The content of this article comes from the Internet, if it is inconsistent with the actual situation or there is infringement, please contact to delete.
The history of the United States is tightly surrounded by war, and there are only 16 years of peace, which makes the United States the representative of the war nation. Given this historical feature, especially after the rapid withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan, it is not difficult to speculate that the United States may be preparing for the next conflict. This judgment is influenced by the current national strategy and international landscape of the United States.
The U.S.-China relationship occupies a central position in the current international landscape, and there is no doubt that the United States has come to see China as its biggest strategic competitor. This determination has formed a consensus in the United States, and in the next ten years, the all-round competition between China and the United States will further escalate until the "war of the century" is decided.
In order to prepare for this "war of the century", the United States began planning more than 30 years ago. In 1989, with the collapse of the Soviet Union, China lost its strategic value in the eyes of the United States and was positioned as a potential adversary. Since then, the United States has adopted a series of measures, including comprehensive sanctions, intervention in the Taiwan Strait crisis, arms sales to Taiwan, bombing of the embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, and the aircraft collision incident in the South China Sea, pushing Sino-US relations from the "honeymoon period" from 1979 to 1989 to the "frost period".
Although the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were once regarded as the "curse" for the further deterioration of Sino-US relations, after the global financial crisis in 2008, Sino-US relations deteriorated sharply again, followed by events such as the containment of the Olympic torch relay, the riots in Tibet, and the return of the Asia-Pacific strategy. Until 2016, the largest naval military standoff between the U.S. and Chinese navies in the South China Sea since the Cold War broke out, identifying China as the biggest strategic competitor in the eyes of the United States, ahead of Russia and Iran.
In the past two years, China and the United States have experienced fierce confrontations in trade, science and technology, human rights, diplomacy and the military, and this escalating competition will continue for more than a decade. At this moment of crisis and death, the United States abandoned the strategy of engagement with China that has continued since the Nixon era, and the probability of high-intensity Sino-US strategic competition has risen sharply.
The actions of the United States show that they are trying to weaken China by any means, and this time the goal is far more complex than dismembering the Soviet Union. The United States has adopted a variety of ways to contain China, including military containment, interference with important sea lanes, discrediting China's image, and cutting off maritime lifelines.
At present, through political influence and military strength, the United States has implemented strategic containment of China in the Indo-Pacific region, forming a circumlunar containment chain. They have also fomented border clashes between China and India on land, intensifying the Myanmar issue. However, there have been problems with the strategic layout of the United States in Central Asia, especially after the accelerated withdrawal from Afghanistan, tense U.S.-Iran relations, and Pakistan's refusal to allow U.S. forces to use its bases.
On the contrary, China's layout is progressing steadily, the key nodes of the Belt and Road Initiative are gradually connected, and the onshore oil pipeline is taking shape after the signing of the 25-year cooperation framework agreement between China and Iran. This broke the situation laid out earlier by the United States. The U.S. attack on Pakistan was actually threatening Chinese investment in Pakistan, and Gwadar Port was seen as an option for China to deal with Malacca's predicament.
Although the U.S. actions in Afghanistan were related to 9/11, geographically, they actually achieved two goals: one is to suppress Russia, and the other is to cut off China's energy channels and restrict China's development. However, with the withdrawal of the United States from Afghanistan, a vacuum has emerged in Central Asia, especially in the tense relationship between the United States and Pakistan. This brings opportunities to China's strategic layout.
China has begun construction of overland pipeline projects with Russia and Iran, addressing maritime transport dependence and mitigating the threat of Malacca's woes. The United States cannot change this reality, so it may start with China's strategic layout and take precision strikes.
With the U.S. withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan, Afghanistan could once again descend into chaos, becoming a hotbed of international terrorism and threatening China's Xinjiang region. In addition, this could trigger a chain reaction that threatens the security of the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor
Whole. This also allows the United States to kill two birds with one stone and take the opportunity to create chaos.
Moreover, the United States may have found a new entry point, China's southwestern gate, Burma. Myanmar plays an important role in China's development strategy, similar to Panama's strategic value to the United States. It helps save transportation costs, connect international routes, avoid strategic threats, and more.
Myanmar has long been seen by the United States as one of the tools it sees to divide China. The Myanmar military, with the support of the United States and Japan, has taken military action in disregard of China's security and regional peace, which directly affects China's security interests.
