Washington’s New Anti-China Strategy

One of the consequences of the Coronavirus epidemic is that Westerners have realised their dependence on Chinese manufacturing capacity. Neither the Europeans nor the Americans were able to manufacture the millions of surgical masks they urgently wanted to distribute to their population. They had to buy them in China and often fought among themselves on the tarmacs to take them home at the expense of their allies.

In this context of general save-and-go, US leadership over the West no longer made sense. This is why Washington decided not to rebalance trade relations with China, but to oppose the construction of the silk roads and to help the Europeans relocate part of their industry. This could be a decisive turning point: a partial halt to the process of globalization that had begun, with the disappearance of the Soviet Union. Beware: this is not an economic decision to call into question the principles of free trade, but a geopolitical strategy to sabotage Chinese ambitions.

This change of strategy had been announced by the campaign not only economic, but also political and military against Huawei. The United States and NATO feared that if Huawei won the Western government contracts to install the G5, the Chinese army would be able to intercept its signals. More importantly, they knew that if the Chinese took these contracts, they would technically be the only ones who could take the next step.

This is not a rallying of the Trump administration to the Red Dawn fantasies, whose anti-Chinese obsession is based on primary anti-communism, but an awareness of Beijing’s gigantic military progress. Admittedly, the budget of the People’s Liberation Army is derisory compared to that of the US Armed Forces, but precisely its very thrifty strategy and its technical progress allow it today to challenge the US monster.

At the end of the First World War, the Chinese of the Kuomintang and the Communist Party together set out to reunify their country and avenge a long century of colonial humiliation. A Kuomintang personality, Chiang Kai-shek, tried to eliminate the Communist Party but was defeated by it and went into exile in Taiwan. Mao Zedong pursued this nationalist dream while guiding the Communist Party in the social transformation of the country. However, his aim was always nationalist, as the Sino-Russian war on Zhenbao Island in 1969 showed. In the 1980s, Admiral Liu Huaqing (the man who put down the coup attempt by Zhao Ziyang in Tiananmen Square) devised a strategy to push the US armies out of the Chinese cultural zone. This strategy has been patiently implemented for forty years. Without ever provoking a war, Beijing is extending its territorial sovereignty in the China Sea and harassing the US Navy. The time is not far off when the US Navy will have to withdraw, leaving China to take Taiwan by force.

After the dissolution of the USSR, President George Bush Sr. considered that the US had no rivals left and that it was time to make money. He demobilized a million soldiers and opened the way for financial globalization. US multinationals relocated their companies to China where their products were manufactured by countless untrained workers, paid twenty times less than US workers. Gradually, almost all the goods consumed in the US were imported from China. The U.S. middle class became poorer, while China trained its workers and became richer. From the principle of free trade, the movement spread throughout the West and then to the whole world. The Communist Party decided to re-establish a modern equivalent to the ancient Silk Road and, in 2013, elected Xi Jinping to carry out this project. When it is realized, if it is realized, China could have a virtual monopoly of manufacturing goods in the world.

Pompeo in mask
In violation of his administration’s health regulations, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo visited Israel on May 13, 2020, four days before the appointment of the new government. To everyone’s surprise, he dispatched regional issues in a matter of minutes and devoted his visit to reviewing Chinese investment in the country.

By deciding to sabotage the Silk Roads, President Donald Trump is trying to push China out of its own cultural zone just as it is pushing the United States out of its own. To do so, he will be able to count on his “allies” whose companies are already devastated by excellent Chinese products at low prices. Some of them have experienced revolts because of this, such as the Yellow Vests revolt in France. In the past, the ancient Silk Road brought unknown products to Europe, while today’s roads carry the same products as those made in Europe, but much cheaper.

Contrary to popular belief, China could give up the Silk Roads for geostrategic reasons, regardless of the amount of its investment. It has done so in the past. It had thought of opening a maritime silk route in the 15th century, sent Admiral Zheng He, “the eunuch with the three jewels”, at the head of a formidable armada, as far as Africa and the Middle East, before withdrawing and scuttling its gigantic fleet never to return.

