Bridging China’s past with humanity’s future – Part 2

Source

June 29, 2020

Bridging China’s past with humanity’s future – Part 2

by Straight-Bat for the Saker Blog

This will be presented in 3 parts and in 3 different blog posts

PART – 1 can be found here


PART – 2

5. POST-DENG CHINA

Post-Deng China witnessed three variants of socio-economic trajectories associated with three different Leaders. Even though the economic programme of reform initiated by Deng went on unhindered, there were significantly different style of implementation of the same. A brief recapitulation is noted below:

A.  Jiang Zemin (till 2003)

In 1997, after Deng’s departure Jiang Zemin became the paramount leader of China. Both – the economic reforms and the deep-rooted problems of economy – accentuated during Jiang’s stewardship. There was marked increase in political corruption, inter-regional imbalance and inter-class imbalance in growth, rural migration into urban areas, unemployment, inequality and wealth gap, and crime rates across China. During 1998 and 1999, many SOE were privatized with massive lay-offs and asset transfer to private businessmen, many others were restructured to make them profitable. The employee welfare and social welfare system which were embedded in SOE (since the Mao era) were completely dissolved – this also created a low-income urban working class. The government followed a policy of retaining the crucial sectors within state-owned enterprises while small and medium SOW were either privatised or closed down. Crucial sectors or ‘commanding heights’ were:

  • Nation-wide service networks like railways, aviation, telecommunication, electricity etc.
  • Mining and exploration coal, oil, and natural gas
  • Basic metal processing like steel, and aluminium
  • Basic hydrocarbon processing like refinery and petrochemicals
  • Heavy industrial machinery such as machine tools, power generation equipment, rolling stock
  • Infrastructure engineering and construction – roads, railways, ports, dams
  • Significant consumer durables like automobiles
  • Military machinery

Apart from reducing the number of SOE (from 262,000 units employing 113 million in 1995-1997 period to 110,000 units employing 64 million in 2007-2008) and restructuring bigger SOEs, the government reduced tariffs, trade barriers, regulations; reformed banking system. The average return on assets in SOEs soared from 0.2% in 1998 to 5% in 2007. In the same period, the SOEs’ profits rose from 0.3% to 6.6% of GDP. Funds continued to be poured into SEZ and export-oriented manufacturing industry. As per Chinese National Bureau of Statistics, Hong Kong-Taiwan-Japan-South Korea-Singapore contributed about 71% of the FDI that flowed into China between 1990 and 2004. To sum it up cogently, it can be said that government of China pursued neoliberal economic agenda along with consulting advice from USA bankers and capitalists. China joined World Trade Organization in December’2001. During the period 1990–2004, China’s economy grew at an average rate of 10% per year.

A very interesting observation can be made related to the foreign relations during Jiang era – all foreign trips by the leadership and communication with foreign media were consciously made to revolve around China’s (the then) economic growth model and the imperatives. Incidents like USA bombing of China embassy in Belgrade, and collision with USA aircraft near Hainan Island were played down after some exchange of documents. Apparently, the top leadership aimed only at maintaining the stability of the government and the economy.

Very significant transformation took place in the CPC itself – from being a party of predominantly peasants and workers, CPC converted itself to a party with large number of middle-class petty bourgeois. This class evolved during the industrial restructuring of 1990s, who came out as the main beneficiary due to their entrepreneurship and connection with the then local and central leadership of CPC, and more importantly this class acted as a robust base of CPC in the urban regions of China.

B. Hu Jintao (2003 to 2012)

Hu Jintao had to continuously swim against the tide of domino effect from the (capitalist) economic reform and opening which was primarily initiated by Deng in 1979. During October’2003 Third Plenum, amendments to the constitution were discussed – an overarching government economic policy would be introduced to reduce unemployment rate, to re-balance income distribution, and to protect the environment. Also private property rights would be protected. Due to widespread poverty, inequality, and discontent the Chinese Government was forced to seek a balanced society above all. Using the concept of “socialist harmonious society”, balanced wealth distribution, improved education, and improved healthcare were assigned high priority.

During 1995, exports from East Asian countries to China were not very significant percentage of their total exports (Japan exported 4.95%, South Korea exported 7.0%, Taiwan exported 0.3%, Singapore exported 2.3%). In 1995, Chinese total exports were worth about 149 billion USD. However, by 2013 there was an explosive growth in exports from East Asian countries to China as a percentage of their total exports – (Japan exported 18.1%, South Korea exported 26.1%, Taiwan exported 26.8%, Singapore exported 11.8%). And, in 2013, Chinese exports to the world were worth about 2210 billion USD (a little over 30% of the value were exported by wholly foreign-owned enterprises, and 12% of the value were exported by joint ventures between foreign-owned and China-owned enterprises). Apparently, during this period China evolved as ‘core’ and East Asia as ‘periphery’ in a new sub-system within the overall world-system (with USA and west Europe as ‘core’ and rest of the world as ‘periphery’).

China’s GDP grew 10.1%, in 2004, and 10.4% in 2005 in spite of attempts by the government to cool the economy. And, in 2006 trade crossed USD 1760 billion, making China third-largest trading nation in the world. Again, in 2007 China registered 13% growth in GDP (USD 3552 billion) becoming world’s third largest economy by GDP. According to UN estimates in 2007, around 130 million people in rural areas of the backward inland provinces still lived in poverty, on consumption of less than $1 a day, while about 35% of the Chinese population lived under $2 a day. Chinese government’s official Gini index peaked at 0.49 in 2008– 2009 and thereafter declined only marginally, to 0.47 in 2014. The Global Financial Crisis in 2008 revealed the innate weakness of Chinese economy – export-oriented economy depends upon economic conditions in foreign countries much more than internal consumption. Government of China took highly effective policy decisions about economic stimulus and implemented those effectively (however, it also increased the already high debt burden). The stimulus (about US$600 billion at the then-current exchange rate) involved state investments into physical infrastructure like railway network, roads, bridges and ports, urban housing complex, easing credit restrictions and lowering tax on real estate. As per National Bureau of Statistics of China, in 2010, GDP of China was Yuan 40850 billion, which can be broken down into following expenditure categories:

  1. Household Consumption Expenditure – Yuan 14146.55 billion (34.63% of GDP)
  2. Government Consumption Expenditure – Yuan 6011.59 billion (14.71% of GDP)
  3. Gross (Fixed) capital formation – Yuan 19186.69 billion (46.96% of GDP)
  4. Net Exports of Goods and Services – Yuan 1505.71 billion (3.68% of GDP)

Household consumption has not increased substantially with economic growth – may be one of the reasons were wages and salaries of working class didn’t move upwards with same pace. Even though the reforms helped to improve the socio-economic indicators, taking into consideration the difference between coastal region and inland regions as well as between urban and rural regions, China could hardly overcome the poverty and inequality predominantly in the inland and rural regions.

By 2011, there were less than 10 out of 40 major industrial sectors in which SOE accounted for more than 20 percent of output. Another significant statistics of 2012 on industrial enterprises (as per National Bureau of Statistics, China) shows:

State-owned EnterprisesPrivate-owned EnterprisesPrivate-owned FDI Enterprises
Total Asset (billion Yuan)31,20915,25517,232
Profit (billion Yuan)1,5182,0191,397

The above statistics might suggest at the first glance that, state-owned enterprises are laggard in profitability. However, such conclusion will be clearly wrong if it is noted that there exist wide difference of asset ownership across various sectors – in mining and extraction of coal, petroleum, natural gas etc. SOE commands 93% of sector-specific assets, while in textiles sector Private enterprises commands 90% of sector-specific assets. Different sectors of industry have different profit-capital asset employed ratio.

C. Xi Jinping (2013 onwards)

Since around 2010, Chinese government and CPC has been busy implementing economic policies that will pursue ‘economic growth based on domestic consumption’ while maintaining the decades old export-oriented economy. With Xi Jinping at the top chair, a long pending but top priority task was undertaken – war against corruption and nepotism. CPC took strong measures so that corrupt among ruling party cadres and government officials were identified and punished, Marxist principles were enforced as guideline for CPC so that the society and economy can be steered towards equality and justice. CPC has also became proactive in taking actions to enhance its geopolitical and geo-economic base throughout the world. Simultaneously, Chinese government has taken concrete measures to modernize all wings of military through research and development of 5th generation stealth military aircrafts, naval ships, nuclear submarines, hypersonic missiles, anti-satellite missiles, as well as procuring most lethal S400 air defence system and electronic warfare systems from Russia.

However, China has performed extremely well in reduction of poverty. In 2015, World Bank Group estimated that only 0.7% of Chinese citizens live below extreme poverty line of $1.9 (2011 PPP) per day, while 7.0% of Chinese population live below lower-middle poverty line of $3.2 (2011 PPP) per day. Such rapid poverty-reduction is an unparalleled achievement in the history of mankind.

As per National Bureau of Statistics of China, in 2019, GDP of China was Yuan 99492.74 billion (by expenditure approach), which can be broken down into following categories:

  1. Household Consumption Expenditure – Yuan 38589.56 billion (38.78% of GDP)
  2. Government Consumption Expenditure – Yuan 16559.90 billion (16.64% of GDP)
  3. Gross (Fixed) capital formation – Yuan 42862.78 billion (43.08% of GDP)
  4. Net Exports of Goods and Services – Yuan 1480.50 billion (1.49% of GDP)

Compared to 2010 statistics, in 2019 the household consumption has moved upwards at almost 39% of GDP. However, the 2019 figures of household consumption below 50% of GDP can’t be considered as healthy neither gross capital formation more than 30% of GDP can be termed as balanced growth. This is not to say that, the period of 1970-1975 was better because household consumption component was around 60 – 65% of GDP (GDP itself was very low).

The inequality between urban and rural remained too glaring even in 2019 – as we can note in the following data as per National Bureau of Statistics of China (2019 data),

  1. Per Capita Disposable Income Nationwide – Yuan 30,733
  2. Per Capita Disposable Income of Urban Households – Yuan 42,359
  3. Per Capita Disposable Income of Rural Households – Yuan 16,021
  4. Per Capita Expenditure Nationwide – Yuan 21,559
  5. Per Capita Expenditure of Urban Households – Yuan 28,063
  6. Per Capita Expenditure of Rural Households – Yuan 13,328

The growth model chosen by Deng and reinforced by Jiang has already run out of steam. It had its own utility to provide mass employment and to build the fixed capital for the national economy. Chinese government need to pivot economic growth on domestic consumption as soon as possible without damaging the export sector much. To boost consumption, ‘demand’ for goods and services will have to be enhanced – in China, ‘purchasing power’ is the key for boosting demand and hence, domestic consumption. Income of ordinary citizens should be increased through forced regulations whereby the surplus from industrial operation (that is pocketed by the capitalists for accumulation of capital) will be distributed to the working class. Similarly for the agricultural sector, government should provide much higher procurement prices for agricultural produces. Another key area that needs government intervention is social security and welfare system, whereby housing-education-healthcare for all rural and urban people living with daily expenditure below USD 10 will be arranged by the government (against a token amount of annual insurance premium). Most of such people will be confident enough to spend instead of saving money for rainy day. The well-entrenched capitalist elites will resist because such steps would restrict their continuous capital accumulation process – however, China being a socialist peoples’ democracy, it has to give priority to the common people.

