China

The fightback
User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 15, 2023 1:52 pm

Ministry rejects West's 'debt trap' claims
By ZHOU JIN | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-04-11 00:02

Image
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin speaks at a press conference in Beijing, China, April 10, 2023. [Photo/fmprc.gov.cn]

China is not the source of "debt traps" for African countries, but a partner that helps those nations get out of poverty traps, Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said on Monday.

Wang made the remark when commenting on recent criticism from United States Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen and World Bank President David Malpass, who both accused China of being a barrier to African countries' debt relief.

The spokesman rejected the accusations as groundless, saying that they are a "narrative trap" fabricated by Western politicians in an attempt to disrupt cooperation between China and developing countries.

These "tricks" have been seen through by developing countries and the international community, he said at a regular news conference.

China attaches high importance to and actively helps African countries deal with debt issues, and has also made the biggest contributions to the Group of 20 Debt Service Suspension Initiative, Wang said.

He cited a report released this week by Johns Hopkins University that said China had fulfilled its role "fairly well" as a responsible G20 stakeholder.

According to the available data, Chinese creditors accounted for 30 percent of all claims and contributed 63 percent of debt service suspensions in the countries that participated in the initiative, the report said.

Nigeria's Vice-President Yemi Osinbajo said last month that the preoccupation of Western governments and media with the so-called "China debt trap" might be an overreaction, and added that most African countries are rightly unapologetic about their close ties with China.

Africa needs the loans and infrastructure that China provides and the country shows up where and when the West will not, or is reluctant to, he said.

Wang said China has been committed to providing support for the economic and social growth of developing countries, including African nations, and has carried out investment and financing cooperation with those countries on the basis of equality and mutual benefit.

World Bank data shows that three-quarters of external debt in African countries is held by multilateral financial institutions and commercial creditors. The debt held by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund accounts for nearly 70 percent of the total amount held by multilateral financial institutions, according to Wang.

Noting that the US is the biggest shareholder in the World Bank and the IMF, Wang urged Washington to step up efforts to promote greater participation of multilateral financial institutions and commercial creditors in handling Africa's debt issues.

In another development, Wang on Monday expressed firm opposition to a visit by India's Home Minister Amit Shah to Zangnan in the south of China's Tibet autonomous region.

The visit violated China's territorial sovereignty, and is not conducive to the peace and tranquillity of the border region, Wang said.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... b9528.html

********

Image

US uses Taiwan as pawn for war on China
In the following article, which originally appeared in Workers World, Sara Flounders, a contributing editor to the newspaper and a member of our advisory group, unmasks and dissects the US plans for war against China, notably with Taiwan as a pretext.

Sara notes that, “Taiwan, like Ukraine, is a pawn. The military and economic threats on both China and Russia are a desperate bid to quash the emergence of a multipolar world.” She proceeds to outline how, “US imperialist hegemony is being challenged from every side,” citing de-dollarization, the strength of China’s economy, its position in international trade, and the Belt and Road Initiative.

“China,” she notes, “and a growing number of countries are in an increasingly stronger position to resist the U.S.’s unequal demands. Countries with three-quarters of the world’s population refused to go along with sanctions on Russia. Will they be willing to accept US sanctions on China?”

Sara explains that, “Taiwan’s trade with China is far bigger than its trade with the US. Mainland China and Hong Kong accounted for 42% of Taiwan’s exports last year, while the US had only a 15% share, according to official Taiwan data. For Taiwan’s imports, mainland China and Hong Kong again ranked first with a 22% share. The US only had a 10% share, ranking behind Japan, Europe and Southeast Asia. South Korea and Japan have greater trade levels with China than with the US.” For US imperialism, the problem is how to make countries and regions in the Asia-Pacific act against their own economic interests.

Explaining the US military moves in some detail, Sara writes that the US is frantically seeking to stop China’s economic rise by militarily encircling it, aiming to create an Asian version of NATO. In its drive to find an excuse for war, the US is reversing the One China policy to which it has committed over the last 50 years.

Her article ends with the militant call: We must mobilize! US hands off China!
While the U.S.-NATO war against Russia in Ukraine continues unabated, the U.S. is preparing at breakneck speed for war with China, using Taiwan as the excuse. Taiwan, like Ukraine, is a pawn. The military and economic threats on both China and Russia are a desperate bid to quash the emergence of a multipolar world.

U.S. imperialist hegemony is being challenged from every side. De-dollarization among major economies of the Global South is a component of trade agreements among the powerful emerging economies of China, Russia, Iran, Brazil, India, Malaysia and South Africa. Even Saudi Arabia, a reactionary bulwark of U.S. domination in West Asia, is willing to seek new agreements with Iran and is interested in trading their oil in Chinese yuan renminbi, rather than be wholly dependent on U.S. dollars.

Even more threatening to U.S. capitalists is that China is developing trade relations with the 40 countries sanctioned by Washington, and they are doing this by barter and direct currency exchanges. This works around the almighty dollar, the international reserve currency that has dominated global trade and capital flows for 100 years.

These are not the first efforts to find a replacement to U.S. dollar domination. There is no crime that U.S. imperialism wouldn’t commit to preserve the U.S. dollar. Both oil rich Iraq, which proposed a currency based on the dinar in 1990 and Libya, which attempted an African currency in 2010 found they had fabulous resources but no protection from U.S. bombs. Their efforts at sovereignty led to their brutal destruction by U.S. imperialism.

The aspiration to break free of U.S. corporate control is today being challenged by many more countries. China is a more formidable opponent.China is surpassing the U.S. in gross domestic product and the development of its economy. China is the top trading partner to more than 120 countries and the largest external trading partner of the European Union.

The ability of China to provide trillions of dollars in development funds through the Belt and Road Initiative means that developing countries can now have more favorable trade relations without the International Monetary Fund and World Bank’s onerous conditions. This option is a threat to every U.S. bank and U.S.-controlled financial institution.

China and a growing number of countries are in an increasingly stronger position to resist the U.S.’s unequal demands. Countries with three-quarters of the world’s population refused to go along with sanctions on Russia. Will they be willing to accept U.S. sanctions on China?

All of this poses a threat to the hegemony of the U.S., the center of world imperialism. The capitalist system is relentlessly driven to expand or die — and now it is shrinking. For multibillionaires and corporate CEOs, this is a life-or-death crisis.

Provoking conflict to retain hegemony.
U.S. strategy is to sabotage Taiwan and its trade with China, by creating conflicts and imposing sanctions. These desperate efforts to reverse Washington’s declining global position will disrupt the global economy.

Presently Taiwan’s trade with China is far bigger than its trade with the U.S. Mainland China and Hong Kong accounted for 42% of Taiwan’s exports last year, while the U.S. had only a 15% share, according to official Taiwan data.

For Taiwan’s imports, mainland China and Hong Kong again ranked first with a 22% share. The U.S. only had a 10% share, ranking behind Japan, Europe and Southeast Asia. South Korea and Japan have greater trade levels with China than with the U.S. (cnbc.com)

The problem U.S. imperialists face is how to reverse this — how to force countries in the Asia Pacific to act against their own economic interests.

The U.S.-NATO war in Ukraine was a strategy to impose sanctions on Russia and to break the EU’s trade with Russia. In 2020 the EU was Russia’s first trading partner; 36.5% of Russia’s imports came from the EU, and 37.9% of its exports went to the EU. The EU was the largest investor in Russia. Russian trade with the EU has since been reduced to 5.8%. (tinyurl.com/55fh6j6f)

The U.S.-NATO war in Ukraine has failed to destabilize and collapse Russia, as the U.S. had hoped. But the war devastated the economy of Ukraine and disrupted the EU, which went along with the sanctions demanded by the U.S. The economies of Europe have suffered greatly. Inflation, recession and supply-chain chaos due to sanctions have harshly cut into the EU’s own markets and increased European dependence on the U.S.

U.S. threats and escalating demands to sanction China will severely damage the economies of Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines.

To force high-tech companies to decouple from the People’s Republic of China, U.S. imperialism needs a political-military crisis with China. Every U.S. plan for sanctions on China starts with a manufactured crisis over Taiwan.

The U.S. is frantically seeking to stop China’s economic rise by militarily encircling it. Utilizing Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Australia and the Philippines, U.S. strategy is to create an Asian version of NATO, a military alliance to disrupt economic cooperation in Asia. This is a terrible danger to the people of Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China. Throughout the entire region, peoples face a U.S.-created crisis that can destroy their lives and futures and ruin their economies.

Poor and working people in the U.S. will be forced to pay for this war, as they pay for every war with steadily deteriorating conditions.

China is one!
In the drive to find an excuse for war, the U.S. government is reversing a position Washington had agreed to and signed more than 50 years ago with China.

China has spent decades developing its economic relations with Taiwan; trade between the island and mainland China has grown, along with political and cultural relations. To counter this effort at peaceful reunification, the Pentagon is turning Taiwan into a porcupine, bristling with billions of dollars in military equipment. Another $10 billion in military aid was just promised.

Washington is openly violating three different signed agreements — joint communiques it made with China in 1972, 1979 and 1982 — affirming that China is one country and Taiwan is a province of China. Such commitments are the political foundation for China’s diplomatic relationship with the U.S. and with every country.

China has not threatened Taiwan. China has only asserted what is recognized by the U.S. and 181 other countries, as well as the United Nations and all international bodies: Taiwan is part of China. Taiwan’s own constitution affirms that Taiwan is a province of China. It is the U.S. that has broken its promises not to interrupt China’s efforts to reunify the island peacefully.

Instead of adherence to the One-China Policy, dangerous mobilization is taking place on military and political levels. The recent manufactured crisis over a Chinese hot air balloon followed by Congressional hearings grilling the CEO of TikTok represent new levels in psychological war propaganda, designed to convince the U.S. population that China is an enemy and a threat.

Democrats and Republicans try to outdo each other condemning China. Taiwan was referred to as “the beating heart to our Indo-Pacific strategy” by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez, a Democrat. (foreign.senate.gov)

Military preparations against China include U.S. pressure for Japan to double its military budget and become the third largest military in the world, in violation of the Japanese constitution.

A new agreement, announced Feb. 2, granted the U.S. military access to nine bases in the Philippines to counter China. Foreign bases are in direct violation of the Philippine constitution. In 1992 a massive peoples’ movement forced the U.S. to close its bases in the Philippines.

More ominously, in early February four-star Air Force Gen. Michael Minihan, head of the Pentagon’s Air Mobility Command, in a “leaked memo” predicted war with China over Taiwan in two years. Gen. Minihan oversees 107,000 airmen and 1,100 cargo, tanker and transport planes. The memo includes training, drills and preparations for war in 2025 and specific orders: “Defeat China” and “Be prepared for deployment at a moment’s notice.” (tinyurl.com/2a7ctjae)

Another threat was the largest-ever launch from a U.S. base of huge C-17 transport aircrafts Jan. 5, as training for a naval blockade of China. This is the opening round of a massive missile-and-air assault on mainland China — the Pentagon’s Air-Sea Battle strategy.

The U.S. Pacific Fleet consists of approximately 200 ships and submarines, nearly 1,200 aircraft and more than 130,000 sailors and civilian workers. The U.S. regularly sends naval patrols and destroyers through the 180-km-wide Taiwan Strait (about 112 miles).

China condemned these arrogant displays of U.S. military power as reckless, provocative and meant to apply pressure.

Taiwan’s ‘president’ visits U.S.
Inflated media coverage greeted the visit to New York City of Tsai Ing-wen, the so-called “president” of Taiwan. (“President” is in quotes because Taiwan is recognized as an island province of China and not as an independent country by the U.N. and 181 countries.)

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning objected to this Taiwanese delegation visit and the receptions held in Tsai Ing-wen’s honor, as a violation of the One-China Policy: “China firmly opposes any form of official interaction between the U.S. and Taiwan.” Mao Ning said the U.S. was “conducting dangerous activities that undermine the political foundation of bilateral ties.” (abcnews.go.com)

Xu Xueyuan, charge d’affaires at the Chinese embassy in Washington, said China does not accept the U.S. claims that Tsai’s trip is merely a “transit,” saying “the so-called ‘transit’ is merely a disguise to her true intention of seeking breakthrough and advocating Taiwan independence” and accuses the U.S. of allowing Tsai to “make a splash” and of arranging her meeting with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. (nbcnews.com)

While in New York City, Tsai Ing-wen was treated to a banquet and “Global Leadership” award from the Hudson Institute, an influential, right-wing think tank funded in part by Taiwan. The Brookings Institution, the Center for American Progress, the Center for a New American Security, the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Hudson Institute actively promote expanded arms sales and trade agreements with Taiwan and anti-China propaganda. These five prominent think tanks receive substantial funding from Taiwan.

The visit reinforces Tsai Ing-wen’s standing, at a time when she is in a seriously weakened political position. She was forced to resign as head of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party of Taiwan, after her party suffered a major setback in local elections in November, which was the DPP’s worst performance since its founding in 1986. The election debacle confirms that the DPP’s aggressive stand on independence is losing support in Taiwan.

Tsai Ing-wen’s visit to Guatemala and Belize, two of only 13 remaining countries that recognize Taiwan, was overshadowed by the Honduran Foreign Ministry’s announcement that its government now recognized “only one China in the world” and that Beijing “is the only legitimate government that represents all of China.”

The statement added that “Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory, and as of today the Honduran government has informed Taiwan of the severance of diplomatic relations, pledging not to have any official relationship or contact with Taiwan.” (pbs.org) Honduras is the ninth diplomatic ally Taiwan has lost since the pro-independence Tsai first took office in May 2016.

China has held a consistent, well-understood position on its sovereignty and territorial integrity that is recognized internationally in all world bodies. China has repeatedly asserted its right to resolve this unfinished national reunification. China’s long-held position is that cooperation, trade and development can overcome differences; it is the only way forward.

The preparation of U.S. imperialism for a possible war with China — surrounding it with military bases and nuclear weapons and military vessels — is a highly dangerous provocation. U.S. wars are for corporate profit.

We must mobilize! U.S. hands off China!

https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/10/u ... -on-china/

Image

The sudden arrival of a cold war with China
In the following article, which we are pleased to reprint from the Morning Star, Ken Livingstone, former Mayor of London (2000-2008), denounces the new cold war that has been instigated against China, in which Britain has once again followed behind the United States.

Outlining some of the hostile measures taken by the UK against China, Ken notes how recent ex-Prime Minister Liz Truss had been set to formally declare China to be an enemy of Britain while current Prime Minister Rishi Sunak describes the country as a “challenge to the world order.”

In contrast, Ken writes: “The rise of China is one of the greatest events in world history in my lifetime. When I was born, life expectancy in China was under 40. Around 90 per cent of the population was illiterate. The country had been torn apart by a century of foreign aggression, invasion, warlordism and civil wars. Millions died every year from floods and famine.

“What a contrast to today’s China, which is on the cusp of overtaking the US as the world’s greatest economy – a change unseen in over a century. China’s life expectancy has already overtaken that of the US… This economic transformation is one that all decent people should welcome.”

Ken compares the present policies towards China with the “golden era” declared by Prime Minister David Cameron and Chancellor George Osborne as recently as 2015 and adds that when he was elected Mayor in 2000, “I was determined that London would develop positive relations with China.” He adds:

“We opened offices for London in Beijing and Shanghai, encouraged Stock Exchange listings, brought the annual celebration of Chinese New Year to Trafalgar Square, and expanded co-operation in a whole range of sectors, such as fashion, design and the creative industries.”

Whilst such positive policies were broadly supported by successive Labour leaders: “Sadly, they now find little or no echo from Keir Starmer and his shadow foreign secretary David Lammy. Their political horizons seem confined to attempting to outdo the Tories as to who can be the most bellicose cold warrior.”

This establishment consensus is leading us into dangerous waters, such as the Aukus nuclear submarine deal with Australia and the United States. Britain is vastly increasing military spending at a time when, “an increasing number of people aren’t being forced to choose between heating and eating because they can’t afford either.”

Ken concludes: “Progressives in the labour movement need to… build the broadest possible alliance to reverse the slide to disaster.”
AS SOMEONE who lived through the first cold war against the Soviet Union and its allies, and who was in some important respects politically shaped by it — including in terms of my decades-long opposition to nuclear weapons — I recognise all too well the depressing signs of a new cold war against China, being fomented by the US, Britain and a handful of other countries.

Here in Britain, we’ve seen:

● A thriving relationship with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei scuppered at US insistence, leaving 5G infrastructure to be ripped out of our networks, increasing costs to the Treasury and leaving us in the broadband slow lane.

● A ban on the massively popular TikTok app on government devices.

● Attacks and threats to close Confucius Institutes, which play an invaluable role in lessening our educational deficit in the teaching of Chinese language and culture.

● Sanctions and refusal of investment from Chinese companies on dubious national security grounds, costing us jobs, markets and technical upskilling.

● A ban on the Chinese ambassador setting foot in the Palace of Westminster, instigated by a vociferous gang of right-wingers like Iain Duncan Smith.

Not surprisingly, all this, along with the attempts to blame China for the Covid pandemic from Donald Trump and his allies internationally, has led to an upsurge in racist attacks on members of Chinese and Asian communities.

Last year’s Conservative Party leadership contest became an unedifying race to the bottom, to which Rishi Sunak was dragged by Liz Truss. Had she not been ignominiously booted out of office in record time, Truss was set to formally declare China as an enemy of our country. For now, Sunak claims that China “is a country with fundamentally different values to ours and it represents a challenge to the world order.”

The rise of China is one of the greatest events in world history in my lifetime. When I was born, life expectancy in China was under 40. Around 90 per cent of the population was illiterate. The country had been torn apart by a century of foreign aggression, invasion, warlordism and civil wars. Millions died every year from floods and famine.

What a contrast to today’s China, which is on the cusp of overtaking the US as the world’s greatest economy – a change unseen in over a century. China’s life expectancy has already overtaken that of the US.

Going on World Bank figures, China has lifted some 800 million people out of poverty.

This economic transformation is one that all decent people should welcome.

The present new cold war against China stands in stark contrast to the situation just a few years ago. With the 2015 state visit of President Xi Jinping, PM David Cameron and his chancellor George Osborne declared that our relations had entered a “golden era.” Today, to even remotely echo their words is regarded as practically treasonous.

Twenty years ago, when I was elected London mayor in 2000, I was determined that London would develop positive relations with China. Whether as the world’s leading financial centre or as home to Europe’s largest Chinese community, this was a necessary and natural course of action for me.

Visiting China, it was clear that our counterparts there were equally invested in a thriving and mutually beneficial relationship. Of course, my policies were slated in the Tory press, but we pressed on.

We opened offices for London in Beijing and Shanghai, encouraged Stock Exchange listings, brought the annual celebration of Chinese New Year to Trafalgar Square, and expanded co-operation in a whole range of sectors, such as fashion, design and the creative industries.

The Daily Mail may not have liked it, but we were supported from the boardrooms of the City to the restaurants of Chinatown, and it brought benefits to every Londoner.

These are the policies that are needed today. Policies for peace and prosperity. Policies that were broadly supported by the most diverse range of Labour leaders, from Tony Blair through Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband to Jeremy Corbyn.

Sadly, they now find little or no echo from Keir Starmer and his shadow foreign secretary David Lammy. Their political horizons seem confined to attempting to outdo the Tories as to who can be the most bellicose cold warrior.

It is this new establishment political consensus that is leading to reckless adventures like the Aukus deal we have joined with Australia and the US.

This agreement, which will see Australia equipped with nuclear-powered submarines, will cost billions, flouts the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and heightens the danger of a catastrophic war with China, a nuclear power.

All this at a time when we face a cost-of-living crisis where an increasing number of people aren’t being forced to choose between heating and eating because they can’t afford either.

Where nurses and primary school teachers are among key workers increasingly reliant on food banks, which in turn are finding it increasingly difficult to meet the ever-growing demands placed on them.

Yet the government is committed to a massive increase in military spending levels that are already amongst the highest in the world.

And it is simply an obscene farce that, in this situation of huge economic difficulties, we should turn our backs on the huge opportunities offered by the Chinese market, in favour of squandering immense sums on nuclear arms, as part of stoking a potential conflict that would kill millions, would be utterly unnecessary, and which we couldn’t possibly win.

A cold war with China is against the interests of the British people, as is a new nuclear arms proliferation.

Progressives in the labour movement need to stand against them — and build the broadest possible alliance to reverse the slide to disaster.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/12/t ... ith-china/

***********

Image
Dragon back terraces, China (Source: McKay Savage, Wikimedia commons)

How China can prevent climate catastrophe? Moving humanity toward global ecological civilization
By David Schwartzman (Posted Apr 11, 2023)

Climate catastrophe? Aren’t we already witnessing climate catastrophe? As the most recent Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report tells us, there is still a chance to keep warming at no more than the 1.5°C target, but tipping points to climate catastrophes much worse than we are witnessing now will kick in if this target is breached. According to Kevin Anderson, a climate scientist at Manchester University, this IPCC report is too optimistic and neglects the interests of most of humanity living in the global South. Anderson estimates there is a 50 percent chance of meeting the 1.5°C target if global carbon dioxide emissions are reduced to zero by 2040.1

It is now crystal clear that ongoing wars, in particular the Ukraine war, create huge obstacles to the global cooperation necessary for any chance of meeting the 1.5°C warming target. Please take note of the Science editorial of April 1, 2022, “To solve climate, first achieve peace,” which recognized this obstacle and called for the imperative cooperation of the United States and China to reach the goal of climate security.2 Following the lead of China’s peace plan, we should support the call for an immediate ceasefire in the Ukraine war, and for all parties involved to negotiate.3 China is now being recognized as the leading peace force in the world with the recent success in bringing about better relations between long-term enemies Iran and Saudi Arabia, a reduction in tensions to the dismay of the United States and Israel, and likewise a potential basis for more effective struggle against these two repressive regimes by their own citizens. Since conventional oil has the lowest greenhouse gas footprint of the fossil fuels (with coal and natural gas having the highest footprint, to be phased out first), we should recognize the potential of oil-producing countries such as Saudi Arabia, Iran, and Venezuela of extracting the minimum amount of conventional oil necessary as an energy source to rapidly build renewable energy technologies especially in the Global South, while phasing out global fossil fuels as quickly as possible, and at the same time earning revenues from such production for improving the quality of life of their own people.4

It is precisely in the Middle East that China can take an historic lead in promoting a renewable energy transition and confront the increasing climate threat. China is the world leader in green capital, actually creating renewable energy supplies, but this green capital is still coupled in the Chinese economy with powerful sectors dedicated to continued implementation and imports of fossil fuels, as well as an ambitious plan to build hundreds of new nuclear fission reactors.5 Can China emerge to fulfill its claim that its goal is a new ecological civilization, that is, become the global leader opening a global ecosocialist path?6 This contingency will likely only be realized with class struggle led by China’s working class and allies. How can China become the global leader for climate security? One example is the termination of China’s plan to build hundreds of nuclear reactors, the rapid phaseout of coal, and the accelerated creation of renewable energy supplies. In a new Belt and Road Initiative, China could build solar power in the Arabian and Saharan Deserts to supply electricity to the whole region and Africa, indeed the whole world, while powering direct air capture of carbon dioxide (DAC) and permanent burial of carbon as carbonates in the crust of Oman. DAC with permanent burial in the crust as carbonates is a carbon removal technology that will be imperative, along with restoring natural ecosystems and replacing industrial agriculture with agroecologies, given that the atmospheric carbon dioxide level must be brought down to below 350 parts per million and kept there as the ocean re-equilibrates with the atmosphere.7

Of course, unless global fossil fuel consumption is ended soon, at the same time as there is a significant buildup of renewable energy supplies, the 1.5°C warming target will be exceeded. Therefore, the enemy of humanity, militarized fossil capital and its political instruments, must be defeated by a transnational movement led by the working class and its allies, in particular Indigenous communities. Promoting a global Green New Deal (GND) with a progressively increased ecosocialist character is a viable strategy to defeat militarized fossil capital, and in its initial stages should capture truly green capital as an ally.8 But green capital is a problematic ally, since it is also a driver of extractivism with its negative impacts. Therefore, transnational class struggle must also confront green capital with the goal of minimizing these impacts, with full respect for the rights of the peoples impacted, notably Indigenous communities around the world and peoples in the Global South. There are already solutions available that can sharply reduce the negative impacts of extractive mining, particularly as renewable energy infrastructure replaces fossil fuels.9 The defeat of militarized fossil capital and an ecosocialist path forward will very likely require the emergence of a global subject with sufficient power to prevail.10 Likewise, the emergence of China as the global leader of struggle for climate security can inspire the transnational working class and its allies to champion a global GND to make this goal possible.

We should recognize China’s enormous achievement of lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty in just a few decades, bringing the Chinese people’s life expectancy to a global rank in 2020 of 45, with the United States ranking 51st, Cuba 49th.11 Hence, there is a strong basis for hoping that China, with its Communist Party in leadership, can lead an ecosocialist path forward for humanity in the next few decades, which is critical for any chance at meeting the 1.5°C warming target. The fate of 8 billion people on our planet literally rests in the hands of China’s workers, farmers, scientists, and engineers.

Notes
1. Kevin Anderson, “IPCC’s Conservative Nature Masks True Scale of Action Needed to Avert Catastrophic Climate Change,” The Conversation, March 24, 2023.
2. H. Holden Thorp, “To Solve Climate, First Achieve Peace,” SCIENCE 376, no. 6588 (March 31, 2022).
3. Patrick Wintour, “Chinese Peace Plan for Ukraine Greeted Cautiously by the West,” Guardian, February 18, 2023; “China’s Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis,” Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the People’s Republic of China, February 24, 2023.
4. David Schwartzman and Quincy Saul, “The Path to Climate Justice Passes Through Caracas,” Counterpunch, March 11, 2019.
5. “Beijing ‘Doubling Down on Fossil Fuels’; China’s CO2 Emissions Increase; Coal Production Growth,” Carbon Brief, March 17, 2022; Nick Ferris, “Weekly Data: China’s Nuclear Pipeline as Big as the Rest of the World’s Combined,” Energy Monitor, December 20, 2021.
6. David Schwartzman, “China and the Prospects for a Global Ecological Civilization,” Climate & Capitalism, September 17, 2019.
7. Douglas Fox, “Rare Mantle Rocks in Oman Could Sequester Massive Amounts of CO2,” Scientific American, July 1, 2021; Peter Schwartzman and David Schwartzman, “Can the 1.5 ℃ Warming Target Be Met in a Global Transition to 100% Renewable Energy?” AIMS Energy 9, no. 6 (2021): 1170–91.
“Surface Area in the Sahara Desert Required to Power the World with Solar Energy Only – World of Engineering,” China Solar Thermal Alliance, December 8, 2022. The China Solar Thermal Alliance is an ongoing initiative to build concentrated solar power in deserts. Note that the computed 23,398 terawatt-hour = 2.7 terawatt-year is about the annual global electricity consumption level, while the present primary global primary energy consumption level is 19 terawatt-year, which would require about 11 percent of the Sahara Desert. This could be reduced by siting concentrated solar power on other deserts including the Arabian Desert, along with oceanic wind farms and photovoltaics on roofs and floating platforms. Global energy needs will very likely require even more than 19 terawatts for climate adaptation and mitigation, see footnote 9.
8. David Schwartzman, The Global Solar Commons, the Future that Is Still Possible: A Guide for 21st Century Activists (Galesburg, Illinois: Solar Utopia.org Press, 2021).
9. Peter Schwartzman and David Schwartzman, The Earth Is Not for Sale: A Path Out of Fossil Capitalism to the Other World That is Still Possible (Singapore: World Scientific, 2019); David Schwartzman, “A Critique of Degrowth,” Climate & Capitalism, January 5, 2022.
10. David Schwartzman and Salvatore Engel-Di Mauro, “Prefiguration and the Emergence of the Global Subject,” Science & Society 86, no. 4 (2022): 564–83; Robert Latham, “Organizing Anticapitalist Internationalism in Contemporary and Historical Perspective,” Rethinking Marxism 34, no. 4 (2022): 449–68.
11. See footnote 6. World Bank Group Wikipedia, list of countries by life expectancy. The latest data for life expectancies will likely show even higher values for China and Cuba than the United States given the COVID deaths/population ratios of the three countries with the United States/China rate = 47.66, United States/Cuba = 4.13. “Mortality Analyses,” Johns Hopkins University & Medicine, accessed March 30, 2023.

https://mronline.org/2023/04/11/how-chi ... ilization/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon Apr 17, 2023 2:02 pm

Image

The Ukraine Crisis and the Building of a New International System
March 28, 2023
Yang Ping
Yang Ping (杨平) is a leading scholar and editor in China’s contemporary ideological and cultural community. In 1993, he founded Strategy and Management (战略与管理), an important magazine which countered the influence of liberalism on Chinese ideology and culture. In 2008, he founded Wenhua Zongheng (文化纵横), a journal that focuses on the construction of Chinese society’s core value system while consistently upholding the banner of socialism. Over the past fifteen years, the journal has grown into one of China’s most important thought platforms.
‘The Ukraine Crisis and the Building of a New International System’ was originally published as the lead article of the June 2022 issue of Wenhua Zongheng (文化纵横). The article urges China, amid the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, to consider the dangers of the current international system that it has been striving to integrate into and the possibilities of building a new international system.

The outbreak of the Ukraine crisis has not merely altered the geopolitical landscape, it has severely disrupted the current international order. Particularly, the imposition of extensive sanctions on Russia by the United States and other Western countries has compromised the rules of the existing international system and revealed its true, coercive nature. This crisis should provide a strong reminder to China that it must deepen its ‘worst-case scenario thinking’ (底线思维, dǐxiàn sīwéi) and seriously contemplate, as a major strategic aim, building a new international system parallel to the current Western-dominated order.

Preparing for Looming Crises
The current international system is one that is dominated by the Western countries, led by the United States, and liberal capitalist in nature. During periods when liberal capitalism functions smoothly, this system expands globally and appears to be rules-based and fair, able to include most countries and regions of the world. However, during periods of crisis, liberal capitalism will contort itself, abandoning established international rules or seeking to create new ones, exemplified by increasing nativism or deglobalisation where the hegemonic nation relinquishes its purported duties of leadership and returns to power politics.

Amidst the Ukraine crisis, the US and the Western countries have disregarded international norms by forcibly casting Russia out of the global financial architecture, namely the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT), confiscating Russian state and personal assets, and freezing the country’s foreign exchange reserves. Such measures go far beyond the typical nonviolent means of confrontation employed by nation states such as trade wars, technology blockades, and oil embargoes, and blatantly contradicts the timeless liberal principles that ‘debts must be paid’ and ‘private property is sacrosanct’, among others. These flagrant violations of the so-called ‘rules-based order’ have laid bare the arbitrary, unlawful, and biased character of the international system and the manner in which it can be manipulated by the US and its allies to violently discipline other countries.

From the Chinese perspective, the Ukraine crisis is a warning to China that it must prepare for scenarios in which it is subject to such hostile measures. It is necessary to re-examine the present international order to grasp an accurate understanding of both its benefits and drawbacks, giving up any illusions in its fairness and long-term viability, and, whilst participating in and maximising the utility of the current system, simultaneously making preparations for the construction of a new international order.

Given the size of China, the task of national rejuvenation requires much more than an economic strategy of mere ‘domestic circulation’ (内循环, nèi xúnhuán). To achieve industrialisation and modernisation, China must engage with the world and develop a broader ‘international circulation’ (外循环, wài xúnhuán) by accessing external resources, technologies, and markets. The central task of China’s reform and opening-up policy over the past four decades has been to open the country to the outside world and participate in the global system in order to promote an international environment more favourable to the pursuit of modernisation.[1] At the same time, China has had to take necessary actions when hostile aspects of the current system have threatened the country’s fundamental interests. In the current situation, it is necessary that China, on the one hand, fights steadfastly against the manipulation of the existing system by the US and the Western countries, and, on the other hand, begins to build a new, more democratic and just global system, in partnership with developing countries.

