The Biden Administration is committed to accelerating the worst elements of the “hard imperial” practices of military encirclement of China while also advancing the “soft imperial” practices, Matt Ehret writes.
Going into the March 18 diplomatic talks between U.S. and Chinese delegates to discuss the long-term strategic interests of the two nations, China projected a largely positive hope that the days of military aggression, trade wars, sanctions and interference into China’s affairs which characterized much of the past 8 years might finally be coming to an end.
They had some reason to make their hopeful assumptions as the U.S. State Department press releases announced that the meetings would “highlight cooperation that promotes peace, security and cooperation in the Indo-Pacific region and around the world.”
The Chinese certainly hoped that the sanctions imposed under Trump’s watch might be rolled back by the new administration and that the new team might respect China’s sovereign right to pursue its economic interests without being seen as an opponent to the decaying western empire. They have understandably gotten quite tired of dealing with the constant unipolar intimidation as has been so common since Obama’s Asia Pivot was first announced in 2012. In response to the pressure of a dying empire attempting to insecurely impose its will on a growing nation which will soon find itself as the economic leader of the world, China has responded consistently with class and restraint calling for cooperation and dialogue.
At various times over recent years, China has offered the USA and other western nations desperately in need of real economic development, opportunities to cooperate on the Belt and Road Initiative, space research and other sectors of win-win cooperation citing these domains as being inclusive of all and beneficial to all participants. The fact that the Chinese have made these offers isn’t surprising. The USA is economically bankrupt, sitting upon a derivatives-fueled hyperinflationary bubble ripe to blow, devoid of any significant manufacturing capacities it once enjoyed and militarily over-extended beyond belief. So it isn’t as if cooperating on the BRI isn’t in the interests of the USA… as a sovereign nation.
But the USA isn’t really a sovereign nation state these days. It’s something else.
This sad fact slapped the Chinese delegation across the face moment U.S. representatives Anthony Blinken and Andrew Sullivan opened their mouths during the keynote remarks and spewed nothing but belligerent poison at their Asian counterparts. Blinken began his condescending chastisements of China’s disruptive influence to “international rules-based order”, condemned China for its alleged cyber-attacks and the apparently vicious treatment of Uyghurs, Hong Kong, Tibetans and Taiwan. Sullivan followed suit promoting the importance of the anti-Chinese “Quad” (often dubbed the “NATO of the Pacific) and virtue signalled “American ingenuity” and leadership.
Using the best newspeak available to an American diplomat these days, Blinken condemned the “might makes right” outlook which has caused so much injustice over the years and which apparently guides China thinking, saying: “The alternative to a rules-based order is a world in which might makes right and winners take all, and that would be a far more violent and unstable world for all of us.”
Of course, one might be confused by this claim since China has only one foreign military base in Djibouti, has started no new wars in generations and has lifted nearly a billion people out of poverty, but that’s only because you don’t receive quality CIA briefings like Blinken and Sullivan.
Yang Jiechi and Wang Yi’s responses provided a sobering sledgehammer of reality as both statesmen took the opportunity to spend 42 minutes laying out in stark terms the scale of hypocritical poison in extolling democracy abroad while not being able to win the support of its own population citing BLM. Jiechi also contrasted the USA’s obsessive use of regime changes and wars across the world in defense of the Washington-run “rules based order” with China’s track record in ending extreme poverty winning the support of its citizens and building great infrastructure projects abroad.
Calling out the disingenuous intention behind the U.S. delegation’s organization of the talks, Jiechi stated:
“isn’t this the intention of the United States – judging from what, or the way that you have made your opening remarks – that it wants to speak to China in a condescending way from a position of strength? So was this carefully all planned and was it carefully orchestrated with all the preparations in place? Is that the way that you had hoped to conduct this dialogue? Well, I think we thought too well of the United States. We thought that the U.S. side will follow the necessary diplomatic protocols.”
Jiechi continued:
“So let me say here that, in front of the Chinese side, the United States does not have the qualification to say that it wants to speak to China from a position of strength. The U.S. side was not even qualified to say such things even 20 years or 30 years back, because this is not the way to deal with the Chinese people. If the United States wants to deal properly with the Chinese side, then let’s follow the necessary protocols and do things the right way.”
In the ensuing days of meetings, it should not come as a surprise that very little in the way of serious conflict resolution occurred. In fact, the only solid points of agreement which the U.S. side would permit involved two joint protocols that fall perfectly into alignment with the Malthusian closed system objectives of the Great Reset agenda attempting to reign in a post-nation state world order in the wake of the oncoming economic meltdown. These included 1) a joint program to coordinate more closely on fighting global warming via green finance and green energy grids and 2) coordinating on COVID-19 vaccination programs.
Nothing which China is doing that relates to actual scientific and technological growth, long term conditionality-free banking or poverty extermination was permitted by the U.S.-side for reasons which should be obvious to the informed reader by now.
While Blinken did announce in the post-conference press release that space cooperation between the two powers was discussed, it is a fact as true as gravity that the imperial technocrats running the Biden White House are so ideologically opposed to the sort of open-system programs which space cooperation creates that Blinken’s remarks are sure to remain dead words.
What is clear coming out of the Alaska meeting is that the Biden Administration is committed to accelerating the worst elements of the “hard imperial” practices of military encirclement of China while building up the QUAD military alliance on the one hand while also advancing the “soft imperial” practices of pulling China into unbreakable de-carbonization treaties and medical health regimes controlled by supranational technocrats on behalf of the Anglo-American oligarchy.
Source: Strategic Culture Foundation