BRI – Challenge to Current World-system?

Belt and Road Initiative (formerly One Belt One Road – OBOR programme) of China actually is a framework wherein investments amounting to anything between one to two trillion USD in different countries of Asia, Europe, Africa, South America will be done in primarily government-to-government projects. When successfully implemented, may be around 2035, BRI will completely transform the economy and comfort of peoples in more than 100 countries. Investments are mainly channelled into physical infrastructure, mining and exploration, power generation, industrial production hub, agricultural production hub, and communication network. BRI, instead of moving away from existing liberal capitalist economy, predicates on existing capitalist system with more inclusive agenda compared to Zionist Capitalist dominated financial system – thus BRI projects attempt to alleviate poverty and unemployment in participating states without bothering about the government ideology.

BRI benefits China in primarily four ways:

  1. Corridors like CPEC (through Pakistan) and CMEC (through Myanmar), when fully established, will provide alternate trade routes for China-based companies to import energy and raw materials as well as export finished goods through Arabian Sea and Bay of Bengal respectively; the corridors will circumvent the ‘choke point’ of Malacca Strait
  2. China-Mongolia-Russia and China-Central Asia-West Asia corridors will be channel for further Chinese investments across Asia; in the long run exports and imports among these Eurasian states will experience quantum jump
  3. ‘State capitalism’ will get a boost with most of the BRI projects being G-to-G kind; most of the participant governments will control the new projects thereby reproducing the production relations of capitalist society with the ‘state’ playing the role of capitalist who will make ‘profit’ and accumulate ‘capital’
  4. Enhance Chinese ‘image’ through socio-cultural exchange
  5. Enhance Chinese ‘influence’ through government-to-government contacts

There are more BRI corridors as well as ‘Maritime Silk Road’ planned as part of BRI. I would not get into the details of such a mammoth programme (consisting of hundreds of gigantic projects) which itself is a separate subject. However, it will be very interesting to analyse if and how BRI will pose a challenge to the existing world-system coordinated by the Deep State.

BRI follows the traditional capitalist economic model of ‘profit’, but unlike the Zionist Capitalist propelled system, BRI system aim for nominal profit margins that will create a tremendous ‘pull factor’ among the developing countries to seek BRI projects. Another key difference is: BRI system is radically different from existing capitalist system by shunning hegemony and force BRI promotes harmonious global integration. In all probability, BRI will create a ‘benign core’ and ‘exultant periphery’ in a global scale which uncannily resembles the Confucian concepts of family and state governance. The existing hegemonic world order and the Deep State will find it very hard to digest such decline of their stature and the formation of a new core-periphery. However, by no means will this new development threaten to upend the existing Zionist Capitalist world order – the new core-periphery will form a significant non-imperial sub-system within the existing world-system. USA, 5-Eyes, and Israel will have to share the hegemony with China being the BRI core and Russia as the semi-periphery (with low population count and hence limited domestic market, Russia can’t play much bigger role).

In practice, post-WW II world order has seen the working of core-periphery system with USA (and NATO) enforcing their will on the weak countries on the ‘periphery’ whenever a threat to the primacy of ‘accumulation capital’ was perceived by the Deep State cabal. The Deep State capital, through control of the media and academia, ensure that such threat to capital gets portrayed as a threat to ‘democracy and human rights’ which in turn provides a moral high ground to the Hegemonic superpower to invade any country at will. In the BRI system such supremacy of capital is not expected simply because Chinese outlook on ‘world-system’ was built typically on Confucian praxis.

Significant observations on post-Deng China:

1. CPC central committee in a conference in 2015 formulated eight principles of ‘socialist political economy with Chinese characteristics’:

  1. Sustainability Led by Science and Technology
  2. Orienting Production to Improve the Livelihood of the People
  3. Public Ownership Precedence in National Property Rights
  4. The Primacy of Labour in the Distribution of Wealth
  5. The Market Principle Steered by the State
  6. Speedy Development with High Performance
  7. Balanced Development with Structural Coordination
  8. Economic Sovereignty and Openness

Undoubtedly the above eight principles (like Buddha’s ‘asta-marga’ teaching) are very sound principles – but these are not focussed to Marxist ideology in a sense that, any other liberal democratic capitalist political party can also follow such principles for an effective management of economy and society. CPC leadership should take into account the core ideology of Marx-Engels-Lenin-Mao to explore that, the owners of capital can never reconcile with the proletariat and petty-bourgeois (as petty-bourgeois, I’m meaning only the middle-income group of rural land-holding peasants and urban professionals and self-employed people who own very little capital to earn their livelihood) – the theory of historical materialism clearly and correctly predict that, in the long-run, the capitalists will continue to accumulate capital with endless exploitation of 90% of the population, eventually they will overrun the CPC setup (as insider like CPSU in Soviet Union, or as outsider like Solidarity Movement in Poland) and create a state which will be ‘liberal capitalist’ in letter and spirit. Mao and Deng differed only on strategy to achieve Marxist economy and classless society, they never differed in the end objective – successive CPC leaders shouldn’t forget to take note of that.

Questions will be raised, ‘why then Mao didn’t create a classless society since 1950 or why Mao also tried for accumulation of capital to begin with’ or for that matter, even before Mao, ‘why in 1921 Lenin was staking on new economic policy (NEP) to introduce free market and capitalism under state control’?

To seek the answer, let’s visit the greatest leader of transformation – Lenin. Lenin considered the NEP as a strategic retreat from principles of socialism – Bolshevik party leaders had to create the “material basis” of economic development in Soviet Union before they could initiate the first stage of socialism to be followed by the second stage. This was exactly the situation for Mao and Deng in China who wanted to first create the basic building block for Chinese economy for which the forces of production were either outdated or non-existent. Interestingly, both CPSU and CPC tried to create ‘communes’ as an ideal communist construct for the rural regions and agricultural sector – primarily due to mismanagement among the party members and lack of indoctrination among the rural population, both the experiments failed. More valid question however remains, ‘why both CPSU and CPC got lost in the quagmire of ‘initial capitalistic development’ and never returned to their end objectives’ even after there was basic level of ‘fixed capital formation’ in Soviet Union by 1960 and in China by 2010! May be because geopolitical events were unsurmountable. To best of my knowledge, this question remains unanswered till date.

2. Another issue related to very high exports and some trade surplus obscures two significant points:

(a) China (with a GDP of Yuan 99,492.74 billion i.e. USD 14,140 billion) in 2019 not only exported goods and services worth USD 2,486.69 billion, but the import was also huge at USD 2,135.74 billion (as per National Bureau of Statistics of China). Even if the overall export surplus is not substantial, when the values are grouped continent-wise, large imbalance due to export surplus can be noted for Oceanic and Pacific Islands (about USD 64 billion), Europe (about USD 95 billion), North America (about USD 330 billion), while marginal imbalance of USD 5 – 10 billion export/import surplus exists in case of Asia, Africa, Latin America. Moving deeper at a country-level, one would find more imbalances. The main reason is that, the sourcing requirements of China (energy, raw materials, manufacturing components, foodstuff, etc.) and sourcing countries are, most of the time different from the nature of exported item (manufactured finished goods), quantity and destination where export opportunity exist.

(b) More often than not, the economists forget to mention that the imports of China has multiple categories including import by foreign-owned export-oriented enterprises for value addition before exporting goods, import by Chinese-owned enterprises for value addition before dispatching for export as well as for domestic selling, import of plant and machinery etc. for capital formation, and import for direct household consumption. Contrary to that, export has almost single dimension – manufactured finished goods, primarily consumer goods with some industrial goods as well. There is overwhelming dependence on exports which jeopardise Chinese economy to the extent that, without continuous growth in demand from foreign countries, Chinese economy will encounter slow growth. In future, there can be scenarios where trade partner countries (other than USA) may reduce good imports from China in order to produce within their country (to reduce unemployment).

3. Trade surplus resulting from the exports and high internal savings empowered the east Asian countries like Japan and China to accumulate largest forex reserves (together they account for more than USD 6 trillion) which were used to purchase USA Treasury bonds. USA Treasury bonds are issued by USA government to cover fiscal deficit – thus China and Japan are largest creditors of USA. With this arrangement of deficit financing successive USA government has been reckless to cut taxes (of oligarchy) and increase direct government expenditure to keep voters happy. The prices of east Asian exports into USA were kept low to keep it attractive in the USA market. Finally, more demand of east Asian goods increased trade surplus and more trade surplus meant more purchase of Treasury bonds. A two-way mutual relation between USA and China-Japan thus helped USA engage in end-less wars as well as keep inflation within USA low, hence, even if USA leaders take anti-import posture that will be only to please the constituency of nationalist voters. However, China will not only be at the receiving end if and when exports get restricted suddenly, China should be prepared for the worst scenario when, in future, USA will simply refuse to pay for their debt.

China will have to take a serious initiative on how US Dollar can be removed from world’s reserve currency status. Along with Russia, China should look into the possibility of introducing a new international currency which will be backed by gold – this action will not lead to a socialist economy, but this action will certainly work towards curbing the USA government’s undue advantage of printing as much fiat Dollar as possible using the global reserve currency without gold-backing status.

4. Indisputably China achieved incredible feats in economic growth and socio-economic indicators during past few decades. But such achievements to a large extent depended also on credit policy (apart from FDI and export). As a result, China’s total debt burden including households, government (central, regional, local), non-financial industry sector (including real estate), and financial sector has been rising over the decades albeit slowly. Apparently, in 2019 beginning, Household debt rose to more than 50% of GDP, Government debt crossed 50% of GDP, Financial sector debt rose to more than 40%, non-financial Industry sector breached 150% of GDP. As a whole, Chinese government is in a precarious position to control such huge debt (total crossing 40 trillion USD) – with strict control economic growth will be at stake. Even though the government of China have been periodically trying to deleverage the economy with control measures, economic growth trounced all such attempts till date.

The problem of bad debt first hit the Jiang government in late 1990s. The non-performing loans (NPL) caught the leadership’s eyes back then. And to address the burning issue, in 1999 asset management company was created, which absorbed Yuan 2 trillion bad loans from state-owned banks leaving the banks normal and healthy. For Chinese government NPL issue will continue to be a thorn in the flesh.

5. Maritime border disputes in South China Sea and East China Sea have historical roots when Japan displaced European powers from these two sea regions. It is also true that, after WW II most of the littoral countries (except Vietnam and North Korea) were/are backed by the Deep State and were/are armed to the teeth. However, it will be a monumental milestone for Chinese diplomacy and indeed, image, if China can resolve the maritime border issues without conflict, and if required, sharing the under-sea resources with the littoral states.

On the land border disputes, China resolved all but the dispute with India. The land border was drawn by the British colonial power who ruled most of south Asia till 1947, but Chinese government never accepted the border. Chinese government should keep no stone unturned to bring India-Pakistan-China on the same discussion table with UNO as observer. It will be beneficial for all three countries if they settle the dispute once for all through mutual concessions using give-and-take policy. A border war for a land with little economic value (but high geopolitical strategic value) makes no sense.