China’s Historical Destiny Is to Stand With the Third World
The present world order has not only been shaped by China, Russia, the United States, and Europe, the countries and regions of Asia, Africa, and Latin America have also created a multitude of new regional networks amid the decline of US power. Working with other developing countries is necessary for China to strengthen efforts to build a new international system. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), since it was proposed by President Xi Jinping in 2013, has in fact laid the foundation for such cooperation and for the realisation of a new system.[2]

Since the People’s Republic of China was founded in 1949, the Third World has consistently provided China with new spaces to survive and grow and new sources of strength whenever it has faced pressure from superpowers, including the national liberation movements of Asia, Africa, and Latin America in the 1950s and 1960s, the Bandung Conference of 1955 and the Non-Aligned Movement, Mao Zedong’s Three Worlds theory developed in the 1970s, the emphasis on South-South cooperation during the early stages of reform and opening up in the 1980s, the establishment of the BRICS mechanism at the turn of the century, and, most recently, the development of the BRI in the last decade. Over the past 70 years, China has had adopted a wide range of foreign policies, from the ‘lean to one side’ (一边倒, yībiāndǎo) policy with the Soviet Union in the 1950s to the ‘integrating with the world’ (与国际接轨, yǔ guójì jiēguǐ) (or with the US, to be exact) policy at the turn of the century; however, China has, consciously or unconsciously, consistently turned to the Third World whenever it has felt that its independence and sovereignty were threatened.[3]

This relationship with the Third World is China’s historic destiny. Today, as China becomes an important pole in the world and is faced with the hostile containment strategy of the hegemonic United States, it cannot follow the alliance politics pursued by the US and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Dividing the world into antagonistic blocs would drive humanity to the brink of war and global catastrophe; instead, China should continue to pursue an independent and nonaligned foreign policy, focused on bringing together the many countries of the Third World – which constitute the global majority – to foster new forms of partnership, establish new multilateral networks, and create a new international system.

Reflecting upon the practices and experiences of the BRI until now and accounting for the challenges posed by the Ukraine crisis, China’s approach towards building a new international system should be guided by the following considerations:

First, China’s orientation should be based on strategic rather than commercial interests. China cannot merely be concerned with exporting its production capacity and capital or securing access to external resources and markets for Chinese enterprises; but rather it must prioritise what is necessary to ensure strategic survival and national development. By adopting such a strategic perspective, it becomes clear that the approach taken by many Chinese firms and local governments towards other nations and regions, as part of the BRI, is not sustainable as it has prioritised commercial interests and tended to ignore political-strategic interests.[4]

Second, the creation of the new international system requires the development of a new vision, philosophy, and ideology to guide and inspire efforts to build it. In this regard, the BRI’s principles of ‘consultation, contribution, and shared benefits’ (共商共建共享, gòngshāng gòngjiàn gòngxiǎng) are insufficient. While the United States today rallies the Western camp under the banner of ‘democracy versus authoritarianism’, China must clearly uphold the flag of peace and development, uniting and leading the vast developing world whilst appealing to and persuading more European states to join this cause. President Xi Jinping’s global call for the ‘building of a community with a shared future for humanity’ (人类命运共同体, rénlèi mìngyùn gòngtóngtǐ) should be adapted to the new international situation. The Chinese concept of ‘common prosperity and common development’ should be shared with the world and promoted as a core value in building a new international system.

Third, a ‘Development International’ (发展国际, fāzhǎn guójì) should be set up as an institutional entity to create a new global system. Unlike the Western alliance mechanisms, such as the Group of Seven (G7) and North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) which are dominated by a minority of wealthy countries, a new global system must address the fundamental issue that the overwhelming majority of the world faces: how developing countries can be more effectively organised under the principle of nonalignment. Loosely organised and nonbinding initiatives such as conferences and declarations are wholly inadequate for this task; an institutional mechanism such as a ‘Development International’ should be promoted and constructed to drive more powerful organisational action and to develop networks of knowledge and culture, of media and communication, of economic cooperation, as well as other projects. In a nutshell, forms of organisational action under the mandate of peace and development should be established and experimented with.

The Relationship Between the Two Systems
Building a new system does not mean abandoning the present one.

In the forty years of reform and opening up, China’s direction and goal have been to integrate into the existing international order. As a latecomer to industrialisation and modernisation, China has had no choice but to learn from the Western countries and take in their advanced knowledge and experience. Breaking away from this system would inevitably drive China back to the old road of the ‘closed-door’ (闭关锁国, bìguānsuǒguó) policy of the 1960s and 1970s, cutting the country off from the advanced economies of the present world.[5]

Nowadays, China has travelled a long way down the road of globalisation and has benefited from it; reform and opening up has become bound up with the Chinese people’s basic interests. For this reason, it is neither desirable nor feasible to give up the benefits derived from participating in the current system.

But this by no means negates the urgent necessity of preparing for the threat of the US-led Western alliance sabotaging the present global system. The development of a new international system and the active participation in the present system are two processes that can be implemented simultaneously without conflict, in which the two systems are bound to overlap and interpenetrate each other. When the quantitative changes accumulated by the new system begin to transform into qualitative changes, a brand-new world order will naturally emerge.

Author’s Notes
1. ‘Reform and opening-up’ refers to the era of China’s economic reform initiated in 1978 under the leadership of Deng Xiaoping. ↑

2. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) is a global infrastructure development project proposed by China’s President Xi Jinping in 2013. By the end of July 2022, China had signed more than 200 BRI cooperation agreements with 149 countries and 32 international organisations. ↑

3. In the early years after its founding, the People’s Republic of China adopted a ‘lean to one side’ foreign policy which declared that the country would ally with other socialist countries against the forces of imperialism. Meanwhile, during the 1990s and 2000s, China pursued a policy of ‘integrating with the world’, increasing its global political and economic engagement. In particular, China and the United States deepened their economic interdependence; in 2000, the US granted China permanent normal trade relations status and, the following year, China became a member of the World Trade Organisation. ↑

4. Along with the central government and firms, China’s provincial and municipal governments are also important actors in the BRI. ↑

5. The term ‘closed-door’ refers to the policy of the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644) and early Qing Dynasty (1644–1911) of limiting China’s economic, scientific, and cultural interactions with the world, which contributed to the country falling behind the Western industrialised nations. ↑

https://dongshengnews.org/en/whzh-vol1-no1-article1/

Image

Building the New ‘Three Rings’: Reconfiguring China’s Foreign Relations in the Face of Decoupling
March 28, 2023
Cheng Yawen
Cheng Yawen(程亚文)is dean of the Department of Political Science at the School of International Relations and Public Affairs, Shanghai International Studies University. He previously taught at the Department of War Theory and Strategic Research, Academy of Military Sciences, People’s Liberation Army. His research areas include comparative politics and national development strategies. He has held a long-term interest in topics such as the impact of globalisation on underdeveloped countries, the development strategies chosen by underdeveloped countries amid globalisation, and the relations between China and underdeveloped countries.
The ‘special military operation’ launched by Russia against Ukraine, along with the attendant stalemate that has set in between the West and Russia, are landmark events that signal the approaching end of the globalisation wave that began in the 1980s. The absurd efforts of the United States to bully its allies into enacting murderous sanctions against Russia and to browbeat other countries into taking sides in this conflict, have brought the world to a state reminiscent of the deadly global struggles of the twentieth century ago. These developments pose a major challenge to China; the end of this wave of globalisation means that the country will no longer have the same external environment for development that it has enjoyed for the past forty years, and that the US will likely intensify its push to re-establish its domination over the international system and to decouple from China and Russia. The world has undergone a paradigm shift.[1] In the face of a potential forced and complete decoupling from the United States and Western countries, China must take initiative and adjust its foreign strategic orientation, reprioritising the countries that it engages with in order to develop a new international order that would safeguard against the repercussions of this decoupling.

The Unspoken Rule of the International Order: The Centre-Periphery Power Structure
During the three decades since the collapse of the Soviet Union, relations between Russia and the West have vacillated. Initially, Russia pursued friendly ties with the US and Western countries, then it gradually grew apart from them, and now it has entered into a fierce confrontation. The evolution of this relationship reflects the political limits of globalisation. Unlike the romantic notions of globalisation that were ascendant following the end of the Cold War, in reality, this era saw the establishment of US hegemony and the dismemberment of the Soviet Union and the socialist camp. This process of globalisation and the US pursuit of global supremacy are two sides of the coin; they condition and promote each other. The inability of this system to promote international equality, with developed and developing countries locked into a relationship of dominator and follower states, means that it cannot continue endlessly. On the one hand, globalisation is abandoned, reversed, or redesigned when it backfires on its initiators, threatening their superiority; on the other hand, countries will continue to resist when powerful states relentlessly pursue domination.[2] Russia’s special military operation against Ukraine was the result of the domineering nature of this round of globalisation, and has brought the US-dominated system to a standstill.

The decades-long eastward expansion of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) was the main reason for Russia’s preemptive strike. This military buildup was not only a security issue but also an economic issue, as part of US efforts to marginalise Russia. Russia’s efforts to leverage globalisation to achieve national development and become a central country in the world order, ran counter to the logic of US-led globalisation. Global capital, financial capital in particular, has mainly concentrated on Russia’s energy, grains, and minerals, sectors which it can exploit for extravagant profits. However, during the tenure of Russia’s President Vladimir Putin, the state has strengthened its grip on key sectors concerning national security and people’s livelihoods, and has sought to build a Eurasian economic union to create space for its own economic growth; all of this has upset foreign capital. NATO’s eastward expansion is a manifestation of capital’s control over politics to achieve market expansion. If Russia cannot respond effectively to the efforts to squeeze its development space and exacerbate its marginalisation, it will become even more deeply confined to being a producer of primary goods and lose access to great power politics, increasing the likelihood of a domestic political crisis, which Russian elites wish to avoid.

The power structure of the contemporary world order has been laid bare by NATO’s eastern expansion and the comprehensive sanctions regime imposed by Western countries on Russia. In the aftermath of the Second World War, the European colonial system began to fade out and, during the last half of the twentieth century, the world order became centred on the United Nations and international law, namely the principle of the sovereign equality of states. However, the hierarchical centre-periphery order of the European colonial system has not actually disappeared, but instead continues to exist in an implicit and hidden manner. The absolute power hierarchies which were enforced by colonial diktat have been replaced by an international order based on ‘common but differentiated’ responsibilities, in which states are sovereign equals on the surface but unequal in their actual operation of power.[3] Although the United States and its allies refer to this international system as a ‘rules-based’ order where every nation is bound to observe the same rules, in fact, it revolves around the West rather than the UN and international law.

Post-war US hegemony is the modern incarnation of the global centre-periphery order. The international Group of Seven (G7), established in the 1970s, holds annual meetings at which Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States discuss not only the affairs of these seven countries, but also global issues for which they negotiate and determine international rules. The so-called rules-based order is indeed an order based on the rules made by Western countries and their allies. What matters here is who makes the rules. In this global system, the division of labour, money supply, industrial production, and rulemaking are the exclusive purview of a select few countries. The advantageous position of these countries would be broken up if other countries attempted to join their club, disrupting the rulemaking authority, monetary dominance, and technological superiority maintained through the intellectual property rights regime. China’s unexpected economic rise in recent decades has broken precisely this post-war centre-periphery world order, threatening the structural privileges of the Western countries, which had never imagined that China could enter the centre of the global stage (even if China is only approaching this position and has not yet arrived). As a result, the United States has labelled China as its ‘strategic competitor’ in recent years and demonstrated its willingness to use any means to halt China’s development.

Both NATO’s eastward expansion and Washington’s attempt to contain China suggest that the US and Western countries only seek to maintain and reinforce their own positions of power in the world order. The Russia-Ukraine conflict and the comprehensive Western sanctions against Russia have further underscored the truth about the global system: the majority of the world find themselves in the ‘countryside’ of the global periphery whereas only a select few countries sit in the ‘cities’ of the global centre, at the core of which is the United States. These countries do not wish to see the ‘countryside’ turn into ‘cities’, as they are. China and Russia hinder the global ‘city centre’ in two key aspects: on the one hand, due to their strong capacity to control capital, the two countries are the largest remaining territories in the world that have not been subject to the arbitrary domination of capitalist globalisation; on the other hand, their national strength is much greater than most countries and impedes efforts of the ‘city centre’ to further control the ‘countryside’ of the global periphery. During this wave of globalisation, China has departed from the ‘countryside’ for the ‘city’ with its strong economic growth and overall growth in national strength. The countries at the centre, despite their earlier enthusiastic praise for globalisation, are now leading ‘deglobalisation’ efforts, exposing the limits of the universality of the post-war international order. China and the other nations of the ‘countryside’ joining the ‘cities’ is simply intolerable to the central countries.

The Base of Support for Multilateralism Is in the Global South
Since the 1980s, China has pursued reform and opening up and promoted international cooperation, including, over the last decade, advancing a proposal for the building of ‘a community with a shared future for humanity’ (人类命运共同体, rénlèi mìngyùn gòngtóngtǐ). These efforts can be traced back to the ancient Chinese idea of ‘the great unity under heaven’ (天下大同, tiānxià dàtóng); however, this ‘great unity’ cannot be achieved by China’s desire alone. In the current context of all-out hostility from the US-led West towards Russia and China, the world can no longer be viewed in a mechanical manner and simply assumed to be united around peace and development. Instead, it is necessary to seriously consider the threats of competition, conflict, and war; even if war is excluded from the likely outcomes, it is clear that it is no longer possible for China to continue to pursue its path of development in the Western-dominated system of globalisation. As such, China must reassess its answer to the primary question in foreign relations: which countries are potential partners for China, now and in the future, and which countries will China find it difficult to establish or maintain partnerships with?

As a well-known Chinese idiom goes, similar things group together and similar people fit together (or, birds of a feather flock together). The same applies to nations; those nations which share similar experiences, contexts, and challenges are more likely to form an enduring cooperative relationship. Since the nineteenth century, the world has undergone a global transformation driven by three key components, industrialisation, rational state-building, and ideologies of progress, shifting from a polycentric world with no dominant centre to a highly interlinked and hierarchical core-periphery order in which the centre of gravity resided in the West.[4] Between the mid-to-late nineteenth century and the early twentieth century, imperialism and globalisation were two sides of the same coin: imperialism has driven globalisation while globalisation reinforced imperialism. Together, these related processes have trapped the peripheral nations of the world in a prison of underdevelopment, from which it is extremely difficult to break free. The West, as the former centre of the international system and the birthplace of imperialism, produced both the modern colonial order as well as the system of US hegemony that has dominated the world since the mid-to-late twentieth century. Meanwhile, many revolutionary movements, namely the anti-colonial struggles of the past century, have fought to overcome the inequality and injustice of this global centre-periphery power structure.

In this unequal world order, the central countries do not fairly welcome peripheral countries to the centre and oppose revolutions in the periphery. Consequently, to liberate themselves from subordination and exploitation, peripheral countries have to work together and, occasionally, exploit the rifts between those states at the centre, tactically cooperating with central states when it can advance the struggle. Over the past century, during the Chinese Revolution and the consolidation of state power, the main external forces that China depended on for support came from the global periphery. In the first half of the twentieth century, the Communist Party of China (CPC) was a member of the Communist International, an alliance of state and nonstate actors among the colonised and oppressed peoples of the world. During the War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression (1931–45), China joined the World Anti-Fascist War, upheld the anti-imperialist banner, and furthered the struggle to dismantle the unequal global structures created by imperialist states. After the People’s Republic of China (PRC) was founded in 1949, China placed a great deal of emphasis on cooperation with the countries of the Third World and supported the anti-colonial movements and post-independence development across Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Of particular importance was China’s active participation in the Bandung Conference of 1955 – an important step in the eventual creation of the Non-Aligned Movement in 1961 – where its proposal of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence (和平共处五项原则, hépíng gòngchǔ wǔ xiàng yuánzé) for international relations was well received; the conference became a milestone in China’s relations with the Global South, where cooperation and solidarity gained positive momentum.[5] It was with the support of peripheral countries that the PRC regained its rightful seat in the United Nations in 1971 and became a permanent member of the Security Council.

The mutual solidarity and support between China and the countries of Asia Africa, and Latin America has remained a key feature of China’s approach to international relations, which emphasises multilateral cooperation with developing countries of the Global South to defend national sovereignty and development in a joint struggle against the unequal and unjust international order structured by the central countries. Despite focusing on relations with peripheral countries, under the framework of ‘omnidirectional diplomacy’ (全方位外交, quán fāngwèi wàijiāo), China remains open to engaging and developing friendly cooperation with Western developed countries and other major powers. However, it should be noted that, in the past, the interaction and cooperation between China and the countries at the centre always bore two preconditions: on the one hand, China insisted on developing foreign relations premised on independence, equality, and mutual benefit, and opposed the existing power hierarchies in international relations; on the other hand, the central countries placed a ceiling on their collaboration with China, namely, the position of Western countries at the centre of the global power structure could not be altered. Whenever either of these two preconditions were not met, China, as a member of the developing world, faced serious challenges in deepening its cooperation with the Western countries, especially on political matters.

Adjusting the Geographic Priorities of China’s Foreign Relations
Over the last forty years, setting aside ideological differences and institutional disparities between countries, China has sought to work with all the other nations. Gradually, China’s international relations came to be guided by the following logic: the major powers are the key; surrounding areas are the first priority; developing countries are the foundations; and multilateral forums are the important stage. However, as the current era of globalisation comes to an end, this approach has increasingly encountered obstacles. The US-initiated process of decoupling from China in terms of economic, technological, knowledge, and people-to-people exchanges – a process that Washington has coerced other Western countries into joining – is unlikely to be reversed and instead, due to the Russia-Ukraine war, it could intensify even further.

Since its founding in 1949, the PRC has undergone several significant shifts in its foreign policy direction, all of which occurred in response to specific historical situations; from the advocacy of the Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence in the early years of the PRC, to the Three Worlds Theory proposed amid the normalisation of the China-US relations in the 1970s, to the emphasis on developing partnerships with Western countries as part of the transition to reform and opening up after 1978. The contemporary situation is defined by, what China’s President Xi Jinping has called, ‘major changes unseen in a century’ (百年未有之大变局, bǎinián wèi yǒu zhī dà biànjú) and the increasing tendency of Western states to suppress challenges to their authority. Especially in the period since war broke out between Russia and Ukraine, Western states have revealed their willingness to gang up on, pressure, and contain developing countries, a feature of the current Western-dominated order that will undermine international relations for some time. China cannot help but be highly alarmed by the punitive measures that the West has imposed on Russia, as they could also be imposed on China in a similar manner in the future. For this reason, it is urgently necessary that China re-examines its multilateralist tradition and re-orients the geographic configuration of its foreign relations, strengthening its partnerships with developing countries of the Global South to foster a new international environment that is conducive to China’s national security and long-term development.

In 1974, Mao Zedong set forth his Three Worlds Theory, which categorised the countries of the world into three major groupings, each necessitating a distinct approach to engagement from China. The third grouping, the developing countries of the Third World, were the main focus of China, which itself was also part of the Third World; the Chinese government and people firmly supported the just struggles of all the oppressed peoples and nations. Drawing on China’s previous practices and experiences in foreign relations, the theory outlined spatial priorities for China’s ties with other countries and provided an important ideological guide to the country’s approach to South-South cooperation. This theory remains highly relevant and should guide the present-day reconfiguration of the spatial priorities of China’s foreign relations. Contrary to the emphasis placed on working with Western countries since reform and opening up began four decades ago, China now needs to foreground the advancement of the South-South project.

Whether it concerns diplomatic affairs, long-term development, or national rejuvenation, for a considerable period of time, China’s foreign strategic arrangements will have to prioritise engaging with countries of the Global South. China should configure its foreign relations and promote the construction of a new global order under the ‘three-ring’ (三环, sān huán) framework. The first ring refers to China’s neighbouring regions of East Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East, which present important resource, energy, and security considerations; the second ring refers to the developing countries of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, with which China engages in trade, investment, and infrastructure projects, and to which China mainly delivers its foreign aid; finally, the third ring refers to the United States, European countries, and other industrialised countries with which China exchanges industrial products, technologies, and knowledge.

Within the new ‘three ring’ framework, China’s first and foremost priority in helping to build a new international system should be the first ring, namely East Asia, Central Asia, and the Middle East. To further promote East Asian economic integration and linkages with Central Asia and the Middle East, it is necessary to strengthen engagement and cooperation between Asian countries.. In recent years, by promoting economic diplomacy, China has made considerable progress in advancing East Asian economic integration and economic cooperation with many Asian countries. The latest breakthrough in East Asian economic integration was realised on 1 January 2022, when, after years of negotiation, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) finally entered into force. However, economic exchanges among East Asian countries have been increasingly affected by extra-regional forces and security issues in recent years, with disputes over maritime rights in the South China Sea and Washington’s ‘Indo-Pacific’ strategy fuelling uncertainty in the region. To prevent external forces from exploiting internal problems in Asia, China should move away from the ‘GDP supremacy’, or a narrow focus on economic matters, which it prioritised previously in its foreign relations, and pay greater attention to political and security agendas in the region, promoting more security cooperation among Asian countries.

South-South Cooperation is the Material Basis of the New ‘Three Rings’
The material basis for the new ‘three rings’ framework is South-South cooperation, a concept that emerged in the late twentieth century regarding mutual interests, support, and solidarity among Third World countries.[6] In the twenty-first century, a new foundation for South-South cooperation is being laid, making the concept more achievable in reality. The main reason for this is that, in recent decades, a number of developing countries in Asia, Africa, and Latin America have been able to industrialise or quasi-industrialise by ‘climbing up the borrowed ladder’, seizing the opportunities afforded by the wave of globalisation. Among these countries, a new global system of material production and circulation has taken shape, and is on track to eclipse the original ‘ladder’ of globalisation built by Western countries. This new global system has manifested in two important respects.

First, the share of developing countries in the global economy has changed significantly. In 1980, developed countries accounted for 75.4 percent of global GDP while developing countries accounted for less than 25 percent; however, by 2021, the former group’s share of global GDP had fallen to 57.8 percent while the latter’s share rose to 42.2 percent.[7] The combined GDP of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa) plus Turkey, South Korea, and Indonesia, in purchasing power parity (PPP) terms, jumped from 21 percent of the global economy in 1992 to 37.7 percent in 2021, while the combined share of G7 countries declined from 45.8 percent to 30.7 percent in the same period.[8]

Second, trade and reciprocal investment between developing countries have also become pivotal. From 1997 to 2010, trade between China and African states increased 22.4 times and trade with Latin American states increased roughly 22 times; and from 2010 to 2021, China-Africa and China-Latin America trade increased another 2 times and 2.5 times respectively.[9] From 2000 to 2018, trade between China and Arab states ballooned from $15.2 billion to $244.3 billion, a 16-fold increase in less than twenty years.[10] Other emerging economies, such as Brazil and India, have sharply increased their trade with developing countries. From 2003 to 2010, Brazil’s trade with Arab states increased four-fold, while its trade with African states increased five-fold, reaching a total of $26 billion, a figure higher than Brazil’s trade with traditional trading partners such as Germany and Japan; and from 2010 to 2019, Brazil’s trade with Arab and African states increased by 98 percent and 68 percent, respectively.[11] Similarly, since 2001, India’s trade with African states has grown at an average annual rate of 17.2 percent and, from 2011 to 2021, it increased 2.26 times.[12] India’s trade with Latin American states as well as the Middle East and North Africa region, has experienced similar growth. Trade volumes between developing countries are growing at a faster rate than the global average, while trading with developed countries continues to decline.

Within the developing world, a particularly important network of economic cooperation has emerged in Asia, centring around China. This is demonstrated in the following four trends:

Asia is once again the world economy’s centre of gravity. In 1980, the developing countries of Asia accounted for only 13.7 percent of global GDP, however, their share would rise to 24.7 percent in 2010 and reach 35.8 percent in 2021.[13] For East Asian countries (including China, Japan, South Korea, and ten Southeast Asian countries), in 1980 their share of global GDP was only about 16.2 percent, but by 2020 it had more than doubled, reaching 30 percent.[14] Meanwhile, among the fifteen member countries of the RCEP, by 2020, their combined population reached 2.27 billion, cumulative GDP hit $26 trillion, and total imports and exports surpassed $10 trillion, accounting for about 30 percent of the global total.[15] According to HSBC, the cumulative size of the RCEP economies is estimated to expand to 50 percent of the world economy by 2030.[16]
Global trade and investment are also shifting to Asia, with its share in global trade having steadily increased from 15.7 percent in 1980, to 22.2 percent in 1990, to 27.3 percent in 1995, to 26.7 percent in 2000, to 25.6 percent in 2001, and further to 36 percent by 2020. Today, Asia is the world’s leading trading region.[17]
The level of intra-regional trade dwarfs that of extra-regional trade in Asia. Between 2001 and 2020, Asia’s total internal trade jumped from $3.2 trillion to $12.7 trillion, with an average annual nominal growth rate of 7.5 percent; during the same period, Asia’s share of total world trade increased from 25.6 percent to 36.0 percent.[18] In 2020, Asia’s intra-regional trade has accounted for nearly 58.5 percent of its entire foreign trade.[19]
East and West Asia are growing closer economically; the main destinations of Middle Eastern energy have shifted from the United States and Europe to East and South Asia.
Today, developing countries have formed the preliminary structure for a new global economic system, but further synergy between them is needed to achieve a higher degree of economic connectivity as well as greater political influence in the international arena and freedom from Western control and coercion. This past decade, China has become the world’s largest real economy (concerning the production and exchange of goods and services) and the second largest economy overall, as well as the largest trading partner of most countries in the world. In 2021, the global share of China’s manufacturing sector was nearly 30 percent. As the country that produces the most material goods in the world, China is in a similar position as the United States was in the post-Second World War period (at its peak, in 1953, the US accounted for roughly 28 percent of global industrial output). What China can and should do is to take initiative in driving a global strategy to improve the system of global material exchange among developing countries, that is, to truly realise South-South cooperation.

However, deficiencies still remain. Current trade and investment between developing countries still rely heavily on Western-led financial and monetary networks. If developing countries are to further enhance their economic and political autonomy, and if emerging economies are to gain levels of political influence in the world system commensurate with their economic scales, they must overcome their financial and monetary dependence on the West. Therefore, to build a ‘new three ring’ international system, developing countries must consider not only traditional geopolitical factors, but also the global systems of finance and information. In recent years, China has explored this by developing currency swaps with several emerging market economies. A higher-level and broader mechanism for financial and monetary cooperation should be created among developing countries. To this end, it is important to take advantage of existing platforms and mechanisms that can enhance South-South cooperation, including: upgrading and transforming the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) and the New Development Bank (NDB) established by the BRICS countries to advance an autonomous international payment system; strengthening security and financial cooperation within the framework of the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO), particularly between China, Russia, India, and Iran cooperation (it should be noted that Russia is also a developing country and that the Chinese and Russian economies are highly complementary); further promoting East Asian economic integration under the framework of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), with special efforts to consolidate the achievements of the RCEP; building a common energy market in Asia, so that buyers in East and South Asia and sellers in the Middle East, Central Asia, and Russia can share the same energy trading and payment network; making proper use of the BRICS Summit mechanism, thus deepening South-South cooperation; and promoting the diversification of the international monetary system and the internationalisation of the RMB in the context of South-South cooperation, as well as supporting the international status of the euro while hedging against the hegemony of the US dollar.

One hundred years ago, the CPC leaders proposed the revolutionary strategy of ‘encircling the cities from the rural areas’ (农村包围城市, nóngcūn bāoweí chéngshì). In the present era of ‘major changes unseen in a century’, China and developing countries need to dismantle the centre-periphery world order, overcome the hostility of Western countries, and improve solidarity and cooperation within the global ‘countryside’. The deepening of South-South cooperation will create favourable conditions and mobilise resources for the construction of a new ‘three ring’ global system, which can ease international tensions and allow developing countries, including China, to take their rightful places at the centre of the world economic and political order. After more than forty years of reform and opening up, China must adjust its understanding of ‘opening up’ and transform its thinking about foreign relations. Of course, China should still try to maintain its cooperation with the West as long as possible and as long as they do not make the choice to go completely against China.

Note: This article was edited by Guo Jinze

Bibliography
Boao Forum for Asia. Annual Report 2022: Asian Economic Outlook and Integration Process, April 2022.

‘Brazil to play an ambitious global role’ [巴西要在全球扮演雄心勃勃角色]. Reference News [参考消息], 2 September 2010.

Buzan, Barry and George Lawson. The Global Transformation: History, Modernity, and the Making of International Relations [全球转型:历史、现代性与国际关系的形成]. Translated by Sui Shunji. Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2020.

Cheng, Yawen. ‘Political Limits of Globalisation’ [全球化的政治限度]. Dushu [读书], no. 11 (2020).

Cheng, Yawen. ‘Understanding the Paradigm Shift in the Characteristics of the Times’ [理解时代特征的范式性变革]. Academic Frontiers [学术前沿], no. 15 (2022): 42-53.

Hong, Liu. ‘China Engages the Global South: From Bandung to the Belt and Road Initiative’. Global Policy 13, no. S1 (2022): 11-22. https://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.13034.

International Monetary Fund. ‘World Economic Outlook (October 2022)’. Accessed 13 February 2023. https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/datasets/WEO.

Jing, Kai. ‘New chapter opens for China-Arab economic and trade cooperation’ [中阿经贸合作奏响新乐章]. Guangming Daily [光明日报], 5 September 2019.

Li, Ning. ‘RCEP Becomes Official! World’s Largest FTZ Starts’ [RCEP正式生效!世界最大自贸区启航]. International Business Daily [国际商报], 3 January 2022.

National Bureau of Statistics of China, Chinese Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 1999.

National Bureau of Statistics of China, Chinese Statistical Yearbook. Beijing: China Statistics Press, 2021.

Sun, Xiaohan. ‘Analysis of the Current Situation and Prospects of India’s Investment and Trade with Africa’ [印度对非投资贸易现状分析与前景展望]. China Investment [中国投资], September 2021.

Wing, Chu and Yuki Qian. Tapping the RCEP Opportunities: Hong Kong to Maximise GBA’s Unique Edge as a Business Platform. Hong Kong Trade Development Council (HKTDC) and ACCA, 18 November 2021,https://portal.hktdc.com/resources/RMIP ... BfRU4=.pdf.

Zhu, Xiaoxiong and Li Pan. ‘How Effectiveness of RCEP Will Benefit World Economy’ [RCEP生效,世界经济受益几何]. Guangming Daily [光明日报], 4 January 2022.

Author’s Notes
1. Cheng Yawen, ‘Understanding the Paradigm Shift in the Characteristics of the Times’ [理解时代特征的范式性变革], Academic Frontiers [学术前沿], no. 15 (2022): 42-53. ↑

2. Cheng Yawen, ‘Political Limits of Globalisation’ [全球化的政治限度], Dushu [读书], no. 11 (2020). ↑

3. Cheng, ‘Understanding the Paradigm Shift’. ↑

4. Barry Buzan and George Lawson, The Global Transformation: History, Modernity, and the Making of International Relations [全球转型:历史、现代性与国际关系的形成], trans. Sui Shunji (Shanghai People’s Publishing House, 2020). ↑

5. Hong Liu, ‘China Engages the Global South: From Bandung to the Belt and Road Initiative’, Global Policy 13, no. S1 (2022): 11-22. ↑

6. For the international edition of this article, statistics have been updated to reflect the latest data. ↑

7. Calculated from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook database (October 2022), https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper ... C/WEOWORLD. ↑

8. Calculated from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook database (October 2022), https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper ... DN/KOR/MAE. ↑

9. In 1997, the trade value between China and Africa was $5.673 billion and that between China and Latin America $8.376 billion, according to the China Statistical Yearbook 1999. In 2010, the trade value between China and Africa was $127 billion and that between China and Latin America was $183.6 billion, according to the China Statistical Yearbook 2021. Finally, in 2021, the trade value between China and Africa was $254.3 billion and that between China and Latin America was $451.591 billion, according to the General Administration of Customs of China. ↑

10. Jing Kai, ‘New chapter opens for China-Arab economic and trade cooperation’ [中阿经贸合作奏响新乐章], Guangming Daily [光明日报], 5 September 2019. ↑

11. Calculated according to the data from the World Integrated Trade Solution (WITS), software developed by the World Bank, in collaboration with the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), that provides access to international trade, tariff, and non-tariff statistical information; ‘Brazil to play an ambitious global role’ [巴西要在全球扮演雄心勃勃角色], Reference News [参考消息], 2 September 2010. ↑

12. Sun Xiaohan, ‘Analysis of the Current Situation and Prospects of India’s Investment and Trade with Africa’ [印度对非投资贸易现状分析与前景展望], China Investment [中国投资], September 2021. ↑

13. Calculated from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook database (October 2022), https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper ... EQ/JPN/AZQ. Here, developing countries of Asia, refers to the IMF’s designated regions of Asia and Pacific, Central Asia and the Caucasus, and the Middle East, except for Japan, Australia, and New Zealand. ↑

14. Calculated from the IMF’s World Economic Outlook database (October 2022), https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper ... LD/EAQ/SEQ. Here, East Asia, refers to the IMF’s designated regions of East Asia and Southeast Asia. ↑

15. Zhu Xiaoxiong and Li Pan, ‘How Effectiveness of RCEP Will Benefit World Economy’ [RCEP生效,世界经济受益几何], Guangming Daily [光明日报], 4 January 2022. ↑

16. Li Ning, ‘RCEP Becomes Official! World’s Largest FTZ Starts’ [RCEP正式生效!世界最大自贸区启航], International Business Daily [国际商报], 3 January 2022. ↑

17. Wing Chu and Yuki Qian, Tapping the RCEP Opportunities: Hong Kong to Maximise GBA’s Unique Edge as a Business Platform, Hong Kong Trade Development Council (HKTDC) and ACCA, 18 November 2021, https://portal.hktdc.com/resources/RMIP ... BfRU4=.pdf. ↑

18. Chu and Qian, Tapping the RCEP Opportunities. ↑

19. Boao Forum for Asia, Annual Report 2022: Asian Economic Outlook and Integration Process, April 2022. ↑

https://dongshengnews.org/en/whzh-vol1-no1-article3/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Wed Apr 19, 2023 2:27 pm

Image
Xi Jinping and former PM David Cameron in a pub in 2015.

