This world is still a world where the weak eat the strong, and the weak and the strong are not talking about rules, but strength.
The South China Sea, which was not very lively at the beginning, became lively because of the successive hype of the United States. For the United States, he has been the "protagonist" for too long, but the United States seems to have forgotten that he was also a "supporting role" at that time.
China did not compromise decades ago, and now, it is even more impossible for us to "submit" to the United States.
On August 9, china and the United States engaged in a heated confrontation at an online meeting of the United Nations Security Council on maritime security, according to the Lianhe Zaobao. At the meeting, Blinken criticized China's actions in the South China Sea without naming names, warning that the conflict that erupted in the area "will have serious global consequences for security and commerce."
The US warning against China in the South China Sea deserves our attention in two aspects, one is that the allegation that our claim to sovereignty in the South China Sea does not conform to national law, which is completely untenable, and our claim does not violate the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, and second, our claim has a historical basis.
We were the first to make relevant claims, which were allowed by the international law at that time, and for a long time, no country in the international community questioned our claims, which was tacitly accepted.
In response to Blinken's criticism, the Chinese side fought back, and the United States, as a country outside the region, has often driven advanced ships and planes into the South China Sea, wantonly provoked and openly provoked dissension among regional countries, which is the greatest threat to the stability of the South China Sea. "The United States is not qualified to make irresponsible remarks on the South China Sea issue."
In fact, the United States is indeed not qualified.
U.S. Secretary of State Blinken has spoken to China as an enforcer and supervisor of the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, but the reality is that the United States has no right or qualification to play such an identity, for the simple reason that the United States itself is not a party to the Convention, where does it have the qualifications to point fingers at China?
Not only is the United States not a party, but the United States has always used international rules as they are useful and discarded when they are useless. Whoever dares to use "international rules" to pressure the United States will be sanctioned.
In this area, the United States has long been a bad record.
For example, in 1986 the Government of Nicaragua filed a complaint before the International Court of Justice against the United States Government for laying mines (illegal use of force) in Nicaraguan seaports. The final decision of the International Tribunal entered into force. As a result, the U.S. government refused to honor the judgment and withdrew from the International Court of Justice.
And in 2020, the ICC decided to investigate the U.S. war crimes committed in Afghanistan, only to have Trump launch economic and travel sanctions against ICC personnel. (It is also to say that Wang is simply ignoring international rules: no one from the International Criminal Court is allowed to enter the United States to investigate.)
It can be seen that in the eyes of the United States, what is in line with the interests of the United States is the rule, and what is not in the interest is nothing.
On the South China Sea issue, China will not shrink back from its own views. In fact, modern China has always changed its destiny through struggle. Leaving aside the fact that China's choice changed the direction of the world situation during the Cold War period, China's struggle has never stopped, and China has never chosen to compromise, just in the modern period of the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea, the Sino-Indian Self-Defense Counterattack, the Treasure Island Self-Defense Counterattack, the War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Vietnam, and the War of Self-Defense against Vietnam.
China's peace has never been given by the United States, but has been won by itself. Looking back at the above history, what right does Blinken have to accuse China of undermining peace?
Decades ago we did not compromise, and now we are even less likely to "succumb" to the United States.
These histories are not far away from us, but they also give us the greatest reminder: in the face of the enemy, we must struggle, struggle, or struggle.