Anti-China narrative is a projection of US insecurities

0

The United States, a nation historically entangled in wars, finds itself grappling with a peculiar affliction – an insatiable appetite for conflict. Despite President John Quincy Adams’ admonition against seeking monsters abroad, the annals of history reveal a starkly contrasting reality. Since its inception in 1776, the US has spent a staggering 94 percent of its existence embroiled in wars. With a sprawling empire boasting 800 military installations across 140 countries, the US exhibits a penchant for perpetual warfare. Yet, unsatiated by ongoing conflicts in various regions, the cacophony of American think tanks and corporate media now clamors for a confrontational stance against China.

This narrative, however, reflects a classic case of psychological projection. Advocates of anti-China rhetoric, employing twisted logic and fallacious arguments, paint China as a looming threat to global stability. Yet, they conveniently overlook the relentless economic and propaganda warfare waged by the US against China for years. Moreover, while the US encircles China with hostile military bases, the inversion of reality portrays China as the aggressor.

Amidst claims of China’s economic slowdown being indicative of expansionist ambitions, the narrative oscillates between portraying China as both weak and omnipotent. The rapid growth in China’s defense expenditure is another focal point for critics, ignoring the defensive nature of China’s military strategy akin to the Great Wall.

Regarding Taiwan, proponents of imperialism face a harsh reality: reunification is inevitable. History attests to the return of strategic territories to China as it regains its rightful position on the global stage. Just as Portugal relinquished Macau and the UK returned Hong Kong, the US will eventually accede to the reunification of Taiwan. Acceptance of this inevitability is paramount for global stability.

The erosion of journalistic integrity in the US is palpable, with once-reputable outlets succumbing to fake news, disinformation, and war propaganda. Hal Brands’ recent article in Foreign Policy exemplifies this decline, lacking substantive evidence while relying on sensationalism and misinformation. Brands’ flawed assessment of China’s economic state ignores its remarkable achievements and resilience.

Critics of China’s trajectory have persistently erred without consequence, perpetuating big lies to bolster American exceptionalism and manufacture consent for war. The dwindling favorability of China among Americans underscores the success of such propaganda efforts.

A recent article by Hal Brands in Foreign Policy is an exemplary case for this decline in American intellectualism. Brands has stellar credentials – educated at Stanford and Yale, author of numerous books, and a regular columnist. However, his article is filled with misinformation and sensationalism. Lacking any real evidence of “China threat”, he quotes the CIA, the organization that lies, cheats and steals – to paraphrase Mike Pompeo, former CIA director.

Hal Brands’ entire premise about the state of China’s economy is deeply flawed. In his echo chamber, nobody talks about China’s 5.2-percent GDP growth in 2023, a trade surplus of a staggering US$800 billion, China becoming the world’s number-one exporter of cars, BYD surpassing Tesla, the resurgence of Huawei, and a long list of other accomplishments.

Amidst interconnected economies, US-China relations transcend mere geopolitics, extending into the realm of commerce and industry. American corporations rely heavily on Chinese labor and consumers, while even the US military depends on Chinese products. Calls for decoupling are unrealistic in a globalized world.

US elites must undergo a paradigm shift, embracing multilateralism and peace over the war-driven ideologies of the past. As the world transitions towards a multipolar order, the US must shed its warlike tendencies and embrace a future characterized by cooperation and development. It’s time for a grand reset in America’s understanding of its role in the world.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here