The sudden arrival of a cold war with China
Originally published: Morning Star Online on April 2023 by Ken Livingstone (more by Morning Star Online) | (Posted Apr 18, 2023)

AS SOMEONE who lived through the first cold war against the Soviet Union and its allies, and who was in some important respects politically shaped by it—including in terms of my decades-long opposition to nuclear weapons—I recognise all too well the depressing signs of a new cold war against China, being fomented by the U.S., Britain and a handful of other countries.

Here in Britain, we’ve seen:

*A thriving relationship with Chinese telecommunications giant Huawei scuppered at U.S. insistence, leaving 5G infrastructure to be ripped out of our networks, increasing costs to the Treasury and leaving us in the broadband slow lane.
*A ban on the massively popular TikTok app on government devices.
*Attacks and threats to close Confucius Institutes, which play an invaluable role in lessening our educational deficit in the teaching of Chinese language and culture.
*Sanctions and refusal of investment from Chinese companies on dubious national security grounds, costing us jobs, markets and technical upskilling.
*A ban on the Chinese ambassador setting foot in the Palace of Westminster, instigated by a vociferous gang of right-wingers like Iain Duncan Smith.

Not surprisingly, all this, along with the attempts to blame China for the Covid pandemic from Donald Trump and his allies internationally, has led to an upsurge in racist attacks on members of Chinese and Asian communities.

Last year’s Conservative Party leadership contest became an unedifying race to the bottom, to which Rishi Sunak was dragged by Liz Truss. Had she not been ignominiously booted out of office in record time, Truss was set to formally declare China as an enemy of our country. For now, Sunak claims that China “is a country with fundamentally different values to ours and it represents a challenge to the world order.”

The rise of China is one of the greatest events in world history in my lifetime. When I was born, life expectancy in China was under 40. Around 90 per cent of the population was illiterate. The country had been torn apart by a century of foreign aggression, invasion, warlordism and civil wars. Millions died every year from floods and famine.

What a contrast to today’s China, which is on the cusp of overtaking the U.S. as the world’s greatest economy—a change unseen in over a century. China’s life expectancy has already overtaken that of the U.S.

Going on World Bank figures, China has lifted some 800 million people out of poverty.

This economic transformation is one that all decent people should welcome.

The present new cold war against China stands in stark contrast to the situation just a few years ago. With the 2015 state visit of President Xi Jinping, PM David Cameron and his chancellor George Osborne declared that our relations had entered a “golden era.” Today, to even remotely echo their words is regarded as practically treasonous.

Twenty years ago, when I was elected London mayor in 2000, I was determined that London would develop positive relations with China. Whether as the world’s leading financial centre or as home to Europe’s largest Chinese community, this was a necessary and natural course of action for me.

Visiting China, it was clear that our counterparts there were equally invested in a thriving and mutually beneficial relationship. Of course, my policies were slated in the Tory press, but we pressed on.

We opened offices for London in Beijing and Shanghai, encouraged Stock Exchange listings, brought the annual celebration of Chinese New Year to Trafalgar Square, and expanded co-operation in a whole range of sectors, such as fashion, design and the creative industries.

The Daily Mail may not have liked it, but we were supported from the boardrooms of the City to the restaurants of Chinatown, and it brought benefits to every Londoner.

These are the policies that are needed today. Policies for peace and prosperity. Policies that were broadly supported by the most diverse range of Labour leaders, from Tony Blair through Gordon Brown and Ed Miliband to Jeremy Corbyn.

Sadly, they now find little or no echo from Keir Starmer and his shadow foreign secretary David Lammy. Their political horizons seem confined to attempting to outdo the Tories as to who can be the most bellicose cold warrior.

It is this new establishment political consensus that is leading to reckless adventures like the Aukus deal we have joined with Australia and the U.S.

This agreement, which will see Australia equipped with nuclear-powered submarines, will cost billions, flouts the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT), and heightens the danger of a catastrophic war with China, a nuclear power.

All this at a time when we face a cost-of-living crisis where an increasing number of people aren’t being forced to choose between heating and eating because they can’t afford either.

Where nurses and primary school teachers are among key workers increasingly reliant on food banks, which in turn are finding it increasingly difficult to meet the ever-growing demands placed on them.

Yet the government is committed to a massive increase in military spending levels that are already amongst the highest in the world.

And it is simply an obscene farce that, in this situation of huge economic difficulties, we should turn our backs on the huge opportunities offered by the Chinese market, in favour of squandering immense sums on nuclear arms, as part of stoking a potential conflict that would kill millions, would be utterly unnecessary, and which we couldn’t possibly win.

A cold war with China is against the interests of the British people, as is a new nuclear arms proliferation.

Progressives in the labour movement need to stand against them—and build the broadest possible alliance to reverse the slide to disaster.

https://mronline.org/2023/04/18/143609/

************

US Rushes to Provoke War w/Growing Chinese Army: Admits Taiwan Will Be Destroyed
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 17, 2023



– US continues push for war with China over Taiwan’s status;

– Officially the US (and the UN) recognizes Taiwan as part of China, unofficially the US promotes separatism;

– China’s attempts to preserve its territorial integrity are depicted by Western governments and the media as “aggression;”

– China’s military capabilities continue to grow, matching or exceeding US military capabilities;

– Recent Chinese military exercises launched after Taiwan’s Tsai Ing Wen met with US representatives in the US included simulated precision-guided missile and rocket attacks on targets across Taiwan and an air and sea blockade;

– Leaked US documents as well as US policy think tanks admit the armed forces of the Taiwan administration lack the capability to defeat any potential Chinese military operation;

– Talk of creating a weapon stockpile on Taiwan to circumvent any future blockade fails to recognize many of the specified weapon systems have been severely depleted in Washington’s other proxy conflict in Ukraine;

– Time is ultimately on China’s side, economically Taiwan is heavily integrated with the rest of China and political forces in Taiwan favoring the status quo or closer cooperation with the rest of China are growing in strength;

– The January 2024 elections in Taiwan and the possibility a more reasonable administration may come into power might trigger increasingly dangerous US provocations between now and then;

References:

My recent article for NEO – Taiwan Pushed Closer to Conflict by Washington: https://journal-neo.org/2023/04/12/ta

CNN – A weapons stockpile and asymmetric warfare: how Taiwan could thwart an invasion by China – with America’s help: https://edition.cnn.com/2023/04/15/as

Washington Post – Taiwan highly vulnerable to Chinese air attack, leaked documents show: https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation

US State Department – U.S. Relations With Taiwan: https://www.state.gov/u-s-relations-w

CSIS – The First Battle of the Next War: Wargaming a Chinese Invasion of Taiwan (January 2023): https://www.csis.org/analysis/first-b

Bloomberg – Taiwan Tensions Spark New Round of US War-Gaming on Risk to TSMC (October 2022): https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl

Gizmodo – Taiwan Official Explains With Extreme Calm Why the U.S. Doesn’t Need to Blow Up TSMC if China Invades (October 2022): https://gizmodo.com/chips-semiconduct

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/04/ ... destroyed/

*********

China Brings Peace To Yemen, Syria And ... Palestine?

Peace is breaking out in the Middle East and the U.S. is pushed aside by more friendly actors.

On March 10 the world was surprised with a China mediated deal that restored ties between Saudi Arabia and Iran:

There are winners and losers in this.

The winners are:

*Iran, which will now be even more able to break through the sanctions wall the U.S. has put up around it.
*Saudi Arabia, which now will likely be able to end its disastrous and costly war on Yemen.
*China, for outplaying the U.S. State Department by achieving this.
*Iraq, Syria, Yemen as they will become more peaceful as the two middle powers influencing policies on their grounds end their rivalry.

The losers are:

*Israel, because the chances for its attempts to get the U.S. into a war with Iran are now diminished. Its hoped for coalition with the Saudis will not come into being.
*The U.S. for having been outplayed on its traditional 'home grounds' in the Middle East.
*Anti-Iran hawks everywhere.
*The Emirates for losing at least some of the sanction busting trade with Iran to Saudi Arabia.
...
Reviving relations between Saudi Arabia and Iran will make a lot of new things possible.
That Iran and Saudi Arabia accepted China's mediation is a recognition of Beijing's new standing in world policies. That alone is enough reason for the White House to hate the deal.


I predicted that the U.S. and Israel would do their best to sabotage the deal or at least make its implementation difficult.

The U.S. sent CIA director Bill Burns to warn the Saudis off. However the deal has held so far and the Saudis are repairing their relations with countries against which they previously waged wars. Yesterday a senior Saudi official visited Sanaa and shook hands with Yemeni Houthi officials:

Saudi Arabia’s military intervention against the Shiite Houthis began in 2015. Bolstered by extensive American military and intelligence support, it came to include 25,000 air raids, according to a count by the Yemen Data Project. The years of fighting created one of the world’s worst humanitarian crises and resulted in the deaths of more than 377,000 Yemenis by the end of 2021 from both war and hunger, the United Nations calculates.
The Houthis have made Saudi Arabia and its coalition allies pay a high price for their failed bid to return to the capital the internationally recognized government after it was ousted by the Houthis. They have launched more than 1,000 missiles and 350 drones into Saudi territory, increasingly deeply since 2019, prompting Riyadh to search for a way out of its military quagmire.

The accelerated moves follow just weeks after a high-profile rapprochement brokered last month by China between rivals Saudi Arabia and Iran – both of which turned Yemen’s civil war into a proxy battleground to expand their regional influence.


Over the last week the Saudis and Houthi sides released prisoners of war. The U.S. has done its best to sabotage the deal:

In the wake of the China-backed détente, the Saudis have largely been willing to abandon their proxies in the interest of ending what has been a draining war. The U.S. responded with alarm, rushing diplomats to the region to insist that pressure continue being applied to the Houthi government in the hope of undermining the deal in the works. [Tim Lenderking, the U.S. envoy for Yemen,] rushed to Riyadh on April 11, as news broke of a peace deal, to remind Saudi leaders of the U.S. desire that they continue to back their proxies in the war.

Instead, the ceasefire talks appear to have become possible because of an agreement in principle that Saudi Arabia would abandon its puppet government, back down from the blockade, and — as the Houthis hoped — use its vast oil wealth to pay Yemeni civil servants.


A similar rapprochement is happening between Saudi Arabia and Syria. On April 12 the Syrian Foreign Minister Faisal Mekdad visited Saudi Arabia:

The visit is the first by a Syrian foreign minister to Saudi Arabia since 2011, when the war in Syria began. Saudi Arabia supported the Syrian opposition, but ties have thawed in recent months.
Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad has largely defeated the opposition with Russian and Iranian backing.

Over the past few months, there has been increasing engagement with al-Assad, who has been isolated since the start of the Syrian war.

Al-Assad has visited the UAE and Oman this year, and last month Saudi Arabia said it has started talks with Damascus about resuming consular services.

Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia will host a meeting of regional foreign ministers on Friday to discuss the return of Syria to the Arab League.


The Arab League re-entry will not happen for some time as Qatar, which supported the Muslim Brotherhood rebels against Syria, continues to be hostile to it.

The Saudis will never the less continue their plan. Today the Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan arrived in Damascus for a meeting with President Bashar al-Assad:

Saudi Arabia severed ties with Assad's government in 2012 and Riyadh had long openly championed Assad's ouster, backing Syrian rebels in earlier stages of the war.

Several other Arab countries also cut ties with Syria as some powers bet on Assad's demise.

But regional capitals have gradually been warming to Assad as he has clawed back most of the territory lost to rivals, with crucial backing from Russia and Iran.


As with Yemen the U.S. does not like this move. It will continue its effort to isolate Syria and its government. It is no by chance that today, Just as the Saudi foreign minister visits Damascus, the U.S. is revealing a looming indictment of high ranking Syrian officials:

The inquiry, which has not been previously reported, aims to bring to account top Syrian officials considered key architects of a ruthless system of detention and torture that has flourished under President Bashar al-Assad: Jamil Hassan, the head of the Air Force Intelligence Directorate when Ms. Shweikani disappeared, and Ali Mamlouk, then the head of Syria’s National Security Bureau intelligence service.
A federal indictment accusing the men of committing war crimes would be the first time that the United States has criminally charged top Syrian officials with the very human rights abuses that Mr. al-Assad has long denied using to silence dissent. Although the men are unlikely to be apprehended, a conviction would signal that the United States aims to hold the Syrian government responsible. Already, the United States has imposed sanctions on Mr. al-Assad and his inner circle, including Mr. Mamlouk and Mr. Hassan, over abuses like violence against civilians.
...
A potential indictment would “personalize the evil of this regime and make it clear you can’t do business with Assad,” said former Ambassador James F. Jeffrey, the Trump administration’s special representative for Syria engagement.


The move will be to no avail. The next country to patch it up with Syria will be Turkey. The Saudi clown prince Mohammad Bin Sultan has decided to develop Saudi Arabia into more than an oil producing country and pilgrimage enterprise. Peace is a prerequisite for development. Good relations with Iran and its various friends in the region will also keep Saudi Arabia out of a potential conflict between Iran and Israel.

There China may also be helpful. It has just offered to facilitate Israel-Palestinian peace talks:

In separate phone calls to the two officials on Monday, [China’s foreign minister] Qin Gang expressed China’s concern over intensifying tensions between Israel and Palestinians and its support for a resumption of peace talks, the Foreign Ministry said in statements issued late Monday.
Qin stressed in his talks with Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen that Saudi Arabia and Iran have set a good example of overcoming differences through dialogue, a statement about that phone call said.

He told Cohen that Beijing encourages Israel and the Palestinians to show political courage and take steps to resume peace talks. “China is willing to provide convenience for this,” he was quoted as saying.


This is another area where the U.S. has previously held, as in Saudi Arabia, an exclusive role.

China, with the support of Russia, is wrestling the U.S. of that role bit by bit. It can do this because it is perceived as neutral and shows no interest in any aggression.

It is the opposite of how the U.S. is perceived in the region. The Chinese way of doing these things makes it likely that these efforts will have better and longer lasting outcomes.

Posted by b on April 18, 2023 at 16:19 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/04/c ... .html#more

**********

China ready to facilitate resumption of peace talks between Israel, Palestine: FM
Xinhua | Updated: 2023-04-18 09:26


BEIJING - China encourages both Israel and Palestine to show political courage and take steps to resume peace talks, and China is ready to provide convenience for this, Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang said Monday.

Qin, in a phone call with Israeli Foreign Minister Eli Cohen, said China is concerned about the current tension between Israel and Palestine, and the current top priority is to bring the situation under control and prevent the conflict from escalating or even getting out of control.

All parties should maintain calm and restraint, and stop excessive and provocative words and deeds, Qin said, adding that the fundamental way out is to resume peace talks and implement the "two-state solution".

It is never too late to do the right thing, he said.

Chinese President Xi Jinping put forward the Global Security Initiative, and China believes that the key to solving the Israel-Palestine issue lies in upholding the vision of common security, Qin said.

China has no selfish interests on the Israel-Palestine issue, and only hopes that Israel and Palestine can coexist peacefully and safeguard regional peace and stability.

Cohen thanked China for its willingness to support the settlement of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Israel is committed to cooling the situation, but the problem is not likely to be resolved in a short term, he added.

Israel attaches importance to China's influence, pays high attention to the Iranian nuclear issue and expects China to play a positive role, Cohen said.

Qin stressed that Saudi Arabia and Iran recently restored diplomatic relations through dialogue, setting a good example of overcoming differences through dialogue.

It is hoped that all parties will seize the favorable opportunity to promote dialogue and reconciliation, implement the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian nuclear issue, and safeguard peace and tranquility in the Middle East, Qin said.

Both sides indicated that they attach importance to bilateral relations.

Qin said that China is willing to strengthen exchanges at all levels with Israel, enhance mutual political trust and promote mutually beneficial cooperation.

Cohen said that he looks forward to the full recovery of cooperation in culture, tourism and other fields between the two countries after the COVID-19 pandemic, and is willing to work closely with China to push for new development of bilateral relations.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... ce31b.html

***********

Are the Chinese nice?

Without mincing words, my answer to the question is that the Chinese are not nice. They are dignified, they are hard working and commercially minded. They pay all due respect to professional competence and operate a system of governance that might fairly be described as a meritocracy. But they are not nice in the sense of tolerant of the sins and transgressions of others. They are not Good Christians.

That is where the Chinese should not be confused with the Russian leadership, in which President Vladimir Putin has over the two plus decades at the helm always shown restraint and frequently turned the other cheek when he and his country were abused by the United States and its allies.

Putin’s Christian convictions and the behavior that follow from them have led his domestic critics among super patriots to harshly condemn the way the war in Ukraine or Special Military Operation, if you will, is being prosecuted. Russia has the capability to decapitate the Kiev regime at any time but has not done anything of the kind. Instead it has regularly permitted Western heads of government to visit with Zelensky at his headquarters as if the country were at peace. Russia has allowed the United States to repeatedly cross its declared red lines without punishment. All that we hear is the Foreign Ministry’s spokesperson Maria Zakharova wail “can you imagine!” She is as closely bound to that lament as Theresa May was to “highly likely.”

Regrettably, judging by the U.S. activities with respect to Taiwan over the past couple of weeks, Washington does not seem to appreciate the difference between Russia and China in temperament of the leaders and national cultures.

In his present declining state, Biden has no memory. But where is the memory of his younger circle of advisers and assistants? Why are Blinken and Sullivan and Austin ignoring the lessons of the Cuban Missile Crisis as they prepare to supply Taiwan with weapons that are as provocative and threatening to China as Khrushchev’s delivery of nuclear tipped missiles was to Cuba in 1962? Where is their memory of the antecedents of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor when Senator Lindsey Graham is allowed to publicly call for disruption of the sea lanes bringing oil to China from the Middle East? I have not heard or seen any criticism of this proposal from the White House.

The Chinese are not big talkers, but they are decisive actors. I have no doubt that if they believe the United States has crossed their red lines regarding aid to Taiwan and interference in the island’s domestic politics to favor independence, then the Chinese will strike. They surely have done their calculations. If they sink America’s aircraft carrier task force in the South China Sea or sink the entire U.S. Pacific fleet as Japan once did under similar circumstances, will the USA launch nuclear missiles and put its own national survival at risk? The answer is a flat no.

For the above acts of reckless endangerment of the Continental U.S., in addition to the violations of perjury before Congress in testimony over the preparedness of Ukraine for a counter-offensive against Russia that contradicts the Pentagon and CIA documents leaked over social media a couple of weeks ago, Biden and many of his team deserve impeachment. Now, before the Chinese show just how un-nice they can be.

©Gilbert Doctorow, 2023

https://gilbertdoctorow.com/2023/04/19/ ... nese-nice/

Attributing Russia's reluctance to see and respond to Western over-reach and aggression to Putin's Christianity is a bit much. Russia's oligarchy wanted a place in the sun along with the 'Golden Billion', which said states had no interests in as they would have Russia subservient and carved up for dinner. And here we are....

As far as 'turning the other cheek' goes, personal relationships and matters of state are two very different things: the former perhaps a fine gesture, the latter a regrettable matter of current necessity.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 22, 2023 2:18 pm

China, Russia Circle Wagons in Asia-Pacific
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 19, 2023
M. K. Bhadrakumar

Image
“Working meeting” between President Vladimir Putin (R), visiting Chinese State Councilor & Defence Minister Gen. Li Shangfu (L) and Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu, Moscow, April 16, 2023

The official visit by Chinese State Councilor and Defence Minister General Li Shangfu to Russia on April 16-19 prima facie underscored the two countries’ emergent need to deepen their military trust and close coordination against the backdrop of worsening geopolitical tensions and the imperative to maintain the global strategic balance.

The visit carries forward the pivotal decisions taken at the intensive one-on-one talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and Chinese President Xi Jinping in Moscow through March 20-21. In a break with protocol, Gen. Li’s 4-day visit was front-loaded with a “working meeting” with Putin — to quote Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov. (here and here)

Li is no stranger to Moscow, having previously held charge of Equipment Development Department of the Central Military Commission who was sanctioned by the US in 2018 for purchasing Russian weapons, including Su-35 combat aircraft and S-400 surface-to-air missile systems.

Song Zhongping, prominent Chinese military expert and TV commentator, forecast that Li’s trip would signal the high level of bilateral military ties with Russia, and lead to “more mutually beneficial exchanges in many fields, including defence technologies and military exercises.”

Last Wednesday, US Commerce Department announced the imposition of export controls on a dozen Chinese companies for “supporting Russia’s military and defence industries.” The Global Times hit back defiantly that “as China is an independent major power, so is Russia. It’s our right to decide with whom we will carry out normal economic and trade cooperation. We cannot accept the US’ finger-pointing or even economic coercion.”

Putin said at the meeting with Li on Easter Sunday that military cooperation plays an important role in Russia-China relations. Chinese analysts said Li’s visit is also a signal jointly sent by China and Russia that their military cooperation will not be impacted by the US pressure.

Putin had disclosed in October 2019 that Russia was helping China to create an early missile warning system that would drastically enhance the defensive capacity of China. Chinese observers noted that Russia was more experienced in developing and operating such a system, which is capable of identifying and sending warnings immediately after intercontinental ballistic missiles are launched.

Such cooperation demonstrates a high level of trust and requires a possible integration of Russian and Chinese systems. The system integration will be mutually beneficial; stations located in the North and West of Russia could provide China with warning data and, in turn, China could provide Russia with data collected at their Eastern and Southern stations. That is to say, the two countries could create their own global missile defence network.

These systems are among the most sophisticated and sensitive areas of defence technology. The US and Russia are the only countries which have been able to develop, build and maintain such systems. Certainly, close coordination and cooperation between Russia and China, two nuclear-armed powers, will profoundly contribute to world peace in the present circumstances by containing and deterring US hegemony.

It cannot be a coincidence that Moscow ordered a sudden check of the forces of its Pacific Fleet on April 14-18, which overlapped Li’s visit. The inspection took place against the background of the aggravation of the situation around Taiwan.

Indeed, in early April, it became known that the American aircraft carrier USS Nimitz approached Taiwan; on April 11, the US began a 17-day military exercise in the Philippines involving over 12000 troops; on April 17, news appeared about the dispatch of 200 American military advisers to Taiwan.

The US Global Thunder 23 strategic exercises at Minot Air Base in North Dakota, (which is the US Air Force Global Strikes Command) began last week where a training was conducted to load cruise missiles with nuclear warhead on bombers. The images showed B-52H Stratofortress strategic bombers being equipped by the flight technical personnel of the base with AGM-86B cruise missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads on the underwing pylons!

Again, exercises of US aviation and fleet forces have been increasingly noticed in the immediate vicinity of Russian borders or in regions where Russia has geopolitical interests. On April 5, B-52 Stratofortress circled over the Korean Peninsula allegedly “in response to nuclear and missile threats from North Korea.” At the same time, South Korea, the US and Japan conducted trilateral naval exercises in the waters of the Sea of Japan with the participation of aircraft carrier USS Nimitz.

Russian Security Council Secretary Nikolai Patrushev recently drew attention to Japan’s growing capability to conduct offensive operations, which, he said, constituted “a gross violation of one of the most important outcomes of the Second World War.” Japan plans to purchase around 500 Tomahawk cruise missiles from the US, which can directly threaten most of the territory of the Russian Far East. The Mitsubishi Heavy Industries is working on developing Type 12 land-based anti-ship missiles “in order to protect the remote islands of Japan.”

Japan is also developing hypersonic weapons designed to conduct combat operations “on remote islands,” which Russians see as options for Japan’s possible seizure of the Southern Kuriles. In 2023, Japan will have a military budget exceeding $51 billion (on par with Russia’s), which is slated to increase to $73 billion.

Actually, during the latest surprise inspection, the ships and submarines of Russia’s Pacific Fleet made the transition from their bases to the Japanese, Okhotsk and Bering Seas. Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu said, “in practice, it is necessary to work out ways to prevent the deployment of enemy forces to the operationally important area of the Pacific Ocean – the southern part of the Sea of Okhotsk and to repel its landing on the Southern Kuril Islands and Sakhalin Island.”

Loudly on the quiet…

Surveying the regional alignments, Yuri Lyamin, Russian military expert and Senior Fellow at the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technologies, a leading think tank of the military-industrial complex, told Izvestia newspaper:

“Considering that we have not settled the territorial issue, Japan lays claim to our South Kuriles. In this regard, checks are very necessary. It is necessary to increase the readiness of our forces in the Far East…

“In the context of the current situation, we need to further strengthen defence cooperation with China. In fact, an axis is being formed against Russia, North Korea and China: the USA, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, and then it goes to Australia. Great Britain is also actively trying to participate… All this must be taken into account and cooperation should be established with China and North Korea, which are, one might say, our natural allies.”


In highly significant remarks at a Kremlin meeting with Shoigu on April 17 — while Li was in Moscow — Putin noted that the current priorities of Russia’s armed forces are “primarily focusing on the Ukrainian track… (but) the Pacific theatre of operations remains relevant” and it must be borne in mind that “the forces of the (Pacific) fleet in its individual components can certainly be used in conflicts in any direction.”

The next day, Shoigu told Gen. Li, “In the spirit of unbreakable friendship between the nations, peoples, and the armed forces of China and Russia, I look forward to the closest and most successful cooperation with you…” The Russian MOD readout said :

“Sergei Shoigu stressed that Russia and China could stabilise the global situation and lessen the potential for conflict by coordinating their actions on the global stage. ‘It is important that our countries share the same view on the ongoing transformation of the global geopolitical landscape… The meeting we have today will, in my opinion, help to further solidify the Russia-China strategic partnership in the defence sphere and enable an open discussion of regional and global security issues.”

Beijing and Moscow visualise that the US, having failed to “erase” Russia, is turning attention to the Asia-Pacific theatre. Suffice to say, Li’s visit shows that the reality of Russia–China defence cooperation is complicated. Russia–China military-technical cooperation has always been rather secretive, and the level of secrecy has increased as both countries engage in more direct confrontation with the US.

The political meaning of Putin’s 2019 statement on jointly developing a ballistic missile early warning system extended far beyond its technical and military significance. It demonstrated to the world that Russia and China were on the brink of a formal military alliance, which could be triggered if US pressure went too far.

In October 2020, Putin suggested the possibility of a military alliance with China. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs’ reaction was positive, although Beijing refrained from using the word “alliance”.

A working and effective military alliance can be formed quickly if the need arises but their respective foreign policy strategies rendered such a move unlikely. However, real and imminent danger of military conflict with the US can trigger a paradigm shift.

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/04/ ... a-pacific/

**********

Chinese "Police Stations" and War Propaganda
Margaret Kimberley, BAR Executive Editor and Senior Columnist 19 Apr 2023

Image
Brooklyn U.S. Attorney Breon Peace said the case “reveals the Chinese government’s flagrant violation of our nation’s sovereignty.” (Photo: Andrew Harnik AP)

The U.S. can shoot down balloons, call names, and claim that China has "police stations" in New York City. It cannot stop the decline of its own making as it engages in war propaganda theater.

President Lula da Silva of Brazil recently visited China’s President Xi Jinping. French President Emmanuel Macron, Belarus President Aleksandr Lukashenko, Iran’s President Ebrahim Raisi and Spain’s prime minister Pedro Sanchez have all made the journey in recent months. Even Germany’s amateurish Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock went, but her goal was to make sure that double talking Macron didn’t stray far from the EU’s pro-U.S. orthodoxy.

The frequency of high level meetings is interesting when one considers Joe Biden's bizarre rant in his State of the Union Speech. He blurted out, “Name me a world leader who would trade places with Xi Jinping! Name me one!” Apparently the answer is all of them because they are making a collective beeline to Beijing. Because of his odd screed and shooting down a weather balloon, Biden can’t get Xi to take his phone call. Nor can Secretary of State Blinken schedule a meeting with his Chinese counterparts that was planned before the balloon fiasco. China is “ghosting” the U.S., which responds in typical fashion.

Like every small child does when frustrated about not getting their way, the U.S. ups the ante with a brand new tantrum. Balloons are so two months ago, as are demented questions about Tik Tok. Now the courts are tools of the futile effort to subjugate China. In New York City prosecutors charged two Chinese-Americans with failing to register as agents of a foreign government by setting up a “police station” under the control of China’s government.

The trope of the Chinese police station has gone from a laughable war propaganda theory to war by other means. Federal prosecutors are charging the two men with obstruction, not espionage, and it appears they may not have been charged at all had they exercised their right not to talk to the FBI.

The charges are a prosecutor’s dream complete with press conferences where they can make outrageous claims against defendants. U.S. Attorney Breon Peace waxed particularly eloquently, “Today’s charges are a crystal clear response to the P.R.C. that we are onto you, we know what you’re doing and we will stop it from happening in the United States of America. We don’t need or want a secret police station in our great city.”

Of course the office was not a secret as it had been opened publicly. Nor is it anything resembling a police station. The term is a fiction, a creation of the state and their friends in the media meant to incite fear and hatred of China and to normalize the idea of armed conflict. These offices where Chinese citizens can get licenses renewed don’t have lock-ups or armed officers and are definitely not police stations.

The charges filed against the two men are purely political and will not lead to any advantage for the United States. While camera-loving prosecutors make nonsensical statements, China’s Defense Minister was in Moscow meeting with Vladimir Putin. China and Russia are now inextricably linked and are preparing to face the U.S. in whatever way it may choose to confront them.

In addition to the two New York men, the Justice Department indicted 34 people in China and charged them with conspiracy to transmit foreign threats but the complaint is a rehash of the old Russian troll farm stories. What was their crime? Among other things, “...an account controlled by the Group made numerous posts about George Floyd’s death and accusing U.S. law enforcement institutions of racism.” Any accusation of racism in law enforcement is a fact and not a reason for an indictment of any kind, but facts are never the issue when the U.S. declares another nation an enemy.

In attempting to diminish China’s economic prowess the U.S. has elevated its stature around the world. The ceasefire between Yemen and Saudi Arabia is the result of Chinese diplomacy as is the recent rapprochement between Iran and Saudi Arabia. The Ukraine obsession and failure to harm Russia with sanctions has instead demonstrated the need to minimize relations with the U.S. and move away from the use of the dollar as the world reserve currency. China is leading in this regard and the more the U.S. amateurishly tries to isolate Beijing, the more it isolates itself.

China’s diplomatic success proves that the U.S. cannot be a peacemaker in the world. Its system depends upon domination and making what passes for friends through threats of force and interference. When another nation was able to bring persuasion to bear, the U.S. role as a hegemon and international aggressor was exposed for all to see.

The U.S. can call names, create hysteria about Tik Tok, claim that China uses “spy balloons” and “police stations” or make up anything else it wants. One quote in the Department of Justice press release is particularly revealing. “This case serves as a powerful reminder that the People’s Republic of China will stop at nothing to bend people to their will and silence messages they don’t want anyone to hear.” That statement is more accurately directed at the U.S.

The people of this country are the ultimate losers. Thanks to the corporate media repeating state talking points, they have no idea that China is moving up in the world and the U.S. is more and more isolated. They don’t know that the long predicted process of dedollarization is beginning to take shape.

