Under the instigation of the United States, the Taiwan Strait issue seems to be becoming internationalized. In the calculation of the United States, it seems that as long as the Taiwan issue becomes an "international" issue, it will be able to put more pressure on China. Now Western public opinion circles are focusing on Taiwan. Obviously, it is not because Taiwan is so important, but because it is at the forefront of the Sino-US game.
The first thing: the British media spread the word, claiming that if China withdraws from Taiwan, the UK will definitely take action!
On December 28, according to domestic media citing reports from the British media " Times ", the British media publicly warned that once China takes military measures against Taiwan, the UK will impose very severe sanctions on China.
Obviously, a new round of competition has begun surrounding the Taiwan issue. The United States is the first to use domestic laws to interfere in China's internal affairs and provide military support to Taiwan to counter mainland China's unified actions.
After China conducted military exercises and 71 fighter jets patrolled Taiwan, the United States accused China of being "provocative." Now the British media is also coming out to spread the word. It is against this background that it happened.
The British media are just saying this to cooperate with the United States and expand its momentum to contain China. To put it bluntly, with Britain’s little strength, what do we have to fear?
A ant is dancing in front of an elephant, and we don't care too much at all. To be honest, if Britain interferes in China's internal affairs, China has no shortage of means to counter the British.
From the British perspective, China seems to be too gentle, so much so that the British have the illusion that China is weak and can be bullied, which is a big mistake.
On the Falklands issue, China is undoubtedly restrained. The United States and Britain can arm Ukraine militarily, and we and Argentina certainly have a lot of room in the military field. We believe that any advancement in Sino-Arab military relations will make the UK nervous.
Of course, we may not do this. However, this merely serves to remind the UK that it is not without weaknesses to target.
At present, the UK and the United States are unable to negotiate a free trade agreement. Relations with the EU have deteriorated, relations with Russia are antagonistic, and the free trade agreement with India has not improved, and the British government is still fighting against China. Given the current situation in the UK, its increasing weakness is inevitable.
Of course, this is the afterglow period of Britain’s empire. We can understand the British’s attempt to gain some presence on the international stage. But in the final analysis, Britain's presence on this stage can only become smaller and smaller.
We don’t need to worry about the nonsense of the British media. Whether it is the British media or the United Kingdom, they cannot block China's development trend, nor can they block China's reunification. We believe that in the future, a declining Britain will witness the reunification of China and a stronger China.
The second thing: The United Nations headquarters is moved to Mongolia. Russian experts said that this is a good idea, but it is extremely difficult to implement!
On December 28, according to domestic media citing the Russian Sputnik News Agency, Sergei Ordzhonikidze, Chairman of the Russian Committee for International Cooperation and Public Diplomacy, told the Sputnik News Agency that the idea of moving the United Nations headquarters from New York to Mongolia is correct, but it is unrealistic. It is necessary to choose a suitable country with relocation funds, and Mongolia does not have this ability.
Russian experts believe that the fact that the headquarters is located in New York, within the United States, is not an advantage for the United Nations. I believe that the headquarters should be located in a country that is not part of a military-political bloc, closer to neutrality.
Maybe some countries want to do this, but in fact, rich countries have the ability, but Mongolia does not have such ability. But how to relocate is a big problem, which requires huge capital expenditures, and the United Nations General Assembly must pass a resolution on relocation. I'm not sure that such a resolution can be supported. "
Although it is said that the relocation of the United Nations headquarters is unlikely at the moment.But why are there voices saying that the United Nations Headquarters needs to be relocated? There is no doubt that the reason is that the United States cannot fulfill its responsibilities as the United Nations headquarters is located in the United States very well.
Previously, the 77th United Nations General Assembly opened at the United Nations Headquarters in New York, and this was the first time since the outbreak of the new coronavirus pneumonia epidemic that the UN General Assembly held a fully offline meeting.
However, due to the sanctions imposed by the United States on Russia, the United States approved 24 of the 56 visas that Russia applied to the United States. The United States has delayed issuing visas to members of the Russian delegation.
To this end, Nebenzia, the Russian Permanent Representative to the United Nations, called on the United Nations to initiate arbitration procedures in a letter to United Nations Secretary-General Guterres on the 2nd. In the end, the United States procrastinated and issued a visa to Russia.
This fully shows that the United States is taking advantage of the United Nations headquarters in the United States to create difficulties for other countries in their normal international activities.
Moreover, United Nations officials work in the New York headquarters of the United States, which provides many channels for the United States to exert pressure on United Nations officials. To put it bluntly, as long as the United States pursues hegemonic interests, it will be difficult for the United Nations not to be influenced by the United States.
It is precisely because of this that people in many countries are now calling for the United Nations headquarters to be relocated to a more neutral country. If the United Nations can move to Mongolia, it will undoubtedly be a good thing for the fair operation of the United Nations.
The third thing: Russia has a clear attitude, and the West will eventually have to negotiate with Russia!
On December 28, according to domestic media citing the US Newsweek website, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated that in the near future, the Western world will see a "serious decline" in its ability to "guide the world economy" and will have to negotiate with Russia.
Lavrov said Russia would strengthen cooperation with other major powers as Western countries have "almost severed all ties" since February.
Lavrov pointed out: "In the near future, we will see that the West's opportunities are reduced and its opportunities to guide the world economy in the direction it wants are greatly reduced. Whether it wants to or not, we will have to negotiate."
Obviously, the West mentioned by the Russian Foreign Minister is not the United States, but refers to Europe. Doesn’t what the Russian Foreign Minister said make sense? It obviously makes sense.
A very key factor in the competitiveness of the European economy is Russia's cheap energy. However, after the Russia-Ukraine conflict, it is an indisputable fact that European countries will get rid of Russia's energy supply.
This winter, we were surprised to find that there seemed to be no gas shortage in Europe. The scene of hunger and cold in Europe did not appear. Perhaps this was what surprised Russia the most.
This fully shows that as long as Europe is willing to spend big money, energy issues are not a big problem. For Europe, this is just a cost issue.
In the long run, Europe will of course have to negotiate with Russia. After all, for European entrepreneurial groups, cheap energy is in Europe's interests. However, the failure of Russian energy weapons will also be inevitable.
Perhaps, relations between Russia and Europe will recover in the future. However, Russia's importance to Europe will decline. Foreign Minister Lavrov's speech is actually an attempt to restore Russia's energy supply to Europe. After all, losing Europe will be a huge loss for Russia.
(End of this article)
statement: The pictures come from the Internet. If there is any infringement, please contact us for deletion!
