In past international issues, several Western developed countries, represented by Britain and the United States, often ignored the interests of other countries and would rather undermine the international situation than contribute to their own interests, demonstrating the true nature of old imperialist countries. Got to have a clear view. However, the world of has righteousness and is mixed with manifolds. Britain and the United States should not think that they can continue to act arbitrarily. On this issue, China will never join forces with Britain, the United States, and Australia!
Not long ago, on August 29, my country’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Zhao Lijian clearly expressed China’s attitude towards cooperation on nuclear submarines between Britain, the United States and Australia in an interview with reporters.
Zhao Liqiang stressed that China firmly opposes nuclear submarine cooperation between the United States, Britain and Australia. During this review conference, many countries, including China, expressed concerns about this cooperation, believing that it violated the purpose of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons and purpose, impact the International Atomic Energy Agency safeguards and supervision system, and pose serious nuclear proliferation risks. Zhao Lijian also emphasized that China’s advocacy of establishing an open and inclusive intergovernmental discussion process is completely reasonable and should not be obstructed by the United States, Britain, and Australia.
The review conference mentioned by Zhao Lijian is actually the 10th Review Conference of the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. This conference was held in the United States a few days ago and was attended by about 191 countries. It can be called the "big brother" of global arms control agreements.
As can be seen from the name, the conference does not pay attention to "minutiae" such as aircraft tanks . It has only one target, which is nuclear weapons .
Since the first atomic bomb was exploded in Hiroshima, Japan, the world has had a more intuitive understanding of this epoch-making weapon, and has lingering fears about its lethality: If every country has nuclear weapons, it will be equivalent to Tie the earth to a powder keg, and anyone can blow up . Therefore, major countries have long begun to restrict the proliferation of nuclear weapons to prevent the spread of nuclear weapons. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is the product of this work.
However, can a treaty bind all countries? Especially an "America First" country like the United States treats it as a blank slate. Not to mention the proliferation of nuclear weapons, the United States is even willing to sell off its allies if it is profitable. It has done too much of this kind of thing.
And on September 15, 2021, the United States took the initiative to spread nuclear technology to its allies for its own selfish interests. On the same day, the United States announced the establishment of the so-called trilateral security partnership with the United Kingdom and Australia, namely the "Australia-UK-US Alliance."
Before this, the relationship between the United States and these two countries was so good that they had to wear a pair of pants. The notorious " Five Eyes Alliance " had three of them, which was considered the "core" of Anglo-Saxon circle". So, what other partnerships does the United States plan to fiddle with?
I believe everyone has thought of it, this must be related to nuclear weapons. That's right, 's so-called trilateral security partnership is fake, but the transfer of nuclear technology is real. On the same day, the United States announced that the two nuclear-weapon countries, the United States and the United Kingdom, would help the Australian Navy establish a nuclear submarine force and assist Australia in building at least eight nuclear submarines.
Whoever started it has no consequences?
Crisis-ridden
The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons is revised every five years. The most recent delay was due to the epidemic. However, China’s opposition to US-UK-Australia nuclear submarine cooperation began on September 15 last year. Looking at the relevant news, almost every one or two months, high-level people from our side express their position on this, and Zhao Lijian himself has emphasized it several times.
Why is China so strongly opposed to this cooperation? This is actually not difficult to understand. The United Kingdom and the United States had nuclear weapons and nuclear submarines in the last century. This is the foundation for the "five permanent members" to live and work. We also have it ourselves, so we can't commit any crime against the United Kingdom and the United States. But Australia is still a non-nuclear country, and accepting nuclear submarines is a very dangerous signal.
On the one hand, the nuclear reactor on the nuclear submarine has considerable research value and can easily be used by Australia to improve its own nuclear technology . As for whether Australia will use these technologies to develop nuclear weapons, no one can determine . Moreover, Australia will have legitimate reasons to purchase nuclear materials in the future, which is already the envy of those countries that are struggling to pursue nuclear weapons. You know, all non-nuclear countries have to go through heavy scrutiny if they want to purchase nuclear materials. Weapons-grade nuclear fuel is almost impossible for them to buy. Iran has built so many centrifuge factories. In order to extract the enriched uranium in the ore, but it is easily available in Australia.