The U.S. should be engaging in peaceful co-existence with the rest of the world. But that isn’t what the oligarchs and plutocrats here want. There would be no need for a military industrial complex if the U.S. wasn’t constantly creating new enemies and undermining other countries. All it has is aggression and the spectacle of name calling and incompetent diplomacy. The descent is obvious to anyone paying attention.

https://www.blackagendareport.com/chine ... propaganda

*******

U.S. Cuts Itself Off From Future Chinese Profits

Yesterday Secretary of the Treasury Janet L. Yellen gave a speech on the U.S.-China economic relationship. It's a bit like of declaration of war:

Our economic approach to China has three principal objectives.
First, we will secure our national security interests and those of our allies and partners, and we will protect human rights. We will clearly communicate to the PRC our concerns about its behavior. And we will not hesitate to defend our vital interests. Even as our targeted actions may have economic impacts, they are motivated solely by our concerns about our security and values. Our goal is not to use these tools to gain competitive economic advantage.

Second, we seek a healthy economic relationship with China: one that fosters growth and innovation in both countries. A growing China that plays by international rules is good for the United States and the world. Both countries can benefit from healthy competition in the economic sphere. But healthy economic competition – where both sides benefit – is only sustainable if that competition is fair. We will continue to partner with our allies to respond to China’s unfair economic practices. And we will continue to make critical investments at home – while engaging with the world to advance our vision for an open, fair, and rules-based global economic order.

Third, we seek cooperation on the urgent global challenges of our day. Since last year’s meeting between Presidents Biden and Xi, both countries have agreed to enhance communication around the macroeconomy and cooperation on issues like climate and debt distress. But more needs to be done. We call on China to follow through on its promise to work with us on these issues – not as a favor to us, but out of our joint duty and obligation to the world. Tackling these issues together will also advance the national interests of both of our countries.


To use undefined "values", undefined "vital interests" and undefined "international rules" always make for a sorry excuse for mischief. To claim "unfair economic practices" in China when it is the U.S. that is breaking its own rules left and right is embarrassing. As Edward Luce writes In today's Financial Times:

Today’s US cannot make trade deals, cannot negotiate global digital rules, cannot abide by WTO rulings and cannot support Bretton Woods reforms. [So] how can China be squeezed into a US-led order in which America itself has stopped believing?
One can of course forget about the third point when the first and second are made. There will be no cooperation when the other points create a hostile confrontation.

Yellen then discusses the three points in more detail. Under 'National Security' she says:

We also carefully review foreign investments in the United States for national security risks and take necessary actions to address any such risks. And we are considering a program to restrict certain U.S. outbound investments in specific sensitive technologies with significant national security implications.

How is prohibiting U.S. investment in China helping with national security? The U.S. has other tools to prevent Lockheed Martin from build new missiles in China. So what investments are envisioned here?

Two days ago Politico had a preview of the program:

Unprecedented rules limiting American investments in China are expected later this month — and the administration has begun briefing industry groups like the Chamber of Commerce on the broad outlines of the executive order, which is expected to require companies to notify the government of new investments in Chinese tech firms and prohibit some deals in critical sectors like microchips.
...
Since the Trump administration, national security lawmakers and Cabinet officials have sought to craft new rules to oversee — and potentially block — U.S. investments in Chinese tech sectors. The goal is to prevent American firms from funding or developing tech that can later be used by the Chinese military.


But that is only a sorry excuse. This is an escalation in the economic war against China. As Politico continues:

Those moves would come on the heels of aggressive trade action last year, when the administration put in place new export rules that explicitly sought to undermine Beijing’s prized microchip sector and passed massive industrial policies aimed at breaking reliance on the Chinese economy. At the time, national security adviser Jake Sullivan was clear that the goal of the strategy was to preserve America’s competitive edge in emerging high-tech industries, even if Washington does not pursue a broader decoupling.
“We must maintain as large of a lead as possible” in high tech sectors like microchips, Sullivan said, previewing new Commerce Department rules released in October that sought to grind Chinese chip development to a halt.


This has nothing to do with national security but with suppressing economic competition.

The new rule prohibiting U.S. investments in China will apply to three large sectors:

While policymakers last year considered including up to five major Chinese industries — microchips, artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology and clean energy — in the order, the biotech and clean energy sectors are now likely to be left out of the program.

To prohibit U.S. investments in those three sectors is still silly.

China does not lack investment money. Its capital account balance is positive and China is investing more abroad than foreigners invest in China. In the last quarter of 2022:

- Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) increased by 27.7 USD bn in Dec 2022.
- China Direct Investment Abroad expanded by 44.2 USD bn in Dec 2022.


China also does not lack know how. It is researching and developing at a high level in all the same sectors where the U.S. is doing it.

Prohibiting U.S. investments in new Chinese chip factories or AI models will only hurt U.S. industries. In earlier decades foreign companies which develop stuff that was of interest for large U.S. companies were bought by U.S. investors. Their knowledge and/or production was replicated in the U.S. or they continued running as before but with their profits flowing into U.S. pockets.

China is the most dynamically developing society. There is a high likelihood that it will find and develop new things before the U.S. will do so. But instead of riding that wave and investing in it the U.S. will prohibit itself from profiting from it.

The Biden administration new rules will cut off U.S. investors from China's future revenue stream.

Posted by b on April 21, 2023 at 17:22 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2023/04/u ... .html#more

********

Image

Bilateral meeting strengthens comradeship between CPC and the Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB)
The recent visit to China by Brazilian President Lula was also an occasion to reaffirm and further strengthen the close friendship and comradeship between the Communist Party of China (CPC) and the Communist Party of Brazil (PCdoB). Brazil’s main communist party has been a consistent ally of Lula and his Workers’ Party (PT) as well as a long-term friend of China.

On April 14, Liu Jianchao, Minister of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee (IDCPC), met with Luciana Santos, President of the PCdoB. Santos, who is also Brazil’s Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation, was accompanying President Lula on his state visit.

Welcoming the Brazilian comrades, Comrade Liu said that both the CPC and the PCdoB are Marxist political parties with a century-long struggle and this year marks the 70th anniversary of the establishment of their relations. The CPC is willing to deepen traditional friendship with the PCdoB, strengthen experience exchanges in party building and state governance and join hands to deal with common challenges.

Comrade Santos said that the major achievements and historical experience of the CPC over the past century are a precious wealth for promoting the development and progress of humanity. The PCdoB cherishes its traditional friendship with the CPC and hopes to further strengthen exchanges and mutual learning between the two parties. She added that President Lula also attaches great importance to Brazil-China relations.

The following report was originally carried on the IDCPC website.
Liu Jianchao, Minister of the International Department of the CPC Central Committee, met here today with Luciana Santos, President of the Communist Party of Brazil (PCB) and Minister of Science, Technology and Innovation of Brazil.

Liu welcomed Santos, who accompanied President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva of Brazil on his visit to China, saying that both the CPC and the PCB are Marxist political parties with a century-long struggle, and this year marks the 70th anniversary of the establishment of relations between the two Parties. The CPC is willing to deepen traditional friendship with the PCB, strengthen experience exchanges in party building and state governance, join hands to deal with common challenges, promote the development and progress of each country, and jointly implement the important consensus reached by the two heads of state during their meeting this time, so as to continuously push the relationship between the two countries to a new level.

Liu said, China and Brazil are major developing countries and important emerging economies, and play an important role in international and regional affairs. Today’s world has entered a new period of turbulence and transformation with various global challenges on the rise. China is willing to, together with Brazil, strengthen the integration of development strategies with Brazil, deepen practical cooperation in various fields, looks forward to Brazil’s participation in the Belt and Road Initiative and Brazil’s active role in cooperation under the BRICS mechanism and in other fields, and is ready to closely coordinate and cooperate in international and regional affairs. It is believed that under the strategic guidance and personal promotion of the two heads of state, China-Brazil comprehensive strategic partnership will usher in a brighter prospect.

Santos said, the major achievements and historical experience of the CPC over the past century are the precious wealth for promoting the development and progress of mankind. The PCB cherishes the traditional friendship with the CPC and hopes to further strengthen exchanges and mutual learning between the two Parties. President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva attaches great importance to Brazil-China relations. This visit to China with many political and business leaders shows his strong willingness to deepen cooperation with China, and will also send a positive signal to the international community that Brazil and China are jointly committed to promoting world peace and development. Brazilian Ministry of Science and, Technology and Innovation will take this visit as an opportunity to actively promote scientific and technological cooperation between Brazil and China in the field of earth resources satellites, and continue to forge new highlights in practical cooperation between the two countries.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/21/b ... zil-pcdob/

Image

The TikTok conspiracy – the Montana connection
In the following article, written for Friends of Socialist China, Keith Lamb uncovers the real reasons behind the move by lawmakers in the US state of Montana to ban the hugely popular TikTok app.

Keith refutes the suggestion that the app presents any national security threat to the US, highlighting instead the degeneration of much of US popular culture as well as the contrast between a bourgeois government in the US – in hock to capital, including the big tech companies – and a socialist government in China, that prioritizes people’s welfare, including the balanced development of the younger generation.

He also looks at why Montana is the first US state to take this drastic step.
Montana lawmakers have decided to ban TikTok, the popular app owned by the Chinese company ByteDance. Now their decision will go to Montana’s Republican governor, Greg Gianforte, for consideration. The argument for banning TikTok is based on several conspiracy theories. But the real conspiracy theory, which Montana has a role in, isn’t being reported.

The popular conspiracy theory narrative is that China will be able to spy on US citizens, propagandize them, and that China is even using TikTok to dumb down Americans while the Chinese version of the app is used to edify China’s citizens.

First, even the CIA has stated there is no evidence that the Chinese government has access to US TikTok data. Indeed, TikTok stores US data on servers based in Texas. As such, the reasoning for banning TikTok is based on made up and hypothetical situations rather than factual evidence.

Second, it is vacuous to claim that China is using TikTok to propagandize US citizens as US TikTok users overwhelmingly consume homegrown content. Banning TikTok would only mean US content creators would migrate to different apps – this is probably the intention!

In terms of the Chinese version of TikTok, an episode of the 60 Minutes TV show argued that it is more likely to show edifying content to Chinese youth while US children get the dumbed-down version. Thus, the reasoning goes, China is purposely dumbing down Americans!

This dumbed-down argument speaks volumes to the ignorance that masks the real causes for seeking to ban TikTok. Any serious self-reflection on popular US culture would recognize that it has long been dumbed down before TikTok’s advent.

Ignorance and mindless hedonism, combined with the generally illusory prospect of quick wealth added onto a catchy jingle, has long been the background melody that big business has used to propagandize American youth. Without widespread ignorance arguments that combine multiple foreign invasions with notions of “democracy” and “the good guys” would be untenable.

In contrast, China, when it comes to its youth, recognizing the power of technology and media, does have stricter regulations. Minors are now restricted by law in their consumption of online computer games. Technology should be edifying and not just a tool for corporations to make a quick buck.

The contradictions are evident. China has a more edifying version of TikTok because the Chinese government acts democratically on behalf of its citizens. However, in the US China can’t control TikTok’s content which is precisely what TikTok’s detractors are accusing China of.

The job of governing US tech media, for the public good, should be that of the US government. However, homegrown tech monopolies, that fund US poitics, would take offense and claim that freedom of expression and the free market are being interfered with by an “authoritarian” government.

The real conspiracy is that TikTok, which is now the most popular downloaded app in the US, competes with US tech monopolies. Consequently the cloak of “free competition” is being discarded and underhanded political means are being used to protect monopoly power.

One only needs to look at donations to the US presidential 2020 elections to understand that big business is calling the shots. Microsoft, Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Netflix all donated between $21 to $5 million across both parties.

Absent from this largescale election funding was ByteDance who according to OpenSecrets didn’t even donate $20,000 across both parties in 2020, though CNBC recently reported that since then ByteDance has spent $13 million lobbying the federal government. Perhaps this is too little, too late and at any rate, they can’t compete with the collective power of US tech.

The problem with TikTok isn’t that it is controlled by China, it’s that it’s not “one of them.” The US government is Facebook et al and they have all the information they need regarding US citizens, the problem is they, much like the Chinese government, don’t have access to TikTok’s US data. Furthermore, TikTok isn’t hostile to China. It won’t be joining the tech funding of anti-China ‘think tanks’ such as the Australian Strategic Policy Institute (ASPI).

If TikTok is eaten up or banned then these monopolies will feast on the windfall of content creators moving to their platforms, the competition for in-demand developers would be eased, and a free-market competitor would be removed.

So what does all this have to do with quiet Montana far from Silicon Valley? Capitalists not only fund politics, they, as we saw with Trump, are increasingly politicians too. Gianforte, Montana’s governor, is a former software engineer and founder of the cloud service company RightNow Technologies. His successful business was sold to the Texas based US tech giant Oracle for a cool $1.5 billion in 2011.

Oracle was the third-largest software company in the world by revenue and market capitalization in 2020. Unsurprisingly, like the other big tech firms, it spends a fortune on influencing US politics. OpenSecrets reveals that in 2020 and 2021 it spent over $21 million in lobbying and its contributions in 2022 were over $33 million – TikTok can’t compete with this.

Can it really be a coincidence that it is innocuous Montana with a governor who has complex and interwoven connections with an industry that made him rich, which funds a political system he is part of, and which rejects incursions into the profits of US tech monopolies, that is today the testing ground for a TikTok ban in the US?

https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/20/t ... onnection/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Thu Apr 27, 2023 2:27 pm

Yellen Threatens China
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on APRIL 26, 2023
Christopher Black

Image
Janet Yellen, the American Treasury Secretary, or Finance Minister, took the US hostility and threat against China to a new level in a speech on April 20 at Johns Hopkins University. In a speech laced with colonialist attitudes and arrogance she talked as if the USA was emperor of the world and China was a rebellious vassal, a speech, despite her rhetoric of seeking ‘constructive” economic ties, that can only destroy any chance of that succeeding.

To read her speech is to understand the mafia mind set of the American leadership for she spoke as if she were the lieutenant of a mafia don threatening to break someone’s legs for not obeying his criminal demands.

She began her long-winded speech by welcoming China’s adoption of some “market reforms” in prior years and claimed the US was responsible for China’s rise as an economic power claiming that “The US Congress and successive presidential administrations supported China’s integration into global markets.” The Chinese have a different view of the matter since China was never disconnected from world markets and relied on its own efforts and the success of the policies of the Communist Party to develop and expand its economy and its trade with the world.

After that introduction, she quickly switched gears by decrying China’s “decision to pivot away from market reforms toward a more state-driven approach that has undercut its neighbours and countries across the world,” and that, “this has come as China is striking a more confrontational posture toward the USA and our allies…”

In effect she admits the communist government of China has succeeded in developing China’s economy and the living standards of its people while the successive US governments have adopted policies destroying the US economy and standards of living. The glaring contrast makes the Americans both angry and embarrassed.

As for China being, “more confrontational,” Yellen cannot point to any evidence of China “confronting the USA at all since the end of the Korean War when China was attacked by the United States. Since the “opening up” to China by Trudeau of Canada, and Nixon of the US in the early 1970’s, China has always sought to cooperate with and improve its relations with all the nations of the world. It is the United States that has always been confrontational, and things have accelerated beginning with President Obama’s “pivot to Asia,” which was the beginning of their renewed strategic objective of forcing China to become their vassal.

President Trump continued with this objective with the imposition of trade tariffs in violation of World Trade Organisation agreements, with increased military sabre rattling over Taiwan, the arrest of Meng Wenzhou, chief financial officer of Huawei, the Chinese communications company. President Biden continues this hostile policy today with increased military posturing and interference in the internal affairs of China over Taiwan, Hong Kong, Xinxiang and other issues, all accompanied by an intense level of propaganda about China threatening American security and American “democracy.”

The United States is hardly a “democracy.” It is instead an extreme example of a plutocracy, a society ruled by the very wealthy but no matter; just a day before her speech, this “democracy” arrested two US citizens of Chinese ethnicity in New York City on absurd charges that they were running a “Chinese secret police station” in New York and members of a black, socialist party that expressed opposition to US war against Russia were charged with crimes amounting to treason for simply expressing their opinion.

She then claimed the US was the largest and most dynamic economy in the world, when data shows that Chins has now surpassed the USA in goods and services produced, and when latest figures project a growth rate in China of 6% this year while the USA may not even grow by 1%. A number of economic analysts and politicians warn of a deepening financial crisis in the US brought on by its failed economic policies and system and by the severe consequences on the USA and Europe of the illegal ‘sanctions” or economic warfare against Russia.

And she was quick to bring Russia into her speech. She made the claim that the “world is confronting the largest land war in Europe since World War II.” when we remember that in 1999 the United States, in an unprovoked attack, bombed Yugoslavia relentlessly for four months and during that war crime attacked the Chinese embassy in Belgrade, killing several diplomats, and when we remember that the United States continued to invade and occupy Syria as she was speaking. She never mentioned Syria of course in her remarks, nor all the death and destruction the USA has wrought on the countries it has attacked and destroyed just since 1945.

And is it the “world” facing the war in Europe-meaning Ukraine? No, it is the US and its NATO allies facing the war which they started in 2014, with the NATO coup, in Ukraine, overthrowing the legitimate government and installing Nazi puppets in its place; which immediately began attacking Russian speakers in Ukraine using shells, bombs and machine guns. Their aggression in Ukraine, their planned offensive, using the Ukrainian army against Russia, the movement of NATO up to Russia’s borders and the nuclear threat, required Russia to take action in self defence of itself and the Russian speakers in Ukraine. The causes of the war are to be found in one place, Washington and it is Washington’s war the world faces.

The military conflict in Ukraine could end tomorrow if the US wanted it to, but it does not, and, as a recent article in Foreign Policy Magazine proves, the goal of the USA is to break Russia into over 40 separate statelets that it will control. The fact is the world faces an American war to destroy Russia and control and exploit its remnants, then bring China to heel, then the rest of us.

Her speech is laced with the usual platitudes about “cooperation”, “negotiation” and “goodwill” but she stated,

“Some see the relationship between the U.S. and China through the frame of great power conflict: a zero-sum, bilateral contest where one must fall for the other to rise.”

Well, who does? Only people like herself and the government she works for. China, with all the good will it can muster, has been pushing the opposite idea for a long time, the concept of win-win situation achieved through meaningful negotiations, in an atmosphere of trust. But again, she states a good outcome can be had only if China “cooperates” and “makes the right choices.” Underlying these platitudes is the threat of force.

She winds up her speech stating she hopes to travel to China to “engage in dialogue.” No doubt the Chinese will agree to meet her. Talking is always a good thing to do. But how can the Chinese deal with an interlocutor who distorts reality, who lies and slanders China, whose smooth words are followed by threats and diktats, and whose US Navy is cruising off China’s coasts threatening China with war over Taiwan and supporting Taiwan with the hope of overthrowing the communist government in China? The Chinese have been complaining for a while now that the US says one thing but then does the exact opposite. But here in Yellen’s speech we see this contradiction stated as a matter of policy. We say this, but we mean that. There is no good faith expressed whatsoever, no amity between nations, no respect for the other party.

Yellen is forced to acknowledge that the US and its allies face debt challenges and economic and financial “pressures” but fails to mention that they are their own entire making. The fact is the USA is essentially bankrupt. Its debt far outstrips its assets. It cannot pay its 31 trillion dollar debt to the world and has to keep increasing its legal debt ceiling to put off the day of reckoning, which causes bickering within the US elites. A large part of this debt is due to their huge military spending and their inflation is largely due to the massive printing of US dollars since the US finally went off the gold standard in the 1971 so it could print money to pay for its defeat in Vietnam and all its other wars since then. It has not stopped the printing presses in all those years and with covid it accelerated. The result is making life miserable for citizens in the USA. Canada and Europe and elsewhere and effectively lowers the cost of labour, the value of wages. This results in the many strikes taking place across the West as workers fight back.

The gutting of the US industrial base in prior decades as US companies left the US to go to China to take advantage of cheaper labour for higher profits is no one’s fault but their own. The American government allowed US companies to leave, even helped them leave, abandoning American workers to destitution, creating the Rust Belt across the USA, the decayed cities and towns, the increased violence, the general misery.

Yellen felt she had to say something relevant about the other elephant in the room, abrupt global warming. She stated that the “Earth is likely to cross a critical global warming threshold within the next decade-if no drastic action is taken.” But what has the USA done about that? The answer is nothing. It is all empty rhetoric and useless programs that have had no effect whatsoever. The “critical threshold “was crossed years ago and the effects of crossing it accelerate with each passing day. We all see it around us. This is the reality. But the Americans always seem to be out of touch with reality.

And while she bragged, that “we remain the largest and most dynamic economy in the world”, she linked that statement to defending “our values and national security,” and that, “within that context, we seek a constructive and fair economic relationship with China.”

But what does fair trade and economic competition have to do with “national security and our values”? It means that the US will continue to use the pretext of “national security and values” to gain unfair economic advantages over China as the recent claims made about security against Huawei and Tik Tok, among other companies have established. By “fair” she means what is good for the USA,” not both parties, and that means nothing but more confrontation with China.

She wound up her speech by stating three “principle objectives” of the US in its economic approach to China, though they are just three ways of saying the same thing, that the principle objective is the domination of China. But she dresses that real objective up in fancy clothes. The first objective is “securing our national security-and protecting human rights.”

So, right after she claimed the US is look for more cooperation with China she boldly stated that the US will continue to violate Chinese sovereignty and to interfere in Chinese internal affairs in every way possible. She stated,

“We will clearly communicate to the PRC our concerns about its behaviour.” Of course, the “behaviour she is referring to is all in the imagination of their propagandists, so that, in effect the Americans intend to increase their slanders against China at every opportunity.

Then she added the following astounding statement, which admits the American confrontational posture,

“Even as our targeted actions may have economic impacts… we are motivated solely by our concerns about security and values.”

One just has to admire their use of words.

The second declared principle, seemingly contradicting the first, but in fact supporting the first objective, is “too seek a healthy economic relationship with China. A growing China that plays by international rules is good for the USA”. She means American rules.

She then spoke about “Chinese unfair economic practices,” a puzzling phrase since she does not state what they are, but we can assume she meant that it is unfair the communists in China are running an economy better than the capitalists do in the USA. She again referred to a “rules-based global economic order” meaning to an American controlled economic order.

Since China insists, as it should, that there is no such thing as a rules-based order, only international law by which all nations are bound, this statement is another declaration of intent to pursue war with China unless China kowtows to the United States. For there to be “rules” there has to be a ruler issuing them but the Americans have forgotten it seems that there are no world rulers on this planet of ours, only individual sovereign nations, governed by the principles set out in the UN Charter. The insistence, by the Americans, and their allies, on the existence of such an order is itself a violation of the founding principles of the United Nations.

Article 2 of the UN Charter states,

“The Organization and its Members, in pursuit of the Purposes stated in Article 1, shall act in accordance with the following Principles.

1.The Organization is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members. “


Their so-called “rules-based order” is a complete negation of the UN Charter. They have, by adopting this phrase, torn up the UN Charter and international law and the entire West has acquiesced in this crime.

The Third principle she stated to be “seeking cooperation on urgent global challenges” by which she means challenges facing the USA, such as the war with Russia. And of course, the Americans are always claiming they are seeking “cooperation” when they mean they are seeking obedience.

Finally, she entered into a long statement meant to reassure American and foreign investors, and the American public, that the mess they see around them in the USA is not real, that everything is just fine, in fact it’s just great. The economy is just fine. The economy is growing. It’s dynamic. Inflation will be beaten. And she assured the world the US financial system is secure, despite the collapse of several large banks in the US in the past few weeks, requiring the government to step in, with warnings of further problems in the near future.

She has to admit China’s growth, its success in the elimination of poverty but tries to minimise and obscure that success by drawing a dark picture with a long list of claimed economic problems, China faces, all sorts of head winds, and again complains about state control of the economy-forgetting of course that in the USA many large corporations are funded by state contracts and large corporations control the government. A number of US companies have been assisted by government sanctions on Chinese companies, by export and import controls, unfair tariffs, and false claims of the use of child or forced labour, all designed to keep Chinese goods and services out of the world market in favour of US goods. She claims the USA is better in everything, while China is in decline. It was quite a sales pitch, and like most sales pitches, a litany of lies and half-truths.

Her big lie was to claim that eliminating Chinese companies from US and allied markets is for “security reasons” not for economic reasons, when we know “security reasons” are just a pretext.

Then, right after that lie she again called for “cooperation” between the US by threatening China over Russia. She said,

“It is essential that China and other countries do not provide Russia with material support or assistance with sanctions evasion. We will continue to make the position of the United States extremely clear to Beijing and companies in its jurisdiction. The consequences of any violations would be severe.”

So much for seeking cooperation. What cooperation? This is just the same old bullying and coercion the Americans have been known for all over the world for a long time. And, again, for one nation to make such threats to another sovereign nation is a violation of Chapter VII of the UN Charter dealing with peace and security and threats to international peace which this threat of “severe consequences” surely is.

She makes things even worse by repeating slanders about China repressing this or that group in this or that place and declares the US intention to take more hostile action against China based on these pretexts. She said,

“The United States will continue to use our tools to disrupt and deter human rights abuses wherever they occur around the globe.”

Yellen then put on a fake smile to be more conciliatory and talked about the strong economic links between the US and China, only again to reveal the true intention; “A growing China that plays by the rules can be beneficial for the United States. For instance, it can mean rising demand for U.S. products and services and more dynamic U.S. industries.”

She closed by stating she hopes to travel to China to talk about the situation. But can the Chinese accept her in the face of this posturing and these threats? They are always polite, and ever seeking some peaceful way forward, so we can suppose they would be willing to talk with her if she asked to meet with them. But what is there to talk about when the United States has made it clear what their objectives are, the domination of China, Russia and the world?

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/04/ ... ens-china/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat Apr 29, 2023 2:06 pm

Taiwan—A Pawn for U.S. War on China
By Sara Flounders - April 27, 2023 0

Image
[Source: youtube.com]

While the U.S.-NATO war against Russia in Ukraine continues unabated, the U.S. is preparing at breakneck speed for war with China, using Taiwan as the excuse. Taiwan, like Ukraine, is a pawn. The military and economic threats on both China and Russia are a desperate bid to quash the emergence of a multipolar world.

U.S. imperialist hegemony is being challenged from every side. De-dollarization among major economies of the Global South is a component of trade agreements among the powerful emerging economies of China, Russia, Iran, Brazil, India, Malaysia and South Africa. Even Saudi Arabia, a reactionary bulwark of U.S. domination in West Asia, is willing to seek new agreements with Iran and is interested in trading its oil in Chinese yuan renminbi, rather than be wholly dependent on U.S. dollars.

Even more threatening to U.S. capitalists is that China is developing trade relations with the 40 countries sanctioned by Washington, and they are doing this by barter and direct currency exchanges. This works around the almighty dollar, the international reserve currency that has dominated global trade and capital flows for 100 years.

Image
[Source: economind.org]

These are not the first efforts to find a replacement to U.S. dollar domination. There is no crime that U.S. imperialism will not commit to preserve the U.S. dollar. Both oil rich Iraq, which proposed a currency based on the dinar in 1990, and Libya, which attempted an African currency in 2010, found they had fabulous resources but no protection from U.S. bombs. Their efforts at sovereignty led to their brutal destruction by U.S. imperialism.

Image
[Source: 21stcenturywire.com]

The aspiration to break free from U.S. corporate control is today being challenged by many more countries. China is a more formidable opponent, surpassing the U.S. in gross domestic product and the development of its economy. China is the top trading partner to more than 120 countries and the largest external trading partner of the European Union.

The ability of China to provide trillions of dollars in development funds through the Belt and Road Initiative means that developing countries can now have more favorable trade relations without the International Monetary Fund and World Bank’s onerous conditions. This option is a threat to every U.S. bank and U.S.-controlled financial institution.

Image
[Source: silkroadbriefing.com]

China and a growing number of countries are in an increasingly stronger position to resist the U.S.’s unequal demands. Countries with three-quarters of the world’s population refused to go along with sanctions on Russia. Will they be willing to accept U.S. sanctions on China?

All of this poses a threat to the hegemony of the U.S., the center of world imperialism. The capitalist system is relentlessly driven to expand or die—and now it is shrinking. For multi-billionaires and corporate CEOs, this is a life-or-death crisis.

Provoking Conflict to Retain Hegemony
U.S. strategy is to sabotage Taiwan and its trade with China by creating conflicts and imposing sanctions. These desperate efforts to reverse Washington’s declining global position will disrupt the global economy.

Presently, Taiwan’s trade with China is far bigger than its trade with the U.S. Mainland China and Hong Kong accounted for 42% of Taiwan’s exports last year, while the U.S. had only a 15% share, according to official Taiwanese data.

For Taiwan’s imports, mainland China and Hong Kong again ranked first with a 22% share. The U.S. only had a 10% share, ranking behind Japan, Europe and Southeast Asia. South Korea and Japan have greater trade levels with China than with the U.S. (cnbc.com)

The problem U.S. imperialists face is how to reverse this—how to force countries in the Asia Pacific to act against their own economic interests.

The U.S.-NATO war in Ukraine was a strategy to impose sanctions on Russia and to break the EU’s trade with Russia. In 2020 the EU was Russia’s leading trading partner; 36.5% of Russia’s imports came from the EU, and 37.9% of its exports went to the EU. The EU was the largest investor in Russia. Russian trade with the EU has since been reduced to 5.8%.

The U.S.-NATO war in Ukraine has failed to destabilize and collapse Russia, as the U.S. had hoped. But the war devastated the economy of Ukraine and disrupted the EU, which went along with the sanctions demanded by the U.S. The economies of Europe have suffered greatly. Inflation, recession and supply-chain chaos due to sanctions have harshly cut into the EU’s own markets and increased European dependence on the U.S.

Image
[Source: independent.co.uk]
U.S. threats and escalating demands to sanction China will severely damage the economies of Taiwan, Japan, South Korea and the Philippines.

To force high-tech companies to decouple from the People’s Republic of China, U.S. imperialism needs a political-military crisis with China. Every U.S. plan for sanctions on China starts with a manufactured crisis over Taiwan.

Image
[Source: reddit.com]
The U.S. is frantically seeking to stop China’s economic rise by militarily encircling it. Utilizing Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Australia and the Philippines, U.S. strategy is to create an Asian version of NATO, a military alliance to disrupt economic cooperation in Asia. This is a terrible danger to the people of Taiwan and the People’s Republic of China. Throughout the entire region, people face a U.S.-created crisis that can destroy their lives and futures and ruin their economies.

Poor and working people in the U.S. will be forced to pay for this war, as they pay for every war with steadily deteriorating conditions.

China Is One!
In the drive to find an excuse for war, the U.S. government is reversing the position it agreed to and signed with China more than 50 years ago.

China has spent decades developing its economic relations with Taiwan; trade between the island and mainland China has grown, along with political and cultural relations. To counter this effort at peaceful reunification, the Pentagon is turning Taiwan into a porcupine, bristling with billions of dollars in military equipment. Another $10 billion in military aid was just promised.

Image
[Source: edukamy.com]

Washington is openly violating three signed agreements—joint communiques it made with China in 1972, 1979 and 1982—affirming that China is one country and Taiwan is a province of China. Such commitments are the political foundation for China’s diplomatic relationship with the U.S. and with every country.

China has not threatened Taiwan. China has only asserted what is recognized by the U.S. and 181 other countries, as well as the United Nations and all international bodies: Taiwan is part of China. Taiwan’s own constitution affirms that Taiwan is a province of China. It is the U.S. that has broken its promises not to interrupt China’s efforts to reunify the island peacefully.

Image
[Source: mapsofworld.com]

Instead of adherence to the One-China Policy, dangerous mobilization is taking place on military and political levels. The recent manufactured crisis over a Chinese hot air balloon followed by congressional hearings grilling the CEO of TikTok represent new levels in psychological war propaganda, designed to convince the U.S. population that China is an enemy and a threat.

Democrats and Republicans try to outdo each other in condemning China. Taiwan was referred to as “the beating heart to our Indo-Pacific strategy” by Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Menendez, a Democrat.

Image
Robert Menendez [Source: politico.com]

Military preparations against China include U.S. pressure for Japan to double its military budget and become the third largest military in the world, in violation of the Japanese Constitution.

Image
[Source: reddit.com]

A new agreement, announced February 2, granted the U.S. military access to nine bases in the Philippines to counter China. Foreign bases are in direct violation of the Philippines Constitution. In 1992 a massive peoples’ movement forced the U.S. to close its bases in the Philippines.

Image
General Michael Minihan [Source: af.mil].

More ominously, in early February, four-star Air Force General Michael Minihan, head of the Pentagon’s Air Mobility Command, in a “leaked memo” predicted war with China over Taiwan in two years. Gen. Minihan oversees 107,000 airmen and 1,100 cargo, tanker and transport planes. The memo includes training, drills and preparations for war in 2025 and specific orders: “Defeat China” and “Be prepared for deployment at a moment’s notice.”

