In the last (March 2024) article on U.S.-China Relationship, I mentioned that for a long time I have always thought that the best approach to U.S.-China Relationship is for the U.S. and China, as the world’s most important countries to work collaboratively to address the many critical problems facing the world, problems like poverty, diseases, unemployment, lack of education, disarmament, climate change, wars, nuclear arms race.
Instead of living together to try to improve the world, why would the U.S. try to create confrontations and adopt a foreign policy toward China that is so antagonistic that can easily escalate into wars? If U.S. and China work together to address the world’s major 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. This answers a lot of questions, such as the U.S.’s position toward Taiwan, and why the U.S. wants to turn back the clock more than half a century. It also answers the question why the U.S. government is adopting such a demonic eye toward its American citizens who are Chinese Americans who also want the best for the U.S.
There is no reason for the U.S. to turn back its position that Taiwan has been part of China for several hundred years. There is no reason to believe a country like Japan who has looked upon Taiwan with a luscious eye to be part of Japan, and who has tried to keep others to think that way. Is the U.S.’s words worth anything?
Part of the U.S. strategy toward China is to use its allies (e.g., Philippino troops or Japanese or other troops) to fight its proxy wars against China. The Philippines has a deliberately grounded (since 1999) a Philippine naval ship (actually a former U.S. naval vessel) called the Sierra Madre (on a disputed island between the Philappines and China in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. However, most of the press coverage on incidents like these are very much pro-Western (or pro-U.S.); so it is difficult to find an objective analysis of incidents like this.
Similarly the U.S. has imposed many large sanctions against Xinjiang products, even though the U.N. Special Rapporteur Alena Douhan) has recently (5/17/2024) stated that “states should lift sanctions against China and also take strong action to curb sanction over-compliance by businesses and other actors under their jurisdistion. She also emphasized that “decline in business activities and the significant loss of global markets either due to unilateral sanctions per se or due to over-compliance with such measures by foreign businesses and entities have led to job losses with consequent disruptions in social protection schemes, by disproportionatly affecting the most vulnerable, particularly in labour-intensive sectors, including women, older persons, and all those in informal employment.” The U.N. Special Rapporteur is warning that such unitateral sanctions can do irreparable harms to many people and companies.
The U.S. is also imposing large tariffs on electric vehicles from China, although the details are still being worked out. See, e.g., “A US-China EV trade war threatens Biden’s clean-car agenda” May 14, 2024 (https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-china-ev-trade-war-threatens-bidens-clean-car-agenda-2024-05-14/), or “Biden Calls Chinese Electric Vehicles a Security Threat” (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/29/us/politics/biden-chinese-electric-vehicles.html). The real reason behind these actions by the U.S. is because the Chinese-made electric vehicles are so much less expansive than U.S. made electric vehicles, even though the reason given by the U.S. is that the China-made electric vehicles pose a security threat to the U.S. The U.S. is not concerned about climate-change impacts from non-electric vehicles and the impacts of the higher costs on the American economy.
Again because the U.S.’s position so much dominates the press coverage around the world, it is difficult for others to get a fair and objective coverage of their situation. We want to urge the importance of the U.S.’s to adopt a valid and impartial assessment of its policies because it has large implications affecting people all over the world.
A New Post on U.S.-China Relationship
In the last (March 2024) article on U.S.-China Relationship, I mentioned that for a long time I have always thought that the best approach to U.S.-China Relationship is for the U.S. and China, as the world’s most important countries to work collaboratively to address the many critical problems facing the world, problems like poverty, diseases, unemployment, lack of education, disarmament, climate change, wars, nuclear arms race.
Instead of living together to try to improve the world, why would the U.S. try to create confrontations and adopt a foreign policy toward China that is so antagonistic that can easily escalate into wars? If U.S. and China work together to address the world’s major 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. This answers a lot of questions, such as the U.S.’s position toward Taiwan, and why the U.S. wants to turn back the clock more than half a century. It also answers the question why the U.S. government is adopting such a demonic eye toward its American citizens who are Chinese Americans who also want the best for the U.S.
There is no reason for the U.S. to turn back its position that Taiwan has been part of China for several hundred years. There is no reason to believe a country like Japan who has looked upon Taiwan with a luscious eye to be part of Japan, and who has tried to keep others to think that way. Is the U.S.’s words worth anything?
Part of the U.S. strategy toward China is to use its allies (e.g., Philippino troops or Japanese or other troops) to fight its proxy wars against China. The Philippines has a deliberately grounded (since 1999) a Philippine naval ship (actually a former U.S. naval vessel) called the Sierra Madre (on a disputed island between the Philappines and China in the Spratly Islands in the South China Sea. However, most of the press coverage on incidents like these are very much pro-Western (or pro-U.S.); so it is difficult to find an objective analysis of incidents like this.
Similarly the U.S. has imposed many large sanctions against Xinjiang products, even though the U.N. Special Rapporteur Alena Douhan) has recently (5/17/2024) stated that “states should lift sanctions against China and also take strong action to curb sanction over-compliance by businesses and other actors under their jurisdistion. She also emphasized that “decline in business activities and the significant loss of global markets either due to unilateral sanctions per se or due to over-compliance with such measures by foreign businesses and entities have led to job losses with consequent disruptions in social protection schemes, by disproportionatly affecting the most vulnerable, particularly in labour-intensive sectors, including women, older persons, and all those in informal employment.” The U.N. Special Rapporteur is warning that such unitateral sanctions can do irreparable harms to many people and companies.
The U.S. is also imposing large tariffs on electric vehicles from China, although the details are still being worked out. See, e.g., “A US-China EV trade war threatens Biden’s clean-car agenda” May 14, 2024 (https://www.reuters.com/markets/us/us-china-ev-trade-war-threatens-bidens-clean-car-agenda-2024-05-14/), or “Biden Calls Chinese Electric Vehicles a Security Threat” (https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/29/us/politics/biden-chinese-electric-vehicles.html). The real reason behind these actions by the U.S. is because the Chinese-made electric vehicles are so much less expansive than U.S. made electric vehicles, even though the reason given by the U.S. is that the China-made electric vehicles pose a security threat to the U.S. The U.S. is not concerned about climate-change impacts from non-electric vehicles and the impacts of the higher costs on the American economy.
Again because the U.S.’s position so much dominates the press coverage around the world, it is difficult for others to get a fair and objective coverage of their situation. We want to urge the importance of the U.S.’s to adopt a valid and impartial assessment of its policies because it has large implications affecting people all over the world.