In July 2016, clouds were thick over the South China Sea.
After the results of the "South China Sea Arbitration Case" were announced, Harris, commander of the US Pacific Fleet, led a dual-carrier fleet into the South China Sea, saying that he would "uphold justice" for the Philippines.
Harris even shouted, "Everyone, get ready for tonight's battle!" And constantly pressed the White House to grant him the readiness to go to war.
In the face of the powerful force of the United States, China has taken out all its family foundations. The Liaoning, nuclear submarines, and the three major fleets were all elite. We even deployed new missiles near the South China Sea and voluntarily announced the coordinates of U.S. aircraft carriers.
After assessing the possible losses, the Americans finally instigated it, and the American fleet withdrew to the Philippines in a daze.
Harris, who was the main fighter, was soon sent to South Korea by the White House as an ambassador to South Korea.
Commander of the Japanese-American Pacific Fleet, Harris
After that, Southeast Asia, a land of 600 million people, will no longer be a weapon for the United States to contain China, but will become the United States' own death pit.
However, six years after the "South China Sea Arbitration Case", the United States is making a comeback in Southeast Asia.
America's comeback?
In order to contain China economically, Biden announced the launch of the "Indo-Pacific Economic Framework" during his visit to Japan and South Korea in May this year.
The Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, or IPEF for short, is currently being negotiated by 13 countries. In addition to the United States, India, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand, there are also seven Southeast Asian countries, including Vietnam and the Philippines.
The framework is divided into four main components: supply chain resilience, taxation and corruption, fair and resilient trade, infrastructure and decarbonization.
The main part of this is "supply chain resilience," which is simple, that is, the United States wants to transfer supply chains from China to other countries, such as Vietnam or India.
Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand will act as a driving force in providing technology and funds.
Biden proposed the "Indo-Pacific Economic Framework" with the intention of containing China economically. But the ideal is full, and the reality is very bone.
I don't know if you remember, but many years ago the Obama administration also launched a similar economic alliance , the Trans-Pacific Partnership, or TPP for short.
So what's the difference between the TPP and IPEF?
Simply put, Obama's TPP is that the United States is cutting its own flesh and feeding it to Southeast Asian countries to compete economically with China.
For example, the core of the TPP is "free trade," which not only cuts tariffs, but also cuts implicit trade barriers, such as requiring the U.S. government not to designate U.S. goods when purchasing some goods.
For other countries in the TPP, the United States, as the group leader, has taken the initiative to reduce trade barriers and open the door to the domestic market, which is of course a great thing;
But for the United States, such an agreement is contrary to the strategy of "supporting American domestic industries", but will exacerbate the outflow of manufacturing, so it has met with a lot of opposition in the United States.
Finally, with Trump on the stage, understand the king with a big stroke of the pen, quit the group!
The first thing Trump did when he took office was to quit the TPP
What about IPEF this time?
Compared to the TPP, IPEF emphasizes "fair and flexible trading". To put it bluntly, the meaning of the United States is, "You export less from me and buy more American goods from me."
At this point, you will surely find that compared to the TPP, the United States has less benefit in IPEF and more demands.
Moreover, IPEF is not strictly a trade agreement, because it does not require the consent of the US Congress and can only be regarded as an administrative document.
Even if an agreement is signed, if the next US government wants to "withdraw from the group", it will be very convenient to tear up the agreement at that time.
So in the end, IPEF is far less attractive than the TPP 6 years ago.
For many countries, participating in negotiations is just buying a face for the United States.
Southeast Asia, turning enemies into friends
After analysis, we found that the Indo-Pacific economic framework is nothing more than a "paper tiger" with an empty table.
However, there are still many people who are worried that judging from the fact that many Southeast Asian countries have actively joined the "US group chat" this time, they will once again join forces with the United States to create trouble for China such as the "South China Sea arbitration case".
This is actually a lot of worry – because China's diplomatic environment in Southeast Asia today is much friendlier than it was six years ago.
Proceeding from the interests of Southeast Asian countries, many things have proved in the past 6 years:
What the United States can give them, China can also give; The United States can't give them, China can still give;
For example, the Biggest chip for the United States to attract Southeast Asian countries is the vast domestic consumer market in the United States, which can greatly promote the export industry in Southeast Asia.
