Before reading, please click a "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!
On April 22, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the mainland announced that US Secretary of State Antony Blinken will visit China on April 24.
It is worth mentioning that on April 4, US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen just visited China.
The successive visits by senior US officials to China mean that the United States is showing goodwill to China? Is it possible for China and the United States to return to the honeymoon period after Nixon's visit to China?
In 1972, U.S. President Richard Nixon visited China, successfully breaking China's diplomatic blockade by the United States and the Soviet Union.
Sino-US relations also entered a honeymoon period of more than a decade, until the collapse of the Soviet Union.
Today is completely different from the past, although China was also a big country at that time, but generally speaking, it was still relatively backward, but today China is already the world's second largest economy, completely bursting the Soviet Union in the past, and the United States is also considered to be equal.
So, do the political leaders of the United States want to coexist peacefully with China again when they visit China one after another?
Of course not, China has always been a stumbling block on the road to US hegemony, there is no doubt about it.
The analysis of international relations experts from the New York Times and Peking University is more consistent, that is, Yellen's trip is to balance the Biden administration's attitude towards China.
One of them sings red face and the other white face, which is similar to Kissinger's visit to China last year.
So, what did Blinken talk about during his visit to China, and what are the demands of the United States now?
Why visit China?
As a matter of fact, since 1972, the Chinese side has been stressing several principles for the development of Sino-US relations: First, it is true to its word and resolute in its deeds, and not to say one thing and do another, especially on the Taiwan issue.
Second, the two sides should not be adversaries, but should be treated as partners.
Third, seek common ground while reserving differences and engage in healthy competition, rather than suppressing each other and engaging in a trade war.
The two sides can obviously cooperate for a win-win situation, but the United States has to hurt the enemy 800 and damage 1000.
Moreover, in the years since the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States, what the United States has said and done has always challenged China's bottom line.
First of all, they are inconsistent with their words and deeds, and they wantonly interfere in the Taiwan issue.
During the first contact between China and the United States, Nixon and China signed the "Shanghai Joint Communique" and promised that he would never support the Kuomintang regime again, would not support any form of "Taiwan independence," and would not be able to interfere in China's internal affairs or interfere in the Taiwan issue with armed force.
After the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States took advantage of us, and then kicked us out of the way and began to suppress China.
Since China began to carry out reform and opening up, the United States has not stopped for a day, and has successively created the Taiwan Strait crisis in '96, the Yinhe incident, and the bombing of the embassy of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, all of which are absolute challenges to China's bottom line and sovereignty.
Moreover, the United States has always pursued hegemony, and has never regarded China as an ally, and if the Soviet Union falls, it will engage China, and if there is no China, there will be other world's second largest economies.
In short, the second child must not be stronger than me, nor can he be similar to me, and must be firmly controlled by me, which is the hegemony that the United States wants.
Since China has become the world's second largest economy, the trade war between the United States and the United States has never stopped.
Now that AI is rising, Lao Mei has begun to control China's professional graphics cards again, strictly prohibiting the sale of all high-computing power graphics cards.
From this point of view, in order to achieve these points, Lao Mei really has to take a look at what she has done.
Moreover, what is most incomprehensible to China is that in the struggle between the two parties in the United States, anti-China seems to have become politically correct, and every time the United States elections, both sides have to pull China out and toss it to see who has a tougher attitude towards China.
From a long-term perspective, Blinken's visit to China is definitely to make up for the previous measures of the Biden administration.
First, the United States really cannot get into too much trouble with China at present, after all, it is impossible for the United States to point to a Europe to feed itself, and if the world's second largest economy completely breaks with the United States, it will definitely have a huge impact on the world pattern.
Clearly, the United States is not prepared to deal with this.
Moreover, under today's international trend, it seems that the advantages of the United States have gradually collapsed, and even begun to disappear.
Just by the operation of harvesting Europe from the Russian-Ukrainian war, it is enough to see that the United States is really poor now, and even began to do whatever it takes for the return of capital.
So in today's increasingly fierce Sino-US trade war, is it really possible for the United States to take the initiative to reconcile with China? Are these goodwill signals released by Blinken's visit to China a delaying tactic by the United States, or does the United States really want peaceful development?
