Biden faces a big picture of international relations in which Sino-US tensions are clearly at the top of the list of difficulties. But after he took office, he did not follow the wishes of many new bureaucrats of the “panda-embracing faction” as well as private strategists to “burn three fires” to reverse the Cold War pattern of the Trump (Trump) era and return to the Obama-era U.S.-China The “honeymoon”. Biden, the new official “a move is better than a quiet”, but let the Chinese Communist Party extra anxious. But the Chinese Communist Party has repeatedly pressed, but it is like punching a cotton wall, never see Biden’s movement. It was not easy for Biden to deliver his foreign policy speech on February 1, but when the situation in Myanmar changed, he postponed his speech on the grounds of light snowfall and rethought the content of his speech behind closed doors.
A, the United States and China Cold War: the United States can not avoid, both sides can not fight
Whether Biden likes it or not, the U.S.-China relationship is an area deeply stamped with Trump’s stamp, and in the last year of Trump’s term the U.S.-China Cold War broke out. Can Biden completely turn the situation around? A slap on the wrist is not enough, and no matter what Biden thinks, the intentions and actions of the Chinese Communist Party will always be the key influencing factor.
When the U.S.-China Cold War broke out in June and July of last year, I published three articles in the Epoch Times, and my June 8 article, “What Does the New U.S.-China Cold War Mean? on July 5, which analyzed the similarities between the old and new Cold Wars, the Sino-U.S. Cold War and the U.S.-Soviet Cold War; and the July 27 article, “Sino-U.S. Cold War Enters the Fast Lane of Escalation? which introduced the many possible aspects of the U.S.-China Cold War. Later, in the September 26 issue of The Epoch Times, I published “Two Cold Wars, Why is the Chinese Communist Party a greater threat to the United States than the Soviet Union? that explained the differences between the U.S.-China Cold War and the U.S.-Soviet Cold War. Of the various media outlets around the world, only the Epoch Times systematically published an analysis of the causes and consequences of the Sino-U.S. Cold War.
I will not repeat in this article what has already been presented in the above-mentioned articles, but only want to emphasize three points.
First, the Cold War was never started by the Red powers. The Chinese Communist Party has been propagating that Trump provoked the Cold War between China and the United States, which is another deception among the countless lies created by the Chinese Communist Party. The Soviet Communist Party brought nuclear missiles to Cuba in the last century, posing a proximity nuclear threat to the United States and causing a rapid escalation of the U.S.-Soviet Cold War. The U.S.-China Cold War was also provoked by the Chinese Communist Party’s three military actions against the United States in the first half of last year, again with nuclear threats; unlike the Soviets, the Chinese Communist Party’s tools were nuclear submarines. President Trump, like President Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis, responded in full force to defend the United States.
Second, because a Cold War would only occur between a Red power with a large number of nuclear weapons and a Western power, neither side could initiate a war, despite a long confrontation. As opposed to a cold war, if the two sides engage in direct war, it would be a hot war. When a hot war begins, the losing side on the battlefield may first use tactical nuclear weapons, and then both sides may further use strategic nuclear weapons. Once a nuclear war breaks out, the nuclear weapons of both sides will be enough to destroy the entire planet, and human society will be destroyed as a result.
Third, the track of the Cold War necessarily follows two iron laws of the Cold War, which I call the two “no matter what”. First, the West can not stop the Red powers from provoking friction between the two sides no matter what. Second, once the Cold War is opened, both sides know that no matter what, they must avoid a hot war.
Second, the cold war between China and the United States just started and stopped?
Most of Biden’s important White House team members and cabinet members are Obama-era officials who once belonged to the “embracing panda faction” that built the “U.S.-China honeymoon,” and naturally refuse to admit their fault for the “rise” of the Chinese Communist Party. They naturally refuse to admit their mistake of paving the way for the “rise” of the CCP. According to their original intention and habitual thinking, they naturally hope to end the Cold War as soon as possible and return to their familiar track of “dialogue and cooperation. This is exactly what the Chinese Communist Party is calling for at this moment.
One characteristic of the “panda-embracing” officials and scholars is that they do not like the Cold War, nor do they understand it. To understand the Cold War, one must be familiar with the Soviet Union and study it. The so-called history of the Cold War is nothing more than the history of modern international relations between the United States and the Soviet Union. In the past, it was mainly Western experts on the Soviet Union who summarized the Cold War experience, while the “panda-embracing” experts and scholars were neither well-informed nor interested in it. They do not know the Soviet Union, they cannot read Russian, and most of them have no military knowledge, so they do not know what to make of the Cold War.