But now, our domestic market in China is also growing rapidly.
Take a look at a set of 2021 data comparisons.
In 2021, domestic retail sales of consumer goods in the United States will be $7.4 trillion, compared with $6.8 trillion in China, only $600 billion worse than the United States. And this 600 billion, I believe in a few years, we will be able to catch up.
So for ASEAN countries, unless the United States can show the same "determination to cut meat" as Obama, why should they give up China's huge market to join the Indo-Pacific economic framework and be at the mercy of the United States?
Not to mention, the Indo-Pacific economic framework is only a vision, and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which China and ASEAN have established together, is already in operation.
After the RCEP officially came into effect on January 1, 2022, China-ASEAN trade volume increased by 8.4% year-on-year in the first quarter, and China has replaced the EU as ASEAN's largest trading partner.
Therefore, in terms of trade and markets, the benefits brought by China to Southeast Asian countries are enough to match those of the United States.
In terms of investment, China is also catching up.
The United States has always been the largest source of foreign investment in Southeast Asia, so in the region, the United States has a very large appeal.
This is easy to understand, because external investment can bring employment and economic development to the country, so of course the government should be friendly to the countries that come to invest.
In recent years, due to the acceleration of the division of labor in the industrial chain, China's investment in Southeast Asia has also risen rapidly.
In 2020, China's investment in Southeast Asia reached US$19.6 billion, surpassing Japan for the first time to become the second largest source of foreign investment in Southeast Asia.
Although the largest source country is still the United States. However, due to its own economic problems, U.S. investment in Southeast Asia is becoming increasingly weak.
Believe it or not, in May, Biden scrapped the boss, invited the leaders of eight ASEAN countries to Washington, and announced in a loud and extremely bold way that he would launch an investment plan for ASEAN.
How much is the resulting investment? A total of $150 million.
And for this $150 million, the United States also divided the ugly.
Of that amount, $60 million, which the United States says is going to invest in "maritime security," is actually spent on the United States itself.
The United States has shoecagged its own coast guard to Southeast Asian countries, saying that it is helping Southeast Asian countries improve their maritime defense capabilities, but in fact it is only to facilitate itself to counter China.
Of the 150 million, the United States has spent 60 million on itself, and of the remaining $90 million, the nine ASEAN countries (not counting Myanmar) can only get $10 million per country according to the average score.
And the 10 million US dollars, how to spend, to whom, what to buy, all have to be decided by the United States.
What the United States means is, I'm going to give you $10 million each, and you're going to work with me to squeeze China. I think at this time, in the hearts of the leaders of Southeast Asian countries, there will only be a group of crows flying over.....
U.S.-ASEAN Leaders' Meeting
But then again, what's more important is that the United States can't give the stability and peace that China can bring to Southeast Asia.
After the 2016 standoff in the South China Sea and the defeat of the US fleet, Southeast Asian countries have seen clearly: China and the United States, who are the leaders of regional security.
So since then, the Attitude of the Philippines towards us has taken a 180-degree turn.
In the past, the countries around the South China Sea were not very happy with us because they had the support of the United States behind them. But after the defeat of the U.S. fleet, countries have expressed their desire to "shelve the controversy and jointly develop" the South China Sea.
I think this may be "subjugating people with virtue".
Six years ago, we were able to scare away the American fleet. Today, when China's third aircraft carrier, the Fujian Warship, has been launched, It is natural for China to counter the United States in the South China Sea and even southeast Asia.
Moreover, China not only has the ability to maintain regional peace, but also hopes for stability and prosperity in Southeast Asian countries.
After the outbreak of the global COVID-19 epidemic in 2020, China was the first to say that it would provide a COVID-19 vaccine to Southeast Asia. As of November 2021, China has provided more than 500 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine to the 10 ASEAN countries.
Among them, Indonesia, the most populous country, has become a vaccine production center in Southeast Asia with our technical support.
Vietnam, which has always had contradictions with us, also shouted the slogan of "never following other countries to oppose China" after receiving vaccine assistance.
Since then, the Vietnamese army has even accepted vaccine assistance from the Chinese army, showing that the trust between the two countries has greatly deepened.