Secretary of State Mike Pompeo traveled to Israel under lockdown. He tried to convince the two future prime ministers, Benjamin Netanyahu (Jewish colonialist) and his deputy, who were nevertheless opposed to General Benny Gantz (Israeli nationalist), to stop Chinese investments in their country Chinese companies already control half of Israel’s agricultural sector and are expected to account for 90% of its trade in the coming months. Mike Pompeo should similarly try to convince the Egyptian president, Abdel Fattah el-Sissi. Indeed, the Suez Canal and the Israeli ports of Haifa and Ashdod were to be the terminals of the modern silk route in the Mediterranean.

After various attempts, China assessed the instability of Iraq, Syria and Turkey and gave up crossing them. A tacit agreement was reached between Washington and Moscow to leave a jihadist pocket anywhere on the Syrian-Turkish border to discourage Chinese investment in the area. Moscow intends to base its alliance with Beijing on silk routes crossing its own territory and not Western countries. This is the project of President Vladimir Putin’s ’Great Eurasian Partnership’.

We come back tirelessly to the same dilemma (“Thucydides’ trap”): faced with the rise of a new power (China), the dominant power (the United States) must either wage war on it (like Sparta against Athens), or give space to the newcomer, that is, accept the division of the world.

Source: Voltaire Network

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
    China will forever trapped in ultra cheap Yuan policy due to their own initial greed and incompetencies, in a currency war with the US.
    China started the trade war against the US in 1994, by weaponising the Yuan with the full approval and support advice from Kissinger.
    In 1994, US$1 = 8.9 Yuan
    In 1993, US$ 1 = 5.7 Yuan
    In 1992, US$ 1 = 5.3 Yuan
    In 1990, US$ 1 = 4.8 Yuan ( after Tiananmen Incident )
    In 1989, US$ 1 = 3.7 Yuan ( before Tiananmen Incident )

    The above shows there is a drastic devaluation from 1992 to 1994, which China weaponised the Yuan to be more exports competitive.
    China cannot even compete with the South East Asia countries such as Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia in 1993 when US$ 1 = 5.5 Yuan.
    After 1994, China become the cheapest labor cost value for money in the world, and caused the Asia Financial crisis 1997-1998.
    This Asia Financial crisis destroyed economy of South Korea, Taiwan,Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia.

    Before 1994, most of the global supply chain are from south east asia countries, Taiwan and South Korea. After 1994, when the Yuan is drastically devalued, most of the MNC supply chain moved to China, thus destroyed south east asia , Taiwan and South Korea economy.
    ……there has been considerable debate over whether China’s 1994 devaluation triggered the Asia regional crises of 1997 and concerns in the region that:

    “the PRC’s entry [into the WTO] will lead to an acceleration of investment flows to the PRC and a corresponding reduction in flows to themselves.”

    China claim they have the most advanced technology in the world. Then why does China continue to devalue Yuan to be competitive ?
    China is the biggest global currency manipulator which was approved by Kissinger/IMF/World Bank.
    China biggest mistake is to peg foolishly the Yuan at such low rate in 1994 USD1=8.9 Yuan. China unintelligent leaders are very desperate to get FDI from American and Japanese MNC, to create jobs and earn enough foreign exchange surplus in US dollars. This ultra cheap Yuan policy is a big mistake and has now come back to haunt the unintelligent leaders of China.

  2. There is no “Thucydides’ trap”. This is hyped to push Congress spend more money on military.

    America should just cut off US dollar supply to China, and China economy will collapse immediately.

    Without billions of US dollars trade surplus, China cannot print trilions of Yuan yearly to subsidise all the R&D to make better high technology to compete against America high technology corporations.

    Also China printing trillions of Yuan every year to build the biggest infrastructure in the world. ALL PAID BY AMERICAN CONSUMERS.

    American consumers are stupidly helping China to buy the best technology and scientists from around the world, to destroy American empire. This OXYMORON behavior of American Congress is mind boggling.

    America high technology should get the high technology supply chain from Taiwan and Thailand and all their problems solved. Taiwan should allow import of cheap labor from China and North Korea to reduce smartphone production cost.

    America can survive without China trade. America partner and loyal allies such as Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Thailand, Phillipines should be leveraged to contain China now.

    But globalist elite from UK is helping China to be the next super power. Why ? You have to ask and hand it to Kissinger and Chatham House.

    Anybody who know the secret discussion going on in Chatham House will have a clue what is going on in global geopolitics play.

Leave a Reply