https://www.state.gov/the-administrations-approach-to-the-peoples-republic-of-china/

A long monologue by the US Secretary, Blinken. Mostly a repeat of what has been said or written before, but with a tinge of mildness.

Summary:

After two world wars, there’s a world order. Since then, this has evolved into a US-led world order. The emphasis of the world order differs with the US Administration. The Democrat Biden Administration pushes an ideology based on the “universal values” of democracy, freedom and human rights. It believes this has allowed the world to make much progress over the past 75 years. It wants to “make sure that it (the world order and its universal values), represents the interests, the values, the hopes of all nations, big and small, from every region.” That’s the vision of the future that the US has for the world.

But China, according to the US, after having benefited from the world order, has grown mighty enough to pose a serious challenge to such a future. The US will not allow this to happen. It will lead and gather followers to challenge China. But it will not be that simple. Co-operations with China are needed to solve certain global problems.
“That’s why this is one of the most complex and consequential relationships of any that we have in the world today.”

Then he recites a long list of wrongs that China has committed internally and internationally.

How to counter the China Challenge? Competition, not conflict. A three-prong strategy. Invest in the US to maintain its edge over China. Align and ally with like-minded nations to form a network against China. Then,together with the allies, compete fiercely with China.

“To the people of China: we’ll compete with confidence; we’ll cooperate wherever we can; we’ll contest where we must. We do not see conflict.
There’s no reason why our great nations cannot coexist peacefully, and share in and contribute to human progress together. That’s what everything I’ve said today boils down to: advancing human progress, leaving to our children a world that’s more peaceful, more prosperous, and more free.”

From the choice of words, one can detect a lower level of belligerence and aggressiveness compared to previous China Strategy statements.

Challenge instead of threat. Competition instead of conflict. Peaceful coexistence and co-operation

Bear in mind that this statement is made when the US-led West is now militarily involved in the Russia-Ukraine War. Though there’s no boots on the ground now, how deeply the US can get involved in this war will depend on how well it can keep China out of it and not side with Russia.

It's like the Chinese Classic Romance of Three Kingdoms. The world is in a Romance of Three Superpowers. Before any two superpowers fight, each will have to make sure that the third remains neutral, or better still, side with it.

On Friday, May 27, 2022 at 10:15:26 PM UTC-4, gera...@gmail.com wrote:
> https://www.state.gov/the-administrations-approach-to-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
>
> A long monologue by the US Secretary, Blinken. Mostly a repeat of what has been said or written before, but with a tinge of mildness.
>
> Summary:
>
> After two world wars, there’s a world order. Since then, this has evolved into a US-led world order. The emphasis of the world order differs with the US Administration. The Democrat Biden Administration pushes an ideology based on the “universal values” of democracy, freedom and human rights. It believes this has allowed the world to make much progress over the past 75 years. It wants to “make sure that it (the world order and its universal values), represents the interests, the values, the hopes of all nations, big and small, from every region.” That’s the vision of the future that the US has for the world.
>
> But China, according to the US, after having benefited from the world order, has grown mighty enough to pose a serious challenge to such a future.

What is a world order anyway?
Is a world order self perpetrating by default?
Or is it a matter of continuous resolution/voting?

Is the US led world order perfect in all aspects? If not, are nations allowed to improve
this world order? How to tell the difference between improving this world order from
pose a serious challenge to this world order?

>The US will not allow this to happen. It will lead and gather followers to challenge China. But it will not be that simple. Co-operations with China are needed to solve certain global problems.
> “That’s why this is one of the most complex and consequential relationships of any that we have in the world today.”

