The U.S. and China have the largest economies in the world. They also are the most influential countries and have the most powerful militaries in the world. Therefore, they are the most important countries to help the world to solve, or at least reduce, the many large and critical problems facing humanity, in areas such as food, health, education, jobs, climate change, war and peace, and disarmament. The U.S. and China should be cooperating to address these problems, and should avoid creating tension and fabricating charges and mass media propaganda toward the other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
This chapter will discuss several important \u201cissues\u201d between the U.S. and China. We will recall and analyze history and see what history has to say about these issues.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n\n\n\n
The first issue is Taiwan:<\/u><\/strong> Every one knows that Taiwan has been a province of China. After China was defeated by Japan in the First Sino-Japanese War (1894-1895), China, besides being required to pay to Japan an extremely large indemnity to Japan, also ceded Taiwan to Japan. After WWII ended with the defeat of Japan, all parties agreed that Japan should give up the territories stolen from China (including Taiwan) and returned them to China. This was consistent with the 1943 Cairo Declaration [1], the 1945 Potsdam Declaration [2], and the September 2,1945 Japanese Instrument of Surrender [3]. After recalling this part of history regarding Taiwan, the issue of Taiwan should be closed, and Taiwan should be part of China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another issue is Diaoyu Islands (or Senkaku Islands<\/u><\/strong>): Most of the people of the world probably have never heard of these islands. The Diaoyu Islands are a small set of unoccupied islands off the northern part of Taiwan in the East China Sea. They have been part of China (part of Taiwan) for several hundred years (dating back to as early as 1403). Since near the end of the 19th<\/sup> century, Japan has also claimed that these islands are part of the Ryukyu Islands (or Okinawa), as part of Japan\u2019s attempt to steal the Diaoyu Islands from Taiwan. More information on the background history of the Diaoyu Islands can be found in Chapter 19 \u201cExperiencing the Worldwide Diaoyu Islands Students Movement\u201d and the details will not be repeated here. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The reason that the Diaoyu Islands is often cited as an issue involving also the U.S. is because the U.S. claims that the U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty should also be applicable to the Diaoyu Islands even though the official position of the U.S. government is that the territorial sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands is still to be determined, thus showing that these two positions [(1) that the Diaoyu Islands should be covered under the U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty, and (2) the territorial sovereignty of the Diaoyu Islands is still to be determined] are internally inconsistent. Therefore, it is not necessary for us to discuss again this issue besides pointing to Chapter 19 for the details. Thus, after recalling history regarding the Diaoyu Islands, the issue of the Diaoyu Islands should also be closed, and the Diaoyu Islands should be part of China, and the U.S. has no justification to claim that the U.S.-Japan Mutual Defense Treaty should be applicable to the Diaoyu Islands.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Another issue is the dispute over the South China Sea Islands:<\/u><\/strong> Although one may often hear claims that China is doing a lot of illegal things in the South China Sea (in particular, the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands) such as stealing territories belonging to other countries, or building artificial islands, or blocking traffic over the international sea or air in the South China Sea area. Often these people will bring in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) to make accusations against China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In particular, several years ago (around 2016), Philippines was involved in a case with the Arbitral Tribunal (AT) declaring that all of the islands in the Paracel or the Spratly area are rocks, and not islands that can sustain human habitation or economic life of their own under UNCLOS. Although the Arbitral Tribunal (AT) is also under UNCLOS, it is clearly stated in UNCLOS that the AT should not rule in cases where the parties have territorial sovereignty\/historical rights. For China since historically China does own the Paracel Islands and the Spratly Islands [see, e.g., Ref. 4 and Ref. 5 for that part of history], from the very beginning, China declared in writing that it would not participate and not abide by the decision of the AT because this dispute involves territorial sovereignty\/historical rights, which should not be arbitrated under the Arbitral Tribunal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Furthermore, Taiping Island (the largest island of the Spratly Islands) is 0.9 mile in length and \u00bc mile in width with an area of 110 acres and has a hospital and an airport. It has fresh water, can grow vegetables, can support livestock, as well as the habitation of people permanently living there. This is contrary to Philippines\u2019 claim that these islands cannot sustain human habitation or economic life of their own.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The U.S. has often stated that China\u2019s activities in the South China Sea have violated UNCLOS which was signed in 1994. One of the accusations is that China has built landfills on some of these islands. First of all, UNCLOS does not forbid building various facilities, including docks and airstrips, on the islands that a country has sovereignty over if those islands are not always submerged under water all the time. Of course, we have all heard of the famous Palm Islands in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, which involve massive landfills to build the large islands with residential, business, and entertainment skyscrapers. But has the U.S., or anyone else, made protests on what Dubai has done?