Another threat was the largest-ever launch from a U.S. base of huge C-17 transport aircraft on January 5, as training for a naval blockade of China. This is the opening round of a massive missile-and-air assault on mainland China—the Pentagon’s Air-Sea Battle strategy.

The U.S. Pacific Fleet consists of approximately 200 ships and submarines, nearly 1,200 aircraft and more than 130,000 sailors and civilian workers. The U.S. regularly sends naval patrols and destroyers through the 180-km-wide Taiwan Strait (about 112 miles).

China condemned these arrogant displays of U.S. military power as reckless, provocative and meant to apply pressure.

Image
U.S. Pacific Fleet. [Source: twitter.com]
Taiwan’s “President” Visits U.S.
Inflated media coverage greeted the visit to New York City of Tsai Ing-wen, the so-called “president” of Taiwan. (“President” is in quotation marks because Taiwan is recognized as an island province of China and not as an independent country by the UN and 181 countries.)

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning objected to this Taiwanese delegation visit and the receptions held in Tsai Ing-wen’s honor, as a violation of the One-China Policy: “China firmly opposes any form of official interaction between the U.S. and Taiwan.” Mao Ning said the U.S. was “conducting dangerous activities that undermine the political foundation of bilateral ties.”

Xu Xueyuan, charge d’affaires at the Chinese embassy in Washington, said China does not accept the U.S. claims that Tsai’s trip is merely a “transit,” saying “the so-called ‘transit’ is merely a disguise to her true intention of seeking breakthrough and advocating Taiwan independence” and accuses the U.S. of allowing Tsai to “make a splash” and of arranging her meeting with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy.

Image
Tsai Ing-wen with House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA) during visit to the U.S. earlier this year. [Source: ketk.com]

While in New York City, Tsai Ing-wen was treated to a banquet and “Global Leadership” award from the Hudson Institute, an influential, right-wing think tank funded in part by Taiwan. The Brookings Institution, the Center for American Progress, the Center for a New American Security, the Center for Strategic and International Studies and the Hudson Institute actively promote expanded arms sales and trade agreements with Taiwan and anti-China propaganda. These five prominent think tanks receive substantial funding from Taiwan.

The visit reinforces Tsai Ing-wen’s standing, at a time when she is in a seriously weakened political position. She was forced to resign as head of the ruling Democratic Progressive Party of Taiwan, after her party suffered a major setback in local elections in November, which was the DPP’s worst performance since its founding in 1986. The election debacle confirms that the DPP’s aggressive stand on independence is losing support in Taiwan.

Tsai Ing-wen’s visit to Guatemala and Belize, two of only 13 remaining countries that recognize Taiwan, was overshadowed by the Honduran Foreign Ministry’s announcement that its government now recognized “only one China in the world” and that Beijing “is the only legitimate government that represents all of China.”

The statement added that “Taiwan is an inalienable part of Chinese territory, and as of today the Honduran government has informed Taiwan of the severance of diplomatic relations, pledging not to have any official relationship or contact with Taiwan.” Honduras is the ninth diplomatic ally Taiwan has lost since the pro-independence Tsai first took office in May 2016.

China has held a consistent, well-understood position on its sovereignty and territorial integrity that is recognized internationally in all world bodies. China has repeatedly asserted its right to resolve this unfinished national reunification. China’s long-held position is that cooperation, trade and development can overcome differences; it is the only way forward.

The preparation of U.S. imperialism for a possible war with China—surrounding it with military bases, nuclear weapons and military vessels—is a highly dangerous provocation. U.S. wars are for corporate profit.

We must mobilize! U.S. hands off China!

https://covertactionmagazine.com/2023/0 ... -on-china/

*********

Tucker Carlson and the U.S. war on China
April 28, 2023 Gary Wilson

Image

Why was Tucker Carlson fired from Fox News? Not for any of his known offensives, even though that’s a very long list.

Carlson is the millionaire (net worth $420 million) son of the director of the CIA’s Voice of America and Radio Marti directed at Cuba as well as the U.S. Information Agency, whose racist, misogynist, homophobic, anti-immigrant views take 27,407 words to chronicle on Wikipedia. Obviously not a friend of the working class.

Glenn Greenwald, the journalist who started his career as a lawyer for a white supremacist and has been a second banana on Carlson’s Fox News show in recent years, suggests that Carlson was fired because “the removal of Tucker means the elimination of the only real, sustained dissent on U.S. militarism.” Greenwald claims Carlson “opposed the U.S. proxy war in Ukraine.”

If Greenwald was honest, he wouldn’t say that Carlson dissented on U.S. militarism; he dissented only on the U.S. proxy war on Russia.

What Carlson says is: “Russia is not America’s main enemy … Our main enemy is China. The U.S. ought to be in a relationship with Russia, aligned against China”.

In another broadcast, Carlson said: “The biggest threat to this country is not Vladimir Putin; that’s ludicrous. The biggest threat obviously is China.”

When Jack Teixeira, the 21-year-old in the Air National Guard’s 102nd Intelligence Wing at Otis Airbase, released top-secret Pentagon documents, Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene praised him as “white, male, christian, and antiwar … he told the truth about [U.S.] troops being on the ground in Ukraine and a lot more.”

Really? This guy, who was known for his racist and anti-Semitic postings, was never antiwar, though he may have opposed the U.S. proxy war on Russia. That’s what Tucker Carlson said, that Teixeira’s leaks “prove U.S. troops are fighting in Ukraine.”

Actually, that part is true. The U.S. and NATO started training Ukrainian forces to fight in Donbass in 2015, and while the training is now done in other countries, NATO provides six-month training courses to all of Ukraine’s forces.

The leaked Pentagon documents revealed that in addition to military trainers and “consultants” in Ukraine, the U.S. has about a hundred special forces personnel operating there, including 14 who are part of a special forces unit made up mostly of “elite” British SAS soldiers.

The leaked Pentagon documents also show a buildup in Pentagon operations targeting China, including assessments that could be used for a U.S. military intervention in Taiwan.

Divisions in U.S. ruling class

The documents also reveal what the Washington Post calls “the U.S.’s gloominess on the war in Ukraine.”

“The [Washington Post] admits that Western media audiences have been misled about the course of the war, that essentially what mainstream media has been reporting about Ukraine has been a pack of lies: namely that Ukraine is winning the war and is poised to launch an offensive that will lead to a final victory,” reports Joe Lauria in Consortium News.

“Instead, the second paragraph of the piece makes clear the leaked documents show the long-planned Ukrainian offensive will fail miserably — ‘a marked departure from the Biden administration’s public statements about the vitality of Ukraine’s military,’ Lauria continues.

“In other words, U.S. officials have been lying about the state of the war to the public and to reporters who have faithfully reported their every word without a hint of skepticism,” he concludes.

The documents show there are sections of the U.S. ruling class who are worried about the disastrous proxy war in Ukraine. The death toll has been rising steadily, and the economic costs of the war are mounting.

The war is also having a destabilizing effect on the global economy, with the price of oil and gas rising sharply and inflation spiraling in the U.S. and Europe. It could disrupt the U.S. war buildup against China.

That’s the fear being voiced by Tucker Carlson, Glenn Greenwald, Representative Greene, the Pentagon leaker, and their kind.

The U.S. war on China is dominant in Washington now. As Financial Times columnist Gideon Rachman noted on April 24: “Visiting Washington last week, it was striking how commonplace talk of war between the U.S. and China has become. That discussion has been fed by loose-lipped statements from American generals musing about potential dates for the opening of hostilities. …

“They are a reflection of the broader discussion on China taking place in Washington — inside and outside government. Many influential people seem to think that a U.S.-China war is not only possible but probable.”

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2023/ ... -on-china/

******

Image

Donald Ramotar: the US is waging a massive propaganda campaign against China
We are pleased to republish this article by the veteran Guyanese politician Donald Ramotar, which was originally carried by China Daily.

Noting that Washington is leading a propaganda campaign aimed at undermining China’s bonds with other developing countries, Ramotar states that the expressed fear of China is not because it is threatening any country militarily, but because of its success in developing its economy and the goodwill it has generated by assisting poorer countries.

Outlining China’s external economic relations, Ramotar points out that, on the one hand, the country became one of the main destinations for investment from the developed countries as well as the largest holder of US government bonds. On the other hand, China’s assistance to developing countries started with an emphasis on the least developed ones, who were generally unable to secure loans from the international financial institutions.

“It was the selfless assistance it provided that raised China’s reputation as a true friend to peoples in the developing world, Africa in particular,” Ramotar notes.

US hostility increased after the 2008 global financial crisis, he explains, when, “China’s economic importance to the world economy became manifest.”

Turning his attention to the myth of ‘Chinese debt trap diplomacy’, the author writes: “When countries got into difficulties repaying loans, they were supported by China, which renegotiated the loans and gave the borrowing countries more time to repay. That allowed the repayments to be made on much easier terms. It also allowed countries to pay their debts with produce that they have in abundance, thereby reducing the pressure to repay in hard currency.”

He outlines how the imperialist countries have announced various initiatives in response to China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), observing that, “on the face of it this seems laudable.” But as their main purpose is simply to counter the BRI, “it is clear that development of poor countries is not a priority for G7 countries.”

China’s reputation as a reliable partner and a real friend to the developing countries continues to grow, but as it does, US hostility, including the imposition of sanctions aimed at slowing the country’s progress, is also increasing.

Concluding, Ramotar states: “Clearly the US is very scared of China. Not because it believes that China wants to dominate the world militarily. The main reason is the example that China has become for many countries in the world. It shows that another road to freedom is possible and very viable.”

Donald Ramotar was President of Guyana, 2011-2015, as well as General Secretary of the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), 1997-2013, to which post he succeeded the late Dr. Cheddi Jagan.
The United States’ attitude toward China has always been complex.

It is apposite to note that the expressed fear of China by the US is not because China is threatening any country militarily, nor because it has attacked any state. It is because of China’s success in developing its economy and the goodwill China has garnered by helping poor countries to improve their productive capacity, that the US has been leading the West in waging a massive propaganda campaign against China. The aim of which is to create a false image of China as an exploitative state.

The reality is vastly different to their smears.

After China’s economy began to grow rapidly, it very soon surpassed that of Europe and Japan to become the second-largest economy in the world. At the same time, in keeping with its internationalist philosophy and its commitment to opening up to the world, China began to create links with the rest of the world, both developed and developing countries.

For the developed countries, China became one of the main destinations for investment. Meanwhile, the economy of China and those of Western countries became very much linked. Indeed China has become the largest holder of the US government’s bonds. It was an example of real mutual economic benefits for all concerned.

China’s assistance to developing countries started with the least developed ones, which were unable to get any loans from international financial organizations. They were considered high risk countries and practically ignored by Western governments.

It was the selfless assistance it provided that raised China’s reputation as a true friend to peoples in the developing world, Africa in particular, which had the greatest need.

During those times the US, from time to time made some criticism of China. But those criticisms grew in hostility particularly after the 2008 global financial crisis.

In this period China’s economic importance to the world economy became manifest. China became the greatest driver of the international economy and a key trading partner for most countries in the world.

From this time, relations with the US and China began to encounter choppy waters.

The main reason for this was an unreasonable fear by the US of China’s growing economic strength and the friendships China was forging by providing assistance to many developing countries.

This included roads linking various parts of individual countries and also linking countries with each other. For instance Chinese built a railway from Addis Ababa, capital of Ethiopia, all the way to the port of Djibouti. This is because Ethiopia is land locked and that project has helped Ethiopia’s foreign trade greatly.

When countries got into difficulties repaying loans, they were supported by China, which renegotiated the loans and gave the borrowing countries more time to repay. That allowed the repayments to be made on much easier terms. It also allowed countries to pay their debts with produce that they have in abundance, thereby reducing the pressure to repay in hard currency.

However, the West has been making no secret of its intentions. At the last G7 Summit, the US and other member countries announced a global infrastructure initiative aimed at mobilizing $600 billion to the developing countries.

Western countries have even continuously launched programs in the name of “higher quality” with the aim of countering the Belt and Road Initiative, including Japan’s Partnership for Quality Infrastructure, the European Union’s Global Gateway, and the G7’s recently announced Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment, among others.

On the face of it this seems laudable. However, they have left nothing to the imagination. They announced publicly that their main purpose is to counter China’s Belt and Road Initiative, which is attracting more and more participants. Therefore, it is clear that development of poor countries is not a priority for the G7 countries. The most important is countering China’s influence as a friend of the peoples of developing countries.

Despite the propaganda offensive of the West against China and the belated attempts of the G7 countries to “assist “poor countries, China’s reputation as a reliable partner and a real friend to the developing countries continues to grow. And as China’s reputation grows, the US’ hostility to it is increasing.

The US has now begun applying economic sanctions on China. In order to slow down China’s progress, the US has banned the selling of computer chips and other technologies to China. China’s leading high-tech companies are now being barred from the US market. Companies such as Huawei and Tik Tok are subjected to bans and other restrictions. Many Chinese exports are subjected to high tariffs.

In addition, the US has been using its political and military influence to force European countries to ban Chinese companies. It is also pressuring other countries to stop their ties with China. Some succumb to such pressures but in most cases the developing countries value China’s friendship.

Clearly the US is very scared of China. Not because it believes that China wants to dominate the world militarily. The main reason is the example that China has become for many countries in the world. It shows that another road to freedom is possible and very viable.

It is time that the US reviews its position on China and abandons its irrational fears.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/26/d ... nst-china/

Image

Qin Gang: Chinese Modernization and the World
Several hundred people from some 80 countries attended the Lanting Forum on China’s Modernization and the World, which opened in Shanghai on April 21, and was jointly organized by the China Public Diplomacy Association and the Chinese People’s Institute for Foreign Affairs, with support from the Shanghai Municipal People’s Government and others.

Chinese President Xi Jinping sent a congratulatory message to the conference in which he pointed out that China, “will provide new opportunities for global development with new accomplishments in Chinese modernization, lend new impetus to humanity’s search for paths toward modernization and better social systems, and work with all countries to advance the building of a community with a shared future for humanity.”

State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang delivered a keynote address at the opening session.

Stating that Shanghai was the right place to hold this meeting, he observed that: “A little over a century ago, the Communist Party of China (CPC) started its journey from here. Since then, Shanghai has witnessed not only the vicissitudes of the Chinese nation, but also the profound transformation across the country. The old Shanghai, dominated by foreign powers, is a forerunner today in China’s reform and opening-up. A bustling and prosperous metropolis has risen from devastation since 1949.”

He went on to note that, “our success in Chinese modernization was not handed down from heaven or just emerged by itself. It has been attained step by step through determined, painstaking efforts of the Chinese people under the leadership of the CPC always staying true to its founding mission… It was not until the birth of the CPC in 1921 that China found the pillar and guidance for its modernization. It is under the CPC’s strong leadership that we have embarked on the great journey of independently building a modern country. We have turned China from an impoverished and backward land into the world’s second largest economy, top trader in goods, biggest holder of foreign exchange reserves, and biggest manufacturer. We have put in place the world’s largest compulsory education system, social security system, and medical and health system. China has realized, in a short span of several decades, industrialization that had taken developed countries several centuries.”

Pointing out that, when Comrade Xi Jinping assumed the leadership of the CPC a little over 10 years ago, at the 18th Party Congress, the “acceleration button” was pressed on China’s modernization drive, Qin Gang continued: “Absolute poverty was eradicated. A moderately prosperous society in all respects became a reality. With this, the First Centenary Goal was realized. The Chinese nation has achieved a great transformation from standing up and growing prosperous to becoming strong. National rejuvenation is now on an irreversible course…With the conviction and responsibility of ‘serving the people selflessly’, President Xi Jinping is steering Chinese modernization forward and leading us in marching on the right path toward a better future.”

Explaining that Chinese modernization is a natural outcome of the laws governing human development, Qin Gang said: “Modernization is a common cause of all humanity. Although the West enjoyed the fruits of modernization ahead of others, history will not end there. As early as 140 years ago, Karl Marx envisioned crossing the Caudine Forks of capitalism, providing a solid theoretical basis for a path of modernization different from that of the West.”

(This refers in particular to some of Marx’s later works, notably studying the Russian commune system, and exploring the potential it held for societies to transition to socialism without passing through all the horrors of the capitalist system. For a detailed consideration of Marx’s views on this matter by a prominent Chinese Marxist scholar, see ‘Leaping Over the Caudine Forks of Capitalism’ by Zhao Jiaxiang, published by Routledge.)

Qin further noted: “Ample facts have proved that there is no fixed model of, or single solution to, modernization. Any country can achieve modernization, as long as the path suits its conditions and answers the need of its people for development. On the contrary, mechanically copying ill-fitted foreign models is counter-productive, and may even lead to catastrophic consequences.”

Turning to the international ramifications of China’s modernization drive, the Foreign Minister said that, “as a Chinese saying goes, ‘A just cause should be pursued for the common good.’ As the biggest developing country, China always keeps in mind the greater good of the whole world.”

He illustrated this with seven points, arguing that:

The modernization of China with such a huge population will be a stronger boost for global economic recovery.
The modernization of China with common prosperity for all will open up a broader path to the common development of all countries.
The Global Development Initiative (GDI) is widely welcomed by the international community: “As an African leader put it, the Chinese path inspires all developing countries to believe that every country is able to achieve development even from scratch.”
The modernization of China with material and cultural-ethical advancement will open up bright prospects for human progress.
The modernization of China with harmony between humanity and nature will provide a more viable pathway to a clean and beautiful world.
The modernization of China on the path of peaceful development will bring more certainty to world peace and stability.
The Global Security Initiative (GSI) has pointed out the right direction of pursuing common and universal security.
Qin Gang then outlined five key tasks for Chinese diplomacy following last October’s 20th Party Congress, namely:

China will defend the right to development of all countries with greater determination.
China will advance high-standard opening-up with more proactive efforts.
China will promote exchanges among civilizations more actively.
China will work more vigorously for a community of all life on earth.
China will safeguard the international order with greater resolve.
Finally, Qin Gang used his speech to clearly reiterate China’s firm and principled position on the question of Taiwan, noting:

“It is right and proper for China to uphold its sovereignty and territorial integrity. We would like to make it clear to those who seek to sabotage international justice in the name of international order: The Taiwan question is the core of the core interests of China, and there will be no vagueness at all in our response to any one who attempts to distort the one-China principle; we will never back down in face of any act that undermines China’s sovereignty and security. Those who play with fire on Taiwan will eventually get themselves burned.”

On the margins of the forum, Qin Gang also met with the Foreign Minister of Gambia, Mamadou Tangara, who had just visited Xinjiang, and with Dilma Rousseff, former President of Brazil and newly appointed President of the New Development Bank, which is headquartered in Shanghai.

We reprint below a report on the message from President Xi Jinping and the full text of Foreign Minister Qin Gang’s keynote address. Both were originally published on the website of the Chinese Foreign Ministry.
President Xi Jinping Sends Congratulatory Message to Lanting Forum on Chinese Modernization and the World

On 21 April, President Xi Jinping sent a congratulatory message to the Lanting Forum on Chinese Modernization and the World held at the Meet-the-World Lounge in Shanghai.

President Xi pointed out that realizing modernization is a relentless pursuit of the Chinese people since modern times began. It is also the common aspiration of people of all countries. In pursuing modernization, a country needs to follow certain general patterns. More importantly, it should proceed from its own realities and develop its own features. After a long and arduous quest, the Communist Party of China has led the entire Chinese nation in finding a development path that suits China’s conditions. We are now building a strong country and advancing national rejuvenation on all fronts through a Chinese path to modernization. China will provide new opportunities for global development with new accomplishments in Chinese modernization, lend new impetus to humanity’s search for paths toward modernization and better social systems, and work with all countries to advance the building of a community with a shared future for mankind.

The Lanting Forum on Chinese Modernization and the World was organized by the China Public Diplomacy Association and the Chinese People’s Institute of Foreign Affairs, and was supported by the Shanghai Municipal People’s Government. Representatives of governments, think tanks and the media from nearly 80 countries participated in the Forum.

Chinese Modernization: New Opportunities for the World
Keynote Speech by H.E. State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang at the Opening Ceremony of The Lanting Forum on Chinese Modernization and the World

Shanghai, 21 April 2023

Your Excellency Secretary Chen Jining,
President Wu Hailong,
Diplomatic Envoys,
Distinguished Guests,
Friends,

Good morning. I am very pleased to join you at the Meet-the-World Lounge by the Huangpu River. This is the first Lanting Forum event in Shanghai. My heartfelt appreciation goes to Secretary Chen Jining and the Shanghai municipal government for your strong support.

Shanghai is the right place for our Forum themed “Chinese Modernization and the World”. As is often said, you should go to Shanghai if you want to know about the last 100 years of China. A little over a century ago, the Communist Party of China (CPC) started its journey from here. Since then, Shanghai has witnessed not only the vicissitudes of the Chinese nation, but also the profound transformation across the country. The old Shanghai, dominated by foreign powers, is a forerunner today in China’s reform and opening-up. A bustling and prosperous metropolis has risen from devastation since 1949. As China’s biggest economic and innovation powerhouse and a trading and shipping hub of the world, Shanghai is leading the trends of our times and development. It is a shining hallmark of the Chinese path to modernization.

Friends,

A towering tree grows from its roots, and a long river flows from its source. Likewise, our success in Chinese modernization was not handed down from the heaven or just emerged by itself. It has been attained step by step through determined, painstaking efforts of the Chinese people under the leadership of the CPC always staying true to its founding mission. Chinese modernization is deeply rooted in Chinese history, practices and philosophies.

Chinese modernization is the natural choice of China’s 100-year-long quest for development. Modernization for China has been a journey of hardship and perseverance, anguish and glory, honor and dreams. During modern times, countless patriots looked to the West for a formula of modernization to save the nation, but they all failed. It was not until the birth of the CPC in 1921 that China found the pillar and guidance for its modernization. It is under the CPC’s strong leadership that we have embarked on the great journey of independently building a modern country. We have turned China from an impoverished and backward land into the world’s second largest economy, top trader in goods, biggest holder of foreign exchange reserves, and biggest manufacturer. We have put in place the world’s largest compulsory education system, social security system, and medical and health system. China has realized, in a short span of several decades, industrialization that had taken developed countries several centuries. We have caught up with the times in great strides.

Chinese modernization is the natural requirement for promoting national rejuvenation on all fronts. As of the 18th CPC National Congress, under the strong leadership of the CPC Central Committee with Comrade Xi Jinping at its core, the “acceleration button” was pressed in China’s modernization drive. The two major miracles — fast economic development and long-term social stability — continued. Absolute poverty was eradicated. A moderately prosperous society in all respects became a reality. With this, the First Centenary Goal was realized. The Chinese nation has achieved a great transformation from standing up and growing prosperous to becoming strong. National rejuvenation is now on an irreversible course. At the National People’s Congress (NPC) and the Chinese People’s Political Consultative Conference (CPPCC) sessions last month, General Secretary Xi Jinping was again unanimously elected President of the People’s Republic of China. It was a choice by history and by the people. With the conviction and responsibility of “serving the people selflessly”, President Xi Jinping is steering Chinese modernization forward and leading us in marching on the right path toward a better future.

Chinese modernization is a natural outcome of the laws governing human development. Modernization is a common cause of all humanity. Although the West enjoyed the fruits of modernization ahead of others, history will not end there. As early as 140 years ago, Karl Marx envisioned crossing the Caudine Forks of capitalism, providing a solid theoretical basis for a path of modernization different from that of the West. Through the past 100 years and more, China has found by itself a path to modernization, and created a new form of human advancement. Ample facts have proved that there is no fixed model of, or single solution to, modernization. Any country can achieve modernization, as long as the path suits its conditions and answers the need of its people for development. On the contrary, mechanically copying ill-fitted foreign models is counter-productive, and may even lead to catastrophic consequences.

Friends,

As a Chinese saying goes, “A just cause should be pursued for the common good.” As the biggest developing country, China always keeps in mind the greater good of the whole world. The Chinese path to modernization is not a one-flower show, still less for self-interest. It is a path toward development of China, through which more positive energy will be added to global peace and new opportunities created for global development. Here is what I believe:

The modernization of China with such a huge population will be a stronger boost for global economic recovery. Over the past 40-plus years since reform and opening-up, the Chinese government has lifted over 800 million people out of poverty, and enlarged the middle-income group to over 400 million people. Today, China is the main trading partner of over 140 countries and regions, making US$320 million direct investment around the world each day and attracting over 3,000 foreign businesses every month. Over the past decade, China has contributed more to global growth than all the G7 countries combined.

With over 1.4 billion people on course toward modernization, a number larger than the combined population of all developed countries, China will give a much stronger impetus for the global economy. The China Development Forum and the Boao Forum for Asia, which were successfully held last month, attracted many political and business leaders from around the world. The most repeated call we heard was to seize the new opportunities that will come along with China’s high-quality development and high-standard opening-up. The Number One unanimous view was to reject decoupling and move forward with China.

The modernization of China with common prosperity for all will open up a broader path to the common development of all countries. Modernization should not make the rich richer and the poor poorer. Nor should it serve the interests of only a few countries or individuals. Common prosperity for the whole world requires the development of all countries. The Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the Global Development Initiative (GDI) are public goods that China offers to the international community. They are also open platforms for pursuing common development and prosperity. Ten years on since the start of the BRI, over 3,000 cooperation projects have been launched, involving close to US$1 trillion of investment and creating 420,000 jobs for participating countries. Many nations have thus realized their dreams of railways, big bridges, and poverty alleviation.

The GDI is also widely welcomed by the international community. With the support of over 100 countries and many international organizations, and with some 70 countries in the Group of Friends of the GDI, the Initiative is giving a strong boost to the early attainment of the UN Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. China takes seriously the debt issue of developing countries. We are actively and fully implementing the G20’s Debt Service Suspension Initiative, and have contributed as much as 63 percent of the total debt payments suspended. It is fair to say that Chinese modernization has helped inspire confidence in many countries in their pursuit of modernization. As an African leader put it, the Chinese path inspires all developing countries to believe that every country is able to achieve development even from scratch.

The modernization of China with material and cultural-ethical advancement will open up bright prospects for human progress. Some countries, while highly developed in economy, science and technology, have descended into a capital-centric mode, rampant materialism, cultural impoverishment, moral degradation, and public disorder. As President Xi Jinping underscored, the ultimate goal of modernization is the free and well-rounded development of people, which means not only material abundance but also cultural-ethical enrichment.

As a Chinese saying goes, “Only when the granary is full will people learn etiquette; only when people are well-fed and clothed will they know honor and shame.” The Chinese nation always yearns for a world of great harmony in which people are free from want and follow a high moral standard. It is a world where people put their cultural pursuit before material needs and see it as part of their social ideal. Back in the Axial Age 2,500 years ago, philosophers of great civilizations, like Confucius and Mencius in China and Plato in Greece, went on their respective yet common pursuit of cultural and ethical enrichment. Modernization is not the demise of ancient civilizations, but a renewal of traditional cultures. The Global Civilization Initiative (GCI) put forth by President Xi Jinping advocates the importance of inheritance and innovations of civilizations, promotes the respect for the diversity of civilizations, and advances the principles of equality, mutual learning, dialogue and inclusiveness among civilizations. The Chinese believe that even for an established country, its future hinges on self-renewal. Chinese modernization will add new vigor and vitality to the profound Chinese civilization, and contribute more Chinese wisdom to global peace and prosperity and to human progress. We envision a better world in which all civilizations prosper from generation to generation through constant self-renewal, enjoying both material abundance and cultural and ethical advancement.

The modernization of China with harmony between humanity and nature will provide a more viable pathway to a clean and beautiful world. As President Xi Jinping noted, lucid waters and lush mountains are invaluable assets. China readily takes on its responsibility of protecting the environment and tackling climate change, and leads the world on many counts: in terms of afforested area, which accounts for a quarter of the world’s total; in the development and utilization of renewable energy, with one-third of the world’s installed capacity of wind and solar power; and in the output and sales of new energy vehicles, with half of the world’s NEVs running on Chinese roads. China has made the solemn pledge of achieving carbon peak and carbon neutrality to the world, and committed itself to moving from carbon peak to neutrality in just 30 years. That is at least years less than the United States and 40-plus years less than the European Union. China has taken the initiative to set up and invest in the Kunming Biodiversity Fund, and contributed to the conclusion of the Paris Agreement. Just early this month, President Xi Jinping and President Emmanuel Macron agreed on jointly developing a carbon neutrality center, in a bid to add new momentum to the global low-carbon transition.

The modernization of China on the path of peaceful development will bring more certainty to world peace and stability. Dominance and hegemony is not the aim of China’s development. The notion that strength will lead to hegemony is incompatible with Chinese culture, and defiance of hegemony is a noble character of Chinese diplomacy. Until today, China is the only country in the world that has put in its Constitution the commitment to a path of peaceful development. China is the top contributor of peacekeeping personnel among the permanent members of the UN Security Council, and the only country among the five Nuclear-Weapon States that has made the promise of no-first-use of nuclear weapons. We have joined over 20 multilateral arms control treaties, and pushed for the conclusion of a joint statement among the five Nuclear-Weapon States on preventing nuclear war. We advocate peaceful resolution of international disputes through consultation and dialogue.

The Global Security Initiative (GSI) put forward by President Xi Jinping has pointed out the right direction of pursuing common and universal security. As a Chinese proverb says, it is better to remove enmity than keep it alive. Facilitated by China, Saudi Arabia and Iran resumed diplomatic relations. And it is encouraging to see that more countries are shaking hands and embracing peace. In the face of the protracted Ukraine crisis, China does not inflame or take advantage of the situation. Rather, China has taken an impartial stance and pushed for peace talks in order to reduce the pressure and lower the temperature around the crisis. Facts have proved that a China moving toward modernization is a boost to the force for peace and justice. 

Friends,

The 20th CPC National Congress held last October drew up the blueprint for China’s future development and laid out the task of advancing the rejuvenation of the Chinese nation on all fronts through a Chinese path to modernization. Fulfilling this central task is an unshirkable responsibility for Chinese diplomacy. We will stay committed to the path of peaceful development, and to fostering a new type of international relations featuring mutual respect, fairness, justice and win-win cooperation. We will work with all countries to build an open, inclusive, clean and beautiful world of lasting peace, universal security and common prosperity, and develop a community with a shared future for mankind.

China will defend the right to development of all countries with greater determination. Modernization is an inalienable right of every country, not a privilege reserved for a few. Those who have realized modernization should not tear down the bridge or block other countries’ path to modernization. And they should not suppress, contain or stop other countries that choose a different path to modernization. China has no intention to engage in major-power competition. What we are firmly defending is our own development interests and the Chinese people’s right to pursue a better life. China respects the modernization path chosen by the people of other countries, and opposes attempts to create ideological confrontation and a new Cold War, interference in others’ internal affairs and imposition of one’s will on others. China stands committed to the right direction of globalization, opposes attempts to build walls and barriers and push for decoupling and severing supply chains, and opposes unilateral sanctions and maximum pressure. China is doing its utmost to ensure stable and smooth functioning of industrial and supply chains, so that economic globalization and the modernization of all countries could move forward in tandem and complement each other.

China will advance high-standard opening-up with more proactive efforts. China’s modernization has made advances in the course of opening-up, and is bound to embrace a brighter future through opening-up. In hosting the Belt and Road Forum for International Cooperation and the China International Import Expo, China will deepen convergence of interests with the world. We will invest more resources in global development cooperation, and do our utmost to help relieve the debt burdens of developing countries. We will endeavor to save international financial and currency circulation from the plight of speculation, manipulation, sanction and pressuring, and help it return to its fundamental purpose of serving the real economy and promoting modernization.

I’d like to take this opportunity to once again congratulate Madame Rousseff on assuming the Presidency of the New Development Bank. I trust the Bank will provide even greater support to the modernization processes of developing countries.

China will promote more actively exchanges among civilizations. We call on all countries to promote peace, development, equity, justice, democracy and freedom — the common values of humanity, and let cultural exchanges transcend estrangement, mutual learning transcend clashes, and coexistence transcend arrogance. We firmly oppose discrimination against races, countries and civilizations in international relations. We are ready to explore with all countries the building of a global network for inter-civilization dialogue and cooperation, to open up new prospects of enhanced exchanges and understanding among different peoples and better interactions and integration of diversified cultures. Together we can make the garden of civilizations colorful and fragrant.