Co-operation must be based on trust. There could not be real cooperation without mutual trust.
>
> Then he recites a long list of wrongs that China has committed internally and internationally.
>
> How to counter the China Challenge? Competition, not conflict. A three-prong strategy. Invest in the US to maintain its edge over China. Align and ally with like-minded nations to form a network against China. Then,together with the allies, compete fiercely with China.
>
>
> “To the people of China: we’ll compete with confidence; we’ll cooperate wherever we can; we’ll contest where we must.. We do not see conflict.
> There’s no reason why our great nations cannot coexist peacefully, and share in and contribute to human progress together. That’s what everything I’ve said today boils down to: advancing human progress, leaving to our children a world that’s more peaceful, more prosperous, and more free.”
>
>
> From the choice of words, one can detect a lower level of belligerence and aggressiveness compared to previous China Strategy statements.
>
> Challenge instead of threat. Competition instead of conflict. Peaceful coexistence and co-operation
>
> Bear in mind that this statement is made when the US-led West is now militarily involved in the Russia-Ukraine War. Though there’s no boots on the ground now, how deeply the US can get involved in this war will depend on how well it can keep China out of it and not side with Russia.
>
> It's like the Chinese Classic Romance of Three Kingdoms. The world is in a Romance of Three Superpowers. Before any two superpowers fight, each
will have to make sure that the third remains neutral, or better still, side with it.

The current situation shares more similarity with the Spring and Autumn period.

On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:15:26 AM UTC+8, gera...@gmail.com wrote:
> https://www.state.gov/the-administrations-approach-to-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
>
> A long monologue by the US Secretary, Blinken. Mostly a repeat of what has been said or written before, but with a tinge of mildness.
>
> Summary:
>
> After two world wars, there’s a world order. Since then, this has evolved into a US-led world order. The emphasis of the world order differs with the US Administration. The Democrat Biden Administration pushes an ideology based on the “universal values” of democracy, freedom and human rights. It believes this has allowed the world to make much progress over the past 75 years. It wants to “make sure that it (the world order and its universal values), represents the interests, the values, the hopes of all nations, big and small, from every region.” That’s the vision of the future that the US has for the world.
>
> But China, according to the US, after having benefited from the world order, has grown mighty enough to pose a serious challenge to such a future. The US will not allow this to happen. It will lead and gather followers to challenge China. But it will not be that simple. Co-operations with China are needed to solve certain global problems.
> “That’s why this is one of the most complex and consequential relationships of any that we have in the world today.”
>
> Then he recites a long list of wrongs that China has committed internally and internationally.
>
> How to counter the China Challenge? Competition, not conflict. A three-prong strategy. Invest in the US to maintain its edge over China. Align and ally with like-minded nations to form a network against China. Then,together with the allies, compete fiercely with China.
>
>
> “To the people of China: we’ll compete with confidence; we’ll cooperate wherever we can; we’ll contest where we must.. We do not see conflict.
> There’s no reason why our great nations cannot coexist peacefully, and share in and contribute to human progress together. That’s what everything I’ve said today boils down to: advancing human progress, leaving to our children a world that’s more peaceful, more prosperous, and more free.”
>
>
> From the choice of words, one can detect a lower level of belligerence and aggressiveness compared to previous China Strategy statements.
>
> Challenge instead of threat. Competition instead of conflict. Peaceful coexistence and co-operation
>
> Bear in mind that this statement is made when the US-led West is now militarily involved in the Russia-Ukraine War. Though there’s no boots on the ground now, how deeply the US can get involved in this war will depend on how well it can keep China out of it and not side with Russia.
>
> It's like the Chinese Classic Romance of Three Kingdoms. The world is in a Romance of Three Superpowers. Before any two superpowers fight, each will have to make sure that the third remains neutral, or better still, side with it.

Blinken's rhetoric again. There are a lot of bullshits in his rhetoric. If US withdraws all matters not belonging to them, those countries that he mentioned will be able to sort their problems out by themselves. It is weird to see how Blinken is playing his rhetoric with little depths to think they should reverse to where it was and not how it was now now. One can see Blinken did not blink because even he was criticized particularly on human right. China's foreign spoke person Zhao Lijian told Bliken not to lecture China on human rights but for US to lecture their own human rights instead.