<\/p>\n\n\n\n Once again, history shows us that there is a lot of purposedly spread misinformation (another example of abuse of world power) creating a false image of China. Thus, after recalling and analyzing history, the issue of the South China Sea Islands is also closed, and China is not doing anything illegal.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Recent talk on a rising power like China will inevitably have a conflict with the established power like the U.S.:<\/span><\/strong> Recently there is some talk whether a rising power like China will inevitably have a conflict with the established power like the U.S. that will lead to war.\u00a0 We and others have analyzed this issue and the conclusion is a definite no. [6]. \u00a0Interested readers can read the two articles mentioned in [6] for more details.\u00a0 Basically the story is between Athens, a then rising power, and Sparta, the then established power.\u00a0 Initially there might not have been a serious conflict between Athens and Sparta. But the conflict became serious when Athens became an imperial power with influence over many cities along both sides of the Aegean Sea. Furthermore, in the case of China and the U.S., the conflict is not due to China\u2019s economic rise, but it is due\u2019s to the U.S.\u2019s economic decline. The U.S. should then take actions to correct its own economic decline, and should not blame China for something due to their own shortcoming.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In his book, Allison discussed how order was decided, or how does one decide whether one can keep your adversary in line. A rule that is often used is a \u201cTwo-Power Standard\u201d announced in 1889 as the general method to maintain Britain\u2019s naval primacy, that is to keep Britain on the top of the order hierarchy is to maintain a fleet of battleships equal to the numbers deployed by its next two competitors combined since naval supremacy was key to the battlefield in the past, including the 19th century and first part of the 20th century. This was a rule used by the British to ensure that the British had enough military power to help to enforce its rule-based order. This was used by Winston Churchill in his various positions as the British Secretary of state for War, Secretary of State for the Colonies, Prime Minister, as well as other positions. Similarly, it was also used by other countries in planning for conflicts or wars with potential adversaries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In the imperialistic world, it was your military might that settled conflicts. The question of fairness was of secondary importance. In our current world with nuclear powers that can lead to the destruction of the whole world and end civilization as the world knows, we should not rely on the \u201cTwo-Power Standard\u201d to keep your potential rival in its place and to maintain your rule-based order.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why does the U.S. government continue to carry on a mass media campaign to demonize China and create a phobia in the public against China and the Chinese?<\/u><\/strong> It is especially important to ask this question when the U.S. and China are the two most important economic and political powers in the world, and as we have previously mentioned, it is crucially important for the U.S. and China to work cooperatively to address the many difficult global problems. <\/p>\n\n\n\n There are many differences between U.S. and China, e.g., their histories, how the governments operate, the way freedom and people\u2019s wishes are expressed and reflected in the government, how government policies are formed and carried out, the country\u2019s strategic alliances with other countries, the conduct of foreign policies and treatment of other governments and countries. These differences could easily lead to conflicts between the U.S. government and the Chinese government, especially when the differences lead to different political orientations. However, such differences should not lead to the two countries getting to diametrically opposite opposing corners. For example, China\u2019s Bell and Road Initiative (BRI) could help a democratic government that is based on free elections and also an autocratic government whose family basically controls the whole country. It could help to improve the livelihood of the people of both countries, and therefore, it should not lead to their foreign policies on China that are diametrically opposite to each other.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why is the relationship between U.S. and China keep on getting more antagonistic when a better relationship can benefit the American people, the Chinese people, as well as the other people of the world? Why is that relationship moving toward more confrontations and even war?<\/p>\n\n\n\n To understand the answer to that question, one needs to take an unbiased assessment of the history of the U.S. and especially what it has done in its foreign policy toward other countries in the last 75 years, since the end of WWII.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The U.S. government always presents itself as a government that is democratic, respects human rights, treats other countries with peaceful intention, and helps to solve world problems. That is the image that the U.S. government and the U.S. mass media depict itself. In reality, the U.S. government doesn\u2019t act that way. It is not a democratic government working for the benefits of all its people; it treats its citizens differently depending on race, sex, place of origin, wealth, social and political status, etc.; it involves in many wars and instigates numerous regime changes in many countries.