6. During 1700 to 1840 China was world’s biggest economy and second largest land empire. However that position didn’t deter the European powers from rampaging at their will inside Chinese territory. Chinese empire lost the edge because of inability to keep track with global technological changes. For the European powers, advancements in few industrial and military technology proved decisive. Keeping such watershed moments in view, government of China should make extraordinary arrangements (like special task force etc.) to bridge manufacturing technology gaps which have been pointed out by McKinsey Global Institute in “China and the world” report published in July 2019, some of which are:

  1. Electronic Components
    1. Display
    2. Integrated circuits
  2. Pharmaceuticals
    1. Small-molecule drugs
    2. Biomolecule drugs
  3. Genomics
    1. Gene sequencing
    2. Gene editing

The above mentioned elements are not necessarily of military in nature – the backwardness in military technology are well-known which are being addressed by Chinese government since past two decades, jet engines with thrust-vectoring control technology among the most significant ones.

6. GEOPOLITICS 1930 ONWARDS

With the setting up of Bank for International Settlements (BIS) in Switzerland in 1930, the disputes and tussle among the most prominent Jewish and Anglo banker families (like Rothschild, Rockefeller, Morgan, Warburg, Lazard, et al.) over type of business, geographical region of influence, and share of banking sector operations got resolved. The Zionist Capitalist elites were fully united in words and deeds notwithstanding the occasional rivalry and difference of opinion between followers of two camps: Rothschild and Rockefeller. The long-term objective of the Zionist Capitalist Deep State clique (representing primarily the Jewish, Anglo, Dutch, French, German oligarch and aristocrat families who had accumulated wealth and have been engaged in business in banking-land-industry-trading) after WW I has been to establish a hegemonic world order which would:

  1. own ‘political process and power’ in every society/country on the earth
  2. own ‘economic process and wealth’ in every landmass/country/ocean on the earth
  3. control ‘socio-cultural process and population’ in every region/country on the earth

I find it difficult to consider that, ‘winning’ political power anywhere in the world, has ever been an objective of the Deep State – they want to ‘own’ the process through which any political party may be made to ‘win’ or ‘loose’ power depending on short-term and long-term interest of the Deep State.

The Zionist Capitalist Deep State crystallized in its existing form when WW II started in 1936 (with signing of anti-communist pact between Germany, Italy, and Japan). Expectations of the Zionist Capitalist Deep State were destruction of powerful societies (non- Anglo/Jewish/Dutch/French) who had potential to develop advanced economy, and expansion of Zionist Capitalist empire:

  1. combatants Fascist Germany and Communist Soviet Union decimating each other’s (i) military forces, (ii) physical infrastructure, and (iii) population across entire Eurasia;
  2. combatants Fascist Japan and Nationalist China decimating each other’s (i) military forces, (ii) physical infrastructure, and (iii) population across entire East Asia;
  3. stages (a) and (b) would be followed by occupation of whole Europe and Asia by the ‘benevolent’ Anglo-American military who would claim that they have ‘liberated’ these ancient civilizations from the ‘authoritarian dictatorships’ of fascism and communism;
  4. stage (c) would be followed by establishment of ‘liberal democratic capitalism’ version of empire (as against ‘colonial extractive capitalism’ version) in whole Europe and Asia to continue plunder of wealth in maximum possible way;

Unfortunately half of the objectives remained unfulfilled in the WW II that was over by 1945 – because of two political parties: Communist Party of Soviet Union (CPSU) and Communist Party of China (CPC) whose top leadership mobilised their countrymen in collective patriotic spirit, Soviet Union and China didn’t capitulate but their direct adversaries (Germany and Japan) were trounced. Phase II became a necessity for the Deep State.

WW II – Phase II:

Phase II of WW II was initiated as soon as phase I was over. ‘Operation Unthinkable’ was planned by most ardent imperialist Churchill in order to launch a surprise attack on Soviet Union to achieve the original objectives that Hitler failed to achieve, but dropped. Realising that a military block consisting of all societies that join together as Zionist Capitalist Deep State would be more effective to demolish: (a) morally and militarily supreme power like Soviet Union which recuperated economically,

(b) new power like Communist China (where by January’1949, Peoples Liberation Army already won three major campaigns in last strongholds of Kuo Mintang party in east and south regions of China), NATO was formed in April’1949.

To achieve the long-term objective of hegemonic world order as well as the four WW II objectives, the Deep State displayed creativity in designing and deploying diplomatic, political, economic, cultural tools and methods that proved to be highly durable and extremely effective:

  1. UNO and its key sister organizations were established to control the international political incidents in all regions across the globe
  2. Through WBG, IMF, ADB global banking and financial companies spread its tentacles to every region of the world to control natural resources and economy
  3. US Dollar as the foreign currency exchange basis across the globe – not only the gold backing was withdrawn from Dollar in 1971 by USA government, but the hegemon also manipulated the Arab rulers to use Dollar as currency for most crucial commodity trading (of petroleum)
  4. Trade pacts like GATT, WTO, and similar other pacts driven by USA-West Europe-Japan were implemented so that the hegemonic power maintains their hold over global trade
  5. Promotion of ‘periodic election’ plus ‘market economy’ plus ‘private ownership’ masquerading as ‘Democracy’ across the globe
  6. Promotion of literature-cinema-fine arts that revolves around sex-drug-commercial duplicity in all major languages across the globe
  7. Promotion of mainstream media for broadcasting and publishing round-the-clock propaganda on the above mentioned tools (i) to (vi) in all major languages across the globe
  8. Promotion of academic institutions and intellectual for propagating curriculum on the above mentioned tools (i) to (vi) in all major languages across the globe
  9. Promotion of religious fundamentalist groups (male chauvinists with belief in illusory past glory from society which profess religious faiths like Sunni Islam, in Catholic Christianity, in Puritan Christianity, Brahminical Hinduism etc.) as well as ethnic fundamentalist groups (believing superiority of his/her ethnicity) in all regions across the globe
  10. Development of highly complex computerised system and other industrial technology to replace human labour in every sphere of productive work as much as possible

During the ensuing four and a half decades- from 1945 to 1990- major tasks accomplished by Deep State were:

  1. The Zionist Capitalist elites located primarily on either side of the Atlantic (who were driving force for aristocratic groups like Bilderberg Club, Club of Rome, Trilateral Commission as well as think-tanks like Council for Foreign Relations) were immensely successful in mobilising most of the academic institutions and media entities across world to spread propaganda among the people world-wide about ‘failure’ of socialism/ communism/ Marxist principles in Soviet Union and east European countries as well as China. While it was true that these countries which were devastated during WW II couldn’t provide the standard of living as west European imperialist/colonialist countries could offer to their citizens, these socialist countries provided all basic amenities of life to all its citizens.
  2. In most unfortunate turn of history, in the second half of 1950s CPSU led by Khrushchev (a closet Zionist) denounced Stalin’s leadership in Soviet Union that not only defeated the most cruel war machinery ever built on earth but became the second superpower of the world by 1945 (in 22 years after Stalin got the top leader’s position). This created an unbridgeable ideological gap between CPSU and CPC that divided the entire socialist/communist movement across the globe. After removal of Khrushchev from the position of top leader in Soviet Union political situation was salvaged internally, however, China became completely blind about the changing landscape of Soviet Union. The lack of trust of Chinese leadership in Soviet leadership was utilised by the Deep State elites in the 1980s to bleed Soviet Union in Afghanistan and Angola.
  3. By 1960 most of the Asian, and African countries got freedom from the west European imperialist/ colonialist powers like UK, France, and Belgium etc. Most of these countries were ruled by nationalist party who heavily mixed socialist ideological tenets with their nationalist creed. Most of these countries, backed by Soviet Union, had highly corrupt ruling party. Such leaders easily became prey for the global capitalist-imperialist elites, and simultaneously those semi-literate societies came under the spell of ‘Hollywood’-promoted illusion and ‘drug-sex-violence’ kind of culture. The significant block led by Soviet Union and relatively small islands of Chinese sphere came to a crossroads – they were falling behind in harnessing technological progress in economic growth, which resulted in relatively low standard of living of majority population while government officials and ruling party leaders led much better life.
  4. Deep State tried hard to manipulate the policy of government and bureaucracy as well as to co-opt the key political parties across all countries so that they can create pro-USA, pro-5 Eyes, pro-Israel policies as well as anti-Soviet Union anti-China policies. Simultaneously, oligarch-aristocrat families and elite individuals with servility towards Zionist Capitalist ideology (i.e. capitalist enterprises, private ownership, European ‘liberal imperialism’) were promoted in political leadership-bureaucracy-judiciary in those countries so that they can convert the policies into actions to advance interests of global oligarchy.
  5. In many large countries across the world, the Zionist Capitalist Deep State manipulated domestic politics to overthrow patriotic and incorruptible leaders who couldn’t be co-opted by them – Congo, Iran, Indonesia, Chile, Guatemala, Afghanistan, Bangladesh, etc. The Deep State mainly mobilised the country’s military forces to grab state power by killing the top leader(s) and by creating a repressive environment. Sometimes that would include mass murder of leaders and members of socialist party/communist party – in Indonesia, in the 2nd half of 1960s, between one to two million members of communist party were killed by military junta. In all the above mentioned cases, soon after coming to power the military junta would create economic policies that would favour the MNC from USA, 5 Eyes, west European countries, and simultaneously reduce contacts with Soviet Union and China.
  6. Developing conventional, nuclear, biological, chemical, and other special weapons and building a military force based on land, marine, air, and space that will be able to dominate every other country in every region, and if necessary, the military force can take punitive actions against any country including carrying out ‘first strike’ against other nuclear powers like Soviet Union and China without any possibility of retaliatory strike. USA built over 700 military bases all over the world.

The Deep State operatives were very successful in their original plan of wrecking Soviet Union from within. In the beginning of 1980s two leaders got into powerful political positions in the Soviet block – Yuri Andropov became top leader of CPSU and Lech Walesa became top trade union leader in Poland, Such high-ranking anti-socialist leaders quickly made inroads into state structure and policies in Soviet Union and Poland. After Andropov handpicked Gorbachev to lead CPSU, it was only a matter of time for the Deep State to wrap-up the socialist experiment what was known as USSR. Gorbachev and his so-called reformist clique systematically incapacitated Soviet economy, and also actively promoted downfall of governments in every east European country which were led by socialist party aligned with CPSU. This clique was helped by professionals from USA and west Europe. They also pinned hope that CPC leader Zhao Ziyang will become the ‘Gorbachev of China’ to bring down the government ruled by CPC – however this was a complete failure as Zhao himself confided with Gorbachev that ‘Deng was the top leader’ in a meeting when Tiananmen Square protest was raging in Beijing in 1989. Without a single gun-shot being fired by the military wings of Zionist Capitalist cabal, the Soviet Union dissolved itself between 1990 to 1991 CE – the phase II of WW II came to an end. Instead of serious introspection and course correction among ruling party officials and government departments to design policies keeping pace with socio-economic changes and technological changes, all these ‘reformist’ leaders decided that the best way to (personal?) growth was to join hands with Zionist-Capitalist world order after bringing down the governments ruled by their own party communist/socialist party.