On Monday, May 30, 2022 at 1:21:31 PM UTC-4, stoney wrote:
> On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:15:26 AM UTC+8, gera...@gmail.com wrote:
> > https://www.state.gov/the-administrations-approach-to-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
> >
> > A long monologue by the US Secretary, Blinken. Mostly a repeat of what has been said or written before, but with a tinge of mildness.
> >
> > Summary:
> >
> > After two world wars, there’s a world order. Since then, this has evolved into a US-led world order. The emphasis of the world order differs with the US Administration. The Democrat Biden Administration pushes an ideology based on the “universal values” of democracy, freedom and human rights. It believes this has allowed the world to make much progress over the past 75 years. It wants to “make sure that it (the world order and its universal values), represents the interests, the values, the hopes of all nations, big and small, from every region.” That’s the vision of the future that the US has for the world.
> >
> > But China, according to the US, after having benefited from the world order, has grown mighty enough to pose a serious challenge to such a future. The US will not allow this to happen. It will lead and gather followers to challenge China. But it will not be that simple. Co-operations with China are needed to solve certain global problems.
> > “That’s why this is one of the most complex and consequential relationships of any that we have in the world today.”
> >
> > Then he recites a long list of wrongs that China has committed internally and internationally.
> >
> > How to counter the China Challenge? Competition, not conflict. A three-prong strategy. Invest in the US to maintain its edge over China. Align and ally with like-minded nations to form a network against China. Then,together with the allies, compete fiercely with China.
> >
> >
> > “To the people of China: we’ll compete with confidence; we’ll cooperate wherever we can; we’ll contest where we must. We do not see conflict.
> > There’s no reason why our great nations cannot coexist peacefully, and share in and contribute to human progress together. That’s what everything I’ve said today boils down to: advancing human progress, leaving to our children a world that’s more peaceful, more prosperous, and more free.”
> >
> >
> > From the choice of words, one can detect a lower level of belligerence and aggressiveness compared to previous China Strategy statements.
> >
> > Challenge instead of threat. Competition instead of conflict. Peaceful coexistence and co-operation
> >
> > Bear in mind that this statement is made when the US-led West is now militarily involved in the Russia-Ukraine War. Though there’s no boots on the ground now, how deeply the US can get involved in this war will depend on how well it can keep China out of it and not side with Russia.
> >
> > It's like the Chinese Classic Romance of Three Kingdoms. The world is in a Romance of Three Superpowers. Before any two superpowers fight, each will have to make sure that the third remains neutral, or better still, side with it.
> Blinken's rhetoric again. There are a lot of bullshits in his rhetoric. If US withdraws all matters not belonging to them, those countries that he mentioned will be able to sort their problems out by themselves. It is weird to see how Blinken is playing his rhetoric with little depths to think they should reverse to where it was and not how it was now now. One can see Blinken did not blink because even he was criticized particularly on human right. China's foreign spoke person Zhao Lijian told Bliken not to lecture China on human rights but for US to lecture their own human rights instead.

I think the US has learnt the wrong historical lessons from the two world wars and from the cold war with the former USSR.
At present, it sees China as the enemy #1. But because of its weakened power position, human right appears to it as the
most useful weapon. Of course, it fails to look at its own human right condition.

Let me quote Russell Kirk, America's godfather of conservatism again:

"ln international affairs, nevertheless, the United States needs to beware of what Sir Herbert Butterfield calls “righteousness,” a cardinal error in diplomacy—that is, national self-righteousness. The American Republic does not possess virtue and power sufficient to thrust Americans’ notions of “human rights” upon all the world. Even a massive assertion of American power, a crusade for “human rights,” might destroy more than it could restore. America’s undertaking in Vietnam, President Lyndon Johnson’s version of human rights, was a salutary lesson in this respect, if in no other. It is not the mission of the United States to establish universally some imitation of the American political and economic order. Every people must find their own way to order and justice and freedom. As Daniel Boorstin has written, the American Constitution is not for export. He means that our Constitution grew out of the peculiar historical experience of the Americans. So it is with the underlying constitution of every people. "