China will work more vigorously for a community of all life on Earth. We will step up efforts to build a sound economic structure that facilitates green, low-carbon and circular development, and promote a transition to green economic and social development across the board. Following the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, we will actively participate in international cooperation in climate response, ocean governance, global biodiversity protection and other areas, and promote a fair and equitable global environmental governance system of win-win cooperation, so as to contribute to addressing global challenges such as climate and environment and building a clean and beautiful world.

China will safeguard the international order with greater resolve. Recently, there have been some absurd rhetoric accusing China of challenging the so-called rules-based international order, of unilaterally changing the status quo across the Taiwan Strait through force or coercion, and of disrupting peace and stability across the Strait. Such claims go against basic common sense on international relations and historical justice. The logic is absurd, and the consequences dangerous. Having suffered among the heaviest casualties in the world anti-fascist alliance during WWII, and as a founding member of the UN and the first country to sign the UN Charter, China sees it as its solemn duty to defend the authority of the UN and uphold the post-war international order. We have the best record in abiding by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter, international law and the basic norms of international relations. We need no reminder by certain countries or groups of countries. Fair-minded people can see full well who is exploiting and discarding the UN at its own will, who is disrupting the international order, and who is engaged in hegemonic, bullying and high-handed practices.

Friends,

Taiwan has been an inalienable part of China’s territory since ancient times, and both sides of the Strait belong to one and the same China. This is Taiwan’s history, and it is also the status quo of Taiwan. Taiwan’s return to China is a component of the post-war international order, written in black and white in the Cairo Declaration and the Potsdam Proclamation. It is not the Chinese mainland, but the “Taiwan independence” separatist forces and a handful of countries attempting to take advantage of “Taiwan independence”, that are disrupting international rules, unilaterally changing the status quo, and undermining stability across the Strait. Their definition of rules, status quo and stability is in fact aimed to hollow out the one-China principle, achieve “peaceful division” of China, and ultimately tamper with the history of WWII, subvert the post-war order, and trample on China’s sovereignty. This is unacceptable to the 1.4 billion Chinese people. China will not lose any part of its territory that has been restored. And the established post-war international order will not be upended.

It is right and proper for China to uphold its sovereignty and territorial integrity. We would like to make it clear to those who seek to sabotage international justice in the name of international order: The Taiwan question is the core of the core interests of China, and there will be no vagueness at all in our response to any one who attempts to distort the one-China principle; we will never back down in face of any act that undermines China’s sovereignty and security. Those who play with fire on Taiwan will eventually get themselves burned. 

Friends,

As a Chinese saying goes, with thousands of mountains already behind, the road ahead is full of promises of a budding spring. While Chinese modernization is conceived in China, the opportunities it brings belong to the world. We are ready to work together with all parties to promote diverse ways of modernization and create an even brighter future for our planet.

To conclude, I wish the Forum a full success. Thank you!

https://socialistchina.org/2023/04/22/q ... the-world/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon May 08, 2023 3:26 pm

About Social Ranking in China
No. 5/81.V.2023

Considering the issue of social rating in China, let's start with the fact that "independent" media have repeatedly painted the public in the yellow press style about the horrors of Chinese digitalization:

“The largest digital concentration camp on the planet has been deployed in China, the state has introduced a universal social rating - total control over citizens. Each Chinese receives points that are spent or earned as a result of overt training. If you don't bow as you walk past Mao's portrait, you'll get points deducted! If you criticize China, get another fine. Called Xi Jinping Winnie the Pooh - instantly turned into an outcast with minimal chances to return to society.

The impetus for another anti-Chinese hysteria was the statement of US Vice President Mike Pence:

“By 2020, the rulers of China are aiming to implement the Orwellian system based on the control of almost every aspect of human life - the so-called social credit rating ... As written in the official plan of this program, it will allow reliable people to roam freely everywhere under heaven, while discredited people it will be difficult to take a step.”

“Just like in “1984” – total surveillance of everyone,” Chinese “human rights activists” obedient to Washington groaned.

Due to the fact that the ominous term “social rating” in the mouths of the American standard-bearers of democracy has the most vague definition, the Western media portrays it in a negative light, exposing China as a monster of totalitarianism as opposed to the “free” world. In fact, back in 2013, paying attention to the problem of developing social responsibility and self-consciousness of the citizens of the PRC, the CPC General Secretary proposed to adopt the “Plan for Building a Social Credit System (2014-2020)” [1]. Where the main goal is to create a culture of sincerity in the country, an effective mechanism for encouraging sincerity and punishing insincerity.

In connection with the “pandemic”, the implementation of this plan, on the one hand, has slowed down - while in the PRC there is no credit or social assessment that determines the place of a citizen in society, on the other hand, solving the problem of controlling anti-COVID measures, the Chinese have gone much further than the “big seven” and their sixes by entering the "health code" [2] . With the exception of the “health code”, all other rating systems of the country are experimental in nature [3].

Credit ratings in the PRC, including state ratings, are a mechanism that reflects the behavior of market participants, and not an instrument of total social control. With the help of credit ratings, the authorities exercise supervision over commercial enterprises. Individuals are counted in the systems if they act as business leaders [4] . All the rest have a credit history, the analysis of which gives an automatic assessment of creditworthiness. A similar practice exists in Russian, and even more so in Western banks.

In other words, American imperialism is concerned about the state supervision of entrepreneurs [5] , they took the CCP's task of "deeply pushing forward the construction of commercial sincerity", holding "scientific views on the development and building of a harmonious socialist society" they perceived as a personal insult. Hence all the scandalous information, all the worries of the Western public about the "hard fate of ordinary Chinese" - nothing more than a system of red and black lists turned upside down [6], operating in the Celestial Empire. The system has existed for a long time and successfully, and not only in China.

In the PRC, public censure is still one of the most effective ways to influence a person. The principle: “it doesn’t matter what you did, it’s important that everyone knows about it” - the boards of honor and shame boards familiar to us in the best Soviet traditions. The Credit China website periodically publishes both black and red lists of residents of the country. The first category includes malicious violators of court decisions, hiding from paying taxes, etc. In the second - citizens who have distinguished themselves in some way, deserving trust and respect. The blacklisting of an individual is not due to constant monitoring and evaluation of his behavior, but due to violation of laws and regulations. Being on the black list may entail restrictions such as the periodic inability to buy tickets for a high-speed train, for a plane, enroll children in a private school (the institution of paid tutoring in China has been curtailed [7] ) or face barriers on popular online platforms. Today, less than 15 million people are on the black list of China - 1% of the population of the Middle Kingdom. For comparison. There are more than 20 million people living below the poverty line in Russia. — 14% of the population [8] who can’t go anywhere anyway, let alone fly [9]. Plus, those who are on the black list of the FSSP of the Russian Federation and who are prohibited from traveling abroad - 8 million citizens of Russia, this is more than 5.5% of the country's population [10] .

Today, social credit in Chinese practice means that if a citizen uses car sharing and has taken a car more than once without violating the contract, a single information processing center provides him with a bonus. The system allows you to rent a car without first making a cash deposit, etc. Or, let's say, a hotel guest damages the property and reputation of the establishment and gets blacklisted. This means that he will no longer be accommodated in any hotel of this chain. The same goes for taxis, railways and airlines.

So, the introduction of social credit in the PRC is justified by the need to "build a society of the rule of law and improve the quality of market relations." That is, in a market society under the rule of the dictatorship of the proletariat, restrictions for “unscrupulous” competitors begin to operate. For example, in the issue of creating a business reputation rating of Chinese companies [11].

By reducing the risks of commercial interaction through the “rating”, the CPC reduces the element of spontaneity of market relations in society and, unlike other countries [12], purposefully introduces elements of scientific planning into them. Due to the fact that the simultaneous existence of the Chinese State Planning Commission [13] and market relations in the PRC is built on the basis of struggle, and not on the basis of equilibrium.

There is no fully unified and integrated into society state system of social credit - "tell me what your rating is, and I will tell you who you are" in China. On the other hand, systems of control over the economic activity of individuals and legal entities are being tested through creditworthiness and solvency ratings [14] . Moreover, this is done in the interests of both citizens and businesses, which benefit from knowing who is in front of them - an authorized supplier or a “laying” company, a bona fide debtor or a malicious defaulter.

Thus, plans to introduce a comprehensive social rating in China are far from complete and have different methods and goals [15] than they are interpreted by the Western media. The essence of a social rating with "Chinese characteristics" lies in the movement towards the systematic regulation of all aspects of human life on the basis of the objective laws of the development of society. For example, it is not beneficial for society when a citizen accumulates debts without being able to pay off, i.e. is on one of the black lists, and vice versa, it is beneficial when a citizen, soberly assessing his potential, consciously [16] subordinates his own interests to the public - being on the red list. It is beneficial because ethical norms gradually replace laws as communism is built, and in the second phase of communism, neither laws, nor the state, nor officials, nor democracy, nor the power of man over man will remain completely. All this will be replaced by communist morality - the main factor in the formation of social consciousness, the way of life and customs of the masses, the main and only regulator of relations between people.

So while the liberal world is discussing the “terrible life of the Chinese”, and the authorities of Western countries are going out of their way to do what China is accused of, it must be borne in mind that digitalization in Chinese is about improving the quality of life of citizens, while in the US and the EU, it is about controlling them and each other.

D. Nazarenko
07/05/2023

https://prorivists.org/81_china-sc/

Google Translator

**************

We must speak up before the propagandists get their war with China

Where are the voices that speak up against fascism, war, and propaganda, asks renowned journalist John Pilger as he surveys the past decade of dirty tricks perpetrated by the United States and its allies

May 06, 2023 by John Pilger

Image
The Congress of American Writers that was held in New York City took a firm stand against fascism and war. Photo: Daily Worker / People’s World Archives

Speak up. Now.

In 1935, the Congress of American Writers was held in New York City, followed by another two years later. They called on “the hundreds of poets, novelists, dramatists, critics, short story writers and journalists” to discuss the “rapid crumbling of capitalism” and the beckoning of another war. They were electric events which, according to one account, were attended by 3,500 members of the public with more than a thousand turned away.

Arthur Miller, Myra Page, Lillian Hellman, Dashiell Hammett warned that fascism was rising, often disguised, and the responsibility lay with writers and journalists to speak out. Telegrams of support from Thomas Mann, John Steinbeck, Ernest Hemingway, C Day Lewis, Upton Sinclair and Albert Einstein were read out.

The journalist and novelist Martha Gellhorn spoke up for the homeless and unemployed, and “all of us under the shadow of violent great power.”

Martha, who became a close friend, told me later over her customary glass of Famous Grouse and soda: “The responsibility I felt as a journalist was immense. I had witnessed the injustices and suffering delivered by the Depression, and I knew, we all knew, what was coming if silences were not broken.”

Her words echo across the silences today: they are silences filled with a consensus of propaganda that contaminates almost everything we read, see and hear. Let me give you one example:

On March 7, the two oldest newspapers in Australia, the Sydney Morning Herald and The Age, published several pages on “the looming threat” of China. They colored the Pacific Ocean red. Chinese eyes were martial, on the march and menacing. The Yellow Peril was about to fall down as if by the weight of gravity.

No logical reason was given for an attack on Australia by China. A ‘panel of experts’ presented no credible evidence: one of them is a former director of the Australian Strategic Policy Institute, a front for the Defense Department in Canberra, the Pentagon in Washington, the governments of Britain, Japan and Taiwan and the west’s war industry.

“Beijing could strike within three years,” they warned. “We are not ready.” Billions of dollars are to be spent on American nuclear submarines, but that, it seems, is not enough. “Australia’s holiday from history is over”: whatever that might mean.

There is no threat to Australia, none. The faraway ‘lucky’ country has no enemies, least of all China, its largest trading partner. Yet China-bashing that draws on Australia’s long history of racism towards Asia has become something of a sport for the self-ordained ‘experts’. What do Chinese-Australians make of this? Many are confused and fearful.

The authors of this grotesque piece of dog-whistling and obsequiousness to American power are Peter Hartcher and Matthew Knott, ‘national security reporters’ I think they are called. I remember Hartcher from his Israeli government-paid jaunts. The other one, Knott, is a mouthpiece for the suits in Canberra. Neither has ever seen a war zone and its extremes of human degradation and suffering.

“How did it come to this?” Martha Gellhorn would say if she were here. “Where on earth are the voices saying no? Where is the comradeship?”

The voices are heard in the samizdat of this website and others. In literature, the likes of John Steinbeck, Carson McCullers, and George Orwell are obsolete. Post-modernism is in charge now. Liberalism has pulled up its political ladder. A once somnolent social democracy, Australia, has enacted a web of new laws protecting secretive, authoritarian power and preventing the right to know. Whistleblowers are outlaws, to be tried in secret. An especially sinister law bans ‘foreign interference’ by those who work for foreign companies. What does this mean?

Democracy is notional now; there is the all-powerful elite of the corporation merged with the state and the demands of ‘identity’. US admirals are paid thousands of dollars a day by the Australian tax payer for ‘advice.’ Right across the West, our political imagination has been pacified by PR and distracted by the intrigues of corrupt, ultra low-rent politicians: a Johnson or a Trump or a Sleepy Joe or a Zelensky.

No writers’ congress in 2023 worries about “crumbling capitalism” and the lethal provocations of ‘our’ leaders. The most infamous of these, Blair, a prima facie criminal under the Nuremberg Standard, is free and rich. Julian Assange, who dared journalists to prove their readers had a right to know, is in his second decade of incarceration.

The rise of fascism in Europe is uncontroversial. Or ‘neo-Nazism’ or ‘extreme nationalism’, as you prefer. Ukraine as modern Europe’s fascist beehive has seen the re-emergence of the cult of Stepan Bandera, the passionate anti-Semite and mass murderer who lauded Hitler’s ‘Jewish policy’, which left 1.5 million Ukrainian Jews slaughtered. “We will lay your heads at Hitler’s feet,” a Banderist pamphlet proclaimed to Ukrainian Jews.

Today, Bandera is hero-worshiped in western Ukraine and scores of statues of him and his fellow-fascists have been paid for by the EU and the US, replacing those of Russian cultural giants and others who liberated Ukraine from the original Nazis.

In 2014, neo-Nazis played a key role in a US-bankrolled coup against the elected president, Viktor Yanukovych, who was accused of being ‘pro-Moscow’. The coup regime included prominent ‘extreme nationalists’ — Nazis in all but name.

At first, this was reported at length by the BBC and the European and US media. In 2019, Time magazine featured the ‘white supremacist militias‘ active in Ukraine. NBC News reported, ‘Ukraine’s Nazi problem is real.’ The immolation of trade unionists in Odessa was filmed and documented.

Spearheaded by the Azov regiment, whose insignia, the ‘Wolfsangel’, was made infamous by the German SS, Ukraine’s military invaded the eastern, Russian-speaking Donbas region. According to the United Nations 14,000 in the east were killed. Seven years later, with the Minsk peace conferences sabotaged by the West, as Angela Merkel confessed, the Red Army invaded.

This version of events was not reported in the West. To even utter it is to bring down abuse about being a ‘Putin apologist’, regardless whether the writer (such as myself) has condemned the Russian invasion. Understanding the extreme provocation that a NATO-armed borderland, Ukraine, the same borderland through which Hitler invaded, presented to Moscow, is anathema.

Journalists who traveled to the Donbas were silenced or even hounded in their own country. German journalist Patrik Baab lost his job and a young German freelance reporter, Alina Lipp, had her bank account sequestered.

In Britain, the silence of the liberal intelligentsia is the silence of intimidation. State-sponsored issues like Ukraine and Israel are to be avoided if you want to keep a campus job or a teaching tenure. What happened to Jeremy Corbyn in 2019 is repeated on campuses where opponents of apartheid Israel are casually smeared as anti-Semitic.

Professor David Miller, ironically the country’s leading authority on modern propaganda, was sacked by Bristol University for suggesting publicly that Israel’s ‘assets’ in Britain and its political lobbying exerted a disproportionate influence worldwide — a fact for which the evidence is voluminous.

The university hired a leading QC to investigate the case independently. His report exonerated Miller on the ‘important issue of academic freedom of expression’ and found ‘Professor Miller’s comments did not constitute unlawful speech’. Yet Bristol sacked him. The message is clear: no matter what outrage it perpetrates, Israel has immunity and its critics are to be punished.

A few years ago, Terry Eagleton, then professor of English literature at Manchester University, reckoned that “for the first time in two centuries, there is no eminent British poet, playwright or novelist prepared to question the foundations of the western way of life.”

No Shelley spoke for the poor, no Blake for utopian dreams, no Byron damned the corruption of the ruling class, no Thomas Carlyle and John Ruskin revealed the moral disaster of capitalism. William Morris, Oscar Wilde, HG Wells, George Bernard Shaw had no equivalents today. Harold Pinter was alive then, “the last to raise his voice’ “wrote Eagleton.

Where did post-modernism — the rejection of actual politics and authentic dissent — come from? The publication in 1970 of Charles Reich’s bestselling book, The Greening of America, offers a clue. The United States then was in a state of upheaval; Nixon was in the White House, a civil resistance, known as ‘the movement’, had burst out of the margins of society in the midst of a war that touched almost everybody. In alliance with the civil rights movement, it presented the most serious challenge to Washington’s power for a century.

On the cover of Reich’s book were these words: ‘There is a revolution coming. It will not be like revolutions of the past. It will originate with the individual.’

At the time, I was a correspondent in the US and recall the overnight elevation to guru status of Reich, a young Yale academic. The New Yorker had sensationally serialized his book, whose message was that the ‘political action and truth-telling’ of the 1960s had failed and only ‘culture and introspection’ would change the world. It felt as if hippydom was claiming the consumer classes. And in one sense it was.

Within a few years, the cult of ‘me-ism’ had all but overwhelmed many people’s sense of acting together, of social justice and internationalism. Class, gender and race were separated. The personal was the political and the media was the message. Make money, it said.

As for ‘the movement’, its hope and songs, the years of Ronald Reagan and Bill Clinton put an end to all that. The police were now in open war with black people; Clinton’s notorious welfare bills broke world records in the number of mostly Blacks they sent to jail.

When 9/11 happened, the fabrication of new ‘threats’ on ‘America’s frontier’ (as the Project for a New American Century called the world) completed the political disorientation of those who, 20 years earlier, would have formed a vehement opposition.

In the years since, America has gone to war with the world. According to a largely ignored report by the Physicians for Social Responsibility, Physicians for Global Survival and the Nobel Prize-winning International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear War, the number killed in America’s ‘war on terror’ was ‘at least’ 1.3 million in Afghanistan, Iraq and Pakistan.

This figure does not include the dead of US-led and fueled wars in Yemen, Libya, Syria, Somalia and beyond. The true figure, said the report, ‘could well be in excess of 2 million [or] approximately 10 times greater than that of which the public, experts and decision makers are aware and [is] propagated by the media and major NGOS.’

‘At least’ one million were killed in Iraq, say the physicians, or five per cent of the population.

The enormity of this violence and suffering seems to have no place in the western consciousness. ‘No one knows how many’ is the media refrain. Blair and George W. Bush — and Straw and Cheney and Powell and Rumsfeld et al — were never in danger of prosecution. Blair’s propaganda maestro, Alistair Campbell, is celebrated as a ‘media personality’.

In 2003, I filmed an interview in Washington with Charles Lewis, the acclaimed investigative journalist. We discussed the invasion of Iraq a few months earlier. I asked him, ‘What if the constitutionally freest media in the world had seriously challenged George W. Bush and Donald Rumsfeld and investigated their claims, instead of spreading what turned out to be crude propaganda?’

He replied. ‘If we journalists had done our job, there is a very, very good chance we would have not gone to war in Iraq.’

I put the same question to Dan Rather, the famous CBS anchor, who gave me the same answer. David Rose of the Observer , who had promoted Saddam Hussein’s ‘threat’, and Rageh Omaar, then the BBC’s Iraq correspondent, gave me the same answer. Rose’s admirable contrition at having been ‘duped’, spoke for many reporters bereft of his courage to say so.

Their point is worth repeating. Had journalists done their job, had they questioned and investigated the propaganda instead of amplifying it, a million Iraqi men, women and children might be alive today; millions might not have fled their homes; the sectarian war between Sunni and Shia might not have ignited, and Islamic State might not have existed.

Cast that truth across the rapacious wars since 1945 ignited by the United States and its ‘allies’ and the conclusion is breathtaking. Is this ever raised in journalism schools?

Today, war by media is a key task of so-called mainstream journalism, reminiscent of that described by a Nuremberg prosecutor in 1945: ‘Before each major aggression, with some few exceptions based on expediency, they initiated a press campaign calculated to weaken their victims and to prepare the German people psychologically… In the propaganda system… it was the daily press and the radio that were the most important weapons.’

One of the persistent strands in US political life is a cultish extremism that approaches fascism. Although Trump was credited with this, it was during Obama’s two terms that US foreign policy flirted seriously with fascism. This was almost never reported.

‘I believe in American exceptionalism with every fiber of my being,’ said Obama, who expanded a favorite presidential pastime, bombing, and death squads known as ‘special operations’ as no other president had done since the first Cold War.

According to a Council on Foreign Relations survey, in 2016 Obama dropped 26,171 bombs. That is 72 bombs every day. He bombed the poorest people and people of color: in Afghanistan, Libya, Yemen, Somalia, Syria, Iraq, Pakistan.

Every Tuesday — reported the New York Times — he personally selected those who would be murdered by hellfire missiles fired from drones. Weddings, funerals, shepherds were attacked, along with those attempting to collect the body parts festooning the ‘terrorist target’.

A leading Republican senator, Lindsey Graham, estimated, approvingly, that Obama’s drones had killed 4,700 people. ‘Sometimes you hit innocent people and I hate that,’ he said, but we’ve taken out some very senior members of Al Qaeda.’

In 2011, Obama told the media that the Libyan president Muammar Gaddafi was planning ‘genocide’ against his own people. “We knew…,”he said, “that if we waited one more day, Benghazi, a city the size of Charlotte [North Carolina], could suffer a massacre that would have reverberated across the region and stained the conscience of the world.”

This was a lie. The only ‘threat’ was the coming defeat of fanatical Islamists by Libyan government forces. With his plans for a revival of independent pan-Africanism, an African bank and African currency, all of it funded by Libyan oil, Gaddafi was cast as an enemy of western colonialism on the continent in which Libya was the second most modern state.

Destroying Gaddafi’s ‘threat’ and his modern state was the aim. Backed by the US, Britain and France, NATO launched 9,700 sorties against Libya. A third were aimed at infrastructure and civilian targets, reported the UN. Uranium warheads were used; the cities of Misrata and Sirte were carpet-bombed. The Red Cross identified mass graves, and UNICEF reported that ‘most [of the children killed] were under the age of ten’.

When Hillary Clinton, Obama’s secretary of state, was told that Gaddafi had been captured by the insurrectionists and sodomized with a knife, she laughed and said to the camera: ‘We came, we saw, he died!’

On 14 September 2016, the House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee in London reported the conclusion of a year-long study into the NATO attack on Libya which it described as an ‘array of lies’ — including the Benghazi massacre story.

The NATO bombing plunged Libya into a humanitarian disaster, killing thousands of people and displacing hundreds of thousands more, transforming Libya from the African country with the highest standard of living into a war-torn failed state.

Under Obama, the US extended secret ‘special forces’ operations to 138 countries, or 70% of the world’s population. The first African-American president launched what amounted to a full-scale invasion of Africa.

Reminiscent of the Scramble for Africa in the 19th century, the US African Command (Africom) has since built a network of supplicants among collaborative African regimes eager for American bribes and armaments. Africom’s ‘soldier to soldier’ doctrine embeds US officers at every level of command from general to warrant officer. Only pith helmets are missing.

It is as if Africa’s proud history of liberation, from Patrice Lumumba to Nelson Mandela, has been consigned to oblivion by a new white master’s black colonial elite. This elite’s ‘historic mission’, warned the knowing Frantz Fanon, is the promotion of “a capitalism rampant though camouflaged.”

In the year NATO invaded Libya, 2011, Obama announced what became known as the ‘pivot to Asia’. Almost two-thirds of US naval forces would be transferred to the Asia-Pacific to “confront the threat from China,” in the words of his Defense Secretary.

There was no threat from China; there was a threat to China from the United States; some 400 American military bases formed an arc along the rim of China’s industrial heartlands, which a Pentagon official described approvingly as a “noose.”

At the same time, Obama placed missiles in Eastern Europe aimed at Russia. It was the beatified recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize who increased spending on nuclear warheads to a level higher than that of any US administration since the Cold War — having promised, in an emotional speech in the center of Prague in 2009, to ‘help rid the world of nuclear weapons’.

Obama and his administration knew full well that the coup his assistant secretary of state, Victoria Nuland, was sent to oversee against the government of Ukraine in 2014 would provoke a Russian response and probably lead to war. And so it has.

I am writing this on April 30, the anniversary of the last day of the longest war of the twentieth century, in Vietnam, which I reported. I was very young when I arrived in Saigon and I learned a great deal. I learned to recognize the distinctive drone of the engines of giant B-52s, which dropped their carnage from above the clouds and spared nothing and no one; I learned not to turn away when faced with a charred tree festooned with human parts; I learned to value kindness as never before; I learned that Joseph Heller was right in his masterly Catch-22: that war was not suited to sane people; and I learned about ‘our’ propaganda.

All through that war, the propaganda said a victorious Vietnam would spread its communist disease to the rest of Asia, allowing the Great Yellow Peril to its north to sweep down. Countries would fall like ‘dominoes’.

Ho Chi Minh’s Vietnam was victorious, and none of the above happened. Instead, Vietnamese civilization blossomed, remarkably, in spite of the price they paid: three million dead. The maimed, the deformed, the addicted, the poisoned, the lost.

If the current propagandists get their war with China, this will be a fraction of what is to come. Speak up.

https://peoplesdispatch.org/2023/05/06/ ... ith-china/

.**********

US Sells Taiwan 400 Harpoon Anti-Ship Missiles as US-Chinese Tensions Rise
Posted by INTERNATIONALIST 360° on MAY 3, 2023
Brian Berletic

Image

US Sells Taiwan 400 Harpoon Anti-Ship Missiles as US-Chinese Tensions RiseAs the US continues its proxy war against Russia in Ukraine, it also continues preparations for a similar conflict with China using the island province of Taiwan as its proxy of choice in Asia.

Toward this end, the US continues flooding the island province with billions of dollars worth of weapons.

One of the more recent announced weapon sales was 400 Harpoon anti-ship missiles.

Washington’s Flawed “Porcupine Strategy” for Taiwan

The anti-ship missiles manufactured by Boeing would presumably be part of developing much wider anti-access area denial (A2AD) capabilities for the administration’s armed forces on the island.

A Taiwan-based analyst, Pei-Shiue Hsieh, in an article for The Diplomat titled, “Building Taiwan’s Own Area Denial Capabilities,” would claim:

While some assert that Taiwan cannot counter a Chinese invasion on its own, the results of my analytical wargames show the opposite. The drills by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) last month likely demonstrated Beijing’s intentions to impose a naval blockade on the island in the event of a military confrontation. Taiwan’s military needs to prevent Chinese fleets from moving into their tactical positions or, if unable to prevent the blockade’s establishment, to disrupt ongoing PLA Navy (PLAN) operations.

In order to do so, the author suggests:

Taiwan must develop its own anti-access/area denial (A2/AD) strategy, which incorporates guided weapons and reconnaissance systems. Currently, Taiwan’s military possesses two possible options for guided anti-ship weapons: the ground-launched Hsiung Feng II/III and the ground- or air-launched AGM-84 Harpoon. With the reconnaissance information gathered by naval surveillance radars and MQ-9B SeaGuardian unmanned aerial vehicles, these legacy anti-ship missiles remain potent defenders of the island. However, as the PLAN is rapidly growing, Taiwan needs more than short- and medium-range options to cope with the PLA threat.

The Hsiung Feng III and Harpoon anti-ship missiles have ranges of 400 km and 139 km respectively. While these ranges may seem like more than enough to target and destroy Chinese warships imposing a sea blockade on the island of Taiwan, the problem is that while the missiles themselves have active radar homing, finding Chinese ships to home in on in the first place will be very difficult for Taiwan’s armed forces.

Land-based radars have a limited range because of the curvature of the Earth, far shorter than the operational range of the anti-ship missiles themselves, which is why Pei-Shiue Hsieh suggests naval surveillance radars and those mounted on unmanned aerial vehicles could help in target acquisition. However, it is widely acknowledged by even Western analysts that Taiwan’s naval fleet and air force will play little to no role in any hostilities between the island and the rest of China, as they would be targeted and destroyed first and foremost by Chinese missiles.

This is why Pei-Shiue Hsieh suggests using the AGM-158C LRASM (Long Range Anti-Ship Missile) which has autonomous targeting. LRASMs however are air-launched, thus short of the US military utilizing the missiles on Taiwan’s behalf, Taiwan’s own air force would not survive long enough to use them.

Much of the author’s argument seems to depend on “intelligence sharing,” or in other words, US aircraft supplying Taiwan missile operators targeting information. The author cites the example of the Moskva, a Russian cruiser allegedly sunk by a Ukrainian anti-ship missile utilizing targeting information provided by NATO.

It should be pointed out that even if this was the result of Ukrainian missiles guided by NATO targeting information, it is only one ship out of the entire Russian Black Sea Fleet. Russia’s navy now simply keeps its distance, out of range of potential anti-ship missiles Ukraine may have, and is still able to control what flows to and from Ukraine by sea.

What Russia is unable to achieve with naval power along Ukraine’s coast it can achieve through long-range cruise missiles like the Kalibr, ballistic missiles like the Iskander, kamikaze drones like the Geran-2, and hypersonic air-launched ballistic missiles like the Kinzhal. Russia’s Black Sea Fleet also includes a number of submarines for which anti-ship missiles are irrelevant unless operating on the surface.

In a scenario where China is attempting to blockade Taiwan and China feels its surface vessels are at risk from anti-ship missiles, it can also employ submarines while using its formidable missile force to strike at and destroy not only military capabilities based on Taiwan, but also ports receiving military aid from abroad as well as ships attempting to deliver it. A blockade by any other name is still a blockade.

The other problem Taiwan’s administration faces is the time frame purchased weapons would actually reach the island. The 400 purchased Harpoon anti-ship missiles will take years at the earliest to arrive.

Reuters would report in its article, “Taiwan to buy 400 US anti-ship missiles to face China threat,” that:

The Pentagon announced a $1.17 billion contract for 400 of the anti-ship missiles on April 7 without naming the buyer, saying production was expected to be completed by March 2029. Bloomberg said Taiwan was the buyer.

According to most estimates, the gap in military capabilities between China and the United States is set to close somewhere around 2025. By 2029, the gap would be in the process of widening, but this time in China’s favor.

Contracts for munitions like the LRASM are not even being publicly discussed, but should such contracts be signed, it’s likely Taiwan will be waiting as long or longer for the missiles to arrive, and that is assuming the missiles are developed into ground-launched systems to adapt to the reality Taiwan’s air force will not play a role in any hostilities with the rest of China.

Profits and Provocations, Not Protection

While Boeing is certainly profiting from the sale of 400 Harpoon anti-ship missiles to Taiwan, the move hardly enhances Taiwan’s military capabilities relative to the rest of China, nor does it do so within the window of opportunity the US seeks to provoke an armed conflict with China over Taiwan. If any blockade imposed by China around the island province of Taiwan is to be broken, it will have to be by the US military using a combination of anti-ship missiles and anti-submarine warfare.

US policymakers having wargamed an armed conflict between the US and China noted that the US would likely exhaust its arsenal of long-range anti-ship missiles of all kinds, a result of America’s limited military industrial capacity, a shortfall on demonstration amid its proxy war with Russia in Ukraine at the moment.

But even if the US didn’t run out of missiles and if the US was successful in thwarting China’s use of naval vessels to impose a blockade, a de facto blockade can still be imposed through the use of China’s long-range missiles fired from the mainland at Taiwan’s ports and any ships attempting to utilize them.

There are no clear solutions for Taiwan if it continues down the path of US-sponsored separatism and antagonism toward the rest of China, so much so that the only logical solution to “defeat” a Chinese blockade of the island is to not provoke one in the first place.