By 2020 whole Europe and half of Asia had been occupied by the ‘benevolent’ Anglo-American NATO military who claimed that they guarantee ‘independence’ of those ‘liberated countries’ from the clutch of ‘authoritarian’ communism, and they also ensure that ‘liberal democratic capitalism’ version of empire will suck the land and citizens dry. No wonder, Soviet WW II war memorials and monuments have been systematically destroyed in east Europe – how long the Deep State would tolerate anti-zionist anti-capitalist flag hoisted by Soviet Red Army in Europe with immense sacrifices and sufferings by Soviet leaders, soldiers and people?

Concomitant with the complete control of all political parties (across the wide spectrum of their professed ideology) on both sides of the Atlantic: North America, South America, Europe, the discerning Zionist Capitalist cabal maintains a complex cobweb connecting all key members and rotating them from one role to another. Thus a retired Director of intelligence department of USA will occupy the chair of Chairman of a big financial investment firm as well as the role of a university Professor! The cabal maintains a carefully constructed façade where professionals from different spheres of society jointly appear as a highly educated, experienced and intelligent wing – industrialists, bankers, politicians, bureaucrats, military officials, business managers, legal and media professionals, academicians, NGO managers, cinema directors and artists all walks of life are present.

[ Link: https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-06-10/does-bilderberg-really-run-world-one-chart-help-you-decide ]

Interlude?

After Soviet Union was pulled down, the corrupt and treacherous Soviet leaders and their lackeys backed by the Zionist Capitalist oligarchy and elites ripped apart the socio-economic fabric of Russian society. The state exchequer was looted blatantly, the natural resources were divided among the Soviet elites-turned-businessmen, the industrial capital largely destroyed or privatised without any meaningful payment to state, workers were retrenched or pauperised without regular wages, and peasants were left without proper means of cultivation. Not only peoples tried to earn livelihood offering sex-drug-smuggling etc., but steep drop in birth rates across all splinter provinces of USSR made it to appear like entire Eurasian landmass will get depopulated within two generations. The Deep State also tried to split Russia (which, after the USSR dissolution, became largest state in Eurasia) into 4 – 5 regions through creating and aiding regional separatist movements with help of the 5th column elites and oligarchy within Russia. Without funding, military capabilities of Russia went into oblivion. Technological research and development as well as manufacturing of defence machinery came to a dead end. Demoralised troops and open corruption became symbolic of Russian military.

So, were the different factions of Zionist Capitalist cabal content with the successful closure of the WW II by 1991? What were they thinking about the glaring failure of destroying the CPC rule in China? Apparently, the Deep State was not only happy with their performance in destroying the CPSU and Soviet Union, they were also very confident about China becoming a ‘normal country’ with full-scale liberal democratic capitalist system of economy and periodic elections to elect governments that will be run by the Zionist Capitalist world order staying behind the curtain (as it happened for all countries in the world in 1992 except China-Vietnam-North Korea-Iran-Zimbabwe-Angola-Cuba). We need to ask ourselves, how the Deep State was so confident that China will be on board with them.

1978 onwards the drive towards industrial capitalism in China using the global finance owned by the Zionist Capitalist bankers and industrialists was initiated by Deng and followed up by Jiang Zemin in such earnestness that, the Deep State representatives like Kissinger and Financial Institutions like JP Morgan had to conclude that Chinese acumen for business and trade will transform the society into a capitalist society. Japan was anyway part of the world order triad i.e. USA-West Europe-Japan, and with China’s entry, the triad would have become USA-West Europe-East Asia. Chinese government went all-out to create a ‘happy hunting ground’ for global Zionist Capitalist interests which wanted more and more profits towards endless accumulation of capital, and hence were busy shifting their manufacturing base to China to harness low-cost labour and slack regulations. By 2008, i.e. after 30 years of reform, China became third largest economy in terms of GDP nominal (as per IMF estimates USD 4604 billion) and largest export base in the world (In 2007-2008, its Export-to-GDP ratio reached 32%, and its Exim-to-GDP ratio was 59%), but it also became a society where inequality was one of the highest in the world – China’s Gini coefficient (a measure of inequality – ‘0’ represents perfect equality, ‘1’ represents perfect inequality) rose from about 0.3 in early 1980s to 0.49 in 2008. The media, academia, multilateral institutions funded by the Deep State went all-out to woo the CPC leaders towards ushering a new era of ‘political reforms’ after such a brilliant success of ‘economic reforms’ – by ‘political reforms’ they meant introduction of multi-party election system and privatisation of the state-owned enterprises. After one and a half decades of persuasion, by middle of 2000s the Deep State cabal understood that, CPC never ever had any such plan of changing their ideology of political economy.

And about the same time in 2007 Munich Security Conference, Putin as the leader of Russia, delivered his famous Munich speech. In no uncertain terms, Putin criticized USA’s hegemonic dominance and its “almost uncontained hyper use of force in international relations“. That speech came as a shocker to the Zionist Capitalist clique – it was like waking up from a slumber. All these years they thought WW II was over with Soviet Union completely decimated – after 16 years they had the ignominy of attending a conference on European soil, where a Russian leader was chastising them about use of force in settling disputes!

Actually 2000 onwards, there had been relentless sole-searching among top leadership of Russia. It was about the overall decay of Russia within a span of just 10 years – between 1985 and 1995. As a result, the Russian government and a section of ruling party led by Putin has been pushing economic policies that created new consumer goods industry and improved agricultural production, enhanced the oil-gas extraction operation. Within few years’ time Russia got on its feet and created an economy based on ‘domestic consumption’ and pushed export of oil-gas to earn foreign exchange. However, the Zionist Capitalist oligarchy led by powerful faction of the ruling party was deeply entrenched in the bureaucracy, academia and media who supported (and benefited from) their illegal amassing of wealth. Corruption, nepotism, extortion among ruling party cadres and government officials, mostly went unpunished. Outward flow of capital and tax breaks for rich businessmen were also happening albeit at a slow pace. But noticing the overall upswing in Russian society the Deep State got alarmed – ‘filthy’ Russian bear is again cooking up some curry that may prove difficult to digest in long run!

Part 1

Part 3 – pending


By profession I’m an Engineer and Consultant, but my first love was and is History and Political Science. In retired life, I’m pursuing higher study in Economics.

I’m one of the few decade-old members of The Saker blog-site. Hope that this website will continue to focus on truth and justice in public life and will support the struggle of common people across the world.

An Indian by nationality, I believe in humanity.

CHINA MOVING TOWARDS ENDING “PHASE ONE” TRADE DEAL, IS TRADE WAR BACK ON THE MENU?

South Front

China Moving Towards Ending "Phase One" Trade Deal, Is Trade War Back On The Menu?

China is reportedly moving towards ending the “Phase One” Trade deal with the US.

The Chinese government appears to be walking back on the deal, reportedly telling state-owned agricultural firms to halt purchases of U.S. soybeans, one of the major U.S. agricultural exports to China and a pillar of the deal’s promised $200 billion in extra exports.

Beijing’s decision followed the May 29th U.S. announcement that Washington will potentially take steps to revoke Hong Kong’s special status and possibly levy sanctions and other economic weapons against both China proper and the once-autonomous region.

State-owned traders Cofco and Sinograin were ordered to suspend purchases, according to an unnamed source of Bloomberg.

Chinese buyers have also canceled an unspecified number of U.S. pork orders, one of the sources claimed.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang vowed in May that China would implement the trade deal, however, rising tensions in regard to Hong Kong, plus Washington’s continued accusations towards Beijing in regard to COVID-19, and weapon sales to Taiwan, have strained relations significantly.

“We will work with the United States to implement the phase one China-U.S. economic and trade agreement,” Premier Li Keqiang told an annual gathering of lawmakers in Beijing on May 22nd. “China will continue to boost economic and trade cooperation with other countries to deliver mutual benefits.”

That vow appears to be in the past now.

“The market has already seen the deteriorating relationship between the China and the U.S. and many think that with the slow progress of Chinese commodity buying so far, the trade deal’s future was already in jeopardy,” said Michael McDougall, a managing director at Paragon Global Markets in New York.

Currently, analysts consider the deal as good as dead, and the only question now is what form of trade confrontation will take its place at a time when U.S. economic policy toward China is dictated less by long-term national interest and more by short-term electoral calculations.

“The locus inside the administration has moved from, ‘Should we drop the deal?’ to, ‘And then do what?’” said Derek Scissors, a China trade expert at the American Enterprise Institute who sometimes consults with the White House. “Trump wants to make sure that [prospective Democratic presidential nominee Joe] Biden can’t outflank him on China. But that dramatic action, if there is any, is going to have costs.”

Since the phase-one deal delivered a truce to growing U.S.-China tensions, what would it mean when it ends?

“The ‘phase one’ deal’s importance to the overall relationship is relatively small. It’s not the anchor that some thought it could be,” said Scott Kennedy, a China expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, who described the status of the trade deal—if reports of Chinese orders to halt purchases are confirmed—as “hanging by a thread.”

“The deal itself cannot stabilize the relationship, but if you remove the deal, then that is further evidence that both sides are throwing up their hands and see the relationship in purely competitive terms with nothing on the other side of the scale,” Kennedy said.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

الأبعاد الاستراتيجيّة لطرد المدمّرة الأميركيّة من بحر الصين الجنوبيّ أميركا تتآكل… الصين الأمر لي

محمد صادق الحسيني

صحيح أن عمليات اختراق الأجواء أو المياة الإقليمية لدولة ما، من قبل تشكيلات جوية او بحرية تابعة لدولة أخرى، ليست نادرة الحدوث، خاصة من قبل قوات حلف الشمال الأطلسي والقوات الأميركية.

لكن قيام المدمرة الأميركية: يو إس إس باري باختراق المياة الإقليمية الصينية، في محيط جزر شيشا (وهي الجزر التي تسميها الدول الغربية: جزر باراسيل والواقعة في بحر الصين الجنوبي، قبالة سواحل مقاطعة هاينان ، وتبعد عن سواحلها حوالي 260 كم، لم يكن حدثاً لا عادياً ولا مقبولاً وانما ذا أهمية استراتيجية عاليةً جداً، وذلك للأسباب التالية:

1

قيام قيادة “مسرح العمليات الجنوبي” في الجيش الشعبي الصيني بإصدار الأوامر الفورية، للوحدات البحرية والجوية الصينية، المسؤولة عن تأمين تلك المنطقة من بحر الصين الجنوبي، باتخاذ الإجراءات الصارمة، لتنفيذ مهامها والاضطلاع بمسؤولياتها الوطنية، ومن ثم قيام تلك الوحدات بمحاصرة المدمّرة الأميركية، بحراً وجواً، وإصدار الأوامر الصارمة لها بمغادرة المياة الإقليمية الصينية حالاً، حسب ما أعلنه العقيد: لي هوآمين يوم الثلاثاء 28/4/2020، حيث قامت الوحدات الصينية بمرافقة المدمّرة الصاروخية الأميركية (مزوّدة بصواريخ موجهة شديدة الدقة) إلى خارج المياة الإقليمية الصينية.

وهذا يعني أن القيادة الصينية كانت صارمة في الردّ على العدوان الأميركي على سيادتها ومياهها الإقليمية، وأنها لن تسمح مطلقاً باستغلال اية ظروف لخرق هذه السيادة، وبالتالي هو إعلان عن استعداد جمهورية الصين الشعبية للدفاع عن مصالحها في بحار الصين وغيرها من البحار المجاورة وصولاً الى غرب المحيط الهادئ (جزيرة غوام).