On Monday, May 30, 2022 at 9:14:10 PM UTC, ltlee1 wrote:
> On Monday, May 30, 2022 at 1:21:31 PM UTC-4, stoney wrote:
> > On Saturday, May 28, 2022 at 10:15:26 AM UTC+8, gera...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > https://www.state.gov/the-administrations-approach-to-the-peoples-republic-of-china/
> > >
> > > A long monologue by the US Secretary, Blinken. Mostly a repeat of what has been said or written before, but with a tinge of mildness.
> > >
> > > Summary:
> > >
> > > After two world wars, there’s a world order. Since then, this has evolved into a US-led world order. The emphasis of the world order differs with the US Administration. The Democrat Biden Administration pushes an ideology based on the “universal values” of democracy, freedom and human rights. It believes this has allowed the world to make much progress over the past 75 years. It wants to “make sure that it (the world order and its universal values), represents the interests, the values, the hopes of all nations, big and small, from every region.” That’s the vision of the future that the US has for the world.
> > >
> > > But China, according to the US, after having benefited from the world order, has grown mighty enough to pose a serious challenge to such a future. The US will not allow this to happen. It will lead and gather followers to challenge China. But it will not be that simple. Co-operations with China are needed to solve certain global problems.
> > > “That’s why this is one of the most complex and consequential relationships of any that we have in the world today.”
> > >
> > > Then he recites a long list of wrongs that China has committed internally and internationally.
> > >
> > > How to counter the China Challenge? Competition, not conflict. A three-prong strategy. Invest in the US to maintain its edge over China. Align and ally with like-minded nations to form a network against China. Then,together with the allies, compete fiercely with China.
> > >
> > >
> > > “To the people of China: we’ll compete with confidence; we’ll cooperate wherever we can; we’ll contest where we must. We do not see conflict.
> > > There’s no reason why our great nations cannot coexist peacefully, and share in and contribute to human progress together. That’s what everything I’ve said today boils down to: advancing human progress, leaving to our children a world that’s more peaceful, more prosperous, and more free.”
> > >
> > >
> > > From the choice of words, one can detect a lower level of belligerence and aggressiveness compared to previous China Strategy statements.
> > >
> > > Challenge instead of threat. Competition instead of conflict. Peaceful coexistence and co-operation
> > >
> > > Bear in mind that this statement is made when the US-led West is now militarily involved in the Russia-Ukraine War. Though there’s no boots on the ground now, how deeply the US can get involved in this war will depend on how well it can keep China out of it and not side with Russia.
> > >
> > > It's like the Chinese Classic Romance of Three Kingdoms. The world is in a Romance of Three Superpowers. Before any two superpowers fight, each will have to make sure that the third remains neutral, or better still, side with it.
> > Blinken's rhetoric again. There are a lot of bullshits in his rhetoric. If US withdraws all matters not belonging to them, those countries that he mentioned will be able to sort their problems out by themselves. It is weird to see how Blinken is playing his rhetoric with little depths to think they should reverse to where it was and not how it was now now. One can see Blinken did not blink because even he was criticized particularly on human right. China's foreign spoke person Zhao Lijian told Bliken not to lecture China on human rights but for US to lecture their own human rights instead.
> I think the US has learnt the wrong historical lessons from the two world wars and from the cold war with the former USSR.
> At present, it sees China as the enemy #1. But because of its weakened power position, human right appears to it as the
> most useful weapon. Of course, it fails to look at its own human right condition.
>
> Let me quote Russell Kirk, America's godfather of conservatism again:
>
> "ln international affairs, nevertheless, the United States needs to beware of what Sir Herbert Butterfield calls “righteousness,” a cardinal error in diplomacy—that is, national self-righteousness. The American Republic does not possess virtue and power sufficient to thrust Americans’ notions of “human rights” upon all the world. Even a massive assertion of American power, a crusade for “human rights,” might destroy more than it could restore. America’s undertaking in Vietnam, President Lyndon Johnson’s version of human rights, was a salutary lesson in this respect, if in no other. It is not the mission of the United States to establish universally some imitation of the American political and economic order. Every people must find their own way to order and justice and freedom. As Daniel Boorstin has written, the American Constitution is not for export. He means that our Constitution grew out of the peculiar historical experience of the Americans. So it is with the underlying constitution of every people. "

WHAT HAVE THE U.S. GOT AGAINST CHINA?