– The US Harpoon anti-ship missiles will not reach Taiwan until 2029, several years after US planners believe the window of opportunity to wage a conflict with China will close;

– Long-range anti-ship missiles require naval radar or aircraft to acquire targets, but US war planners believe such assets of Taiwan will be destroyed within the first few days of any armed conflict;

– China has other ways of imposing a blockade on the island province of Taiwan including targeting ports and ships attempting to enter or leave them with missiles, submarines are also an option;

– It is likely the sale of 400 Harpoon missiles to Taiwan was meant to provoke Beijing and reap profits for Boeing, not actually protect the administration on Taiwan;

References:

Defense News – How ‘MacGyver’ magic can get Taiwan its Harpoon defenses faster (December 2022): https://www.defensenews.com/opinion/c

Diplomat – Building Taiwan’s Own Area Denial Capabilities (September 2022): https://thediplomat.com/2022/09/build

Forbes – 3,600 American Cruise Missiles Versus The Chinese Fleet: How One U.S. Munition Could Decide Taiwan’s Fate (January 2023): https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe

CSIS – Missiles of China: https://missilethreat.csis.org/countr… CSIS – Missiles of Taiwan: https://missilethreat.csis.org/countr

https://libya360.wordpress.com/2023/05/ ... ions-rise/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat May 13, 2023 1:59 pm

Image

Aleksandar Vučić: The world looks to China for innovative solutions that help tackle the challenges of the future
We are pleased to republish the speech given by Aleksandar Vučić, President of the Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) and the Republic of Serbia, at the CPC in Dialogue with World Political Parties High-level Meeting, which was organized by the Communist Party of China on 15 March. It was originally carried on the website of the CPC’s International Department.

Congratulating Xi Jinping on his re-election as Chinese President, Vučić stressed that: “Your leadership is more critical than ever, as the world faces unprecedented challenges that demand bold and visionary solutions.”

Reviewing relations between the two countries, President Vučić noted that both China and Serbia advocate, “strict compliance with the basic principles of international law. The UN Charter does not distinguish the big and the small, the strong and the weak, but it rather establishes rules of conduct amongst equals… China and Serbia insist on the fact that all states must have equal rights and equal voice in the highest political forums.”

Referring to the status of Kosovo, Vučić said that China has, “always provided Serbia with diplomatic support for our territorial integrity, and our attempts to defend the international legal order. We are grateful to the People’s Republic of China for its down to the letter respect of the United Nations Resolution 1244, which guarantees peace and integrity to our country.” Equally, he added, Serbia fully supports the one-China policy.

Surveying the economic aspects of bilateral relations, Vučić noted that, “Chinese involvement in infrastructure, energy and mining sectors in Serbia has significantly boosted our economy, creating jobs and opportunities for our citizens, and has helped promote cooperation and exchange between our two nations.” Especially, China has helped Serbia’s important infrastructure projects, including the modernization and construction of roads, bridges and railways. China has also invested in Serbia’s energy, technology, agriculture and tourism.
Honorable friends,
Presidents from political parties and countries from all over the world,
Members of Central Committee,
Most honorable Friend President Xi Jinping,

Congratulations on your historic third term as President of your Great country. This remarkable achievement is a testament to your unwavering dedication to serving the Chinese people and advancing the prosperity and stability of your nation. Under your leadership, China has achieved continuous economic growth and has become a leading global power. Your visionary approach to development, your commitment to innovation, and your steadfast focus on building a better future for all of the Mankind.

Dear Friend,

As you embark on this new term as President, I have no doubt that you will continue to lead China with wisdom, strength, and compassion. Your leadership is more critical than ever, as the world faces unprecedented challenges that demand bold and visionary solutions.

My dear Friends,

A great leader and guarantor of security, China, has the privilege of being led by a visionary like President Xi. I would like to start my speech by quoting my friend, architect of peace, President Xi Jinping. He once observed that “peace is like air and sun. We hardly notice him. None of us can live without peace.” The entirety of my public service and my diplomatic discourse is based on my ambition to promote Peace, Solidarity and Cooperation amongst the peoples and nations that comprise the Humanity. What a difficult task that is! Specially today in this ever-changing world full of disparity, inequality and hatred.

Dear friends,

That is why it represents a great privilege to be able to address this esteemed gathering. As a highest representative of the Republic of Serbia, Which is the biggest country in the western Balkans and at the same time I do represent, I believe, by far the biggest party in western Balkans which is Serbian Progressive Party, I wish to celebrate the remarkable achievements and contributions of China, and to reaffirm our commitment to the strong and prosperous relationship between our two nations. Under the leadership of President Xi Jinping, China has become a global economic powerhouse. In recent years, China has made remarkable achievements in the area of science and technology. China has become a leader in the fields of artificial intelligence, quantum computing, and space exploration. The world looks to China for innovative solutions that can help us tackle the challenges of the future.

The Belt and Road Initiative has become an important project that has brought nations closer together and fostered economic cooperation. China has shown the world that it is possible to achieve great things while remaining committed to the cause of global peace and understanding. Also, China has played a crucial role in the international community, promoting mutual respect, cooperation, and peaceful relations with other countries. And I need to say one thing, at least I believe that is well-known throughout the world, as a guy that is not flattering anyone, but I have to say everything that I have just said about Xi Jinping, because we got a lot, we took a lot from the cooperation with China, and from learning many things from President Xi and will keep on doing so.

Friends,

Our generation, as well as generation of our children, are both living in harsh times full of challenges. The COVID-19 pandemic has shaken many health care systems, challenging global solidarity. We live in a world that is increasingly complex and interconnected.

That is precisely the reason why, we must continue to emphasize the importance of peace and stability. Instead of a general economic recovery accompanied by the optimism and well- being of Humanity, we are witnessing rapid changes today that are certainly not positive. Many people, all over the globe, spend their lives fearing for a mere existence, and millions fear for their lives.

We must, therefore, remain committed to the ideals of innovation, reform, and progress. We must ensure that the benefits of growth and development are shared equitably among all members of society.

It is by looking at positive example of China, that we are able to adjust the moral compass of our diplomacy. We altogether as leaders of countries and leaders of political parties need to build a new world based on multilateralism and strict adherence to the Founding Charter of the United Nations. It is our duty that the basic postulates of the Charter are never interpreted, but carried out to the full extent. There is an ancient Chinese proverb, that President Xi so often mentions: “let us replace weapons of war with gifts of jade and silk.” Any global challenge must be solved through diplomatic dialogue and by peaceful means.

Peace, in itself, is also the starting point for balanced progress, which in turn is a prerequisite for the eradication of poverty. The United Nations Agenda 2030 focuses on sustainable development, insisting that all countries must have equal rights in achieving their legitimate economic goals. The crisis caused by the coronavirus pandemic has had the biggest economic impact on supply chain disruption. A sustainable world economy is possible only in a well-balanced multilateralism. President Xi once said that countries around the world are “like passengers on the same ship who share a common destiny.” Just like the People’s Republic of China, the Republic of Serbia advocates strict compliance with the basic principles of international law. The UN Charter does not distinguish the big and the small, the strong and the weak, but it rather establishes rules of conduct amongst equals. Although we are aware that not all countries have the same strength, China and Serbia insist on the fact that all states must have equal rights and equal voice in the highest political forums such as the General Assembly of United Nations.

Dear friends,

China, as a permanent member of the Security Council, was always committed to preserving the peace, and has always provided Serbia with diplomatic support for our the territorial integrity, and our attempts to defend the international legal order. We are grateful to the People’s Republic of China for its down to the letter respect of the United Nations Resolution 1244, which guarantees peace and integrity to our country! Needless to say, Serbia, in full diplomatic capacity, supports the one- China policy and the territorial integrity of your country’s. Our partnership, over the decades, has only grown stronger through common diplomatic approach to relevant issues, and often through concrete joint actions.

The Serbian Constitution of 1835 states that “every slave who set foot on Serbian soil becomes a free man”, and today’s Chinese Constitution obliges the People’s Republic of China to “adhere to the path of peaceful development”. I believe that the love that our peoples have for Freedom and Peace further strengthens our traditional friendship.

The Chinese involvement in infrastructure, energy and mining sectors in Serbia has significantly boosted our economy, creating jobs and opportunities for our citizens, and has helped promote cooperation and exchange between our two nations. Two direct flights between China and Serbia, to Beijing and Tianjin, introduced last year, are of great importance for increasing tourism traffic. Over 30 Chinese companies plus two major Chinese tour operators had an opportunity to meet with their Serbian colleagues and Serbian tourists and explore the possibilities for future cooperation. The number of Chinese tourists increased nine times from 2013 to 2019, and Serbia was the first country in the CEE region to abolish visas for Chinese citizens as early as 2016.

Having in mind other aspects of our economic relations I would like to make a short review of the exponentially fast growth of our exchange. The value of total merchandise trade with the People’s Republic of China has increased 342%, in the last 10 years. In the past ten years, we have increased Serbian exports to China 182 times, and from a statistically negligible 6.4 million dollars, our exports have reached 1.2 billion dollars. China is also among the top five economic partners of Serbia, as it ranks high in terms of total merchandise trade, as well as the value of our exports and imports. Moreover, the People’s Republic of China is also on the list of the top ten largest investors in the Serbian economy.

Furthermore, the most significant area of cooperation between Serbia and China in recent years has been the implementation of our most important infrastructure projects. China has helped in the construction of important infrastructure projects in Serbia, including the modernization and construction of roads, bridges, railways…The most significant projects include the construction of the Danube bridge in Belgrade, the modernization of the Belgrade-Budapest railway and the reconstruction of the RumaŠabac- Loznica road. In addition, China has invested in the development of industries in Serbia, including energy, technology, agriculture, and tourism. In summary, cooperation between Serbia and China is very important for both countries, particularly in the area of infrastructure projects and economic development. Serbia and China also share a long and rich history of cultural exchange, and we are grateful for the opportunity to deepen our cooperation in the areas of culture, education, and science. We appreciate the scholarships that have been offered to Serbian students to study in China, which has helped to create a new generation of young people who are knowledgeable about China’s rich culture and history.

We must continue to strengthen our cooperation in areas such as technology, innovation, and renewable energy, which will contribute to sustainable development and benefit our citizens. President Xi’s Belt and Road Initiative was supported by almost entire international community. China has signed cooperation documents with 149 countries and 32 international organizations. In response to climate change, China is working to implement the Paris Agreement with major technological breakthroughs.

In June 2022, at a BRICS summit, President Xi called on Humanity to “for peace, development, openness and innovation to build a high-quality partnership” This call for “the advancement of global science and technology governance, and enabling more people to access and benefit from the fruits of scientific and technological progress,” we in Serbia regard with great hope, knowing that China generously shares a large part of its scientific achievements with our country. To promote peace and security, and to contribute to addressing global challenges, President Xi proposed the Global Security Initiative and the Global Development Initiative. President Xi is the greatest promoter of dialogue and cooperation, unity and openness. China follows the path of peaceful development, making efforts to advance global governance and promote an open society with a common future for humanity.

We must adhere to equality and mutual learning, dialogue and inclusivity, overcome cultural barriers through exchange, overcome conflicts between nations. We must once and for all overcome the sense of superiority of civilizations and cultures through peaceful coexistence.

In order to understand each other better we must strengthen international cultural exchange and cooperation, explore the possibility of building a global network for dialogue and cooperation, enrich the content of exchange, expand channels of cooperation, promote mutual understanding and friendship among peoples of all countries, so that we can together advance the development of Mankind.

Dear friends,

I would like to express, once again, our sincere appreciation to China and the CPC for its friendship and support over the years. We are confident that our strong relationship will continue to grow and flourish, creating new opportunities for cooperation and progress. Let us work together to build a better world, where all people can thrive and live in peace.

In conclusion, I would like to come back to the commencement of my address, and quote the great leader, President Xi, once again: “peace is like air and sun. We hardly notice him. None of us can live without peace.”

May the future bring us peace and the general well-being of humanity.

Long live our iron friendship!

Long live all our independent and sovereign countries!

https://socialistchina.org/2023/05/03/a ... he-future/

Image

Carry forward the spirit of Dr Kotnis to strengthen China-India friendship
As part of a tour of South Asian countries in the first week of May, Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang visited India to attend the Foreign Ministers Meeting of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which was held in Goa. Whilst there, on May 4, Qin Gang met with the family members of Dr. Dwarkanath Kotnis (known in China as Ke Dihua), along with representatives of friendship organizations with China and young people from both countries.

Dr. Kotnis was one of a team of five Indian doctors, one of whom had previously served with the International Brigades in Spain, who were sent to help the Chinese people in their war of resistance against Japan by India’s Congress party, then led by Jawaharlal Nehru and Subhas Chandra Bose, after China’s Red Army leader Zhu De had written a request to Nehru on the suggestion of Agnes Smedley, the American internationalist who maintained deep ties with the freedom movements in both countries.

In the spirit of the great Canadian communist, Dr. Norman Bethune, who the team had gone to replace following his death from sepsis incurred while operating behind enemy lines, Dr. Kotnis worked tirelessly, sometimes for 72 hours without sleep. He refused any special treatment, taught himself fluent Chinese, and passed on his knowledge by writing two textbooks on surgery (one uncompleted, he was actually struck by a fatal seizure as he was writing), and becoming a teacher and then the head of the Bethune Medical School.

It was while teaching at the school that he met, fell in love with and married Guo Qinglan, a nurse and nursing teacher. Their son, Yinhua, whose name means India-China, was born just four months before Dr. Kotnis’s death. In July 1942, Dr. Kotnis was admitted to membership of the Communist Party of China.

After Dr. Kotnis passed away on December 9, 1942, from epileptic seizures exacerbated by prolonged overwork, Mao Zedong wrote the following calligraphy in his memory:

“Dr. Kotnis, our Indian friend, came to China from afar to assist us in our war of resistance. He worked for five years in Yan’an and north China, giving medical treatment to our wounded soldiers and died of illness owing to constant overwork. The army has lost a helping hand, and the nation has lost a friend. Let’s always bear in mind his internationalist spirit.”

In meeting with Dr. Kotnis’s relatives, Qin Gang carried on a tradition of senior Chinese leaders visiting India, beginning with Premier Zhou Enlai in the 1950s through to President Xi Jinping in recent times.

Qin Gang said that Dr. Kotnis was a great friend of the Chinese people and an outstanding fighter in the anti-fascist war, who devoted his precious youth and life to the Chinese people’s war of resistance against Japanese aggression. His spirit, Qin continued, is a humanitarian one of saving lives, a heroic one of daring to struggle and not being afraid of sacrifice, and an internationalist one of advocating peace, friendship, and a shared future.

One distinct feature of Qin’s meeting, consistent with the change of generations, as well as the fact that May 4 is celebrated as Youth Day in China, in honour of the anti-imperialist May 4 Movement of youth and students in 1919 that contributed significantly to the founding of the Communist Party of China two years later, was the emphasis placed on the need for young people to inherit and carry forward the spirit of Dr. Kotnis so as to firmly safeguard peace and friendship between China and India.

Noting that the young people of both China and India are full of vitality and are the main force for development in their respective countries, Qin Gang called on them to promote people-to-people exchanges and to explore a path for the two major neighbors to coexist in peace, get along in amity and seek rejuvenation together.

He also urged the youths to promote bilateral cooperation for mutual benefit and to boost mutual trust, so as to jointly safeguard the common interests of developing countries and uphold international fairness and justice.

The following articles were originally published by the Chinese Foreign Ministry and the Xinhua News Agency.
Qin Gang Meets with Relatives of Dr. Dwarkanath Kotnis and Representatives of Chinese and Indian Young People

On May 4, 2023 local time, State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang met with relatives of Dr. Dwarkanath Kotnis and representatives of China-India friendship organizations and Chinese and Indian young people in Goa, India.

Qin Gang and relatives of Dr. Kotnis visited the photo exhibition of Dr. Kotnis’ life. Qin Gang said that Dr. Kotnis, a great friend of the Chinese people and an outstanding fighter in the anti-fascist war, devoted his precious youth and life to the Chinese people’s war of resistance against Japanese aggression. The spirit of Dr. Kotnis is a humanitarian one of saving lives, a heroic one of daring to struggle and not being afraid of sacrifice, and an internationalist one of advocating peace, friendship and a shared future.

Qin Gang pointed out the need to inherit and carry forward the spirit of Dr. Kotnis, firmly safeguard peace and friendship between China and India, inherit and promote people-to-people friendship, continuously enhance communication and exchanges between the 1.4 billion Chinese people and the same number of Indian people, and explore a path of peaceful coexistence, friendly interactions, and common revitalization between neighboring major countries. He also pointed out the need to promote mutually beneficial cooperation between China and India, enhance mutual trust, strengthen cooperation, jointly safeguard the common interests of developing countries, and uphold international fairness and justice. Noting the occasion of China’s Youth Day, which falls on May 4, Qin Gang said that Chinese and Indian young people are full of vitality and are the main force of development in both countries. He called on them to contribute to the people-to-people and cultural exchanges and mutually beneficial cooperation between China and India, and pass on the China-India friendship from generation to generation.

Relatives of Dr. Kotnis and representatives of China-India friendship organizations and young people from both countries said that the spirit of Dr. Kotnis, embodying the common values of humanity, will always shine in human history. They stressed the need to inherit and carry forward the spirit of Dr. Kotnis, promote people-to-people ties between India and China, and continuously advance friendly cooperation between the two countries.

Chinese FM calls on youths to contribute to China-India cooperation, friendship

Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang on Thursday called on youths from China and India to contribute to mutually beneficial cooperation and friendship between the two countries.

When meeting with relatives of late Indian doctor Dwarkanath Kotnis and representatives of Chinese and Indian youths, Qin said the youths are the main force for the development of the two countries, noting Thursday is the Youth Day in China.

The young people of both countries should do their part to promote bilateral cultural exchanges and mutually beneficial cooperation, so that the China-India friendship can be passed down from generation to generation, he said.

Qin called Dr. Kotnis a great friend of the Chinese people and an outstanding fighter of anti-fascist war, who devoted his youth and life to the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.

Dr. Kotnis was one of five Indian physicians sent to China to provide medical assistance during World War II, where he breathed his last breath.

The spirit of Dr. Kotnis, known in China as Ke Dihua, is emblematic of humanitarianism of saving lives, heroism of struggle and sacrifice, and internationalism of championing peace and friendship with a shared future, Qin added.

The Chinese foreign minister called on young people from both countries to inherit the spirit of Dr. Kotnis to safeguard peace and friendship, and promote people-to-people exchanges between China and India, which should explore a path for the two major neighbors to coexist in peace, get along in amity and seek rejuvenation together.

He also urged the youths to promote bilateral cooperation of mutual benefit and boost mutual trust, so as to jointly safeguard the common interests of developing countries and uphold international fairness and justice.

Qin also visited a photo exhibition on Dr. Kotnis together with relatives of the late doctor.

The families of Dr. Kotnis and representatives of India-China friendship organizations and young people from both countries said that the spirit of Dr. Kotnis represents the common values of all humankind, which will always shine throughout human history.

The spirit of Dr. Kotnis should be passed on and carried forward to strengthen people-to-people ties and push forward friendship and cooperation between the two countries, they added.

Qin is in India to attend the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) foreign ministers’ meeting.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/05/09/c ... riendship/

**********

NATO urged not to create divisions
By WANG QINGYUN | China Daily | Updated: 2023-05-09 09:32

Image
A NATO flag flutters at the Tapa military base, Estonia April 30, 2023. [Photo/Agencies]

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization, which is led by the United States, should reflect seriously on the crimes it has committed and stop creating divisions and turmoil, Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin said on Monday.

Wang made the remarks at a daily news conference one day after the 24th anniversary of NATO's bombing of the former Chinese embassy in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. The attack on May 7, 1999, killed three Chinese journalists and wounded more than 20 Chinese diplomatic personnel.

Serbians and Chinese people gathered at the site of the bombed former Chinese embassy in Belgrade on Sunday to mark the anniversary, according to Xinhua News Agency.

China's Ambassador to Serbia Chen Bo, Serbian Minister of Sport Zoran Gajic, and dozens of officials and civilians laid wreaths and flowers at the memorial monument to honor the victims, Shao Yunhuan of Xinhua, and Xu Xinghu and his wife Zhu Ying of the Guangming Daily newspaper.

"The Chinese people will not forget their sacrifice for truth, equity and justice. Nor will they forget the US-led NATO's barbarous crime," Wang said.

NATO has claimed it is a regional and defense organization, but has kept hyping up regional tensions and creating bloc confrontation, Wang said.

Since the end of the Cold War, the US-led NATO has "sparked one conflict after another around the world," the spokesman said, adding that since 2001, the organization has waged or participated in wars that have killed hundreds of thousands and displaced tens of millions of people.

More recently, the bloc triggered high vigilance among Asia-Pacific countries by continuing to exert its influence in the region, stoking bloc confrontation and disrupting regional peace, the spokesman said, urging NATO to renounce the Cold War mentality and take concrete actions to contribute to peace in Europe and the world.

wangqingyun@chinadaily.com.cn

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... d1d75.html

*******

China's Report on U.S. Cyber Attacks Only Scratches Surface of Washington's Impunity
Danny Haiphong, BAR Contributing Editor 10 May 2023

Image
Northwestern Polytechnical University, Shaanxi Province, China, September 5, 2022. (Photo/CFP)

China has been the victim of US espionage and cyber attacks, despite claims that it is "stealing" US technology.

Originally published in CGTN .

U.S. political leaders and media analysts often hype "threats" from abroad in order to justify an increasingly aggressive foreign policy. China is now considered a top "threat" from significant elements of the U.S. political establishment and is regularly accused of conducting cyber espionage and other forms of snooping. Often, these accusations reflect the actual policies carried out by the U.S. government regardless of which political party holds majority power. On May 4, China's National Computer Virus Emergency Response Center (NCVERC) and internet security company 360 offered verifiable proof of this in a joint report detailing the cyber weapons used by the U.S.' Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) on other countries.

The report builds on earlier findings in 2020 that an unknown cyber organization hacked into China's major petroleum, infrastructure, aviation, and several other industries using methods related to WikiLeaks' "Vault 7" documents. These documents revealed that the CIA was able to infiltrate cyber technology and use it to spy on other countries as well as U.S. citizens.

The latest joint report found many instances where U.S. cyber warfare presented clear and present danger to other nations and the privacy of people. Investigators in the report detailed, for example, the CIA's use of a cyber attack toolkit that infiltrated smart TVs and turned them into spy tools even as the devices appear to be "off." Also, the CIA was found to wield malware programs and other cyber networks that allow the agency to spy on virtually any country at any time.

The CIA and National Security Agency (NSA) have conducted numerous cyber-attacks on China over the past several years as part of the U.S.' Cold War containment strategy. Not only is the CIA connected to the theft of information from Chinese companies but the NSA was also found to have stolen the private information of staff and researchers at the Northwestern Polytechnical University in 2022. It should come as no surprise, then, that China's latest joint report found that the NSA and CIA regularly share information and technology in their cyber war efforts. The CIA alone has more than 5,000 hackers and at least 1,000 hacking systems within its Center for Cyber Intelligence.

China is certainly not the only case where the U.S. has used cyber warfare to sabotage and spy on other countries. In 2014, famed whistleblower Edward Snowden told the media that NSA infiltration of Syria's internet system caused a nation-wide blackout early in the conflict. In 2019, the U.S. Cyber Command conducted a cyber attack on an Iranian intelligence group in an attempt to shut down the Islamic Republic's weapons systems. The U.S. has also admitted to launching cyberattacks on the side of Ukraine in its ongoing conflict with Russia.

As China's report notes, cyber attacks are just one form of warfare employed by the U.S. against other countries. The U.S. has attempted the overthrow of more than 50 governments since the end of World War II. While much of the world has been aware of the U.S. role in destabilizing Iraq and Afghanistan, the CIA and the U.S. military-intelligence industrial complex have been involved in dozens of regime change operations around the world. CIA and Pentagon assistance to anti-government forces in Libya and Syria in 2011 and Ukraine in 2014 directly led to the death and displacement of millions of people. U.S. economic sanctions on Iran, Venezuela, and dozens of other countries have caused the preventable death and impoverishment of millions more.

Incessant attempts from the U.S. mainstream media and political establishment have been made to paint U.S. foreign policy as "democracy" at work. But, it's clear that U.S. aggression is geared toward securing unchallenged hegemony over other nations at the expense of democracy worldwide. The principles of the UN Charter and international law more generally are disregarded entirely.

In fact, U.S. foreign policy analysts and officials frequently champion the U.S. as the sole arbiter of democracy from which all other countries must follow. Such imperial hubris is justified by a Western ideology of exceptionalism which posits that other nations possess inferior or even more oppressive governance systems and must therefore submit to U.S. domination.

China's report sends a signal to the international community that the U.S. must be held accountable for its actions on the international stage. Though a multi-polar world is inevitable, true peace cannot exist within conditions of impunity. The U.S. has, for far too long, been able to get away with the gravest crimes against humanity without consequences. A new multi-polar order led by China, Russia, and the Global South must therefore possess not only the means to secure prosperity and sovereignty for all but also accountability for global wrongdoing.

https://www.blackagendareport.com/china ... s-impunity
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Sat May 20, 2023 1:56 pm

Image

G7’s coercion claim against China slammed as ‘absurd’
In the following article, originally carried on China Daily, Chen Weihua deconstructs and ridicules the claim – expected to appear in the statement arising from this weekend’s G7 Summit – that China is engaged in ‘economic coercion’.

Chen Weihua includes observations from a number of commentators, including Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez, that it is in fact the US and its allies that are the world leaders in economic coercion. As Carlos states, “the G7 states are all involved in multiple forms of economic coercion, and to accuse China of doing so is hypocritical in the extreme.”

Columbia University economist Jeffrey Sachs comments: “The report that the G7 may call out China’s economic coercion is hypocritical given that the US is by far the world’s biggest deployer of unilateral coercive measures.”
The United States and its Western allies have been the major perpetrators of economic coercion that have inflicted suffering on millions of people around the world, according to international experts and scholars.

G7 leaders meeting in Hiroshima, Japan, from Friday to Sunday are set to issue a statement that includes their concerns about alleged economic coercion by China, Reuters reported, citing unnamed US officials.

“The report that the G7 may call out China’s economic coercion is hypocritical given that the US is by far the world’s biggest deployer of unilateral coercive measures,” said Jeffrey Sachs, a Columbia University economist who served as a special adviser to the UN secretary-general from 2001 to 2018.

Research by Francisco Rodriguez, a professor at the University of Denver’s Josef Korbel School of International Studies, has found that economic coercion by the US, the European Union and other Western allies has devastated vulnerable groups in targeted countries and degraded living standards.

He reports that 30 of 32 studies on the effects of economic sanctions by the US and others found that they had negative effects on outcomes including per capita income, poverty, inequality, mortality and human rights.

In the cases of Iran, Afghanistan and Venezuela, sanctions that restricted government access to foreign exchanges affected the ability of those states to provide essential public goods and services, and had substantial negative spillovers on private sector and nongovernmental actors, according to the research published online on May 4 by the Washington-based Center for Economic and Policy Research.

Better approach
“Rather than accusing China of what the G7 itself does, a much better approach by the G7 would be to call for discussions with China so that all countries ensure that economic and trade measures are compatible with the UN Charter and World Trade Organization rules,” Sachs said.

He said the G7 represents a group of wealthy countries allied with the US that accounts for 10 percent of the global population and 31 percent of global GDP at international prices. By comparison, BRICS — a bloc comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa — represent 40 percent and 32 percent respectively.

“The G20, which brings the two (G7 and BRICS) together and others, is a much more representative grouping,” he said, adding that the G20 should be expanded to include the African Union to increase representation.

Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang said on Jan 11 at the inauguration of the headquarters of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, that China was the first country to support the AU in joining the G20 and will encourage G20 members to take robust steps to support a greater role for the AU and African countries in the global governance system.

Joseph Stiglitz, a Nobel laureate in economics, warned on Friday that “hostile” US policy risks splitting the world into two blocs. He urged the West to offer investment not “lectures” to developing countries.

“It would be a good idea … for the other G7 countries to try to put pressure on the United States and say, what you’re doing is forming the world into two blocs, and that will be hard,” he told the Agence France-Presse on the sidelines of the G7 ministerial talks in Japan.

Stiglitz warned that competition between US Democrats and Republicans to look tough on China could undermine international action on climate change and other global crises.

Carlos Martinez, co-editor of Friends of Socialist China, a London-based platform, echoed Sachs by saying that “any accusation of Chinese economic coercion is beyond absurd”.

“The US is by far the global leader in unilateral sanctions,” he said, citing the cases of Iran, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Eritrea, Zimbabwe, the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, and China.

Martinez added that the US has been using the role of the dollar in the global economy to apply long-arm jurisdiction, forcing third parties to go along with its sanctions regime.

“The G7 states are all involved in multiple forms of economic coercion, and to accuse China of doing so is hypocritical in the extreme,” he said.

Image

https://socialistchina.org/2023/05/17/g ... as-absurd/

Image

New book: The East is Still Red – Chinese socialism in the 21st century

We are pleased to announce that the new book by Friends of Socialist China co-editor Carlos Martinez, The East is Still Red – Chinese socialism in the 21st century, has been published by Praxis Press. It is currently available to buy on the Praxis Press website in paperback and ePub forms, and will be available more widely from early June.

Description
China provides a powerful living example of what can be achieved under a socialist system; by a Marxist-led government firmly grounded among the people. The East is Still Red explains the escalating hostility by the imperialist powers towards China and clears up various popular misconceptions.

All available evidence indicates that not only is the Communist Party of China committed to Marxism, but it is a leading force for the development and enhancement of Marxism in the 21st century.

If the first century of human experience of building socialism teaches us anything, it is that the road from capitalism to socialism is a long and complicated one, and that ‘actually existing socialism’ varies enormously according to time, place and circumstances. China is building a form of socialism that suits its conditions, using the means it has at its disposal, in the extraordinarily challenging circumstances of global imperialist hegemony.

Carlos Martinez provides a concise, deeply researched and well argued account that China’s remarkable rise can only be understood by acknowledging its socialist past, present and future.

Contents
Introduction: The East is Still Red
Chapter 1: No Great Wall – the continuities of the Chinese Revolution
Chapter 2: Neither Washington nor Beijing?
Chapter 3: Will China suffer the same fate as the Soviet Union?
Chapter 4: China’s long war on poverty
Chapter 5: Manufacturing consent for the containment and encirclement of China
Chapter 6: China is building an ecological civilisation
Chapter 7: Oppose the New Cold War on China
Appendix: The universalisation of ‘liberal democracy’
Appendix: Recommended reading
Testimonials
Cheng Enfu (Chief Professor of the University of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences):
Although there are many works on China from scholars worldwide, the vivid description and objective analysis of this book provide a perspective for accurately studying China. The inspiring idea that “the left must resolutely oppose the new Cold War against China led by the United States” proposed by this book, should become the international strategic principle of the left around the world.

Professor Radhika Desai (Convenor, International Manifesto Group):
In a world gone beserk with US-incited rage against People’s China; in a world where the bulk of Western scholarship has become so deeply compromised so as to yo-yo between the most tendentious anti-Chinese positions and confusion; in a world where the left has lost its ability to distinguish between imperialism and liberation; in a world that fails to understand just how world-changing have been the achievements of actually existing socialisms; Carlos Martinez shines the light of his crystal-clear prose and his acute political and scholarly insight on China’s achievements, material, ecological, scientific and social. If you want to understand the most profound earthquake shaking up our world, read this book.

Margaret Kimberley (Executive Editor, Black Agenda Report):
As the new cold war accelerates, it is vital to have thorough analysis regarding China. Carlos Martinez is an important thought leader at this critical juncture in history.

Professor Roland Boer (Renmin University of China):
In this important new book, Carlos Martinez sets out the case for the Western Left’s resolute support of the socialist project in China. Based on in-depth research and written in an accessible style, the book will soon become an indispensable resource for anyone who wants to know the facts concerning China. Read it carefully, absorb its insights, and rectify your view of Chinese socialism!

Ben Norton (Editor-in-chief of Geopolitical Economy Report):
The people of China carried out the largest revolution in human history; it would be difficult to overstate its importance. Yet many books analyzing China’s revolutionary process are frozen in the past, acting as though it ended in 1978. Carlos Martinez has done an invaluable service in helping us understand the new phase in China’s project to build socialism. He shows the ways in which this path has zigzagged over time, but how it still remains the same path. “The East Is Still Red” is essential reading for those who wish to understand the China of the 21st century, and the economic reasons driving Washington’s new cold war against it.

Chen Weihua (China Daily columnist, EU Bureau Chief):
From the history of the CPC in more than a century and China’s latest achievements in poverty eradication and ecological civilization to the dangerous US’ new Cold War against China, Carlos Martinez’ expert writing and thought-provoking analysis will help and inspire people who hope to better understand today’s China.