2

إن قيام هذه المدمرة بعملية الخرق، المذكورة أعلاه، لم يكن الأول وانما الثاني خلال الاثنتين وسبعين ساعة الماضية. وهو ما يدل على رغبة جامحة للولايات المتحدة بأن ترسل إشارات الى جمهورية الصين الشعبية بأنها تعمل على الحفاظ على وجودها (الولايات المتحدة) في غرب المحيط الهادئ وبحار آسيا. وبكلمات أخرى فإنها تحاول عبثاً الإيحاء بأنها قادرة على المحافظة على هذا الوجود. حيث أثبت الجيش الصيني، من خلال عملية طرد المدمرة الأميركية، انه كامل الاستعداد ويتمتع بقدرات عالية جداً، لمنع أي اعتداء على سيادة الصين.

3

إلا أن تصريح الناطق باسم مسرح العمليات الجنوبي، في الجيش الشعبي الصيني، العقيد لي هوآيمين ، قد وضع النقاط على الحروف وحدد الخطوط الصينية الحمراء، أمام القوات البحرية والجوية الأميركية، عندما قال: إن التحركات، البحرية والجوية الأميركية، تهدد الأمن والاستقرار في البحار الصينيّة وفي آسيا، وأن القوات الصينية سوف تؤدي واجبها وتحافظ على السيادة الصينيّة وأمن المنطقة وكذلك على السلام والاستقرار في بحر الصين الجنوبي.
وكلامه هذا يعني بكل وضوح: أن اليد العليا، في تلك البحار، هي للجيش الشعبي الصيني وليست للأساطيل الأميركية. كما أن مسؤولية السلم والاستقرار وحماية الملاحة هي من مسؤوليات الصين وليس غيرها وأن أيّام عربدة الأساطيل الأميركية في بحار العالم قد ولّت الى غير رجعة.

4

إن ما أضافه الناطق باسم قيادة مسرح العمليات الجنوبي، في الجيش الصيني، في تصريحه من أن الصين تحثّ الولايات المتحدة، على التركيز على مقاومة وباء كورونا والتصدي له في الولايات المتحدة، والمساهمة في التصدي لهذا الوباء، على الصعيد العالمي، والتوقف الفوري عن هذه العمليات (العسكرية / التحرشات)، ضد الأمن الإقليمي والسلام والاستقرار (في جنوب شرق آسيا).

وهذا كلام يعكس مدى الاستعداد الصيني لمواجهة العربدة البحرية والجوية الأميركية. فعندما يقول الناطق أن على الولايات المتحدة التوقف الفوري عن استفزازاتها فإنه، من الناحية العملية يصدر أمراً تحذيرياً للقطع البحرية الأميركية ويقول لها إنّ الجيش الصيني مستعدّ لاتخاذ الإجراءات الضرورية لوضع حدّ لخروقاتها اذا لم تلتزم هي بهذا الأمر. وهو دليل آخر على جدية الصين، في هذه المواجهة، وعلى تآكل الهيمنة البحرية والجوية الأميركية في تلك المنطقة.

5

وفِي الإطار نفسه تأتي أقوال الخبير العسكري الصيني، في معهد الابحاث والدراسات العسكرية البحرية في الجيش الشعبي الصيني، شانغ جونشي ، التي أدلى بها لصحيفة غلوبال تايمز الصينية بتاريخ 28/4/2020، ونصح فيها الولايات المتحدة بالتخلي عن عقلية الحرب الباردة والالتفات لحياة جنودها ومعالجتهم من وباء الكورونا بدلاً من مواصلة هذه التحرشات.


ففي ذلك رسالة جديدة لواشنطن بأن القعقعة بالصواريخ الأميركية لم تعد تخيف أحداً، خاصة في ظل وجود صواريخ صينية مضادة للسفن، سرعتها خمسة أضعاف سرعة الصوت، وتطلق من الأرض ومن البحر وقادرة على تدمير أية حاملة طائرات أميركيّة بضربة واحدة.

6

أما ما يعزّز تراجع القدرات الأميركية، وبالتالي الدور الأميركي، في غرب المحيط الهادئ وبحار الصين فهو قيام القيادة الاستراتيجية الأميركية، يوم 16/4/2020، بسحب قاذفات القنابل الخمس من طراز / B 52 /، من القاعدة الجوية الأميركية في جزيرة غوام، وإعادتها الى الولايات المتحدة، بعد انتشارها هناك لمدة ١٦ عاماً متواصلة، وذلك بسبب وجود القاعدة في مدى الصواريخ الروسية والصينية والكورية الشمالية، حسب ما صرّحت بة كيت أناستاسوف، الناطقة باسم القيادة الاستراتيجية الأميركية، لموقع ديفينس نيوز الأميركي بتاريخ 16/4/2020.

اذاً فإنّ السيدة، المذكورة أعلاه، تعترف بأنّ زمن الهيمنة الأميركية قد ولّى وأنّ التفوق التكنولوجي، سواء العسكري أو المعلوماتي والفيزيائي (الأسلحة الكهرومغناطيسية)، لكلّ من روسيا والصين وقريباً إيران، على مستوى التسلح الأميركي قد أصبح عاملاً فاعلاً في إفراغ عمليات الحشد الاستراتيجي الأميركي، ضدّ الصين وروسيا، من محتواها. كما أن أقوال الناطقة باسم القيادة الاستراتيجية الأميركية، عن أن القاذفات المذكورة أعلاه، سوف تقوم بمهماتها انطلاقاً من بحار أخرى لا يلغي أن البحار والأجواء أخذت تضيق، أمام العدوان الأميركي، وأن سياسة الصين، في انشاء مناطق ( 2 A ) او أنتي أكسيس ، وهي المناطق الممنوع الدخول إليها. وكذلك مناطق ( AD ) او إيريا دينايال ، أي المناطق المحظورة، قد أثبتت فعاليتها الشديدة وأنها بدأت تطبق حرفياً في مسارح العمليات المختلفة. الأمر الذي يجب أن يوضع في اطار كونه الخطوة الأساسية في اخراج القوات والقواعد، البحرية والجوية، من كل بلدان وبحار العالم، بما في ذلك منطقة الخليج والجزيرة العربية وإعادة هذه الاسلحة والجيوش الى الولايات المتحدة في سبيل المساهمة في الحد من الإنفاق العسكري الاميركي واستثمار هذه الأموال في تطوير البنى التحتية الأميركية ووضع حد للسياسة العدوانية الأميركية المتوحّشة والتي أثبتت أنها سياسة فاشلة غير قادرة على تأمين أدنى مستلزمات الرعاية الصحية، لا للجيش الاميركي ولا للشعب الاميركي نفسه، في ظل الوباء الذي يجتاح الولايات المتحدة. هذا علاوة على انها وقفت عاجزة امام هذا الوباء، على الصعيد الدولي، وأصبحت دولة تنتظر المساعدات الطبية من كل حدب وصوب وهي أقرب الى وضع الدولة الفاشلة من وضع الدولة العظمى.

والله غالب على أمره، ولكن أكثر الناس لا يعلمون.

بعدنا طيبين، قولوا الله…

الصين تُسقط خطوط دفاعه الثلاثة وإيران تُجهِز على النمر الأميركيّ

محمد صادق الحسينيّ

تحوّلات كبرى متسارعة ومتلاحقة في البيئة الاستراتيجية العالمية، تحيط بالقوة التي كانت حتى الأمس القريب القوة الأعظم في العالم، وها هي تتهاوى دفاعاتها الواحد بعد الآخر في ظل تنامي المقاومة العالمية للأحادية الأميركية الغاشمة…!

وإليكم التفاصيل الميدانية وهي في غاية الأهمية كما يلي:

لا شك في أن موازين القوى الدولية، وبالتالي الوضع الاستراتيجي الدولي، يشهدان تغيّرات متسارعة، لا بدّ من التدقيق في جوهرها وإخضاعها لتحليل معمَّق، كي نصل الى نتيجة علمية، في الحكم على نجاح او فشل أي استراتيجية لأي من محاور هذا الصراع الدولي، المحتدم في إطار إعادة تشكيل الأقطاب الدولية.

إن هذا الصراع ليس جديداً بالطبع، بل إنه صراع متجدّد، حاولت الولايات المتحدة، ومنذ اندلاعه بُعيد انتهاء الحرب العالمية الثانية، أن تحسمه، عبثاً، لصالحها. إذ قام الديبلوماسي الأميركي، جون فوستر دالاس سنة 1951، والذي أصبح وزيراً للخارجية لاحقاً، من سنة 1952 حتى وفاته سنة 1959، بوضع استراتيجية أسماها: استراتيجية سلسلة الجزر ، والتي تمّ تبنيها كاستراتيجية دولية للولايات المتحدة.

وقد تمثلت عناصر هذه الاستراتيجية وأهدافها في ما يلي:

1

ـ إقامة ثلاثة خطوط دفاعية، عن الولايات المتحدة، في مواجهة أعدائها آنذاك، الاتحاد السوفياتي وجمهورية الصين الشعبية وجمهورية كوريا الديمقراطية (الشمالية).

2

ـ تقوم هذه الاستراتيجية على سيطرة الولايات المتحدة على سلسلة جزر، تقع في بحر الصين الجنوبي وتمتد من سواحل جنوب فيتنام وماليزيا، في جنوب بحر الصين الجنوبي، مروراً بجزيرة تايوان وشمال جزر الفلبين، وصولاً الى جنوب اليابان وجنوب كوريا (كانت الحرب الكورية في أوْجها آنذاك ولم يكن التقسيم قد حصل بعد)، أي وصولاً الى بحر الصين الشرقي وجزر ساخالين الروسية على سواحل المحيط الهادئ. وهو ما يشكل خط صد أولي، حسب تلك الاستراتيجية، للاتحاد السوفياتي وحلفائه (كانت الصين الشعبية لا زالت حليفة لموسكو آنذاك).

3

ـ إقامة خط دفاع ثانٍ، في مواجهة الخطر السوفياتي الصيني المزعوم، عبر السيطرة على مجموعة جزر أخرى، تقع الى الشرق من الخط المشار اليه أعلاه، وتمتدّ من شمال جزيرة سولاويزي جنوب الفلبين ويمتدّ حتى خليج طوكيو شمالاً.

ويمتدّ هذا الخط، حسب البيانات الرسمية الأميركية آنذاك، من جزر بونين وڤولكانو اليابانية، الواقعة جنوب شرق اليابان، وحتى جزر ماريانا الأميركية، الواقعة شمال جزيرة غوام الأميركية، شمال غرب المحيط الهادئ.

4

ـ أما خط الدفاع الثالث فيمتدّ من جزر ألويتيان ، التابعة لولاية ألاسكا الأميركية، والواقعة في بحر بيرنغ، شمال المحيط الهادئ، إلى جزر هاواي في شمال المحيط الهادئ أيضاً، وصولاً الى منطقة (أوشانيا ، التي تبلغ مساحتها ثمانية ملايين ونصف المليون كيلومتر مربع، وهي المنطقة التي تربط شرق الكرة الأرضية بغربها، وتشمل كلاً من استراليا ونيوزيلاندا، بالإضافة الى مجموعة جزر (بولينيزي ، الواقعة جنوب شرق استراليا، ومجموعة جزر مايكرونيزيا ، التي تقع شمال وشمال شرق استراليا، الى جانب مجموعة جزر ميلانيزيا الملاصقة لشمال شرق اوستراليا، التي تبعد حوالي تسعة آلاف كيلومتر عن سواحل الصين جنوباً.