Another Statement on US Policy and Strategy Towards China by yet another US Administration.

Same old ramblings and grumblings about the same old stuff. The US pole position in the world is being threatened by a rising China. China appears to be a better governed country than the US. To convince the world otherwise, the US resorts to the esoteric realms and nebulous spheres of rules-based international order, democracy, freedom, human rights.

CHINA CHALLENGES THE RULES-BASED INTERNATIONAL ORDER?

The world knows what this rules-based International Order is about. Previous US Administrations have referred to a World or Global Order. Perhaps this one has realised that not the whole world, but only some nations, subscribe to it. The current “Rule-based International Order” is an evolution of the European colonisation of the world going back to about 500 years ago. It is a West-dominated order. Those non-Western nations which want to fit in would have to follow the rules which are set to advantage the West.

After the historic visit of US President Richard Nixon, China was slowly introduced into the Rule-based International Order. They didn’t not make it easy for China. The Asian giant was made to struggle and make sacrifices. It struggled for years before it was accepted into the WTO. For this, it had to subject itself to unfair rules. For example, it had to become the dumping ground for huge amount of wastes from other member nations of the WTO.

This and other experiences make China realises that the so called International Order is a West-dominated one, with the rules made to favor the West. It’s not only China. Many other countries have come to realise this and seek changes to the rules. But you need might to do this. With its growing might, China becomes more vocal in seeking changes to the rules. It is working to reform the International Order to make it fairer to all. For this, it is being accused of challenging or threatening the International Order.

THOSE VALUES OF DEMOCRACY, FREEDOM AND HUMAN RIGHTS.

US-style democracy has resulted in undesirable characters and personalities being elected as its President. Just look at a few in the recent past. There was a molester and drug abuser who was impeached but managed to retain his Presidency. He was mocked in the way he defended his behavior as no-penetration-no-inhalation Bill. Then there’s Donald Trump who was impeached twice but also retained his Presidency. Now there’s senile old Joe Biden who is yet to be impeached.

USs’ freedom and human rights have resulted in a dysfunctional society. The crime rate is shockingly high. People are being shot and killed almost daily. Many more escape this fate only to face the risks of being mugged, robbed, raped or killed by other criminal means. There are not enough prisons to hold all the criminals. Many have to be released after so called “rehab”. There’s still the racial crimes and riots which cause more deaths and destruction. Many Americans are robbed of the most basic of human rights, the right to live. Most pitiful are those children who are robbed of the chance to grow up. They die too young to even know what the hell it is all about.

The COVID-19 pandemic lays bear the inherent defects of US-style freedom and human rights. Individual freedom and rights triumph over the collective needs to protect the community. Mitigating measures cannot be in place long enough for them to be effective. This allows the virus to continue to spread, multiply and mutate. As a result, the pandemic cannot be brought under control, let alone eliminated. It continues to erupt in wave after wave. So far, a quarter of Americans are infected, over a million dead, with the numbers still increasing, with no end in sight.

Whether its democracy, freedom or human rights, China has them all but differently. The Chinese have their own style of democracy. They have their freedom and rights to different degrees and levels.

Chinese values are proving to be better than the Americans’. Chinese society has few of the ills afflicting Americans’. In China, the relationship between the ruler and the ruled is cordial. After some initial hiccups, the country has been in order and peace for decades now, allowing it to develop and rise to the extent that the US feels threaten by it.