However, at the beginning of this year, Myanmar underwent a huge political upheaval, and the military junta overthrew the democratically elected government, which attracted widespread attention from the international community. The fall of this democratically elected government, a symbol of democracy created by the West, has had an impact on Western countries. A series of events similar to color revolutions hint at the existence of those behind the scenes.
The international community generally believes that ASEAN should intervene in the mediation of Myanmar, which affects the national strategy of the United States. However, as ASEAN seems unwilling to act entirely at the pace of the United States, the capabilities and influence of the United States have become limited. This makes it urgent for the United States to find new entry points, and even in unfavorable circumstances, it is not ruled out that they will seize the initiative by military means.
If the United States intervenes militarily in Burma, China will face a direct U.S. military threat for the third time, directly threatening the security of China's strategic rear in southwest, especially the important industrial base in the southwest.
In this case, the United States will link the situation in Myanmar to the Sino-Indian border conflict, forming a land linkage chain across China's national border. This would seriously threaten the security of China's southwestern gateway and western regions such as Tibet and Xinjiang.
In the Sino-US game, the United States is increasingly feeling overwhelmed, so it cannot be ruled out that after the withdrawal of troops in Afghanistan, they will choose to intervene in Myanmar. Against this backdrop, we must remain highly vigilant.
Revelation:
As can be seen from the war records of American history, war and American history are closely linked, which not only shaped the international role of the United States, but also reflected its national strategy and international policy. In the current international landscape, Sino-US relations have become a decisive factor, and the United States has regarded China as its biggest strategic competitor, which means that there will be fierce competition in the future, and it may even trigger a century war.
The United States began its strategic layout more than 30 years ago, regarded China as a potential adversary, and adopted a series of measures, including comprehensive sanctions, intervention in the Taiwan Strait crisis, and increased arms sales to Taiwan, which eventually led to the deterioration of Sino-US relations. With the fierce conflicts in trade, science and technology, human rights and other fields in recent years, Sino-US relations have become more tense, and the United States has abandoned its engagement strategy with China, indicating the possibility of high-intensity strategic competition between China and the United States.
At present, the United States encircles China in military containment, geostrategy, smearing China's image, and cutting off maritime lifelines. However, there are also problems with the strategic layout of the United States, especially in Central Asia, where the US military withdrew from Afghanistan and China steadily advanced under the Belt and Road project to build important land pipelines, breaking the previous strategic assumption of the United States. The United States is likely to look for new alternatives, including at the China-India border, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor and Myanmar.
In this context, Myanmar becomes a key entry point, especially after the regime in Myanmar, the United States may resort to military intervention to link the Burma issue to the Sino-Indian border conflict, and build a land-based linkage strategy that threatens the security of southwest China. This would be the third direct military threat to China that could jeopardize the security of China's strategic rear in the southwest, including Tibet and Xinjiang.
Summary:
Starting from the war record and national strategy of the United States, it can be seen that the United States has always regarded war as one of the means to achieve its international policy and strategic goals. At present, the relationship between China and the United States is considered to be a core factor in the international landscape, and the United States has seen China as its biggest strategic competitor, which means that there will be more fierce competition in the future, which may turn into a century war.
The United States began its layout more than 30 years ago, positioning China as a potential adversary and taking a series of actions that led to the deterioration of Sino-US relations. In recent years, conflicts between China and the United States have escalated in several areas, exacerbating tensions. The strategic adjustment of the United States indicates that Sino-US relations may be further tense and high-intensity strategic competition may occur.
The United States has adopted a variety of ways to contain China, including military, geographical, information warfare and other means. However, there are also problems with the strategic layout of the United States, especially in Central Asia, where China's Belt and Road Initiative has been advancing after the United States withdrew from Afghanistan, breaking the strategic assumption of the United States. As a result, the United States may act on new entry points, including at the China-India border, the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, and Myanmar.
Especially after the regime change in Myanmar, the United States may adopt military intervention to link the Burma issue with the Sino-Indian border conflict and build a land-based linkage strategy to threaten China's southwest security. This would be the third direct military threat to China that could jeopardize the security of China's strategic rear in the southwest, including Tibet and Xinjiang. In this case, China must maintain a high degree of vigilance to ensure national security and strategic interests.
The above content and materials are derived from the Internet, relevant data, theoretical research in the Internet materials, does not mean that the author of this article agrees with the laws, rules, opinions, behaviors in the article and is responsible for the authenticity of the relevant information. We are not responsible for any issues arising above or in connection with the above and the author of this article do not assume any direct or indirect legal liability.