On the other hand, we already have nuclear submarines. Is the next step to equip them with nuclear missiles ? This is not unprecedented for . As one of the Five Permanent Members of the Security Council, Britain's nuclear submarine technology and submarine-launched nuclear missiles are inseparable from the assistance of the United States. Nowadays, British nuclear submarines even have to go to the United States for maintenance. Furthermore, do you still want to bet that a nuclear submarine does not carry nuclear missiles? Even if it claims to use conventional missiles , it must expect the enemy to be lenient and avoid listening to the smoke bombs released by the enemy.
With nuclear technology and nuclear submarines, it is actually not something worth worrying about. The key is to see who has this thing. Where does acne appear without affecting myself? Of course it grows on other people's faces. If a certain American country has nuclear submarines, the United States should be worried now. As for the relationship between Australia and our country, it goes without saying that the only target that can be thought of for this country to equip nuclear submarines is China itself.
Why do you say that? Because the military strength of Australia's neighboring countries is quite weak and there is no conflict with it, Australia can crush them without using nuclear submarines.
This is clearly aimed at China. India will not be a strategic focus of the United States even for a long time to come.
It is not difficult to see from the layout of the United States. In the face of the increasingly developing People's Liberation Army, the US military is gradually decentralizing power in order to maintain its military superiority and choosing to strengthen allies to expand its overall strength. Japan is a good example. In recent years, Japan has torn up the " Peace Constitution " and the Self-Defense Forces have continued to expand their military preparations and increase military expenditures. This is mainly because the United States has loosened its dog leash. If Japan had not been bombed by an American atomic bomb and was instinctively sensitive to nuclear weapons, Japan might have obtained nuclear submarines before Australia.
(Screen of US-Japanese military exercises)
There is Japan in East Asia, but who is there in the South Pacific? Australia, no one else, wants to be the United States' anti-China bridgehead in Asia. So as the owner, the United States should give its pets some benefits. Isn't it only natural?
The above is the direct reason why China firmly opposes Australia's acquisition of nuclear submarines. Asia has always been at peace, and the United States has never stopped fanning flames around China. Australia's expansion of arms and preparations for war will inevitably aggravate tensions in neighboring countries.
Say no to the United States
Of course, the above are factors in practical considerations. As a major country in the world, China has another reason to say no to the United States on this issue, and that is its responsibility as a major country.
First of all, we must make it clear that the proliferation of nuclear technology and nuclear weapons is something that is not tolerated by the international community. The Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons was born for this purpose. For most countries, the proliferation of nuclear weapons means increased instability. Everyone has nuclear weapons, which means no one has nuclear weapons. No one can threaten anyone. On the contrary, it worsens peripheral security. Moreover, if nuclear weapons are not fully secured, they will flow into the hands of terrorists. Even if they cannot detonate them, just making an dirty bomb is enough to shock the world.
Nuclear technology and nuclear weapons should be in the hands of countries capable of controlling them. However, this time the United States actually agreed to transfer nuclear submarines to its allies as a move to curb China's development. This is undoubtedly intolerable.
However, how many countries in the world today can curb the actions of the United States? For a long time, the United States has pursued hegemony and power politics, turning the international community into its one-stop shop. Actions to circumvent the United Nations are commonplace, and its foreign wars have never been successful. reason. Even Powell, the former US Secretary of State, was able to convict Iraq with a bottle of unknown powder. This move was even ridiculed by Putin . Putin said that " might be laundry detergent ."
Speaking to the United States does not require courage, but more strength. There are not many people who have the ability to do this, and China is undoubtedly the most confident among them.
At the high-level dialogue between China and the United States at the beginning of last year, the sentence " You are not qualified to say in front of China, you talk to China from a position of strength" is enough to explain China's attitude towards the United States.