Some of them even hope that it would be better for China and the United States to leave the Cold War so that they can avoid this problem. In a previous article, “U.S. Indo-Pacific Strategic Framework: Three Questions,” published by the Diplomat on Jan. 14 of this year, the author followed the stereotypical vision of typical geopolitical thinking and criticized the Trump Administration‘s 2018 Indo-Pacific Strategic Framework for ignoring the importance of Mongolia to the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy; and in a recent article in the New York Times on Feb. 1 In his article “China Could Be Biden’s Nightmare,” former China correspondent Sidao Ji argues that “the United States could well be in the most dangerous confrontation with another nuclear power since the Cuban missile crisis” and that “different political factions in the United States are taking a hard line against Beijing, leaving little room for diplomacy. This makes me nervous.
For the United States, the advent of this U.S.-China Cold War has been severely underprepared due to the misguided policies of Obama and his predecessors toward China. Only the RAND Corporation in the United States has published a military assessment in 2016 (War with China: Thinking Through the Unthinkable, 2016), and that was a study completed in 2014. The RAND report points out the fact that “in all the current research and scholarly opinion on the outbreak of war between the United States and China and the U.S. response to war, at least in the publicly available studies and opinions, there is no rigorous analysis of the specifics and outcomes of war. This is a serious omission.” This statement was written in 2014 and remained true until last year when the Cold War between the United States and China broke out.
Recently, there has been a flurry of news about various aspects of U.S.-China relations. Will the tensions between Trump and the Chinese Communist Party ease after Biden takes office? This is a question of global concern. When the Chinese Communist Party, the “panda”, “holds a sharp edge in its hand” and presses forward, what can the “panda huggers” do, continue to hug? As it turns out, the “panda huggers” are learning how to face the reality of the Cold War between China and the United States. In fact, they can not eliminate the cold war between the United States and China, because the one wearing the “panda” coat is actually a “red tiger” fed by the United States strong. The “red tiger” to eat people, this is the common sense in the history of the Cold War.
Third, the Chinese Communist Party is eager to force a new Sino-US relations
As Biden takes over, the Chinese Communist Party is eager to improve U.S.-China relations economically and diplomatically. The CCP has three specific goals wrapped in diplomatic rhetoric that it is eager to achieve. The first is the elimination of U.S. tariffs on China so that the CCP can resume large-scale exports to the United States; the second is the elimination of U.S. financial controls so that Chinese companies can resume their money-making operations in the United States; and the third is the elimination of U.S. technology controls and personnel controls so that the CCP can regain the “freedom” to steal intellectual property. After Biden came to power, he only suspended the discussion on restricting investment in the Chinese military industry, but other aspects still “follow the rules of Sichuan and Bay”.
Before Biden entered the White House, the Chinese Communist Party had its ambassador to the U.S., Cui Tiankai, arrange for Yang Jiechi, the “No. 3” in diplomacy, to go to the U.S. for high-level talks since last December, and even try to get Xi Jinping to hold a summit with Biden. But the U.S. response was lukewarm, so it gave up. On January 26, the website published an article titled “Xi Jinping’s Time to Biden is Running Out,” urging Biden to make an early decision. This article said that the CCP has no reason to wait for Biden, and the CCP has no reason to wait for Biden. Biden and his team cannot fail to understand that the CCP has consolidated its relative advantage over the United States on top of the reality of the G2. The CCP’s attitude of impatience and eyeing the U.S. leaps to the fore.
On January 26, former CCP Vice Premier Zeng Peiyan used the “Hong Kong China-US Forum” to say that the U.S. and China should launch a new round of economic and trade negotiations and abolish the high tariffs since the trade war as soon as possible, and on January 28, CCP Vice Foreign Minister Le Yucheng publicly called on the U.S. to adjust its strategy toward China and “set things right. “. Then, on January 29, Wang Qishan shouted by video to the U.S. representatives attending the 12th round of dialogue between U.S. and Chinese business leaders and former senior officials, setting the tone and charting the course for future U.S.-China relations. Then, on February 2, Yang Jiechi held a video dialogue with the National Committee on U.S.-China Relations, and his speech clearly demonstrated his intention to harness the Biden Administration‘s policy toward China.
In his speech, Yang Jiechi said that “the Trump administration is carrying out an extremely wrong anti-China Policy” and that the U.S. should make efforts in four aspects: First, the Trump administration has made a historical, directional and strategic mistake towards China and must “set things right”; second, normal contacts should be restored; and third, the U.S. should abolish those policies that are not in line with the Chinese policy. First, the Trump administration has made a historical, directional and strategic mistake with China and must “set things right”; second, normal relations must be restored; second, the erroneous policies towards foreign students, Chinese Communist Party media and Chinese Communist Party enterprises should be cancelled; third, the U.S.-China joint communiqué should be fulfilled and the one-China principle should be strictly observed; and fourth, mutually beneficial cooperation should be developed. The CCP said that these four demands are only the first step that the U.S. should take.