توضيح: جزر هاواي تقع في شمال المحيط الهادئ وعلى بعد أربعة آلاف كيلومتر من سواحل ولاية كاليفورنيا الأميركية، بينما تقع منطقة أوشيانيا في جنوب المحيط الهادئ، وتبعد عن مجموعة جزر هاواي ثمانية آلاف كيلومتر، أي أن خط الدفاع الأميركي هذا، يمتد مسافة عشرة آلاف كيلو متر تقريباً، من الشمال الى الجنوب.

5

ـ أما إذا نظرنا الى الواقع الاستراتيجي الدولي، في الوقت الحاضر، فإننا لا بدّ أن نلاحظ فشل هذه الاستراتيجية الأميركية التوسعية. فرغم انهيار الاتحاد السوفياتي السابق وتغير موازين القوى في اوروبا، فان الولايات المتحدة قد فشلت في احتواء وريثة الاتحاد السوفياتي، روسيا الاتحادية، كما فشلت في منع الصين من التحول من قوة برية (غير بحرية/ او بلا اساطيل بحرية) الى دولة عظمى، تنافس الولايات المتحدة على المكانة الاقتصادية الاولى في العالم، ودولة بحرية أسقطت خطوط “الدفاع”، التي حاولت الولايات المتحدة أقامتها، في بحار الصين وبحر اليابان وغرب المحيط الهادئ، فيما أقامت هي مناطق محظورة ومناطق يمنع دخولها (وهي ما يطلق عليها اسم مناطق 2) على الأساطيل البحرية الأميركية المنتشرة في محيط تلك البحار.

ويبقى السؤال الأهم هو: ماذا تعني هذه التحولات، في موازين القوى الدولية، وما هي تأثيراتها وتداعياتها على هيمنة الولايات المتحدة الأحادية على العالم، خلال العقود الثلاثة الماضية؟

إنّ أهمّ تأثيرات وتداعيات هذه المتغيّرات، على مكانة الولايات المتحدة وسطوتها في العالم، هي التالية:

أ ـ نجاح روسيا في إعادة بناء قوتها العسكرية الجبارة ودخولها عالم الأسلحة الاعلى دقة وتقنية في العالم، سواء في المجالات البرية/ المدرعات والمدفعية الصاروخية/ أو في المجال البحري/ الغواصات والصواريخ البحرية الفرط صوتية، او في مجال الأسلحة الجو فضائية، من طائرات تفوق جوّي لا مثيل لها/ ميغ 41/ او الصواريخ الاستراتيجية الفرط صوتية او منظومات الرادار التي تكشف ما وراء الأفق او غير ذلك من أسلحة مذهلة، أسقطت خطوط دفاع جون فوستر دالاس الوهمية.

ب ـ بلوغ الصين مرحلة بناء الثالوث النووي الصيني، المكوّن من:

ـ قاذفات القنابل الاستراتيجية الصينية، من طراز ، وهي قيد الخدمة منذ سنتين، إلا أن الكشف عنها سيتمّ في معرض تشوهاي الجوي، في شهر 11/2020، وهي طائرة قادرة على حمل صواريخ نووية شبحية وفرط صوتية، لا يمكن كشفها من قبل أية انظمة رادار في العالم، ويبلغ مداها عشرة آلاف كيلومتر. مما يجعلها قادرة على قصف القواعد الأميركية في هاواي واستراليا.

وهذا يعني سقوط خط الدفاع الأميركي الثالث، المشار إليه أعلاه، من خلال امتلاك الصين لهذه القاذفة العملاقة، التي توازي في مواصفاتها أحدث القاذفات الأميركية الاستراتيجية، مثل القاذفة ب 2 والقاذفة ب 21.

ـ سلاح الغواصات الصينية، القادرة على حمل رؤوس نووية، والمنتشرة في جميع بحار العالم، إضافة الى استكمال الجيش الصيني لتجهيز البنى التحتية العسكرية، الضرورية للدفاع عن الجزر الصينية المنتشرة في بحر الصين الجنوبي وبحر الصين الشرقي، كما كتب جيمي سايدِل بتاريخ 2/1/2020 في صحيفة نيوزيلاند هيرالد . وهذا يعني إسقاط ما أسمته الولايات المتحدة، في استراتيجية سلاسل الجزر، خط الدفاع الثاني عن الولايات المتحدة وذلك من خلال تكريس السيادة الصينية على هذه البحار وبناء القوة البحرية القادرة على الدفاع عنها وحمايتها.

ـ تطوير سلاح الصواريخ الاستراتيجية الصينية، وصولاً الى صاروخ دونغ فينغ 41 (معناها: الرياح الشرقية 41 / وهو صاروخ يمكن تحميله برؤوس حربية نووية او تقليدية وتبلغ سرعته ثلاثين ألفاً وستمئة وستة وعشرين كيلومتراً في الساعة ويبلغ مداه عشرة آلاف كيلومتر ويمكن إطلاقه من قواعد أرضية ثابتة أو من عربات إطلاق متنقلة. وهو قادر على إصابة جميع الأهداف الأميركية الواقعة ضمن دائرة عشرة آلاف كيلومتر.

كما انضمّ اليه، منذ شهر 10/2019، شقيقه دونغ فينغ / 100 / ذو المدى المتوسط والمتخصّص في ضرب الأهداف البحرية، من قواعد ثابتة وحاملات طائرات عائمة، والذي أسمته مجلة ذي ناشيونال انتِرِست الأميركية، في مقال لها بتاريخ 17/4/2020: قاتل الحاملات.

وهذا يعني ما يلي :

انكشاف استراتيجي كامل لكافة القواعد العسكرية الأميركية، جوية كانت أم بحرية، إلى جانب كافة الأساطيل البحرية الأميركية، السابع في غرب المحيط الهادئ والخامس في الخليج الفارسي وبحر العرب وغرب المحيط الهندي، إضافة الى الأسطول السادس في البحر المتوسط، انكشافها تماماً أمام الأسلحة الصاروخية الروسية والصينية، التي ستساندها الصواريخ البحرية لكل من كوريا الشمالية وإيران.

وهو ما يجعل هذه الأساطيل الأميركية عديمة الفعالية وغير قادرة على تنفيذ أي مهمات قتالية على الإطلاق وذلك لأن نتيجة الدخول في أي معركة مع الصين او روسيا أو الاثنتين معاً ستكون بمثابة معركة كاميكاز (الانتحاريون اليابانيون كانوا يسمّون بالكاميكاز) خاسرة تماماً. وهذا ما يعلمه قادة البنتاغون تماماً منذ زمن وليس فقط منذ بداية التوتر الحالي بين الصين والولايات المتحدة.

وفي هذا السياق فلا بد من إضافة الخرق الاستراتيجي، الذي حققته إيران، بالتنسيق مع الحليف الروسي والصيني بالتأكيد، من خلال عملية إرسال ناقلات النفط الإيرانية الى فنزويلا، مع ما يشكله هذا الخرق من تداعيات، ليس فقط على سمعة الولايات المتحدة في العالم بشكل عام، وإنما على انكشاف الاسطول الأميركي الرابع، المكلف بأمن البحر الكاريبي وجنوب أميركا، ما يعني أن من الأفضل، للولايات المتحدة وتوفيراً للإنفاق، إخراج هذا الاسطول من الخدمة وإحالته الى التقاعد كما كان عليه حاله قبل ان يقوم الرئيس أوباما بإعادته الى الخدمة بتاريخ 24/4/2008.

فإذا كان الزعيم الصيني العظيم ماوتسي تونغ قال يوماً إن الإمبريالية نمر من ورق، فها هي التحولات العالمية الكبرى وفي الطليعة ما فعلته إيران في رحلة الكاريبي المزمجرة بوجه هذه الإمبريالية المتجبرة تحوّل نبوءة ماوتسي تونغ الى حقيقة ميدانيّة ملموسة: أميركا نمر من ورق!

وفي الختام لا بدّ من التأكيد على أن سقوط “خطوط الدفاع” الأميركية، التي هي خطوط عدوان على الدول في الحقيقة، وإسقاط قانون القرصنة البحرية الأميركية، عبر الخرق الاستراتيجي القاري، الذي حققته إيران في حرب المضائق، من مضيق مالاقا شرقاً بإرسالها أربع ناقلات نفط إيرانية الى الصين، ومضيق هرمز وباب المندب وقناة السويس ومضيق جبل طارق غرباً، حيث أرسلت إيران خمس ناقلات نفط إيرانية، عبرت كلّ هذه البحار ومنها الاطلسي لتصل الى البحر الكاريبي وتفرغ حمولتها في الموانئ الفنزويلية، نقول إنه لا بد من التأكيد على ان التغير الهام في موازين القوى الدولية لا بدّ ان يقود الى إنتاج أقطاب دولية جديدة، ستكون إيران أحد محركاتها الرئيسية، لقيادة العالم الى الاستقرار الاستراتيجي، الذي لا يمكن الاستغناء عنه لتأمين السلم الدولي وإقامة نظام دولي أكثر عدالة يكون مستنداً الى القوانين الدولية المتعارف عليها، والتي تنظم العلاقات بين الدول بشكل متكافئ كما يفترض، وليس الى قانون القرصنة البحرية الأميركية، الذي أضيف اليه، بعد أحداث 11 أيلول 2001، قانون القرصنة الجوية الأميركي.

سأريكم آياتي فلا تستعجلون.

بعدنا طيّبين قولوا الله…

مقالات متعلقة

GEO-ECONOMIC BATTLE FOR RUSSIA

Geo-Economic Battle for Russia
REUTERS/Hyungwon Kang

As the world struggles to achieve any semblance of normality amid the developing economic and coronavirus (COVID-19) cries, China is playing towards increasing its influence throughout Eurasia.

In the first quarter of 2020, China bought a record high number of Russian oil (Urals) – 4 million tones. As a comparison, in the fourth quarter of 2019, China received only 2.5 million tones. The previous record of the supplies of Russian oil to China was registered in the third quarter of 2018 – 2.7 million tones. Therefore, China expanded its import of Russian crude by 1.6 times.

This decision of the Chinese leadership could be seen as a politically-motivated move; especially if one takes into the account the declining demand to oil supplies and massive discounts by Saudi Arabia on the Asian market.

Thus, Beijing is choosing to purchase Moscow’s crude oil, as a sort of a “grant” in the conditions of an economic crisis, taking place amid the coronavirus hysteria. How the liberal-controlled economic bloc of the Russian government pushed the country to the brink of the crisis despite years of preparations for the current situation is another question.

Some critics could call the purchase of Russian crude by China a sort of political bribe, which would ensure either Russia’s compliance, or at least Moscow not getting in the way, while Beijing works to realize its geopolitical agenda.

This, however, leads to a bit of eyebrow raising, as Moscow and Beijing have, for a while now, cooperated in various fields of interest, as well as various common regions of interest.

