Blinken sounds a rallying cry for a ‘new cold war’ that US cannot win

 ;How Joe Biden's War with China is Making the USA Weaker

;

;

0:13 / 5:33

Is China a threat? Andrew Marr questions CCP spokesperson

US Secretary of State Antony Blinken Photo: AFP

The growing US' geopolitical competition with Russia and China marks the end of the post-Cold War world order, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken said, speaking at the Johns Hopkins University's School of Advanced International Studies on Wednesday. "What we are experiencing now is more than a test of the post-Cold War order. It's the end of it," he noted. "Decades of relative geopolitical stability have given way to an intensifying competition with authoritarian powers, revisionist powers." This statement appears to be a rallying cry for a "new cold war."

Since the post-Cold War order is coming to an end, what kind of new world order does the US want? Various signs indicate that the US wants major power competition and camp confrontation in order to maintain its global hegemony, even at the expense of the interests of other countries, including allies, and partner nations. However, the reality is that major power competition goes against the trend of the times and cannot solve the US' own problems and the challenges facing the world. It will only further divide the world, leading the world to slide toward a more dangerous cliff edge.

Regarding Blinken's remarks, there are two main points to consider. Firstly, Blinken was creating a sense of crisis in the world. The underlying message to US allies and other countries is that there are challengers, particularly China and Russia, who want to change the existing order. Secondly, Blinken's remarks also reflect a sense of anxiety in the US. The US is attempting to slow down China's rise through strategic competition, while hoping to sustain its hegemony without jeopardizing its own interests. However, it seems that the US has no clear solution to this dilemma.

China is one of the beneficiaries of the existing system and does not seek to challenge or subvert this order. However, the US has viewed any legitimate demand made by China, even those that reflect the reasonable demands of the majority of developing countries, as a challenge and ill-intentioned sabotage.

Xin Qiang, deputy director of the American Studies Center of Fudan University, believes that US irrational crackdown on China will only irritate China and other developing countries. Many developing countries share common demands with China, but the US opposes whatever China proposes and intends to strangle its legitimate right for development. This will ultimately lead to the destruction of the existing international order and be counterproductive to the US' goals.

The US believes that by containing China, it will gain an advantage. However, whatever damage they're doing to China, it also backfires on the US and even the world.

The US now sees China as a competitor and challenger, opposing and obstructing anything that may benefit China, regardless of its impact on the US. This approach not only fails to maintain US hegemony but also leads it further away from the right direction. 

Today, the US is embroiled in simultaneous confrontations with China and Russia. The US needs to think carefully, as it will be more difficult to engage in a "new cold war" compared to the previous one. In the 1970s, the US GDP accounted for nearly one-third of the global total, but now it is only one-fourth. Its two major opponents are the nuclear power Russia and the economic powerhouse China. In order to defeat Russia, the US must ultimately dismantle its nuclear deterrence, which would be a thrilling adventure. 

As for China, the US is attempting to stifle its development by imposing unlimited technological restrictions, but it is unable to completely decouple from China economically. For the US and its main allies, China is either their largest single trading partner or one of the largest. Today, the US is a reckless strategic aggressor, attempting to unite its relatively weaker strength with its allies to wage a new cold war. It should be noted that the power of US allies has declined significantly, and the unity of the "West" is crippled due to the US transitioning from a "blood donor" to a "vampire".

The current generation of American elites arrogantly seeks to replicate the victory of the Cold War, but they will never succeed. Instead, the US will face a different ending.

Source link

TikTok officially launches e-commerce services in US despite crackdown

TikTok, the popular short-video app owned by Chinese technology company ByteDance, officially launched its e-commerce business in the US after months of testing. The platform, with 150 million monthly active users, is expected to play a catfish role in North America's livestreaming e-commerce sector despite growing uncertainties about a potential US crackdown, industry analysts said.

Related posts:

World needs more than ‘beautiful words’ from the US: Global Times editorial

'We lied, we cheated, we stole', ‘the Glory of American experiment’ by former US Secretary of State/Ex-CIA director Mike Pompeo

Global connection, disconnection, reconnection

Xi emphasizes inclusiveness, rejects zero-sum game match his thoughts, while Biden’s speech plays with words and ideas at UN

US can't accept painful fact that China is now its equal: Martin Jacques

International community must take action to oppose the 'new Cold War'

 

Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

The direction represented by the US-Japan-South Korea summit is severely misaligned

South Korea has further "Japanized", becoming a more thorough servant of the US. South Korea faces security dilemma of Korean Peninsula, and its prosperity is more fragile than Japan's, requiring greater political wisdom to protect its own development environment: Media professional Hu Xijin

If recent developments in the three major areas of politics and diplomacy, international trade and economics, and military in the US are looked at together, there will be a chilling discovery. This week, the leaders of the US, Japan, and South Korea will hold a meeting at Camp David, a retreat of US presidents. This kind of summit is the first in the history of these three countries, and its target against China is no longer concealed. According to reports from Japanese media, Japan and the US will also agree this week to jointly develop an interceptor missile "to counter hypersonic warheads being developed by China, Russia and North Korea." As for the executive order on introducing investment restrictions on China recently signed by US President Joe Biden, its negative impacts are spreading and fermenting.

The actions and policy measures of the US mentioned above are all marked by a strong "new Cold War" color and exhibit a trend of continuity and escalating intensity. Can they be characterized as "new Cold War" thinking or actions? This can be discerned through the following four criteria. First, is it confrontational zero-sum competition or cooperative mutual benefit? Second, does it involve ideological delineation or equal exchange, mutual learning, and peaceful coexistence among different civilizations? Third, does it create cliques and alliances for confrontation or does it promote openness, inclusivity, and the construction of a community with a shared future for mankind? Fourth, does it resort to containment and suppression against perceived competitors, or does it engage in benign competition within the scope of international rules and principles? Upon comparison, the answer becomes self-evident.

Just as the drumbeats of the "new Cold War" are becoming more frequent and the smell of gunpowder more suffocating, prominent figures in the White House, including President Biden, have been emphasizing on various occasions that the US "does not seek a "new Cold War"," that "the US must reject neo-containment," and that "Washington should learn from the lessons of the Cold War and the old Cold War construct of blocs is not coherent." This has created a strange scene where there is not just a departure but even a contradiction between the actions and statements of the US, as well as between US self-assessment and the real impressions of the outside world about it. This issue goes beyond American hypocrisy or lack of self-awareness; it harbors a significant underlying risk.

There are at least two possibilities. The first one is that the US knows it is engaged in a "new Cold War" and is well aware that people all around the world, including Americans, strongly oppose and are deeply concerned about a "new Cold War." In other words, the US realizes that this is a highly risky undertaking and therefore would never admit to it. Instead, it might label its actions with a new term to deceive the world.

The second scenario is that the US has actually initiated a "new Cold War," but it does not really think that it is engaging in a "new Cold War." This will have more serious consequences than the first scenario, because the US not only refuses to make a reflection and change its course, but also will gain a stronger "moral drive" from self-hypnosis. In order to wake the US up from its pretended or genuine sleep, the international community needs to strengthen its resistance and criticism against the US' initiation of a "new Cold War" and take actions.

Regardless of what the US diplomatic strategists say or think, their actions speak louder. When faced with international challenges, especially when dealing with countries that have similar power with the US but different political and cultural backgrounds from the US, they habitually and unconsciously refer to the Cold War experience. They sometimes even directly resort to Cold War tactics, without taking off the "Cold War glasses" to view the world and era that have already undergone tremendous changes, even though they may also know that this is wrong and dangerous.

An article in the American magazine Foreign Affairs points out that Cold War history has become a straitjacket constraining how Americans perceive the world, including making Americans struggle to understand gray areas between friend and foe, making negotiations with rivals appear to carry impossibly high stakes and making it hard for Americans to imagine a less-militarized foreign policy.

The deeper the misunderstandings of history and reality, the stronger the limitations and misguidance of Cold War thinking on American foreign policy decision-makers. Binary thinking makes it impossible to understand the complexity and richness of a multipolar world, and severely lacks imagination for the future. The diplomatic strategies and approaches formulated based on this have distorted international politics.

More specifically, Washington has misunderstood history, misjudged the times, and misunderstood the Communist Party of China and the Chinese people. The destructive power of "new Cold War" is world-class, and the fate of all humanity stands at a crossroads. American political elites may believe that the US was the winner of the Cold War, which is controversial, but it is certain that the US cannot be the winner of the "new Cold War" and must bear historical responsibility for today's choices.

Source link

RELATED ARTICLES

The Camp David summit wants to forcefully add drama to ASEAN: Global Times editorial

The contrast between the words and actions of the US itself, combined with the actual comparison between China and the US, provides the most vivid display for ASEAN and other countries around the world.

China lodges solemn representations with relevant parties in Camp David summit on Taiwan question and South China Sea issue: FM

​China expresses strong dissatisfaction and has lodged solemn representations with relevant parties after the leaders of the US, Japan and South Korea smeared and attacked China on the Taiwan question and South China Sea issue during the Camp David summit, ...

Camp David summit serves as hypocritical anti-China pantomime with a 'mini-NATO' in the making: analysts

Despite the US President Joe Biden claimed that the US-Japan-South Korea summit at the US presidential retreat Camp David "is ...

Unscrupulous attacks on China make US nastier and nastier: Global Times editorial

As the election campaign progresses, Washington's bottom line will sink lower and lower, and more sensational claims are likely to come out. The unscrupulous smearing and attacking of China has made the US nastier and nastier.

Chinese senior diplomat calls to resist Cold War mentality at BRICS security meetings

Cyber security as well as other threats in traditional and non-traditional security fields have taken the spotlight at ...

New China-US cold war not an inevitable destiny

The US is struggling to engage in decoupling both domestically and internationally, and to provoke a war would ...

Facts, lessons still need to be told 78 years after Japan surrender in war

Seventy eight years ago, the Japanese government officially announced its unconditional surrender, signifying the end of World War II and the victory of people worldwide against fascism. Despite post-war efforts by the Allied powers, Japan's war criminals were subjected to ...

Int'l Memorial Day for 'Comfort Women' marked in China with fewer than 20 survivors still alive

Monday marks the 11th International Memorial Day for the “Comfort Women,” which refers to victims forced into sexual slavery by Japanese troops during World War II. More than 200,000 Chinese women were tortured between 1931 and 1945 with fewer than

Learning history is to treasure peace: head of Museum of the War of Chinese People's Resistance Against Japanese Aggression

August 15 marks the 78th anniversary of Japan's surrender in World War II, following with September 3, China's Anti-Japanese War Victory Day.

Related posts:

Pentagon planning Cold War against China - AirSea Battle concept!

World needs more than ‘beautiful words’ from the US: Global Times editorial

'We lied, we cheated, we stole', ‘the Glory of American experiment’ by former US Secretary of State/Ex-CIA director Mike Pompeo