Text/Assassin
According to Observer Network , US Secretary of State Blinken recently attended a public event and stated that he believed that the tension between the United States and China "has eased", and at least the possibility of conflict can be ruled out, which is "very much in the interest of the United States." In addition, Blinken also claimed that at some point, China and the United States can start discussions to ensure cooperation in times of fierce competition to avoid conflict.
Detente is not defined unilaterally by the United States, as Sima Zhaozhi made it clear. A netizen said it well, "I don't want you to think, I want me to think." It would be a big mistake to think that the United States will "live in harmony" with China from now on. You know, Blinken also claimed in Washington recently that the United States and Japan have regarded China as the "most important strategic threat." At the same time as he made the above remarks, according to Observer.com, he still did not forget to make wrong remarks, slandering China for "trying to change the status quo across the Taiwan Strait" and claiming that such behavior "will have an impact on the world economy and security."
In the final analysis, in order to prevent its superpower status from being replaced, the United States wants to curb the rise of China through illegal competition, but it is also afraid of triggering a conflict between China and the United States. Therefore, after Blinken made provocative remarks such as "China is the main strategic threat" recently, the US White House Senior Coordinator for Indo-Pacific Affairs Campbell had to step in to put out the fire in time: the US seeks to establish a "safety guardrail" with China in 2023 to prevent conflict. It can be seen that the United States obviously cannot afford the consequences of conflict with China.
does not dare to face conflicts between major powers. In a sense, it can be said to be a "short board" of the United States' containment policy against China. In addition to maintaining some advantages over China in the military field, the United States' advantages in other fields are very small or even non-existent. Therefore, the United States cannot bear the cost of conflict with China, which shows that its use of military advantages in its policy of suppressing China has far greater political significance than military significance.
The Trump administration launched a trade war against China, and its failed results show that the United States does not have much advantage over China on bilateral trade issues. Even in the high-tech field, which Biden regards as his "trump card" to contain China, Biden's so-called "chip alliance" aimed at containing China is full of loopholes because of the refusal of allies to cooperate.
Some experts once believed that if the United States wants to stop its policy of suppressing China, the prerequisite is that China's comprehensive strength will equal or exceed that of the United States, and then Washington will naturally stop. Therefore, as far as the current situation of Sino-US relations is concerned, the United States will not stop provoking China. Blinken's statement that "China-US relations have eased" is actually to appease those allies who are worried about being affected by the Sino-US conflict. At the same time, it can also be interpreted as helplessness towards the rise of China.
A few days ago, a Swedish think tank published an article stating, "In this era of global multipolarity, it is a mistake for the United States to continue to pursue unilateralist policies. Its containment policy against China has long been doomed to fail." " Beijing Daily " also quoted experts in its report on the 21st: More and more Asia-Pacific countries are worried about becoming pawns or even abandoning pawns for the United States to contain China, and they are distancing themselves from the United States. If things continue like this, the so-called "Indo-Pacific Strategy" of the United States aimed at containing China will inevitably be unsustainable.
What's more, although the United States has always emphasized strengthening military cooperation with Asia-Pacific countries, its unilateral protectionism and military interventionism in promoting prosperity and stability in the region run counter to the expectations of most countries in the region. Therefore, U.S. allies and partners in the Asia-Pacific, including Southeast Asia, India and even Australia, are reluctant to be kidnapped by the U.S. anti-China strategy.
More importantly, China and the United States are the two most important economic and military powers in the world. Once a conflict occurs, according to Blinken himself, "it will have an impact on the security and economy of the world." Therefore, neither Europe nor Asia-Pacific allies want to see the outbreak of major power conflict due to the United States overstimulating China.
With the rapid rise of China, it is no longer possible for the United States, which is in a state of decline, to use the same methods that brought down the Soviet Union to contain China. Under such circumstances, although the United States wishes to push China back to the Paleolithic Age, it is suffering from the fact that it has fewer and fewer trump cards to deal with China's "challenges" and the price it has to pay becomes increasingly unbearable. Therefore, it can only maintain Sino-US relations at the level of "fighting without breaking up."
Blinken made a few feints in an attempt to stabilize China. One is to alleviate the liquidity problem of U.S. debt , and the other is to concentrate on attacking Russia. Will the United States get its wish?