In fact, we should borrow a sentence from Chairman Mao here: "The heart of the US imperialists will not die." ”
Changes in U.S.-China relations
In April 2024, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken visited China and sent a positive signal of political cooperation.
But before that, China and the United States can be said to have been incompatible, and China accuses the United States of handing knives to Ukraine and letting NATO expand the situation between Russia and Ukraine.
The United States, on the other hand, has slandered China for providing weapons and military assistance to Moscow.
In addition, the trade war between the two sides is also very happy, and it seems that it has reached an irreconcilable level.
But at this juncture, U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken's sudden visit to China is reminiscent of the U.S.-China meeting 50 years ago.
In 1971, Kissinger, who was also the US Secretary of State, visited China and successfully eased Sino-US relations at a time when Sino-Soviet relations were completely broken and tense.
The following year, U.S. President Richard Nixon's visit to China once again sent a signal of goodwill and successfully signed a joint communiqué with China.
At this point, China completely changed from an ally of the socialist camp of the Soviet Union to an ally of the Western camp of the United States.
At that time, China's diplomacy was blocked and it was in a difficult period, and it was actually very rare to have such an opportunity to break the situation.
This is also the first time that Lao, the United States and New China have reconciled with each other since the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea.
Since the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression, the United States has had better relations with the Kuomintang and has greatly supported Chiang Kai-shek.
Wooing China had three undeniable benefits for the United States at the time.
First, although China was not a world power at that time, its position in Asia was also very important, after all, China's size was there.
Moreover, China and the Soviet Union have completely broken up and there is no turning back, so to win over China at this time is undoubtedly to bury an atomic bomb in the Soviet Union, which will make it difficult for the Soviet Union to sit still.
Second, the Chiang Kai-shek government in Taiwan at that time had lost its usefulness to the United States, and the United States wanted to kick them, and the establishment of diplomatic relations with the mainland was the best excuse.
Third, China's cheap labor and land were the best targets for the United States to relocate manufacturing at that time.
Therefore, the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States is an absolute win-win situation for both sides, and China also has reasons why China cannot refuse to engage with China and the United States at that time.
First, China's diplomatic undertaking has been close to stagnation for many years, and with the exception of Asian, African, and Latin American countries that have friendly relations with us, almost all Western countries have followed the pace of the United States and blockaded China.
Engagement with the United States could break China's long-standing isolation.
Second, at that time, relations between China and the Soviet Union broke down, and China directly became a force isolated by the whole world, and during the Cold War, it did not belong to either the Soviet camp or the American camp, which was actually a very dangerous thing.
Third, at that time, China's productivity level was still relatively backward, and the United States could learn from many advanced production methods.
So, in this way, China and the United States took what they needed and signed the Sino-US Shanghai Joint Communiqué in a very pleasant atmosphere.
But it has to be said that China is still too naïve and pays too much attention to the spirit of contract.
We thought that if the United States said that it would not interfere in Taiwan, it would never come up with it again, but the result was that after the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States found that China had become a new threat to their hegemonism, so it began to regard China as a mortal enemy again, until today.
Therefore, in the course of history, we have finally learned that development is the last word.
All countries will only engage in diplomacy for their own benefit, and being able to provide mutual benefit is the most basic element and a prerequisite for qualifying to play the world table.
And how big your fist is can really determine the status and voice of this country in the world.
Blinken's visit to China this time can at least show that the current attitude of the US side is still mainly based on relaxation, on the one hand, it wants to sanction China, and on the other hand, it does not dare to completely tear its face with China, which is what the United States wants at present.
Today, the United States is in a mess, the economy is declining, and the dollar's influence around the world is weakening.
How to bring the United States back to the top of the world is something that all American presidents can't sleep on every day.
However, the essence of capitalism is to exploit and divert contradictions, and the United States cannot play with China in trade, so it can only engage in so-called sanctions.
At present, the United States has even coined a new term, which is called China's "excess."
How it ends
In 2024, U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken will visit China one after another.