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Just look at how the government of the U.S. behaves when former President Donald Trump has been charged in four criminal cases, including 44 federal charges and 47 state charges, all of them felonies. In Washington, D.C., he faces four felony counts for his efforts to overturn the 2020 election. In Georgia, he faces 13 felony counts for his election interference in that state. In New York, he faces 34 felony counts in connection with hush money payments to a porn star. And in Florida, he faces 40 felony counts for hoarding classified documents after he left office and impeding the government\u2019s efforts to retrieve them. [7] Numerous mass shootings and killings of innocent people, including children, occur frequently in the U.S., to the tune of 686 mass shootings incidents in 2021. [8] U.S. Americans\u2019 trust in their government has consistently fallen in the past 20 years and now fewer than two-in-ten Americans say they trust the government in Washington to do what is right. [9] At the same time when the U.S. government has consistently trying to demonize China, and President Biden has as recently as November 2023 called President Xi Jingping a dictator. [10]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Furthermore, in many respects the U.S. government behaves contrary to what a democratic government is supposed to behave. Not only that it often doesn\u2019t get involved in solving various world problems. It sometimes drops out of critical agreements (e.g., Paris Agreement on Climate Change) and criticizes or even sabotages other countries\u2019 contributions.\u201d The U.S. really needs to look inward at itself to have a real assessment of its government, its political leaders, and its actions and attitudes toward other countries and people. Hopefully after such as assessment, the U.S. would look at the world differently and treat other countries and people differently and with more respect.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The conclusion is that the U.S. is not the same as what the U.S. government depicts itself. I will now discuss the real conflict between the U.S. and China, and why that relationship is getting worse with more confrontations and possibly leading to war. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The Real Conflict Between U.S. and China:<\/u><\/strong> <\/strong>In the last 40+ years, China has transformed itself from a very poor and backward country into the world\u2019s second largest economy, lifted most of its huge population out of poverty, became basically the factory of the world, became the world\u2019s third largest nuclear power, and has the world\u2019s second strongest military, and can compete with the best of the world in science, engineering, bio-medicine, space explorations, and new patents, as well as gaining influences in world affairs. What is best for the world is for China and the U.S. to work cooperatively to address and solve the many difficult problems facing humanity. If the world\u2019s two richest economies and the most powerful countries cannot work cooperatively, at least we hope that they don\u2019t try to sabotage each other. Unfortunately, it seems that one country, the U.S., has been working hard to do just that.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Why? Instead of living together to try to improve the world, why would the U.S. try to create confrontations that can escalate into wars? If U.S. and China work together to address the world\u2019s problems, then the U.S. would not be able to control the world and dictate their so-called rule-based order for the world to follow. Instead of creating a world with multi-modality, the U.S. wants to create a single modality world with the U.S. in the center and in control of that modality.<\/p>\n\n\n\n This may be surprising to many people, but it is consistent with U.S. policy in how it has been treating the rest of the world in the past century. Unlike the image that the U.S. government has been presenting to the world that it is a democratic and benevolent country trying to do the best for all the people of the world, unfortunately, that image has been repeatedly shown to be false, as illustrated by the large number of regime change activities engaged by the U.S. [11] [12] [13]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Some of the activities of the U.S. government have been so evil that it is almost unimaginable. An example of that is what the U.S. did in the Marshall Islands in the Pacific, using island natives as guinea pigs to see the effects of nuclear radiations. [14]<\/p>\n\n\n\n Unfortunately, we have to face reality because the U.S. is not willing to give up its power to dominate the world, the U.S. is willing to create conflicts with China, even leading to a war between the world\u2019s two most powerful military powers, possibly leading to a world war with the use of nuclear weapons. This is the essence of the real conflict between the U.S. and China.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In future releases of this website, we will discuss in more details how the world can address this issue. An important component must have the U.S seriously look inward at herself and figure out how it can improve herself, including its government structure and whether its government leaders are working to improve the welfare of the American people, or improve their own livelihoods or stay in power, and whether the U.S. treats other countries and people fairly and with respect. Another major component is to mobilize the pro-peace\/anti-war movements of the world into a unified and formidable force.<\/p>\n\n\n\n References for Chapter 36<\/u><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n [1] See, e.g., \u201cThe 1943 Cairo Declaration\u201d: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/1943_Cairo_Declaration<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [2] See, e.g., \u201cPotsdam Declaration\u201d: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Potsdam_Declaration<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [3] See, e.g., “National Archives: Surrender of Japan (1945)”: https:\/\/www.aarchives.gov\/milestone-documents\/surrender-of-japan.