lantern Festival is over, it means that the entire Spring Festival is over. This year's Spring Festival is very lively because we also have a Winter Olympics. Snow sports are the most appreciated sports. At the Winter Olympics, China's young players were full of vigor, tenacity and bravery, showing a new look of the young generation of Chinese sons and daughters, which made us feel pleased. Xu Mengtao's friendly embrace with American ashley Caldwell made all those who engaged in the so-called boycott of the Beijing Winter Olympics and tried to use sports to engage in confrontation seem so despicable and dirty.
Of course, this year's Spring Festival has another kind of "liveliness", that is, the hard work of clowns outside the venue. The most eye-catching thing here is the farce of the United States hyping up "Russia is going to invade Ukraine". Although the so-called prediction of war on the 16th has been shattered, US President Biden still vows that "the possibility of Russia invading Ukraine is still very high."
As for why the United States is engaged in such a big farce, I will talk about it in detail later. Today, I still want to talk about things that are related to our immediate interests.
Suppose you are a soldier who is standing guard and suddenly someone makes a big noise in the distance, what should you do first? In fact, the most important thing at this time is to be vigilant about the dangers that may occur around you. Because this kind of movement may also be someone trying to divert your attention, or it may be to cover up the action against you.
The united states hypes the Ukraine crisis this time, the purpose is multiple and complex. But there is one phenomenon that is obvious and ignored by many of us, and that is that the Various Threats to Me by the United States have also been frequent during this period. But all of these actions have been downplayed, ignored, and even covered up by the Western media. Our own people, whether it is the official media or the self-media, pay enough attention to these things.
One of the most important things in this is the US arms sales to Taiwan.
The nature of the matter is serious
On February 7, the U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency announced on its official website that the U.S. Department of State has approved the sale of equipment and services that support Taiwan's participation in the Patriot missile engineering service project and field monitoring project for a period of five years and a total price of about $100 million. In this regard, Zhao Lijian, spokesman for our Foreign Ministry, said: The US arms sale to the Taiwan region seriously violates the one-China principle and the provisions of the three Sino-US joint communiques, especially the provisions of the "August 17" communique, seriously harms China's sovereignty and security interests, and seriously undermines Sino-US relations and peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait. China firmly opposes this and strongly condemns it. The Chinese side urges the US side to abide by the one-China principle and the provisions of the three Sino-US joint communiques, immediately revoke the above-mentioned arms sales plan to Taiwan, and stop arms sales to Taiwan and US-Taiwan military ties. China will certainly take legitimate and effective measures to firmly safeguard its sovereignty and security interests.
The "August 17" Communiqué, which Zhao Lijian highlighted here, was signed by the Chinese and American governments on August 17, 1982, in order to completely resolve the issue of US arms sales to Taiwan. In the communiqué, the Chinese Government reiterated that "the Taiwan issue is China's internal affair." The U.S. government reiterated that "it has no intention of violating China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, has no intention of interfering in China's internal affairs, and has no intention of implementing the 'two Chinas' and 'one China, one Taiwan' policy." The U.S. government further stated that "it does not seek to implement a long-term policy of arms sales to Taiwan, and the weapons it sells to Taiwan will not exceed the level of supply in recent years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States." It is prepared to gradually reduce arms sales to Taiwan and lead to a final settlement after a period of time. ”
By August this year, the 40th anniversary of the signing of the "August 17" Communiqué. Forty years is two generations. Many young people who were not married at the time now have grandchildren. But has the United States lived up to its promises? Not at all. The United States has not only turned arms sales to Taiwan into a long-term policy, but also the technical level of weapons has also kept pace with the times and has been continuously improved.
What is the nature of the question? It's not just a matter of non-compliance. According to the content reiterated by the United States itself in the communique, this is deliberately "infringing on China's sovereignty and territorial integrity, interfering in China's internal affairs, and engaging in 'two Chinas' and 'one China, one Taiwan.'" ”
According to the basic understanding of international politics, this is an act of aggression. Logically, the United States is selling weapons to separatist forces within a sovereign state. This is in fact encouraging division, with the intention of dismembering this sovereign state. If we go further, this is actually a disguised war with the legitimate government of this country. So this is a blatant act of aggression. The United States now blames Russia, saying that russia's entry into Ukraine is aggression. But the United States itself has already quietly sent its own soldiers into Taiwan, China's territory.