Specific to this matter, Australia is not only aware of the threat of nuclear submarines, but also India. India has always regarded the Indian Ocean as its own inland sea, trying to dominate the entire Indian Ocean and control the trade routes between Asia and Europe. When the Chinese navy was not enough to expand its influence to the Indian Ocean, India actually faced few obstacles. However, Australia's sudden action at this time undoubtedly taught India a hard lesson. Can India be sure that Australia's nuclear submarines are not aimed at itself? Obviously it is impossible. Nuclear submarines are not fixed targets. Can they go to the South China Sea but not the Indian Ocean?
But India is dissatisfied because it does not have the ability to oppose the nuclear submarine cooperation plan of Britain, the United States and Australia. Naturally, we can only look back and sigh, and swallow our anger on this issue.
But China is different. We have the ability to turn over the table and point at the United States. On the issue of nuclear technology proliferation, besides China, who else can express opposition to the United States?
This is actually a trend that has been emerging in recent years. On many sensitive issues, the United States still acts recklessly, and those countries whose interests have been violated by the United States do not have the capital to stand up and speak out, so they place their hopes on China, and hopes that China can stand up and say something fair.
What is reflected behind this is China’s development.
Utility geometry
Having said so much, let us turn our attention back to Australia's development of nuclear submarines. Looking at it now, the hostility between Britain and the United States towards China will not disappear, and the sale of nuclear submarines to Australia will remain their focus in the future.
It would be better to say that Britain and the United States have offended France for this deal and "hacked" France's arms sales order worth US$266 billion. They have already started to move forward and have no choice but to move on. Even if we have to keep going despite the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, otherwise how can we appease the domestic shipyards that have already started construction? What's more, the British and American economies are in recession, and some military purchase orders are needed to stabilize the economy. Mosquito legs are also meat.
Regarding this "Non-Proliferation Treaty", we don't have to have much expectations. It is better to be lenient and assume that Australia can get these 8 nuclear submarines.
If you look at it from this perspective, it does mean that "you don't have to worry about too much debt". In recent years, the United States has deployed a large number of technological weapons near our country. South Korea has THAAD, Philippines has American military bases, not to mention Japan, which is about to be completely armed by the United States. There are only 8 nuclear submarines, so it’s really not worth making a fuss about .If you think that just eight nuclear submarines can defeat the enemy without a fight, you would be overestimating the level of the People's Liberation Army.
What's more, time is not on Australia's side. It is not clear when these eight submarines will be delivered, and the formation of combat effectiveness is a long process. According to analysis by foreign military media, these eight nuclear submarines are likely to reach full status around 2030 and be able to perform missions. Eight years is relatively fast for a country that has never experienced nuclear submarines. Don’t you see that India has been struggling with nuclear submarines for so long and still hasn’t figured it out.
What level will the People’s Liberation Army be in in 2030? Judging from the current development speed of , it must be quite amazing. At least the fifth aircraft carrier of and are likely to be completed. By then, Australia may feel like it is trying to control the situation.
At the end of the article, Rong Ping has something to say
Looking at the world with cold eyes, the hot wind blows and rains on the river. Let’s not talk about the experience brought by our country’s 5,000-year history. Just look at the 73 years since the founding of the People’s Republic of China. Have there been fewer countries like Australia that pretend to be powerful? Has the U.S. military deployment in Asia ever stopped? Neither
has it, but none of them have succeeded. China has used its own actions to eloquently illustrate one point: Any conspiracy or trap against China will have little effect. China will not accept this set of ! The sale of nuclear submarines by the United States to Australia this time will inevitably end up like this. Just relying on eight nuclear submarines cannot buy people who can see the current situation clearly.
And historical experience tells us: " A strong crossbow is at the end of its life, and it cannot penetrate Lu Zhen." This is a summary of the second dynasty of China's feudal dynasty - Han Dynasty at the beginning of the Western AD. Although the United States is still the most powerful country at the moment, it has internal social conflicts and partisan struggles, external allies covet it, and other countries are chasing it. Who would believe that such a country is on the decline? I'm afraid neither Biden nor can deceive themselves in this way. As for how much bravery such a country has left, and how many benefits it can offer to win over allies, we will wait and see.