The CCP’s shouting is very high-profile, soft with hard, and actually draws a red line for the Biden administration’s policy toward China. Yang Jiechi’s speech not only sounded tough, but also specified the various tasks that the Biden administration has to accomplish for the CCP. Among the four demands he made, the first three were non-negotiable; while the fourth point, “develop mutually beneficial cooperation,” although the word “cooperation” was repeated 24 times, was hollow and purely imaginary. In his speech, Yang Jiechi even lectured the United States not to keep mentioning the word “national security” in front of the Chinese Communist Party. Related to this, Yang Jiechi did not mention a word about the military confrontation between China and the U.S., as the Chinese Communist Party is blackmailing the Biden administration with constant military threats.
IV. No Peace in the Pacific as China and the U.S. Continue Military Confrontation
The Biden administration seems to be indifferent to the constant diplomatic pressure from the Chinese Communist Party, not warming up and ignoring it. One of the key considerations is that there is no peace in the Pacific Ocean.
Recently, the Chinese Communist Party’s military threat against the United States has gradually accelerated. The CCP originally planned to build 10 aircraft carriers to form a massive carrier fleet to compete for sea control in the Pacific. However, due to the limitations of the shipbuilding project and the technical level of the equipment and aircraft on board, the CCP has realized that its carrier fleet will not be able to create military pressure on the United States in the near future.
Since last year, the Chinese Communist Party has quietly changed its naval strategy from relying primarily on aircraft carrier formations to relying primarily on a nuclear submarine fleet. Whereas in the Cold War era, nuclear submarines played the role of a “second strike” force, the CCP’s emphasis on the strategic nuclear submarine fleet now goes beyond the need for a “second strike”; the CCP’s navy is now pursuing a strategic nuclear submarine that will The CCP’s navy is now pursuing the strategic nuclear submarine to reach deep into the central Pacific Ocean, close to the U.S. west coast, and to form a deterrent capability for an active nuclear attack against the United States.
To this end, the CCP’s strategic nuclear submarines are trying to break through the First Island Chain so that they can enter the deep waters of the Central Pacific Ocean, where they can be safely hidden and yet ready to launch a sudden nuclear attack against the United States. Thus the focus of the Sino-US Cold War changed from above water to underwater. The main base of the Chinese Communist Party’s nuclear submarine fleet is at Yulin Port in Sanya, Hainan Island, and its nuclear submarines have only three underwater routes from the so-called “deep sea fortress” in the forcibly occupied international waters of the South China Sea to enter the Central Pacific Ocean, which are currently the key sea areas for the U.S. Navy to guard against. Among them, from Sanya to the northeast, is the closest to the United States in the Bus Strait, so the southwest waters of Taiwan has become one of the key sea areas of the underwater confrontation between the two sides.
From October last year to the present, Communist nuclear submarines have continued to operate in the southwest waters of Taiwan, and U.S. submarines have continued to conduct underwater surveillance. This year, from January 2 to 9, then every day continuously from the 11th until the 20th, and then from the 22nd until the end of January, the Communist forces intensively deployed anti-submarine aircraft to repeatedly detect U.S. submarines off the Fujian and Guangdong junctions. The USS Roosevelt carrier formation crossed the Bus Strait from east to west into the South China Sea on January 23, both to break the Communist Party’s “deep sea fortress” of nuclear submarines in the South China Sea and to support the U.S. submarines that were battling the Communist Party’s nuclear submarines underwater in the waters southwest of Taiwan.
The Chinese Communist Party has not only repeatedly attempted to breach the Bus Strait with strategic nuclear submarines, but has also used unmanned underwater vehicles in the Java Sea of Indonesia to gather hydrographic information on submarine routes in order to open the Deep Sea Bastion southern route into the Central Pacific Ocean via the Java Sea and the northern coast of Australia. The Chinese Communist Party has also been preparing to build a submarine base on Daru Island in Papua New Guinea, near Australia, and has imposed economic sanctions on Australia for six months to force Australia to abandon its defense program.
This escalating series of underwater nuclear threats against the United States is also an attempt to put pressure on the Biden administration. The two-pronged approach of the Chinese Communist Party’s civil and military attacks and intimidation on the Biden administration has effectively pushed the Biden administration to a point of no return. As a result, the “Sichuan rule” has become a natural consequence of the current Sino-US relations.
Recent Comments