Qiao Collective (A diaspora Chinese media collective challenging US aggression on China):
Carlos Martinez’s body of work on the history and continued reinvention of Chinese socialism had a formative influence on many of us in the diaspora who came together as Qiao Collective in 2020. It is a story replete with advances and reversals, with great contradictions and still greater triumphs, and Carlos has always treated this veritable revolutionary epic with the respect and attention to detail it deserves. His optimism about its future – so rarely shared by those in the Western left who entirely negate the Mao era, the reform and opening period, or both – shines through in every piece, beginning with the upbeat conclusion to his earlier book on the collapse of the USSR. We at Qiao heartily congratulate Carlos on the publication of The East is Still Red and have no doubt it will prove a worthy and altogether more uplifting sequel.

Professor Ken Hammond (New Mexico State University, Pivot to Peace):
Carlos Martinez’s The East is Still Red: Chinese Socialism in the 21st Century, brings together essays and commentaries from his recent writings on a wide range of issues, both historical and contemporary, concerning China’s revolutionary path and its ongoing efforts to build a socialist future for the Chinese people. Recognizing the challenges inherent in this effort, and the obstacles being placed in China’s way by American-led imperialism, Martinez clearly demonstrates that China remains committed to the revolutionary mission of creating a just and equitable social economy for itself and as part of the imperative work of addressing the challenges of global climate change. He rejects those voices which see China as a neoliberal member of the global capitalist order, and upholds the need to recognize China’s achievements in eliminating absolute poverty and improving the lives of its people as well as in leading in the construction of a new international order outside the hegemonic domination of the United States and its allies. This is a most welcome contribution to the discourse about China on the Left, and for a broader audience of the politically engaged.

Elias Jabbour (Associate professor of theory and policy of economic planning at Rio de Janeiro State University’s School of Economics):
Carlos Martinez has excelled in defending frontier positions on the nature of the Chinese socioeconomic formation. In fact, it is very rare to find intellectuals with his argumentative power and intellectual sophistication. In this book, the reader will have access to a wide source of information and living theory necessary to understand China and its unique socialism. Carlos Martinez, great intellectual and friend, is an honourable exception among Marxists in the West. Marxism in the West depends heavily on the talent and creativity of people like Martinez.

Daniel Kovalik (Educator and author):
This book is a refreshing antidote to the barrage of anti-China rhetoric coming from both the left and the right. As Martinez eloquently explains, China, led by the Communist Party, has succeeded in building an equitable and modern society which has eradicated poverty in astounding, historic numbers. Meanwhile, China has helped other developing nations in the spirit of socialist internationalism. What’s more, China succeeded where the USSR failed by simply surviving. This book represents a message of hope — that socialism has a future, and China is leading the way in its own, unique way.

Ben Chacko (Editor, Morning Star):
Carlos Martinez is one of the most interesting journalists writing about Chinese politics in Britain today.

He makes regular contributions to newspapers and websites on modern China, covering everything from environmental policy and poverty elimination to the potential of the Brics to promote a multipolar world based on co-operation between countries rather than great power rivalry. In the process he has helped shed light on the political reality of a country routinely misrepresented and widely misunderstood in Western media.

Brian Becker (National Coordinator of the ANSWER Coalition)
There is no doubt that China’s stupendous rise since the Communist Party took state power in 1949 has altered world politics and the global economy. The US government has also chosen in recent years to refocus its military and industrial strategy in order to prepare for “major power” conflict with China. This constitutes a dramatic shift in US policy in just the past 15 years. But why did the U.S. abandon the pretence of friendship with China and opt instead to prepare for war? Carlos Martinez’s latest book, “The East is Still Red- Chinese socialism in the 21st century” locates the core cause of this growing conflict in the political and class character of the Chinese state. Although China chose to create an economic development model that included private enterprise and allowed for foreign direct investment by capitalist corporations, Martinez argues that the underlying enmity by the U.S. toward the PRC is that China’s socialist revolution still lives and serves as a societal anchor as the country emerges as a rapidly expanding global power.

Danny Haiphong (Co-author of American Exceptionalism and American Innocence):
Carlos Martinez has done what to too few are willing to do in the West: Take a hard look at the lessons we can learn from Socialism with Chinese characteristics. This book is essential reading for understanding China today and why it’s so important to oppose the US-led New Cold War against it.

Dr Francisco Dominguez (Specialist on Latin American politics):
This is a most welcome and timely book. In it, Carlos Martinez furnishes us with rigorous and illuminating analyses covering crucial features of socialist construction in China, essential, especially for Western audiences, to grasp its highly progressive nature. The penetrating discussion Martinez engages in, elegantly pierces through the thick fog of malicious and aggressive imperialist anti-China propaganda. A must for all those who wish to build a better and peaceful world.

Keith Bennett (Co-editor of Friends of Socialist China):
There can be few more important issues in world politics than the development and prospects of Chinese socialism. Yet, when asked what is the best book to read on this, I’ve been lost for an answer. Happily, I no longer have that problem. Carlos Martinez’s new book is a masterpiece of committed scholarship. With a profound historical and theoretical grasp of his subject, he answers the questions that people around the world are asking. Intellectually rigorous and thoroughly researched, yet written in a clear, lively and direct style, this is a book for newcomer and specialist alike. Every socialist and anti-imperialist needs to read it.

Carlos L. Garrido (Editor at the Midwestern Marx Institute, author of The Purity Fetish and the Crisis of Western Marxism):
As the U.S. and NATO develop their New Cold War against China, atrocity propaganda aimed at manufacturing consent for war in their populace grows rampant. In these volatile times, as imperialist forces walk humanity up to the precipice of nuclear Armageddon, it becomes indispensable for peace seeking individuals, especially socialists, to be capable of contrasting the invented reality of their government with the truth. Carlos Martinez’s The East is Still Red: Chinese Socialism in the 21st Century, allows us to do just that – superbly capturing both Chinese history and contemporary reality in the comprehensive and thought-provoking style he is known for. It is a crucial book for those who seek to know the truth about China and to counter the distortions Western imperialist powers disseminate through their lapdog media to beat the drums of war.

Sara Flounders (United National Antiwar Coalition; International Action Center; co-author of Capitalism on a Ventilator: The Impact of COVID-19 in China and the US):
With The East is Still Red, Carlos Martinez has made a significant contribution not only to the understanding of the class nature of China and the significance of the changes in that great section of humanity in the last 40 years, but to the world struggle of workers against capitalists and of the nations of the Global South against the imperialist cabal in North America, Western Europe, Japan and Australia that still oppresses most of the laboring peoples of the world.

The The East is Still Red, is deeply optimistic. But it is grounded in solid research, and a scientific approach, not in idyllic hopes.

As an organizer of the antiwar and anti imperialist movement in the United States − the center of world imperialism − I especially appreciate that section of his well-documented text entitled, “The left must resolutely oppose the US-led New Cold War on China.” Martinez takes headon those who profess to be left but who place an equal sign between the old colonial powers and those nations centered around an ever-stronger China that are confronting the historical rulers − those who historically − and still currently − use their economic and military power to make life miserable for most of humankind. The whole book builds up to and supports this final chapter.

Reading and discussing this book will strengthen those of us organizing inside the imperialist metropoli who understand that only by confronting and defeating the rulers of these countries, can life on earth be made acceptable for all human beings and viable for all living things.

Vijay Prashad (Executive Director, Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research):
Carlos Martinez’s The East is Still Red is a necessary antidote to the grotesque parody of reality that is paraded out in the West as opinion about China.

Tings Chak (Art director and researcher of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research and co-editor of Dongsheng News collective):
We are indeed living in a time of changes “not seen in a century,” which seems to become clearer each day. One of the driving forces behind these historic changes is China, a large country with a long history that is little understood by the rest of the world. This book comes at an important moment to help guide our understanding of China, giving a historic perspective to the changes underway today.

John Catalinotto (A managing editor of Workers World newspaper since 1982):
Five minutes of corporate radio news these days or one New York Times foreign policy article is enough to make me wince in pain. Thus I identified immediately with Carlos Martinez’s chapter in The East Is Still Read entitled, “Manufacturing consent for the containment and encirclement of China.” While Martinez explains elsewhere why the U.S. rulers target today’s China, this chapter shows how the imperialist state and its corporate media mobilizes every aspect of propaganda from Hollywood films to think tanks to demonize the People’s Republic. The Niagara of lies from Fox News to The New York Times or, in Britain, from The Sun to the Guardian parrot the state’s lies and double them.

Martinez explains the difficult issues, for example, Beijing’s policies toward the Uyghurs, a mostly Muslim national minority located in Xinjiang province. For this issue, even the media considered progressive repeats the anti-China line. Martinez gives us examples and repudiates the lies with well-sourced truth. After demolishing the charge of “genocide,” Martinez makes the best argument answering charges of systematic bias: “Certainly any discrimination against Uyghurs pales in comparison with, for example, the treatment of African-Americans and Indigenous peoples in the United States …” Bulls-eye!

Martinez shows that the lies radiating from Washington about Peoples China extend beyond Xinjiang to Hong Kong to China’s role in the Global South to the struggle over the Chinese province of Taiwan. He repels these lies, and makes the following point: This has reached the level of a “propaganda war” against China, and a “propaganda war” can be “war propaganda” − that is, an attempt to mobilize mass opinion to support military action against China. Mastering the arguments Martinez makes in this book and disrupting the propaganda avalanche is a necessary part of the struggle to stop this war.

https://socialistchina.org/2023/05/16/n ... t-century/

**********

China Is Governed in the Interests of Working People, the US in the Interests of Capital (Interview)
MAY 18, 2023

Image

Interview with Sara Flounders. Photo: Global Times.

In this interview with Global Times, Sara Flounders – a contributing editor to Workers World and a member of our advisory group – shares her analysis of the escalating New Cold War and the US’s global hegemonic project. Comparing the West’s approach of war, sanctions, coercion and destabilisation with China’s vision of a human community with a shared future, Sara observes:

The very concept of shared future and cooperation has a profound impact. It’s not threatening to other countries, and it has the win-win idea, meaning if your economy is growing and our economy is growing, that’s better for both of us. That’s the basis of building further and deeper trust.

Sara points out that the differing approaches to international and domestic politics taken by the US and China can ultimately be explained by their differing social systems. In socialist China, the government operates in the interests of working people, whereas “the political parties in the US operate in the interests of the top corporations and banks.”

The interview concludes with a note of caution: with US hegemony in decline, the US ruling class is hitting out in all directions in a bid to prevent that decline. “It’s a very dangerous juncture, because this is very threatening to US imperialism and we have to be prepared what they will do to try to preserve their role.” The situation calls for maximum unity of the global working class and oppressed nations, to defend our collective interests and press ahead to a multipolar future free from imperialism.

Whither Multipolarity in a Changing World Order


GT: The Russia-Ukraine conflict has dragged on for more than a year. What lessons can the world draw from this conflict?
Flounders: Hopefully, they will draw the conclusion not to go along with US provocations, intentional disruptions, and efforts to create crisis.

Now, out of this war in the past year, Russia has not only survived economically, its currency and its trade with the Global South have been reinforced and are stronger today. However, for the EU, they’re in a much weaker position. We shouldn’t forget that even though they are US allies, they are also competitors. The euro is now weaker than the dollar, the war has benefited the US and yet has been very harmful for all of the EU countries that went along with the war.

I think countries around the world will draw their conclusions. Do they want to be roped into this? Especially in Asia, who can US imperialism rope in in terms of their own sovereignty? Who can resist the US pressure?

GT: Taiwan regional leader Tsai Ing-wen was in California and met US House Speaker Kevin McCarthy. While the US contains Russia through the Ukraine war in Europe, does it also want to provoke a war in the Taiwan Strait to contain China?
Flounders: This meeting was a direct and intentional violation of signed agreements that the US has made with China. China is one. Taiwan is a province of China. This is agreed to by the world, by the United Nations, by the US and by Taiwan’s “constitution.” For Kevin McCarthy to line up other congressional members and meet with Tsai Ing-wen is a direct violation of past agreements.

In the same way that Nancy Pelosi’s trip to Taiwan last year was a direct and deliberate violation of the agreement. There’s no reason to do this, except to attempt to create provocations, to create further disruption of what had been an orderly process of reconciliation and of Taiwan becoming part of China, which is the wish for great majority of the people, even in Taiwan.

China’s approach is to continue to use diplomacy to not be baited into an intentional provocation. However, it is becoming a difficult situation because one offense after another, one arms shipment after another. And US aircraft carriers, nuclear submarines, destroyers, sail into the Taiwan Straits. These are all intended provocations, and any one of them could be a dangerous jumping-off point.

GT: The US pursues hegemony by provoking conflicts. China promotes a human community with a shared future. What do the two differing governance concepts bring to the world?
Flounders: The very concept of shared future and cooperation has a profound impact. It’s not threatening to other countries, and it has the win-win idea, meaning if your economy is growing and our economy is growing, that’s better for both of us. That’s the basis of building further and deeper trust.

The US way of operating, from its very founding, has been ruthless competition. The US is built on the African slave trade, the genocide of indigenous people, the exploitation of workers and constant expansion. It must, as an economic system and thoroughly capitalist system, expand or die.

That is how they see it.

Corporate CEOs see now they’re not expanding. That to them is death and dangerous because they can more easily literally envision the end of the world than the end of their own power, and they will risk a great deal. These are very ruthless people. The US and China have two systems. In China, the Communist Party of China is operating in the interests of the working people of China. It’s why China was able to solve its own problems and develop its economy.The political parties in the US operate on the interests of the top corporations and banks. And the top corporations are military industries who pay the lobbyists and run the politicians. That’s where the loyalty is. You can’t even have anti-war politicians. They’re elected into office and they will vote again and again for the military budget and go along with the wars, even if they’ve promised that they wouldn’t when they were running.

China’s Growing Influence in Central Asia and the Middle East Will Lead to Further US Decline


GT: What role does Global South play in rejecting US imperialism? What does this trend mean for the changing global geopolitics?
Flounders: It’s really quite incredible to see the refusal of all the countries of the Global South to go along with US sanctions on Russia and they more actively sought to pursue trade in many different forms. It’s even clearer today. You can see it with the BRICS. You can see it with the agreement of Saudi Arabia and Iran.

US policy has always been to set countries, particularly these two countries in the Middle East, against each other. And instead, they found this is a danger to both of them. They try to normalize relations and not go along. Dedollarization has become a fact. That’s a huge change, because the US dollar has been the basis of all trade for decades. These changes are coming so quickly and it’s hard to even put them all together. In the past to meet with the IMF for the World Bank, it was a surrender of sovereignty for many countries. You have to prove what industries you would lay at the feet of the US, what would be privatized, what you’re turning over to them. Entirely different agreements are being reached now.

So I think the term is being increasingly used by so many – the emergence of a multipolar world. That is a reality. Will the world operate in the interests of a tiny handful of multibillionaires? Or will there be new forms of trade, exchange, and development that benefit the world and its billions of people? That is respectful of the many differences that do still exist.US hegemony is declining. It’s a very dangerous juncture, because this is very threatening to US imperialism and we have to be prepared what they will do to try to preserve their role. Our interests are one with people in the world for peace, for development, for reconciliation, and not for corporate profit.

https://orinocotribune.com/china-is-gov ... interview/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10587
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: China

Post by blindpig » Mon May 22, 2023 2:00 pm

Image

China’s peace in West Asia
Originally published: Al Mayadeen on May 18, 2023 by Janna Kadri (more by Al Mayadeen) | (Posted May 20, 2023)

Under the auspices of China, Iran and Saudi Arabia agreed to restore diplomatic relations on March 10. At the time of the deal’s announcement, U.S. President Joe Biden said better relations between “Israel” and their Arab neighbors are better for everybody rather than relations with Iran. Better for “everybody” depends on what is meant for everybody. If it means the U.S. financial classes and their Arab and Zionist comprador in the region, then Biden is spot on. However, for the masses of the Arab World that experience declining living standards, whether by peace or war, the U.S.-Israeli aggression against them will not stop. What must be understood is that the aggression is necessary for Western wealth-making because it extracts regional resources, which should otherwise better Arab social conditions, and ships them to U.S.-European markets in order to feed exponential growth and profits.

Moreover, the aggression, whether military or ideological, is itself an industry in its own right, which fuels wealth accumulation. At a first-principle level, the policies that dominate the air-waves, all aim to foment wars. To extoll the virtues of the market, erect a cultural identity that aborts the potential of labor as a historical agent, and push down the throat of indebted states policies of privatization and private property, leaves little resources for the peoples of the region and delivers them into inter-communal strife. The case of Sudan is one such blatant example. The wars visited upon the Arabs drive away their resources and are therefore a must for the global financial class.

However, capital or the principal social relation governing the remaking of the global order is a two-pronged process. At first, capital is of the same class fabric, and it initially aims at oppressing workers everywhere. This capital against labor is a first contradiction. A second but not secondary contradiction is the inter-capitalist competition for power, which determines the shares of the various circles of capital. For instance, the U.S. sits atop the capital pyramid and receives a fallout in rent depending on its power standing. It would not want lower suzerains to catch more of the rents. It sometimes sacrifices its bourgeois allies to grab their shares. Saudi Arabia was one such candidate readied to be sacrificed along with some sections of its ruling class.

With the rise of China, the global balance of forces shifted, and bourgeois classes disgruntled with the U.S.’s avarice for rents saw a window of opportunity to save themselves. After years of war with Yemen at the behest of the empire to secure the Mandeb Straits, it was left weakened and alone. Sensing the danger of bourgeois fratricide, the Saudis intelligently decided to maneuver into a position backed by Chinese guarantees of security. China builds capacity and détente abroad, which are measures anathema to U.S. imperialism whose goal is to destabilize in order to snatch resources.

For the U.S., War Masquerades as Peace
In efforts to normalize relations between “Israel” and the Arab world, the U.S. brokered a series of agreements called “The Abraham Accords”. They propose a strategy of forging alliances with “Israel” to counterbalance the Axis of Resistance. They base the rationale for joining Arab and Israeli forces on an alleged Iranian threat. Already, these Arab ruling classes were extensions of and under the purview of the U.S.-Israeli ruling classes. Their coming out is nothing less than a sign of weakness to reposition forces around a strengthening Axis of resistance.

These Abrahamic shenanigans provide new venues for class allies to enhance their own aggressive capabilities through the purchase of arms from “Israel”. “Israel”, by the way, is the largest exporter of arms per capita in the world. So far, “Israel” normalizes with Oman, Bahrain, the UAE, Morocco, and Sudan, in addition to the earlier trophies of peace, Jordan, and Egypt. It shares an informal relationship with Saudi Arabia and Doha. It for instance conducts diamond trade in Doha while Saudi Arabia has recently opened its airspace for Israeli commercial airplanes.

The so-called “Abraham Accords” are an unthinkable ‘promise’ for peace without Palestine and the right of return. They supposedly foster incremental developments with the GCC by precluding even the lowly option of a two-state solution which was endorsed by the Arab Peace Initiative (API). Saudi Arabia maintained that its position remains solely expressed through its commitment to the API, wherein normalization with “Israel” would only be conceivable once the conditions listed in the Arab-brokered initiative are fulfilled. But the fact that UAE, Sudan, Morocco, and Bahrain normalized their relations with “Israel” is indicative of consent by Saudi Arabia. As observed by Israeli writer Henrique Zimmerman, the signatories of the Accords “would not have signed the agreement without the approval of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, which is the most influential country in the Arab world.” So what would have really prevented an alliance between “Israel” and Saudi Arabia?

In a previous article, I showed how the U.S. failed to fulfill its security commitments toward Saudi Arabia. Whereas Saudi Arabia has boosted the U.S. status as a world hegemon by denominating its oil in dollars, the U.S. has failed to stick to its side of the bargain by ensuring that the Saudi Kingdom has all its security needs, foremost its regime, or ruling class security answered. Fearing the tightening grip of the Axis of resistance around it, normalization with “Israel” went out of the window, while China provided the face-saving arrangement with Iran.

An agreement “Made in China”
Unlike the U.S., China needs peace to expand. The Chinese-brokered agreement emerged in retaliation to the U.S. as the latter continues to wage a series of provocations aimed at destabilizing China’s domestic stability with regard to Taiwan. It is retaliatory because it presents a strategic threat to U.S. interests and its hegemonic influence across the Arab region. It is also retaliatory because it threatens to undermine the petrodollar system upon which the dollar supremacy is based on. Since the Saudi-Iran agreement went into effect, it is only fair to characterize the scale of the changes that ensued following its implementation as unprecedented. Very much like a drop of water falling into a puddle, the agreement rippled across the region, bearing fruits in Yemen and Syria.

First are the developments that ensued between Yemen and Saudi Arabia. For eight years, Yemen endured a U.S.-sponsored war that has claimed the lives of nearly half a million people. On April 9, Saudi officials met with high-ranking officials from the Sanaa government for peace negotiations, and on April 14, the International Committee of the Red Cross announced that a massive prisoner exchange operation had kicked off. On April 29, senior member of the Ansar Allah political bureau Ali Al-Qahoum admitted that China played a pivotal role in the negotiations for restoring regional peace and warding off Western hegemony. Some challenges however remain with regard to U.S. and UK interference in pushing for another escalation. Yet a positive outlook persists as officials from both sides mobilize efforts for dialogue.

Secondly, there has been the push to re-integrate Syria into the Arab League through the collective efforts of several Arab countries, including Saudi Arabia, which has in spearheaded the move. The U.S. and the UK had on the other hand reaffirmed their commitment to remain opposed to the restoring of ties with Damascus but they would continue to work with Arab states that rekindle diplomatic relations.

Thirdly, there has been news of Saudi Arabia expressing an interest in holding talks with Hezbollah. Saudi Arabia was largely a precursor for designating Hezbollah as a terror organization both at the GCC level as well as in the Arab League. With a shift in policy that appears to be more driven from the Saudi side than from Iran, prospects for political stability in Lebanon are also looming. But the fact remains that Lebanon is sickened with sectarianism fueled by geopolitical rents that easily plays into the hand of “Israel” and the U.S.

Fourthly, prospects for normalization with Hamas are likewise on the horizon as talks were recently held between Hamas and Saudi officials. On April 16, the two parties met in Riyadh to hold discussions on the release of Hamas-affiliated individuals detained in Saudi jails. There are also hopes for relations to improve between Saudi Arabia and Iraq’s movement for resistance, the Kataib Hezbollah.

Finally, whether the deal restores relations between Turkey and Syria is still up for discussion. However, chances are they might broach the issue considering that the project of restoring peace in Syria is part of the wider Iran-Saudi deal agenda. Yet the presence of U.S. troops in Syria remains problematic for two reasons: firstly, U.S. troops are stationed in Syria for the sole purpose of toppling the government of Bashar Al-Assad. To loot Syria’s oil resources in the north is simply a means towards that end; and secondly, because Saudi Arabia’s institutions are closely tied to the U.S., the latter holds much leverage inside the Kingdom. As a key regional player, Saudi Arabia could exert pressure to restore Ankara-Damascus relations, but it is unclear how able it is to do so.

What now?
The U.S. has been setback by the China-sponsored peace. Its “rules-based” world order hangs by a thread, while its dollar supremacy wanes. Doubtless, the blow was hard for Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu who just a month prior to the Iran-Saudi deal said that “Israel” and Saudi Arabia were planning to join forces on the basis of a common goal of stopping Iran. By more sober analysis, normalizing ties with “Israel” for any regime in the region is an act of suicide, unless the march of history eliminates the working classes as subject of history.

After all, the Israeli-Arab war is a war of capital against labor. The principal lesson learnt so far is that regional peace is global-relations-derived peace. The saddest part of this is that Arab progressive forces still prioritize internal demands for higher working-class wages over struggles against imperialism. Without Arab national security, there is no working-class living security. While the region’s future and much of the Third World will depend on how China unseats the U.S. hegemon, the Arab vanguard is fast asleep.

https://mronline.org/2023/05/20/chinas- ... west-asia/

Image
.S. Army rocket system used for a live fire event during Balikatan 23 war exercises in the Philippines, April 26.

Biden drops ‘One China’ policy, uses Philippines for war drive over Taiwan
Originally published: Struggle-La Lucha on May 20, 2023 by Scott Scheffer (more by Struggle-La Lucha) | (Posted May 22, 2023)

Pentagon strategists have been beefing up their military presence in Asia and building alliances in preparation for an all-out war against China. In recent months Taiwan has increasingly come into focus as the likely excuse to justify a war as terrible—or worse–than any in modern history.

They want to use Taiwan as a tool to “manufacture consent.” But the island is important for more than just war propaganda. Pentagon planners are readying plans for control of areas of Asia and, in particular, the South China Sea that would be of value in war.

In early April, CNN reported that U.S. forces would now be allowed to rotate troops to nine military bases in the Philippines, including four new bases. Three of the four are within a few hundred miles of Taiwan and close to military defense locations of China’s People’s Liberation Army.

The Philippines bases would facilitate a takeover of the channel between northern Luzon and Taiwan—the area called the Bashi Channel. Control of Taiwan would be instrumental in moving into the South China Sea.

Only weeks after securing access to the bases, the U.S. conducted war exercises jointly with the Armed Forces of the Philippines (AFP). Annual Balikatan war exercises between the U.S. and the Philippines have been growing in size and scope in their decades-long history, and this was the largest ever, involving 17,600 troops—nearly double that in 2022.

More than 12,000 of the troops were from the U.S., a small number from Australia, and the remainder from the AFP. They used live ammunition, F-16 fighter jets, the F-35B stealth bomber, Patriot missile batteries, and Blackhawk and Chinook helicopters. They included amphibious landing practice, and targeted and sunk a decommissioned ship close to the South China Sea.

Balikatan 2023 was an open threat and practice for war against China.

In another signal of the heightened war danger, Philippines President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. followed up with an announcement that the AFP would join the U.S. in ongoing naval patrols of the South China Sea. Marcos’ father was a brutal U.S.-backed dictator who was driven into exile by an uprising of the Filipino people in 1986.

War budget, arms sales
On March 9, U.S. Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin announced President Joe Biden’s proposed Fiscal Year 2024 Defense Budget of $842 billion—which is $26 billion more than 2023.

Describing Biden’s proposal, Austin said: “To sustain our military advantage over China, it makes major investments in integrated air and missile defenses and operational energy efficiency, as well as in our air dominance, our maritime dominance, and in munitions, including hypersonics.

This budget includes the largest ever request for the Pacific Deterrence Initiative, which we are using to invest in advanced capabilities, new operational concepts, and more resilient force posture in the Indo-Pacific region. It also enables groundbreaking posture initiatives in Guam, Mariana Islands, the Philippines, Japan, and Australia.

Separate from the proposed defense budget, the Biden administration has approved $19 billion in arm sales to Taiwan. Weapons makers are energetically pushing for more of that.

Defense News reported May 3,

A delegation of United States defense contractors and a former senior leader of the U.S. Marine Corps pledged the beginning of deeper cooperation with Taiwan.

Speaking at a public forum in Taiwan’s capital Taipei, retired Lt. Gen. Steven Rudder said the U.S. wants to be part of the defense capabilities of Taiwan and improve the supply chain resilience of the island. He also emphasized how critical the island’s position is for security.


Taiwan was already part of China more than a century before George Washington was elected the first president of the U.S. Its unwarranted recognition as a separate country only happened in 1949 when Chiang Kai-Shek, the nationalist leader who slaughtered hundreds of thousands of Mao Zedong’s revolutionary fighters beginning with the 1927 Shanghai Massacre, was finally chased out.

Chiang fled to Taiwan and was recognized by the imperialist powers of the U.S. and Britain as the legitimate government of China. Under pressure from the U.S., the United Nations didn’t even grant the People’s Republic of China a seat until 1971.

Since then, officially, the U.S. has adhered to the “One China” policy in recognition of the fact that Taiwan is part of China. The “Three Communiques” were mutually agreed on policies that the U.S. ostensibly accepted in exchange for the right to invest in China.

Two trends of thought have competed with each other among those billionaires who dominate U.S. policy toward China. There are those who want to maintain a stable profit-taking relationship.

But the spectacular successes of China in lifting more than 800 million people out of extreme poverty, China’s rise as a world scientific power, its global leadership in surviving the COVID-19 pandemic, and myriad other achievements have emboldened those capitalist rulers who want to destroy China.

The anti-imperialist movement is facing its greatest challenge in many decades. The proxy war against Russia and the growing momentum for war against China have to be seen as one. A powerful people’s movement that takes militant action against U.S. imperialism can and must block another calamitous war.

https://mronline.org/2023/05/22/biden-d ... er-taiwan/

********

New accusations seen as sign of G7's failure
By ZHANG YUNBI | chinadaily.com.cn | Updated: 2023-05-21 23:26

Image
People rally in a protest against the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Hiroshima, Japan, May 20, 2023. [Photo/Agencies]

The fresh accusations made by the Group of Seven wealthy member nations against China cannot conceal their failures in advancing global governance as well as the G7's declining influence and obsession with fanning bloc confrontation, officials and experts said.

As the annual G7 Summit in Hiroshima, Japan, concluded over the weekend, observers warned that the grouping also outlined the United States-led Western countries' plans to further stir up the Asia-Pacific region politically, economically and militarily.

China was a hot topic in a series of documents adopted by the summit, such as the G7 Hiroshima Leaders' Communique.

Through these documents, the grouping hyped up the Taiwan Strait situation and made accusations regarding the East China Sea, the South China Sea, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region, the Xin­jiang Uygur and Tibet autonomous regions and China's nuclear power.

Beijing strongly deplores and opposes this and "has made serious demarches to the summit's host Japan and other parties concerned", according to the Foreign Ministry.

"The G7 used issues concerning China to smear and attack China and brazenly interfere in China's internal affairs," said a Foreign Ministry spokesperson on Saturday.

The spokesperson said that the G7 claimed it was "promoting a peaceful, stable and prosperous world", but "what it does is hinder international peace, undermine regional stability and curb other countries' development".

Noting that the G7 continues to emphasize cross-Strait peace without mentioning the need to oppose "Taiwan independence", the spokesperson said that this "constitutes connivance and support for 'Taiwan independence' forces, and will only result in having a serious impact on cross-Strait peace and stability".

The East China Sea and the South China Sea have remained stable overall, and relevant countries need to "stop using maritime issues to drive a wedge between regional countries and incite bloc confrontation", the spokesperson said.

"The G7 needs to reflect on its behavior and change course", as the world does not accept the G7-dominated Western rules that seek to divide the world based on ideologies and values, the spokesperson said.

Su Xiaohui, an associate research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies, said the G7's latest comments and documents show that "it is still failing in its role of tackling issues facing the whole of humanity, such as global governance".

"Although Washington has underscored increasing the G7's influence, it has not responded to concerns of the international community, and the grouping has ended up as a key tool for advancing US-driven strategic competition," she said.

"Routinely, the G7 Summit is intended to discuss economic issues, but (Japan), as the host this year, has linked economic topics to politics and security, and the summit's documents involve a lot of content related to politics," said Yang Bojiang, director of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences' Institute of Japanese Studies.

"By doing so, Tokyo is marching in lockstep with Washington in viewing China as a competitor and a threat," he said.

Yang noted that Japan also invited eight countries — most of them from the Asia-Pacific region — to attend the summit's expanded meeting this year in an attempt to encourage them to take sides and join the US-led coercion against China.

"Prioritizing 'dealing with China' is actually inviting external forces to further interfere in Asia-Pacific affairs and seeking collective hegemony. This will only add to tension and confrontation in this region and sabotage peace and stability here," he said.

On several occasions this year, the G7 also made claims about "economic coercion" that allude to China.

A spokesperson for the Chinese embassy in Japan said on Saturday that "in reality, it is the US itself that is engaged in economic coercion", and the US "has so far applied sanctions arbitrarily to the detriment of nearly half of the world's population, and even G7 members such as Japan are not immune".

Observers noted that in parallel with the G7 Hiroshima gathering, the China-Central Asia Summit was held in Xi'an, Shaanxi province, on Thursday and Friday.

The fruitful Xi'an summit issued seven bilateral and multilateral documents and witnessed the signing of over 100 cooperative documents, State Councilor and Foreign Minister Qin Gang told reporters on Sunday.

"Our cooperation is not directed at any third party, nor is it subject to a third party, we do not engage in closed, exclusive 'small circles', and we oppose bloc politics and Cold War confrontation," he said.

http://global.chinadaily.com.cn/a/20230 ... d436e.html
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply