On March 24, President Joe Biden held a cabinet meeting at the White House to discuss the refugee issue at the southern border.
Senior U.S. media sources said last week’s U.S.-China meeting in Alaska clearly showed that the Biden Administration still lacks credible and substantive threats to Chinese Communist Party policy, and that Biden needs to be tougher on both economic and trade issues, as well as human rights.
Credible threat is a term used in game theory, where parties to a game usually fear only credible threats and believe only credible promises.
If the Biden administration wants the Chinese Communist Party to take him seriously, it needs a strong, coherent policy, said Steve Postal, a veteran U.S. media personality, in an article on the American Spectator website Monday (March 22). policy.
He argues that the Biden administration’s performance at the first U.S.-China meeting last week was a sham.
The Chinese Communist Party’s Tactfulness Needs to Be Taken to the Heart of the Matter
Besto cited that while the Biden team talked about allies, it was not clear how they planned to work with them and how they would unite with them to counter the Chinese Communist Party’s invasion policy. For example, Secretary of State John Blinken said he had just made his first visit to Japan and South Korea and heard a very different “official” narrative than the Chinese representatives.
“I also heard deep concerns (from allies) about some of the actions your (Chinese) government has taken, and we’ll have an opportunity to discuss those as we get to work,” Blinken said. Blinken said. “I remember well that we were visiting China when President Biden was vice president. This occurred in the wake of the financial crisis. There was a lot of discussion at the Time. Biden, who was vice president at the time, said that it’s never a good bet to bet on the United States to lose, and that’s true today.”
In contrast, China replied that Yang Jiechi, director of the Office of the Foreign Affairs Working Committee of the Communist Party of China Central Committee, cited foreign trade data that Japan and South Korea are China’s second and third largest trading partners; ASEAN countries have surpassed the European Union and the United States as China’s largest trading partners.
Besto said Yang’s rebuttal to Blinken’s words means that U.S. allies do more business with China than with the United States, so why would they choose the United States over China?
“To counteract this rhetoric, the Biden team would need to demonstrate that 1) when push comes to shove, America’s Asian allies will choose to trade with the United States over China, and 2) the United States and its Asian allies have a credible threat to sanction China economically. But the Biden administration has failed to make either of these points.” Besto stumped.
Need for Chinese Communist Party to Change Behavior Requires U.S. to Construct Credible Threat
Besto also argued that statements by two foreign officials of the Chinese Communist Party on Xinjiang, Tibet and Taiwan affairs also indicate that they are not concerned about outside views of the Chinese Communist Party on Xinjiang, Tibet and Taiwan unless the U.S. side offers a response they must face head-on.
In addition, the Biden team has no credible plan to pressure the Chinese side economically.
Besto said the Biden team has no plans to date to counter China’s (CCP) unfair trade practices, which also include but are not limited to punishing the use of Xinjiang Uighur slave labor.
Then look at Yang Jiechi’s rhetoric in whitewashing the CCP’s compulsion of foreign companies to do business in China. He said, “The vast majority of American companies in China say that the business environment in China is good and that no one is forcing them to stay in China. They see the profits that exist in China, they see the tremendous opportunities in China. That’s why they stay in China.”
While Young once again played the logic game and muddied the waters with that theory about the economic interests of U.S. companies in China, it also shows the other side of the coin that any serious policy by the Biden administration seeking to change the behavior of the Chinese Communist Party needs to pose a credible threat to China’s economic interests and should also provide an alternative.
A few pieces of advice for the Biden administration from members of the media
So what should be done?
Besto offers several suggestions: First, to get the Chinese side to take the Biden administration seriously, the Biden administration needs a strong, coherent policy that includes legislation requiring Uighur slave labor products to be banned from the supply chain of U.S. companies in China, similar to the order issued before the Trump administration left office, and consideration of a credible tariff threat similar to that imposed under Trump.
Second, bring back the U.S. pharmaceutical industry and build a new multilateral supply system based on Circle of Trust countries, while increasing self-sufficiency in medical devices, personal protective equipment, biologics, and rare earth supplies, divesting and decoupling from China to the extent possible.
Third, the Biden administration should endorse the Trump Administration‘s warnings for U.S. companies to beware of data services and equipment provided by companies with ties to the Chinese Communist Party, for example by insisting that huawei be banned from 5G and by preserving and expanding the Trump administration’s “clean network.
Fourth, issue more sanctions against Chinese Communist Party officials who violate human rights. The Biden administration issued its first sanctions against Chinese officials only last week, targeting 24 Communist Party officials for undermining Hong Kong‘s autonomy, which is a little late but still welcome.
Recent Comments