Since the beginning of this summer, as the plague situation has changed from one to the other, the international political and military situation has also undergone some subtle changes. This is mainly reflected in a clear shift in the way the world treats the CCP; the vicious fighting and agitation within the CCP is also more or less evident. The signing of the New Atlantic Charter by the U.S. and Britain, NATO’s sparring and long-armed strikes, and Russia’s retreating hand and watching the fire from across the river to the CCP after the U.S.-Russia summit have all caused the CCP regime to feel an unprecedented crisis, leaving Zhongnanhai facing a situation where it is surrounded by enemies on all sides.
Whether these subtle changes in the international political and military situation, and the apparent shift in the world’s attitude toward the CCP, are related to the rumored defection of a senior CCP official with biological warfare information to the United States is not known and cannot yet be confirmed, but the possibility clearly exists. This is best supported by the fact that information about this senior official has disappeared from Chinese websites. If this defector’s actions and the messages he brought out are confirmed, and if the Biden administration orders the U.S. military to conduct a 90-day investigation into the virus, the Chinese Communist regime will face immediate ruin. More defections, ship-jumping, disclosures, and the Chinese Communist Party’s death-defying machinations could come out one by one as the CCP sinks its ship and before it is overthrown.
Eighty years ago, in 1941, Churchill and Roosevelt signed the famous Atlantic Charter, putting forward eight principles for post-war reconstruction and maintaining world peace. Eighty years later, Biden, who was visiting Europe, met with British Prime Minister Johnson and signed the New Atlantic Charter, which also had eight principles, following the example of his predecessors. The New Charter states to maintain enduring values, to defend and respond to challenges old and new, to work with all partners who share democratic values, and to counter efforts to undermine alliances and institutions. The New Charter is heavily targeted at the Chinese Communist Party, promising to defend such key principles as freedom of navigation and overflight and other uses of the seas under international law, protect the West’s innovative edge in science and technology, and strengthen global interests such as responding to global health threats and collective defense.
Subsequently, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization summit held in Belgium on June 14 issued a joint communiqué afterwards, listing the Chinese Communist Party as a “systemic security threat” to NATO. NATO, as the world’s most powerful political and military alliance, has never considered the Chinese Communist Party as a target for direct military confrontation by NATO. The NATO summit, promoted by the U.S., for the first time pointed to the Chinese Communist Party in the communiqué, a breakthrough since the establishment of NATO, and a breakthrough for NATO to attack the Chinese Communist Party, the last and largest communist regime, with a long arm, marking the beginning of the Chinese Communist Party’s nightmare.
The NATO military alliance summit was preceded by a summit of the heads of the Group of Seven industrialized nations (G7) from June 11 to 13. Most surprisingly, the network in the conference room was cut off at one point when the seven heads of state were talking about China (the Chinese Communist Party). It is believed that the host country, the UK, cut off all internet and WiFi in the summit meeting rooms because it was worried about eavesdropping by the Chinese Communist Party. What needs to be kept secret is when it comes to the root cause of the Chinese Communist virus, topics related to Chinese Communist biological weapons, and when discussing the Taiwan issue.
It is not very surprising that the EU countries and the US, UK and Canada have divergent views on the CCP, but the US and UK do need to use more evidence to convince the Europeans of the threat of the CCP. The U.S., Britain and Canada advocate tougher action against the CCP’s dictatorial and authoritarian practices; the EU countries tend to take a more wishy-washy approach. Even more surprisingly, the G-7 had little disagreement about the final revised communiqué, with even Japan, which is usually very moderate toward the CCP, wanting to take a tougher line against it. Japanese Prime Minister Yoshihide Suga said he was in favor of investigating the origins of the new coronavirus (CCP virus) and of reforming the World Health Organization (WHO).
What draws attention to the seven-nation talks is that it was Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau who led the discussion on China, calling on leaders to take unified action in the face of the Chinese Communist challenge. Rather than intimidate Canada, the Chinese Communist Party’s bullying and interference in the Huawei issue has pushed Canada more clearly into opposition and into becoming a powerful aide to the United States. The seven leaders agreed to launch a U.S.-sponsored infrastructure program to help low- and middle-income countries counter the Communist Party’s “Belt and Road”. This “democratic-led, high-standard, value-driven, transparent infrastructure partnership investment program will help improve infrastructure in developing countries worth more than $40 trillion. With the Communist Party’s foreign exchange reserves depleting and export opportunities dwindling, the “Belt and Road” paved by the yuan will be overwhelmed by the transparent road paved by the dollar.
The Chinese Communist Party mouthpiece Xinhua said, “President Xi Jinping dominated the entire agenda of the G7 summit, even though he did not attend it. This is ridiculous. The pig that was targeted and put on the chopping block to be slaughtered thinks it is the master of the kitchen! But behind this ridiculous perception of the CCP, there is indeed a high degree of anxiety about its own fate.
On June 16, 2021, Biden and Putin held a U.S.-Russia summit in Geneva, Switzerland, with the participation of Secretary of State Antony Blinken. The meeting was attended by Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov. Sergei Lavrov, the Russian foreign minister. The talks lasted just over three hours, and there was not even a joint dinner arrangement. The summit achieved some minor results, but major differences remain. Both sides claimed only that the first summit between Biden and Putin was “pragmatic,” but Putin did not compromise when it came to issues such as arms control, hacking and human rights. The two sides also resumed sending ambassadors to each other after Biden called Putin a “killer,” leading Putin to recall the Russian ambassador to the U.S. from Washington and Biden to recall the U.S. ambassador to Russia. U.S.-Russian ambassadorial relations have been restored, but U.S.-China ambassadorial relations are still hanging in the air.