A new form of aggression for the U.S. Empire
The question of aggression has been one of the core issues in the construction of the international order since the First World War. The Nuremberg trials after World War II laid the groundwork for the legal confirmation of the definition of "aggression". However, after the Cold War, in international political and legal practice, Western countries have muddyed the waters on the concept of "aggression." On the one hand, some old militarist forces such as Abe put forward the so-called "no definition of aggression" and wanted to overturn the case for their past crimes of aggression; on the other hand, the Western countries headed by the United States wanted to justify the series of wars of aggression they launched after the Cold War.
Of course, the legal discussion of the issue of "aggression" is a traditional manifestation of the illegal occupation of the territory of other States through the direct use of force. However, the war of aggression launched by the United States after the Cold War created a new form, that is, the so-called "leader maintaining order", which was expounded by them academically as the so-called "hegemonic stability theory".
The basic routine of the United States aggression after the Cold War is:
First, take advantage of the political contradictions within a country, carry out political differentiation, and disrupt the country's basic state structure, and then openly carry out political or military intervention in the name of so-called "democracy and human rights" to foster pro-Western forces and establish a pro-Western regime. What we usually call a "color revolution" is the final step in this phase. After the color revolution, the United States began to practice political and military annexation in the form of NATO or other military alliances. Today's Ukraine is one of the classic cases. The former Yugoslavia was the first victim. After the disintegration, those small and lonely "independent" countries have to face the fate of having to join the EU and NATO on extremely unfavorable terms, otherwise they will face an extremely harsh living environment.
Of course, as a new imperialist country that inherits the old imperialist tradition, the United States will adopt the same method of direct aggression against the weak. The usual routine of this kind of aggression is to first stigmatize and then obtain the so-called "legitimacy" of the use of force through the manipulation of international public opinion. Examples such as Iraq and Syria are typical cases. They are now directly occupied by the United States military and have to face direct plunder by the United States. Libya, on the other hand, was blown up by NATO, and although it seemed difficult to control due to the complexity of internal traditional forces, it could only struggle with itself under external control.
Taiwan will become a new case of a new type of US aggression
In Taiwan, the United States is playing a more complicated routine, and the Taiwan Strait issue is becoming a new case. I have always opposed some scholars calling the US Policy on Taiwan and some practices "playing the Taiwan card." The strategy of the United States to occupy Taiwan for a long time is clear. The so-called "policy of ambiguity" is only a strategy adopted in response to real legal and political difficulties. They know very well what they want to achieve, and the legal framework is very clear. The so-called "Taiwan Relations Law" is the law that separates Taiwan from the mainland.
Of course, whether the United States can achieve its goals depends on the internal factors of the mainland and Taiwan. And what the United States is doing now is to facilitate this shift in internal factors. The first is to encourage the development of Taiwan independence and strengthen the separatist forces within Taiwan. Selling arms is one of the means, and in the past two years, official exchanges have been strengthened. Second, it is necessary to weaken the continental will to unify. Anti-military unification is one of the main means. Is there any effect? Of course.
Look at the many people inside us who consciously or unconsciously downplay or even cover up the evil nature of US arms sales to Taiwan. It is said that the weapons given to Taiwan by the United States are not the most advanced, so they will not help Taiwan. In fact, this kind of remark is gradually paralyzing itself, and at the same time giving legitimacy to the United States' arms sales to Taiwan. If you say today that you can accept or tolerate US arms sales to Taiwan, your opposition tomorrow or the next time will become unreasonable, even "illegal." On the issue of military unification, some scholars who are now called "doves" in the West and Taiwan have openly put forward self-restrictions on military unification. Isn't this subtle change happening?
Therefore, starting this year, demanding that the United States stop selling arms to Taiwan should become one of the core contents of handling Sino-US relations.
At last:
Why, today, I would like to emphasize that US arms sales to Taiwan are an act of aggression. This is because the United States is now launching a public opinion information war against Russia on the Ukraine issue, which is of a rehearsal nature for intervention in the Taiwan Strait. I will elaborate on this in the next article.