As he approaches his 100th day in office, President Biden spoke to a joint session of Congress on April 28. On China, he said the competition with China is about democracy versus autocracy, a contest that cannot be lost. But he welcomed competition with China, but did not seek conflict. Biden’s statement, which caught the world’s eye, seemed to be a hard-soft one, and it was perhaps his opponent Xi Jinping who could be the first to appreciate some change in tone. Xi’s team should also have noticed that since taking office, Biden’s team has rarely used the term “Chinese Communist Party,” which is most hated in Zhongnanhai. Under Trump, the term “China” was deliberately distinguished from the term “CCP,” arguing that “CCP” does not represent “China The term “Chinese Communist Party” does not represent “China”, let alone “the Chinese people”.
In an interview with the Voice of America, David Dollar, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s China Center, commented on Biden’s China policy in his 100 days in office, saying, “I would say that the United States does not have a coherent strategy toward China yet. Biden’s team for the most part is still following Trump’s policy on China.” But he noted: the Biden administration’s language in criticizing China is less direct in its accusations against China’s Communist Party than the Trump administration’s. He said, “I think one big change is that several members of the Trump administration’s cabinet have been very targeted in their criticism of the Chinese Communist Party and China’s leaders, and some of their rhetoric has come very close to calling for regime change. I haven’t heard that kind of rhetoric from Biden’s team. They seem to have more expertise in accepting Chinese politics and not seeking to change it.”
The political stance of the above American expert on China is unknown, but his observations can be described as both objectively neutral and pointedly careful. While he does not name examples of the terms “China” and “Chinese Communist Party,” it immediately comes to mind that several members of the Trump-era cabinet use the term “Chinese Communist Party” rather than Isn’t it true that several members of Trump’s cabinet used the term “China” instead of “China” in order to “call for regime change in China,” as David To put it, with a great sense of hostility? Later, Biden’s team seldom made the same statement, first because they did not want to anger Beijing. Secondly, it may be that, as David Du says, the Biden team “seems to be accepting Chinese politics and not seeking to change it.
In the short 100 days since Biden took office, he has told several times how memorable he was for the many thousands of kilometers and hours of informal conversations on the plane with Xi Jinping. In his 100-day speech to Congress, he retold the story of his special relationship with Xi Jinping, a move that shows some personal respect for him? “Welcome competition, but do not seek conflict”? Where can Zhongnanhai find a leader of a great nation who is so rule-based and so free of hatred? Perhaps we should praise U.S. leader Joe Biden for having the political “gravitas” to transcend ideological differences and accept a Communist leader who is sharpening his sword and is always looking to outflank the United States and have global ambitions. As long as China does not seek conflict, the United States will not seek conflict either. The United States and China compete in peaceful coexistence and, if necessary, seek international cooperation, without missing each other. If this is still a form of cold violence and decoupling, it is better for Beijing than the threat of hot war. As for whether the “Chinese Communist Party” is China? That is a matter for the Chinese, not the Americans.
Xi Jinping has made a big deal of the “two-faced” people in the Party hierarchy at home, but who is not a two-faced person, including himself? President Joe Biden is a multi-faceted political leader. He told the world that Xi Jinping does not have a “democratic bone in his body” and defined the competition between China and the United States as a contest between democracy and dictatorship, a contest that cannot be lost. So until now, the Biden administration has retained many of its Trump-era policies toward China.
In his speech at the Munich Security Conference on Feb. 19, Biden made the point that the challenges facing the world today are different from those of the past, and that the global situation has changed. People are now in a fundamental debate about the future and the direction of the world today. “We are at an inflection point between two schools of thought, and given all the challenges we face – from the fourth industrial revolution to global pandemics – there are those who argue that tyranny is the best way forward, and there are those who understand that democracy is critical, – critical to meeting those challenges.” Biden said democracy will and must prevail, but “democracies must prove that democracy can still meet the needs of our people in this changed world.”
In his subsequent address to Congress, Biden also said again that Xi and other autocrats believe U.S. democracy is doing things too slowly to compete. He therefore called for greater U.S. investment in science, technology, education and families, and also introduced a Democratic-tinged American-style socialist “big government” economic plan. In order to get the approval of Congress, President Biden seems to use the “China threat” as a domestic political tool and the most convincing argument for both parties: in order to compete with China, the U.S. even has to follow the Chinese Communist Party’s “efficiency” and economic model of doing things fast. ” and economic model, with a major construction boom, expensive epidemic economy, deficit economy, green economy, etc. Biden, who was once suspected of being more pro-China, has now wielded the politically correct stick of the “China threat” with more skill and sophistication than one would expect.
In his 100th day in office, Biden’s policy toward China is apparently clear but actually ambiguous and contradictory, with considerable room for maneuvering: when dealing with domestic politics and allied countries, he highlights the high profile of the ideology of democracy against dictatorship, while when dealing with China, he shows the pragmatic style of “welcoming competition but not seeking conflict”. The term “Chinese Communist Party” that has caused so much pain to the Chinese Communist Party nest may be shelved for the time being, a change in terminology that is difficult for the average American to understand, but the Biden team understands it, and Zhongnanhai understands it even better.
Recent Comments