Push around | Columnist

The grandfather of Chinese President Xi Jinping sometimes looks a little confused. He had no threats from Hitler or Stalin, nor Putin’s naughty smirk. However, with his expressionless face, Xi Jinping seems to understand that this is a historical juncture at which China must stand up.

American international relations expert and realist John Mearsheimer believes that American foreign policy cannot accommodate peer competitors. When the United States fought in Afghanistan and lost another war, and tried to change the regimes in Iraq and Libya, with harmful consequences for the two countries, China was busy developing its economy and building military forces to achieve a credible level of deterrence. China is now definitely a competitor to its peers in the economic, military and technological fields. Its idea of ​​stealing intellectual property is ridiculous for an independent country that has now landed its own rover on Mars, built its own space station, and landed a spacecraft on the dark side of the moon.

Both parties in the United States agreed that China must be contained. But what does this really mean? In the recent intellectual square debate, Robert Daly of the Kissinger Institute pointed out that Mearsheimer advocated letting China fall back into poverty. Mearsheimer said: If I can slow China’s economic growth, I will definitely do so. . Scholar Mearsheimer is not part of Washington’s foreign policy institutions. But if he can express such views publicly, one can only guess what Washington hawks think about China. Europeans are more pragmatic and noticed that the United States seems to care more about what China is, while their Europeans care more about what China does!

In recent times, in every instance promoted by the United States, China has pushed back. On the issues of Hong Kong, Taiwan and Xinjiang, China has drawn a red line and insisted on its sovereignty over territory and internal affairs. The United States is wooing India, Australia, Japan and South Korea. China has strengthened its diplomatic outreach in South and Central Asia. The American media tried to question the efficacy of vaccines developed by Chinese companies. China has obtained WHO approval and accepted vaccines from COVAX for global distribution. The United States took the lead in promoting the origin of the Wuhan laboratory leak of the SARS Cov-2 virus and asked its intelligence agencies to investigate. China immediately dismissed the accusation for unscientific reasons, and refused to cooperate while pursuing the laboratory’s leaked theory. The Biden administration maintained the Trump administration’s tariffs unchanged and put pressure on some Chinese companies listed on the U.S. stock exchange. China has sanctioned Western officials, is experimenting with its digital currency, and is pushing its companies to list in Shanghai and Hong Kong.

Compared with Xi Jinping’s speech at the celebration of the 100th anniversary of the founding of the Communist Party of China on July 1, the aggressive rebuttal of Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi is now almost mild. Deterred by threats of force. As a nation, we have a strong sense of pride and confidence. We have never bullied, oppressed, or conquered the people of any country, and we will never. Similarly, we will never allow any foreign forces to bully, oppress, or conquer us. Anyone who tries to do this will find themselves colliding with the Great Wall of Steel forged by more than 1.4 billion Chinese.

What can explain the aggressive stance of Xi Jinping and China? First, it may be a response to the condescension that the Chinese think the United States has shown to them. The Chinese characterize the American approach as preaching. They are obviously dissatisfied with this and will not kowtow to the Americans. Secondly, China believes that the United States is hypocritical, conniving in Israeli settlements, ignoring its abuses in Palestine and the United States itself, such as repressing minority voting rights, and it points out that it is repressing in Hong Kong and Xinjiang. Thirdly, and the most important reason so far, as a long-term strategic thinker and actor, China believes that if it makes a one-centimeter concession to America’s hegemonic posture, it will open the door to its economic and political subversion, just like the Mills Sea. That’s what silently advocated.

Apart from the blockade of Cuba, the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States had little economic or political impact on us in the Caribbean. However, the brewing Cold War between China and the United States will have a negative impact on Caribbean countries, which have extensive historical, trade and financial relations with China, which they have never had with Russia. If the United States asks countries to choose sides, the impact may be great. This is especially true for countries like Australia and Singapore, whose economic ties with China are broader and deeper than ours. Europe has already stated that it will continue to trade and invest with China and put its own economic interests above the hegemonic intentions of the United States. For example, despite the opposition of the United States, Germany decided to continue to obtain natural gas from Russia through pipelines, thus emphasizing this pragmatic European thinking.

Let us hope that, apart from rhetoric and war of words, the United States and China will seek common ground on key issues such as climate change, continued epidemics, and much-needed investment in developing countries. The good news is that the United States and China have contacted and talked, most recently in Tianjin. A country like ours must be able to freely establish good relations with the two countries and use the capital, technology, and market access provided by each, rather than being forced to choose sides.