[Disclaimer: The content of this article is written with authoritative sources and personal opinions]
Text | Overseas TestimonialTalk
Edit | Overseas TestimonialTalk
On September 6, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg made a shocking remark in Oslo, the capital of Norway. He accused China of being an "important promoter" of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, and pointed out two paths for China: either stop supporting Russia or face consequences of damaged interests and reputation. As soon as these remarks came out, they immediately caused an uproar in the field of international public opinion.
Loading...
To be honest, Stoltenberg's words sounded like "harsh words". Because, at the same time as he said this, NATO warships of many countries had already arrived in the waters of the Asia-Pacific region one after another.
Germany's frigate "Baden-Württemberg" and supply ship "Frankfurt am Main" are preparing to cross the Taiwan Strait, Italy's aircraft carrier "Cavour" has docked at the port of Yokosuka in Japan, and warships from United Kingdom, France, and Netherlands are also eager to try. This battle does seem to be not small.
China, however, doesn't seem to care too much about it. At the same time as NATO warships arrived in the Asia-Pacific region, China and Russia also held the "Northern · Joint-2024" exercises in the Sea of Japan and the Sea of Okhotsk. The scale of the exercise is not small, and the Russia Defense Ministry also announced that they are also holding the "Ocean-2024" exercise, which is expected to involve more than 400 warships, submarines and auxiliary fleet support ships. It seems that China and Russia are not vegetarians either.
Moreover, when the NATO secretary general is "unashamed" about China, the leaders of some European countries have come to visit China one after another. From September 8 to 11, Spain Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez paid an official visit to China. From September 9 to 11, Norway Prime Minister Støre also came to China. The visit of these two European leaders seems to be somewhat inconsistent with the attitude of the NATO secretary general.
Norway Prime Minister Støre said that although there are some differences between the two sides, the two countries can still become partners in the future. He also stressed that Norway must ensure economic and trade exchanges with China and will not focus on United States. These words sound very different from the attitude of the NATO secretary general.
The main purpose of Spain Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez's visit to China is to strengthen business ties between China and Spain. He also intends to discuss issues such as the EU's tariffs on Chinese electric vehicles and China's launch of an anti-dumping investigation into EU imports of pork and pig by-products. It seems that political differences are less important in the face of economic interests.
What is even more interesting is that there is also news within the EU that some countries want to join the BRICS. In Bulgaria, there was a heated debate at the National Assembly, with calls for Bulgaria to leave the EU and join the BRICS. Similar calls have been heard within France, with Shoprad, a former member of the European Parliament from France, even saying that France should join the BRICS.
Looking back at NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg's remarks, he accused China of being an "important promoter" of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, arguing that China's continued "adding fuel to the fire" of the conflict in Ukraine would adversely affect its interests and reputation. However, this argument is completely untenable.
China has always advocated the peaceful settlement of international disputes, and has always called on the two sides to resolve the conflict through dialogue and negotiation during the Russia-Ukraine conflict. China has not supplied weapons to either side, let alone directly participated in the conflict. On the contrary, it is some NATO member states that continue to supply weapons to Ukraine, which has led to the continued escalation of the conflict.
Moreover, China and Russia do have close economic and trade exchanges, but this is a normal state-to-state relationship. Is it because Russia is involved in the conflict that other countries will cut off all ties with Russia? Such an approach would not only be inconsistent with the basic norms governing international relations, but would also have serious repercussions for the global economy.
In addition, the rationality of NATO's existence as a product of the Cold War era is itself debatable. Since the end of the Cold War, NATO has not only not disbanded, but has continued to expand eastward, and this behavior itself is one of the important reasons for the current international tension.
Therefore, Stoltenberg's remarks seem to be tough, but in fact they are trying to shift the blame for provoking the conflict between Russia and Ukraine to China. Such an approach is not only irresponsible, but also does nothing to solve current international problems.
Moreover, in the face of multinational warships, China has the strength to ignore it, and China has the confidence to "resist" both economically and militarily.
Silence does not mean weakness. On the contrary, this silence demonstrates China's self-confidence and determination. In the face of unjustified accusations, China has chosen to respond with concrete actions, which is more convincing than a battle of words.
China has also always advocated building a community with a shared future for mankind and advocating mutually beneficial and win-win international relations. In the face of NATO's provocations, China has chosen not to respond positively, but to continue to advance its foreign policy, which reflects China's great power demeanor.
China is also making its position clear with concrete actions. Holding joint military exercises with Russia is sending a clear signal to the international community that China has the ability and determination to safeguard its own interests and regional stability.
At the same time, China's silence has given some European countries room to think. As we have seen, despite the tough attitude of the NATO Secretary General, the leaders of some European countries have chosen to visit China to seek greater cooperation. This shows that not all European countries agree with NATO's approach.
China is likely to continue to adhere to its path of peaceful development and will not change its strategic positioning due to external pressure. Both economically and militarily, China is capable of meeting a variety of challenges.
In the face of NATO's provocations and pressure from some Western countries, China has chosen a silent but firm attitude. This attitude not only reflects China's self-confidence and determination, but also leaves more possibilities for the future development of international relations. In this uncertain world, China's stability and rationality are undoubtedly a reassuring force.
In this contest without gunpowder, China has chosen its own way to deal with it. Perhaps, it is this kind of calmness and self-confidence that is the true demeanor of a great power.
What do you think about this? Feel free to leave a message in the comment area!