Most importantly, during the meeting, Blinken expressed concern about "China's manufacturing 'overcapacity' and the consequences for the global economy." ”
Obviously, this is just a polite remark, which is translated into human terms, that China's current productive forces are too strong, and they have squeezed the market of the United States.
When the market economy can no longer play, it has begun to engage in sanctions again, which is the usual method of the United States.
You reason with him, he plays hooligan with you, you play hooligan with him, he runs in front of the whole world and accuses you from the moral high ground.
And when Blinken said the so-called surplus, he was referring to China's trams.
At present, the tram ownership rate in China's big cities can basically reach more than 30%, and some cities can even be half of the petrol cars.
This is also because China's new energy vehicle companies have been really competitive in recent years, and the configuration of more than 100,000 cars is the same as that of more than 300,000 joint venture cars, which is also the core competitiveness of domestic cars.
However, last year, China's exports of new energy vehicles accounted for only 12% of production, which was said to be overcapacity by the United States.
But then again, is there really such a thing as "overcapacity" in China?
And China's overcapacity has also led to the closure of enterprises in the United States and the loss of factories? Isn't that what you brought on yourself?
The market economy and the capitalist system are the first to start playing in the United States, under the trend of globalization, free trade is also advocated by everyone, and now China has only exported 12% of the trams to overcapacity, so what is Tesla?
Not only that, Blinken also raised the so-called "issue of taking sides", before visiting China, Blinken attended the foreign ministers' meeting in Italy, and put forward a remark called: "You can't please both sides".
However, facts have proven that the "one-sided" policy we formulated at the beginning of the founding of New China is not applicable to the current multipolar world.
Moreover, China has never been aligned and has never taken sides.
And Blinken's goal is simple: to use this method to sow discord between China and other Western countries.
The implication of his rhetoric is that international disputes are black and white, that there is no side or alliance, that there are either friends or enemies, and that there are no gray areas.
But in fact, there are many gray areas in this world, everything in the world is not extreme, nor is it black and white, and Blinken's remarks can only deceive fools.
Of course, since Blinken is willing to visit China, he is certainly not here to make trouble, but also with the sincerity to solve the problem, or the compromise of both sides taking a step back.
However, how the bilateral relationship between China and the United States can develop and how far it can go depends entirely on the United States, not China.
China has always been happy to develop peacefully with the rest of the world, but the United States wants to play the hegemonic game, and this is the essence of the contradictions between China and the United States.
But the United States today is no longer as hegemonic as it was twenty or thirty years ago.
Now, Europe is waking up like a dream, knowing that the United States has been sucking their blood, and the Russian-Ukrainian war has been frantically handed over by the United States, and it has also pulled Europe to the end, which has caused Eastern European capital to begin to flee frantically and return to the United States, making the United States return a large wave of blood.
Today, when the whole world is engaged in de-dollarization, this is indeed one of the few happy things in the United States in recent times.
And peaceful development is exactly what the United States wants the most, and the world that the United States wants the most is that the people below are fighting each other, and they support this today and that tomorrow, buying and selling weapons and arms, being idle and waiting for capital to run to the safe United States.
But today's United States seems to be a little too much to play.
Macron has repeatedly urged the United States to intervene in Russia and Ukraine, but the United States still sits firmly on the Diaoyutai and has not even listened to a word.
After a long time, it is not impossible for Europe and the United States to turn around and go it alone.
Therefore, Blinken now urgently needs to balance the relationship between China and the United States, and although he is not an ally, he must not be a mortal enemy.
Otherwise, the United States may one day be isolated by the whole world.
But in any case, trying to get the United States to accept the main theme of peaceful development is contrary to the capitalist system in the United States.
It is true that it is up to the United States to maintain the current world pattern and whether the United States is willing to develop peacefully or not, but China will not be afraid of any challenges now.
At least from the current point of view, Sino-US relations will never ease in a short period of time, and the honeymoon period between China and the United States may never be repeated.
If you like my articles, you can click "Follow" and receive the article push as soon as you become a fan. Finally, due to the rules of the platform, you will only be considered a fan if you interact with me.