The three-day G7 summit finally came to an end. As always, the G7 member states issued a meaningful joint statement after the meeting.
But what is unexpected is that China is mentioned as many as 14 times in this statement. Obviously, the main discussion of this meeting of G7 member states may not be how to resolve the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine, but it seems more like it is specifically aimed at China.
In this joint statement, there is a lot of content about China, which can basically be summarized as the "two major crimes" made by the G7 member states against China.
The biggest "crime" is to accuse China of "trying to unilaterally use force to change the regional situation." Issues such as the Taiwan Strait, the South China Sea, and various conflicts between China and neighboring countries are all listed among them, as the G7 "Evidence of guilt" accusing China.
For example, regarding the South China Sea issue, this statement declared: "China's extensive maritime claims in the South China Sea have no legal basis."
Regarding the situation in the Indo-Pacific region, the G7 joint statement also stated that they strive to build an "inclusive, free and open Indo-Pacific region." Its potential meaning is naturally to exclude China from the so-called "free and open Indo-Pacific system." outside.
Secondly, the second major "crime" mentioned in the statement is that threatened that China would engage in "economic coercion" against its trading partners, which listed China-Australia relations, relations between China and ASEAN countries, China-U.S. relations and Sino-European trade relations, etc.
In short, in one sentence, China does business and makes money, but it "forces" the United States and its partner countries to make some choices that it is unwilling to make and abandon the so-called "values" of Europe and the United States.
Of course, issues such as "human rights in Xinjiang" are also mentioned repeatedly, but these are entirely China's internal affairs. Even if it is as shameless as the G7, it cannot be said that similar issues are entirely China's "culpability."
Looking at the whole article, these two "crimes" are simply confusing right and wrong, confusing right and wrong. Whatever method China uses to solve the Taiwan issue is just dealing with its own household affairs, and no country has room to interfere.
Regarding the South China Sea issue, if the United States had not fanned the flames and hyped up the so-called "free navigation", the South China Sea would have been fine. However, the United States came and wanted to use its powerful naval power to win over Philippines and other countries to start disputes with China in the South China Sea.
As for the allusion that China is "not tolerant and not free and open", it is more of a fabrication than anything. Now the country that has formed a "small circle" in the Indo-Pacific region and is trying to engage in a cold war with China is the United States. To say it is not inclusive, it is because the United States first excluded China, which has nothing to do with us.
As for China's "economic coercion" of its trading partners, it is even more nonsense. The United States and the West have been shouting about freedom all day long, but now they even have to control who China does business with.
Countries like Australia are trying to make money from China while trying to get in touch with China. If this is considered economic coercion, then what does it count if the United States is constantly imposing economic sanctions on other countries?
In addition to accusing China of "two major crimes", there is another detail in the joint statement of G7 member states that clearly reflects the differences between Europe and the United States.
To put it simply, after listing the above "evidences", the G7 countries emphasized in a joint statement the need to cooperate on global issues such as climate change, biodiversity, and international security.
This abrupt turn reflects on the one hand the inability of G7 member states to respond to global crises and their necessity to cooperate with China. On the other hand, it also reflects that there are still serious divisions within the G7 member states on how to deal with China.
There is no doubt that the United States is leading this joint statement. Under the strong pressure of the United States, European countries can only respond to its call. But before this statement was issued, countries including the United Kingdom and Germany had expressed their willingness to strengthen trade and cooperation with China.
Looking at this joint statement now, it seems more like a foreshadowing made by these countries in advance after they knew that they could not withstand the pressure from the United States.
This statement is abrupt and blunt. It shifts from accusing China to seeking cooperation with China. This statement is more like something European countries deliberately added because they don’t want to break up with China.
means to tell China that what is reflected in the joint statement is not the true will of European countries. Europe has no intention of completely "decoupling" from China.
Even the United States itself, when leading this statement, may have been anxious, worried that the outside world would mistakenly believe that relations between the West and China were broken, which would affect the U.S. stock market and confidence in global economic recovery.
In a word, this G7 joint statement exposed the true face of Western countries that do not mean what they say and seem to be at odds with each other.