This support from China towards Russia is not unexpected, and it is not surprising, as it also fits into the expected format of new strategic partnerships in Eurasia, that wish to compete with the United States’ ambitions. Purchase of crude oil or not, it is apparent that when it comes to geopolitical activity, China expects that Russia to either support or simply does not stand against the Chinese national security interests.

For example, China formed two administrative units aimed at specifically managing the artificial islands it constructed in the South China Sea.

“The State Council has recently approved the establishment of the Xisha and Nansha districts under Sansha city.”

According to the notice, the Xisha administration will be based in Woody Island, also known as Yongxing Island. Meanwhile, the Nansha administration will be placed in the Fiery Cross Reef, referred to as Yongshu Reef in Chinese.

The US strongly opposes China’s attempt to seize a larger area under its jurisdiction in the South China Sea, not least because it is the region through which the most trade passes year-round.

Meanwhile, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Kazakhstan hosted a meeting with Chinese Ambassador Zhang Xiao.

Kazakhstan’s side reacted an article published on a Chinese website http://www.sohu.com titled “Why Kazakhstan is eager to return to China”.

“The meeting pointed out that an article of such content does not correspond to the spirit of eternal comprehensive strategic partnership reflected in the Joint Statement of the Republic of Kazakhstan and the People’s Republic of China, signed by the Heads of State on September 11, 2019. The parties agreed to closely cooperate in the fields of spreading information and mass media.”

Various plans of China’s territorial expansion are actively being discussed in the Chinese society itself. And this appears to be taking place into most directions. Alongside all of this, the intensification in the confrontation between China and the US appears to be all but avoidable.

Another important factor is that the increasing supplies of energy resources from Russia will allow China to be covered in the event of a new military conflict in the Persian Gulf (it will likely involve the US and Iran). In these conditions, Russia, as a key Chinese partner, becomes the apparent and vital supplier of energy resources by contrast with Saudi Arabia and other large oil suppliers.

The COVID-19 crisis has exacerbated the dire situation in which the markets and state economies already were. The crisis deepened the global and inter-regional competition, including those between the two key economic players: Beijing and Washington.

Russia is both an object and a subject of the global geo-economic standoff.

It is an object by virtue of its size – it has a massive market which needs materials (raw and otherwise), but it also produces its fair share of products and energy. It is a subject in terms of the simple fact that it is the world’s second largest military power and is one of the leaders on the international diplomatic scene.

Due to the same reasons, the US might also move towards easing the rhetoric towards Russia, and attempt to expand trade and economic cooperation, something which China would likely also plan to do. Even the media organization of Michael Bloomberg, a key Donald Trump competitor said that it was a possibility.

“Yet a small opening exists to professionalize a segment of bilateral U.S.-Russia ties. Russia has long been interested in pulling the United States into coordinating the global oil market. Although the United States does not need to join OPEC+ and its pledges to mandate production cuts, having regular exchanges about global energy trends could create a niche for constructive discussions between Russian and U.S. officials. It is not crazy to think that a dialogue around common energy interests could evolve into a more meaningful conversation about how to deal with Venezuela’s collapse, for instance,” one of the recent Bloomberg articles says.

However, in the current situation, it is understandable that the Russian leadership is more inclined towards cooperating with China. Beijing has demonstrated itself as a complicated, but also consistent and stable partner. In contrast, the US has spent the last almost 30 years in very apparent attempts to entirely undermine any semblance of Russian strategic power and shake the foundations of the Russian state itself.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

The unbearable lightness of China

April 26, 2020

By Pepe Escobar – posted with permission

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is Kishore-Mahbubani-300x198.jpg
Singaporean ex-diplomat and author Kishore Mahbubani speaks at an Asia Society event in a file photo. Photo: Flickr Commons

As a living embodiment of how East and West shall meet, Mahbubani is immeasurably more capable to talk about Chinese-linked intricacies than shallow, self-described Western “experts” on Asia and China.

Especially now when demonization-heavy hybrid war 2.0 against China is practiced by most factions of the US government, the Deep State and the East Coast establishment.

Distinguished fellow at the National University of Singapore’s Asia Research Institute, former president of the UN Security Council (from 2001 to 2002) and the founding dean of the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy (2004-2017), Mahbubani is the quintessential Asian diplomat.

Ruffling feathers is not his business. On the contrary, he always deploys infinite patience – and insider knowledge – when trying to explain especially to Americans what makes the Chinese civilization-state tick.

All through a book elegantly argued and crammed with persuasive facts, it feels like Mahbubani is applying the Tao. Be like water. Let it flow. He floats like a butterfly reaching beyond his own “paradoxical conclusion”: “A major geopolitical contest between America and China is both inevitable and avoidable.” He centers on the paths towards the “avoidable.”

The contrast with the confrontational, stale and irrelevant Thucydides Trap mindset prevalent in the US could not be starker. It’s quite enlightening to observe the contrast between Mahbubani and Harvard University’s Graham Allison – who seem to admire each other – at a China Institute debate.

An important clue to his approach is when Mahbubani tells us how his Hindu mother used to take him to Hindu and Buddhist temples in Singapore – even as in the island-state most Buddhist monks were actually Chinese. Here we find encapsulated the key cultural/philosophical India-China crossover that defines “deep” East Asia, linking Confucianism, Buddhism and the Tao.

All about the US dollar 

For Asia hands, and for those, as in my case, who have actually lived in Singapore, it’s always fascinating to see how Mahbubani is the quintessential Lee Kuan Yew disciple, though without the haughtiness. As much as his effort to understand China from the inside, across the spectrum, for decades, is more than visible, he’s far from being a disciple of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).

And he stresses the point in myriad ways, showing how, in the party slogan, “Chinese” is way more important than “Communist”: “Unlike the Soviet Communist Party, [the CCP] is not riding on an ideological wave; it is riding the wave of a resurgent civilization … the strongest and most resilient civilization in history.”

Inescapably, Mahbubani outlines both Chinese and American geopolitical and geo-economic challenges and shortcomings. And that leads us to arguably the key argument in the book: how he explains to Americans the recent erosion of global trust in the former “indispensable nation,” and how the US dollar is its Achilles’ heel.

So once again we have to wallow in the interminable mire of reserve currency status; its “exorbitant privilege,” the recent all-out weaponization of the US dollar and – inevitably – the counterpunch: those “influential voices” now working to stop using the US dollar as reserve currency.

Enter blockchain technology and the Chinese drive to set up an alternative currency based on blockchain. Mahbubani takes us to a China Finance 40 Forum in August last year, when the deputy director of the People’s Bank of China, Mu Changchun, said the PBOC was “close” to issuing its own cryptocurrency.

Two months later, President Xi announced that blockchain would become a “high priority” and a matter of long-term national strategy.  It’s happening now. The digital yuan – as in a “sovereign blockchain” – is imminent.

And that leads us to the role of the US dollar in financing global trade. Mahbubani correctly analyzes that once this is over, “the complex international system based on the US dollar could come tumbling down, rapidly or slowly.” China’s master plan is to accelerate the process by connecting its digital platforms – Alipay, WeChat Pay – into one global system.

Asian Century 

As Mahbubani carefully explains, “while Chinese leaders want to rejuvenate Chinese civilization, they have no missionary impulse to take over the world and make everyone Chinese.” And still, “America convinced itself that China has become an existential threat.”

The best and the brightest across Asia, Mahbubani included, never cease to be amazed at the American system’s total inability to “make strategic adjustments to this new phase in history.” Mahbubani dedicates a whole chapter – “Can America make U-turns?” – to the quandary.

In the appendix he even adds a text by Stephen Walt debunking “the myth of American exceptionalism.” There’s no evidence the Exceptionalistan ethos is being seriously contested.

A recent McKinsey report  analyzes whether the “next normal” will emerge from Asia, and some of its conclusions are inevitable: “The future global story starts in Asia.” It goes way beyond prosaic numbers stating that in 20 years, by 2040, “Asia is expected to represent 40% of global consumption and 52% of GDP.”

The report argues that, “we may look back on this pandemic as the tipping point when the Asian Century truly began.”

In 1997, during the same week when I was covering the Hong Kong handover, I published a book in Brazil whose translated title was 21st: The Asian Century (excerpts from a few chapters may be found here). By that time I had already lived in Asia for three years, and learned quite a few important lessons from Mahbubani’s Singapore.

China then was still a distant player on the new horizon. Now it’s a completely different ball game. The Asian Century – actually Eurasian Century – is already on, as Eurasia integration develops driven by hard-working acronyms (BRI, AIIB, SCO, EAEU) and the Russia-China strategic partnership.

Mahbubani’s book, capturing the elusive, unbearable lightness of China, is the latest illustration of this inexorable flow of history.

Has China Won? The Chinese Challenge to American Primacy (Kishore Mahbubani), published by Public Affairs (US$19.89).

U.S. Propaganda Went Full Offensive Against China. Now It Blames Beijing For Nuclear Weapon Testing

South Front

U.S. Propaganda Went Full Offensive Against China. Now It Blames Beijing For Nuclear Weapon Testing
Members of the Chinese Ministry of Defense team during the tank biathlon championship held as part of the 2015 International Army Games at the Alyabino firing range near Moscow, Russia, Aug 3, 2015. [Photo/CFP]

The US propaganda went full offensive against China. Additionally to adopting the official narrative blaiming China for the creation of COVID-19 and spreading the COVID-19 outbreak around the world (including the US), the US State Department is now blaiming China for nuclear weapons tests.

“China maintained a high level of activity at its Lop Nur nuclear weapons test site throughout 2019. China’s possible preparation to operate its Lop Nur test site year-round, its use of explosive containment chambers, extensive excavation activities at Lop Nur, and lack of transparency on its nuclear testing activities – which has included frequently blocking the flow of data from its International Monitoring System (IMS) stations to the International Data Center operated by the Preparatory Commission for the Comprehensive Nuclear Test-Ban Treaty Organization – raise concerns regarding its adherence to the “zero yield” standard adhered to by the United States, the United Kingdom, and France in their respective nuclear weapons testing moratoria,” the State Department’s Adherence to and Compliance with Arms Control, Nonproliferation, and Disarmament Agreements and Commitments (Compliance Report) says.

It seems that US diplomats and media outlets got a direct task to paint China as the modern Mordor.

MORE ON THE TOPIC:

الأميركيّون يخسرون البحار ويتخوّفون من پيرل هاربر صيني

محمد صادق الحسيني

بعد أن اجتاح وباء كورونا حاملات الطائرات الأميركية، ومن بعدها المستشفى العسكري العائم العملاق، سفينة المستشفى كومفورت (Comfort)، الرئاسية قبالة شواطئ نيويورك، ها هو فيروس كورونا يجتاح القوات الأميركيّة، المرابطة في كوريا الجنوبية منذ عام 1957، والبالغ عديدها 30 ألف عسكري، يتبعون من ناحية قيادة العمليات لقيادة المحيط الهادئ، التي تسمّى بالانجليزية (PACOM) انتصاراً لكلمة US – PACIFIC COMMAND.