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [4] For the history of the South China Sea islands like the Paracel Islands (\u897f\u6c99\u7fa4\u5cf6) and Spratly Islands (\u5357\u6c99\u7fa4\u5cf6), please read Chapter 34 \u201cSouth China Sea Dispute: Abuse of World Power,\u201d the contents of that chapter was also published by the author in China-US Focus<\/em>, September 15, 2016. The link for the English version is: http:\/\/www.chinausfocus.com\/foreign-policy\/south-china-sea-dispute-abuse-of-world-power\/<\/a>. The link for the Chinese version is: http:\/\/cn.chinausfocus.com\/foreign-policy\/20160915\/8681.html<\/a><\/p>\n\n\n\n [5] \u201cSome Thoughts on South China Sea Dispute\u201d: https:\/\/www.dontow.com\/2015\/12\/some-thoughts-on-south-china-sea-dispute\/<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [6] Recently there is some talk whether a rising power like China will inevitably have a conflict with the established power like the U.S. that will lead to war. Graham Allison, Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides\u2019s Trap?<\/em>, Mariner Books, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, Boston-New York, 2018. We and others have analyzed this issue and the conclusion is a definite no. <\/a>See \u201cReview of \u2018Destined for War: Can America and China Escape Thucydides\u2019s Trap?\u2019\u201d: https:\/\/www.dontow.com\/2023\/06\/review-of-destined-for-war-can-america-and-china-escape-thucydidess-trap\/<\/a>. See also Alan Freeman, \u201cIs war between China and US inevitable?\u201d, video broadcast by Thinkers Forum: https:\/\/www.youtube.com\/watch?v=STi5J6ppjvk<\/a>, April 16, 2023. See in particular, the (5:10-6:50) segment of this video showing the map of Athen\u2019s imperial power and Athen\u2019s many potential partners and allies in the Aegean Sea.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [7] \u201cBreaking down the 91 charges Trump faces in his four indictments,\u201d by Derek Hawkins and Nick Mourtoupalas, <\/strong>The Washington Post<\/em>, August 23, 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [8] \u201cMass Shootings in the U.S.,\u201d An Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund Analysis, November 2023 was last updated. <\/p>\n\n\n\n [9] Pew Research Center \u201cPublic Trust in Government: 1958-2023,\u201d September 19, 2023.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [10] After President Biden\u2019s remark that his most recent discussion with President Xi Jingping on November 17, 2023 was one of the most interesting and productive discussions that they have had, President Biden then made the comment that Xi Jingping is a dictator. <\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n [11] Overthrow: America\u2019s Century of Regime Change from Hawaii to Iraq<\/em> by Stephen Kinzer, Times Books, Henry Holt and Company, LLC, New York, 2006. This is a book by veteran New York Times writer who reported from over 50 countries and served as the paper\u2019s bureau chief in Turkey, Germany and Nicaragua.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [12] United States involvement in regime change: https:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/United_States_involvement_in_regime_change#1991%E2%80%93present:_Post-Cold_War<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n [13] \u201cThe U.S. tried to change other countries\u2019 governments 72 times during the Cold War,\u201d Lindsey L. O\u2019Rourke, The Washington Pos<\/em>t, December 23, 2016: https:\/\/www.washingtonpost.com\/news\/monkey-cage\/wp\/2016\/12\/23\/the-cia-says-russia-hacked-the-u-s-election-here-are-6-things-to-learn-from-cold-war-attempts-to-change-regimes\/<\/a>. According to the author, of the 72 times, 60 were covert operations and 6 were overt operations. And among the 60 covert operations, only 20 successfully brought the U.S.-backed government to power, and 40 failed. <\/p>\n\n\n\n [14] The Marshall Islands in the Pacific Ocean between Hawaii and Australia is part of the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands under the administrative control of the U.S. after WWII. It was here that the U.S. tested nuclear weapons 67 times between 1946 and 1958. There are several documentaries on Marshall Islands and the sufferings experienced by the Marshall Islands natives from the numerous nuclear bomb testings there. The best one is probably the one made in 2011 by Adam Jonas Horowitz: \u201cNuclear Savage: The Islands of Secret Project 4.1.\u201d You can see a 7-minute summary of this documentary for free at https:\/\/vimeo.com\/30869044<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" The U.S. and China have the largest economies in the world. They also are the most influential countries and have the most powerful militaries in the world. Therefore, they are the most important countries to help the world to solve, or at least reduce, the many large and critical problems facing humanity, in areas such […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":"","jetpack_publicize_message":"","jetpack_publicize_feature_enabled":true,"jetpack_social_post_already_shared":true,"jetpack_social_options":{"image_generator_settings":{"template":"highway","enabled":false}}},"categories":[4],"tags":[],"jetpack_publicize_connections":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","_links":{"self":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8397"}],"collection":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=8397"}],"version-history":[{"count":12,"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8397\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":8445,"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/8397\/revisions\/8445"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=8397"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=8397"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"http:\/\/www.dontow.com\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=8397"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}