Putin called Biden a “constructive and experienced partner,” but there was no friendship between them, only pragmatic dialogue. Biden said he told Putin some “basic rules of the road that both sides can follow. Putin has a deeper engagement with Trump, and the two men are sympathetic and have similar interests, and it would have been possible for Trump to reach a more solid cooperation with Putin to deal more effectively with the Chinese Communist Party. Biden does not have such political credibility, personal charisma and political maneuvering, so the Russian cooperation he was able to obtain was more limited. Neither Biden nor Putin, have invited each other to visit each other, showing that they have not been able to build deeper trust and cooperation. But even limited cooperation is enough to pose a threat to the Chinese Communist Party. After the summit, the U.S. and Russia each held a press conference and then issued a joint statement.
The consensus and joint statement demonstrated that even in a tense international situation, the U.S. and Russia can make progress on common goals, including ensuring predictability in the strategic arena and reducing the risk of armed conflict and the threat of nuclear war. The two sides also agreed to hold talks on arms control and cybersecurity.
In response to a U.S. reporter’s question about how Russia would respond if the Chinese Communist Party attacked Taiwan by force, Putin laughed for several seconds before giving a non-committal answer, which was essentially a non-answer, saying that Russia has no intention of assisting the Chinese Communist Party in the Taiwan Strait conflict. Where is the promised “Shanghai Cooperation Organization” and strategic partners?
The CCP’s purpose in bringing about the SCO, the core pillar of the SCO, is security cooperation, which was the core driving force behind the SCO when it was first created. Obviously, the Chinese Communist Party was not willing to move from the “Shanghai Five” mechanism to the SCO, only to work closely with member states on borders, disarmament, military trust, and combating transnational crimes such as drug trafficking, arms and human smuggling, but rather to form a military bloc similar to the Warsaw Pact that could be used to confront NATO. But although SCO has expanded its membership and security cooperation has expanded geographically, it falls far short of the CCP’s expectations in key areas of defense and security cooperation and in forming a security community similar to NATO and the Warsaw Pact. Therefore, the Chinese Communist Party has been hoping that “SCO will continue to develop and form a pluralistic security community. But now Russia, at the request of the United States, has abandoned the Chinese Communist Party on the occasion of the summit between Putin and Biden without informing it and in total disregard of its face.
While the U.S.-Russian dialogue has not led to a breakthrough in bilateral relations, nor has it resolved U.S. concerns about Crimea or Russian concerns about Ukraine’s membership in NATO, the two sides have, after all, made progress on the topics of the number of nuclear weapons, moderation in their use, and avoidance of serious military conflict. In other words, the United States has fixed and stabilized Russia. A united U.S. front to contain the Chinese Communist Party by joining Russia, Europe and the Asia-Pacific has been formally formed. Putin, on the issue of Taiwan, which is of the greatest concern to the CCP, does not offer help to the CCP and does not cut both ways, but clearly states that he will watch the fire from across the river and will not intervene in the anti-communist layout of Europe and the United States. The hundreds of billions of dollars paid by the Chinese Communist Party to buy high-priced oil and natural gas, high-priced Russian arms, and the deliberate establishment of SCO, all the efforts have gone down the drain as if they were wasted.
The Chinese Communist Party is highly nervous about the current U.S.-Russian summit, and high-profile claims that China-Russia relations are “real gold not afraid of fire”. As it turned out, Zhongnanhai found out that Sino-Russian relations are not really real gold and cannot stand the fire. Before Biden’s meeting with Putin in Geneva, the Chinese Communist Party, like an abandoned woman, issued a series of articles emphasizing how “strong and close” the relationship is. But to the CCP’s dismay, Russia’s response was completely different from its own. Russia only frequently emphasizes its economic ties with the CPC, while downplaying or ignoring its “strategic partnership” with the CPC. In an interview with the Chinese Communist Party’s mouthpiece Global Times, Russian Ambassador to China Andrey Denisov explicitly denied the existence of an “alliance” between the two countries. Russia only sees the Chinese Communist Party as a slaughterhouse, a profiteer who satisfies Russia’s energy exports and provides Russia with foreign currency!
The Chinese Communist Party has always been worried and afraid of Russia’s strategic tilt toward the United States, and this time in Geneva, what the Chinese Communist Party fears most has happened. Although the United States and Russia have not formed an alliance-type relationship, but in the event of a conflict between the United States and China, Russia just set aside, shrink and do not care, in the eyes of the Chinese Communist Party, is actually a betrayal. And in the history of Chinese (Soviet) and Russian relations, mutual betrayal between the two sides has been a long time coming, if not a common occurrence. The relationship between the two sides is, in fact, not that solid. The Chinese remember the Soviets’ “betrayal of trust and justice” and the withdrawal of experts and talents in the 1950s; the Russians remember the Chinese Communist Party’s criticism of “Soviet revision” and the tearing up of the Soviet Union during the Khrushchev era. Both sides also knew that Jumbo Island, Jiangdong 64 canton, Vladivostok, and even the partition of Outer Mongolia were lingering shadows.
The New Atlantic Charter of the U.S. and Britain, the long arm of NATO, and Russia’s retreating hand and watching the fire on the other side of the river have made the Chinese Communist Party feel an unprecedented crisis and put it in a situation of being surrounded by enemies on all sides. Under such high external pressure, the CCP’s implosion, explosion, and mutiny are becoming more and more likely to collapse.