In June, at the "Shangri-La Defense Summit" just held, in the face of the pressure of the United States to ask Southeast Asian countries to "choose sides", the defense ministers of Southeast Asian countries spoke up for China.
Shangri-La Defense Summit
Among them, Indonesia stated that "China is the vanguard of anti-imperialism and anti-colonization"; Malaysia, on the other hand, said: "ASEAN countries have the right not to abide by the interests of the United States."
So we can see that after the DEFEAT of the US fleet in the South China Sea for 6 years, we and Southeast Asian countries have now had a high degree of trust and cooperation.
Gone are the days when the United States wanted to "return to Southeast Asia" with a paper agreement and a threat.
America's backhand?
From a larger strategic perspective, the United States positioned Southeast Asia as:
Economically, the use of the ASEAN 10 countries to divide the supply chain of China's low-end industries, the use of Japan and South Korea to block China's industrial upgrading, at low latitude and high latitude, while squeezing China's development space;
Militarily, it still provokes the "South China Sea issue" and incites disputes between ASEAN countries and China. In this way, one can reduce cooperation between China and ASEAN, and the other can create instability around China and force capital to flee.
In our strategic vision, our positioning of Southeast Asia is as follows:
Southeast Asia is closely involved in China's industrial chain division of labor. China is responsible for industrial upgrading, upward breakthroughs, squeezing the ecological niche of Japan, South Korea, and even the United States, while Southeast Asia gives full play to its human and cost advantages and provides raw materials and resources.
"China-Southeast Asia" will form the strongest manufacturing alliance and work together to make money from all over the world.
So in the end, in the eyes of the United States, Southeast Asian countries are only the thugs of the United States and the sharp weapon to curb China. But in China's eyes, Southeast Asian countries are partners in common prosperity, but they have become the death pit of the United States.
Among them, the biggest variable is the attitude of Southeast Asian countries.
And just now, after our analysis, we should be able to find:
As the United States can provide fewer and fewer benefits to Southeast Asian countries and more and more things that China can give, it is clear who Southeast Asia will eventually turn to.
Therefore, the US Indo-Pacific strategy with Southeast Asia as the core is doomed to failure.
But is there no backhand at all in the United States? Nor is it.
If it is not possible to win over, the United States can play the characteristics of stirring up sticks and stir up chaos here;
Once there is civil unrest in Southeast Asia, China will not be able to smoothly carry out industrial cooperation with Southeast Asian countries. The unstable situation around China will also shake the confidence of world capital to invest in China.
Just as the Kosovo War interrupted the upward momentum of the European Union and the euro.
So what are the means of disturbance that the United States can use? There are three main ones:
First, the color revolution.
At present, Vietnam and Laos are still one-party socialist countries, Thailand and Brunei have feudal kings, and Burma is governed by military governments. With economic development and social reform, the United States has ample opportunity to incite color revolutions.
Racial civil strife
Southeast Asian countries generally have complex racial contradictions.
For example, Malaysia has a malay and Chinese conflict; Indonesia has javanese and Ethnic Yachi and Papuan contradictions; In the Philippines, there is a contradiction between Catholicism and Islam; Not to mention Burma, which is still fighting a national civil war;
Among the 10 ASEAN countries, 6 countries have a majority ethnic group accounting for less than 70%, which means that this is a natural "powder keg" that is not inferior to the Balkan Peninsula.
Third, national contradictions
Although 10 countries in Southeast Asia have formed the "ASEAN" organization. But the contradictions between countries do not disappear so easily.
Among the 10 ASEAN countries, Vietnam has invaded Cambodia and Laos; Thailand sees Vietnam as its number one competitor; Malaysia has long been at loggerheads with Indonesia over control of the Strait of Malacca.
Therefore, we Chinese often see Southeast Asia as a whole, but in fact, it is a natural place for the United States to "do things".
In the future, once the "Indo-Pacific strategy" of the United States fails because Southeast Asia has invested in China. The United States is bound to set off a bloody storm in Southeast Asia through the operation of churning sticks.
The time will come to test China's ability as a spokesperson to bring stability and peace to the Southeast Asian region.
~End of full text~
Thanks for reading, if you think the article is well written, welcome to follow me, forward, bookmark and casually like it.