وعلى الرغم من أنّ مصادر عسكرية خاصة أكدت أنّ قيادة القوات الأميركية في كوريا، وكذلك البنتاغون، على علم بانتشار هذا الوباء بين القوات الأميركيّة في كوريا الجنوبية منذ 20/2/2020، إلا أنّ البنتاغون لم يتخذ الإجراءات الصحية الضرورية لمواجهة انتشار الوباء بين جنودها، المرابطين في القاعدة العسكرية الأميركية دايجو، ولا زالت تواصل فحصهم بواسطة شمّ خلّ التفاح، كما نشرت صحيفة «ستارت آند ستريبس» الكورية الجنوبية يوم 6/4/2020، التي نقلت تطوّرات انتشار الوباء عن قائد القاعدة الأميركية، الجنرال ادوارد بالانكو، الذي ظهر على وسائل الإعلام وهو يحمل علبة فيها قطعة إسفنجية، مبللة بخلّ التفاح، ليشرح للصحافيّين طريقة فحص جنوده، التي قال إنها تتبع أيضاً في مستشفيات كوريا الجنوبية.

علماً انّ وباء الكورونا يواصل انتشاره بين القوات الأميركيّة في اليابان ايضاً، مما أجبر القيادة العسكرية الأميركية، وعبر إعلان قائد هذه القوات في اليابان شخصياً للصحافة، اللفتنانت جنرال كيفين شنايدر، يوم أول أمس الاثنين 6/4/2020، عن حالة الطوارئ بين صفوف القوات الأميركية هناك، بسبب انتشار وباء الكورونا بين أفرادها، البالغ تعدادهم 38 الف جندي أميركي، الى جانب خمسة آلاف متعاقد مدني أميركي و25 ألف متعاقد مدني ياباني.

وعليه فقد أصبحت هذه القوات ومعها القوات الأميركية في كوريا الجنوبية وحاملة الطائرات ثيودور روزفلت ورونالد ريغان خارج الخدمة. أيّ أنّ 80 % من القدرات العسكرية الأميركية في غرب المحيط الهادئ وبحر اليابان وبحار الصين اصبحت خارج الخدمة. وهو أمر كانت محطة «سي أن أن» الأميركية قد اشارت إلى خطورته قبل أيّام قليلة.

من جهة أخرى فمنذ أيّام عدة، وتحديداً منذ 4/4/2020، أعلنت وزارة الدفاع الأميركية عن إصدارها أمراً لحاملة الطائرات الأميركية هاري ترومان بالتحرّك، مع المجموعة القتالية البحرية المرافقة لها، من منطقة عملياتها في بحر عمان، من دون أن يحدّد أمر العمليات هذا وجهة انطلاق الحاملة. الأمر الذي دعا المتابعين للاعتقاد بأنها ستحلّ محلّ حاملة الطائرات، ثيودور روزفلت، التي خرجت من الخدمة في منطقة عملياتها، غرب المحيط الهادئ/ قرب جزيرة غوام، وذلك بسبب انتشار وباء كورونا بين بحارتها وإخلاء اربعة آلاف منهم الى اليابسة، وبقاء ألف جندي فقط على متنها، لمتابعة تشغيل المفاعل النووي الذي يولِّد الطاقة اللازمة لعمليات الحاملة وحركتها.

ما توجّب طرح السؤالين الرئيسيين التاليين حول:

الجهة التي اتجهت اليها حاملة الطائرات هذه، التي تحمل على متنها ما مجموعه 90 مقاتلة ومروحية قتالية أميركية، ولماذا صدر هذا الأمر لها ولمجموعتها القتالية الكاملة بالانتقال الى منطقة عمليات أخرى؟
ولماذا لم يصدر أمر التحرك للحاملة فقط، مع الإبقاء على القوة المرافقة، /مجموعة قوامها عشر قطع بحرية بين مدمّرة وبارجة وفرقاطة وزورق حراسة وسفينة إنزال وسفن إمداد/ في منطقة عملياتها، بحر عمان، حتى إصدار الأمر، أيّ حتى يوم 4/4/2020؟
وللإجابة عن هذين السؤالين يجب على المرء أن يعود قليلاًً الى الوراء، ودمج الإجابة عن السؤالين في إجابة واحدة، ويتذكّر عنجهية الرئيس الأميركي، وتهديداته لجمهورية الصين الشعبية، واتهاماته لها بخرق القانون الدولي البحري، في بحار الصين المختلفة.

آنذاك، وتحديداً في النصف الثاني من شهر أيلول 2019، قرّر الرئيس الأميركي، بعنجهية لا حدود لها، إرسال فخر سلاح البحرية الأميركية، حاملة الطائرات رونالد ريغان، التي وصلت تكلفة صناعتها الى ثلاثة عشر مليار دولار، دون سفن مرافقة، أيّ دون مجموعتها القتالية، الى بحر الصين الجنوبيّ.

وقد وصلت هذه الحاملة العملاقة فعلاًً إلى بحر الصين الجنوبي، يوم 28/9/2019، وعند اقترابها من جزر سبراتلي (Spratly Islands) الصينية، الواقعة في أقصى جنوب بحر الصين، قبالة السواحل الفيتنامية غرباً والفلبينية شرقاً، أطبقت عليها خمس قطع بحرية أجنبية وقامت بتثبيتها في نقطة تمركزها، حسب الأصول القانونية المتعلقة بالقانون البحري، وأجبرتها لاحقاً على تغيير وجهتها واستخدام ممر بحري حدّدته لها القطع البحرية الصينية، التي أوقعت هذه الحاملة في كمين بحري محكم، لم تتمكن رونالد ريغان لا من اكتشافه ولا من تفادي الوقوع فيه، لمتابعة إبحارها شرقاً، بعيداً عن المياه الإقليمية الصينية، حسب المعلومات ووصول الأقمار الصناعية التي نشرتها صحيفة «سوهو» (Sohu) الصينية يوم 28/9/2019.

هذا هو الدرس الذي تعلّمه سلاح البحرية الأميركي، من الحضور الدائم والاستعداد الكامل للقوات البحرية الصينية، في مختلف بحار الصين وتلك المحيطة بها شرقاً وغرباً.

وهو الأمر الذي أرغم قيادة سلاح البحرية الأميركية على عدم الإفصاح عن وجهة حاملة الطائرات، هاري ترومان، واضطرها أيضاً الى تحريك المجموعة القتالية البحرية المرافقة لهذه الحاملة الى بحر اليابان، ومن ثم الى منطقة جزيرة غوام، وذلك خوفاً من الكمائن البحرية الصينية التي لا تراها الأقمار الصناعية الأميركية.

أما الأهمية الاستراتيجية لهذا التطور اللافت فتكمن في انّ الصين الشعبية قد ثبتَت سيادتها على كلّ تلك الجزر، التي يعتبرها الأميركيون متنازعاً عليها، وأنها (الصين) لن تسمح لأيّ سفن او طائرات عسكرية أجنبية بالاقتراب من هذه الجزر، سواء كانت طبيعية او صناعية، لانّ اختراق أجوائها او مياهها الإقليمية يعتبر خرقاً للسيادة الصينية. وعليه فانّ الصين، وفي حال إصرار الولايات المتحدة على تحرشاتها بالصين فانّ جمهورية الصين الشعبية ستجد نفسها مضطرة لوضع حدّ أبدي لتلك التحرشات وذلك من خلال إنهاء خط الدفاع الأميركي الممتدّ من تايوان، الصينية المنشقة، في بحر الصين الجنوبي، الى كوريا الجنوبية، في البحر الأصفر شمالاً، وصولاً الى اليابان وكلّ بحر اليابان وحتى غرب المحيط الهادئ، على سواحل اليابان الشمالية الشرقية.

وباختصار: إنهاء الوجود العسكري الأميركي في تلك المنطقة من العالم والى الأبد.

من هنا فقد ذهبت مصادر عسكرية أميركية الى الاعتقاد بانّ الصينيين ربما يفكّرون جدياً في تكرار هجوم على أحد الموانئ الأميركية الغربية لتكرار سيناريو پيرل هاربر، ولكن صيني هذه المرة كما تتحدّث عن خطر قيام الصين بهجوم مفاجئ على تايوان لاستعادتها للسيادة الوطنية الصينية، أيّ الاستيلاء على الجزيرة في ظلّ شلل أميركي تام بسبب كورونا، ‏وأن يمتدّ الهجوم ليشمل كلّ البحار المحيطة، ‏وصولاً الى غرب الولايات المتحدة من هونولولو الى كاليفورنا وفلوريدا، ‏وهو ما تشبّهه تلك المصادر بهجوم اليابان على ميناء پيرل هاربر الشهير في الحرب العالمية.

فهل من مدّكر!؟

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

الصين العظيمة وروسيا العظمى

زياد حافظ

قد تكون المقارنة بين الصين العظيمة وروسيا العظمى نوعاً من السفسطة الكلامية غير أنّ دلالاتها معبّرة. فالطريقة التي عالجت بها الصين العدوان الجرثومي عليها عبر القرارات الواضحة والصارمة للحكومة والتعبئة الناجحة للشعب الصيني والانضباط اللافت للنظر لتعليمات الحكومة تدلّ على أنّ عظمة الصين هي في القدوة التي تمثلها والنموذج المختلف عن النموذج الغربي الذي حاول حكم العالم منذ الحرب العالمية الثانية. أما روسيا، فنعتها بالعظمى يعود إلى قدرتها على التأثير المباشر على العالم ونشر نفوذها دون مجهود يذكر، بل عبر استعمال قوّة خصومها ضدّهم كما في الفنون القتالية.

فبالنسبة للصين تعرّضت لوباء فيروس كورونا في مدينة وُهان الصينية منذ خريف 2019 وبالتحديد بعد الألعاب الأولمبية العسكرية التي أجريت في تلك المدينة. ويعتبر القادة الصينيون أنّ الوباء أدخل إلى الصين من قبل الوفد العسكري الأميركي المشارك في تلك الألعاب. قد يكون ذلك الإدخال صدفة بعد ما تمّت هندسة ذلك الفيروس في أحد المختبرات العسكرية الأميركية دون أخذ الاحتياطات الوقائية اللازمة وذلك إذا ما أرادت القيادة الصينية عدم افتراض سوء نيّة عند الأميركيين. وما يعزّز الادّعاء الصيني الاعتراف على لسان مسؤول مركز السيطرة على الأوبئة (سي دي سي) روبرت ردفريد أنه تمّ اكتشاف عدد من الإصابات في الولايات المتحدة قبل الانتشار في الصين. لكن هنا رواية أخرى تقول إنّ الفيروس من صنع فرنسي (صنع سنة 2003 مع دائه) وتمّ نقله إلى مختبر مشترك صيني فرنسي تمّ افتتاحه سنة 2017 في مدينة وُهان. تمّت التجارب على الخفافيش إلاّ أنّ أحد الخفافيش هرب من المختبر فكان الوباء. لكن بغضّ النظر عن الروايات ومدى دقّتها إلاّ انه بات واضحا أنّ الاحتمال الأكبر أنّ الفيروس هو من صنع الإنسان وليس من صنع الطبيعة، وبالتالي تفتح التساؤلات حول التجارب الجرثومية في المختبرات وجدواها واحتمال تحويلها إلى سلاح دمار شامل.

المهمّ هنا ليس في حيثيات الفيروس والملابسات حوله بل كيف تعاملت الدولة الصينية والمجتمع الصيني مع الوباء والدلالات الناتجة عن ذلك التعامل. فالدلالة الأولى هي أنّ الحكومة الصينية تعاملت بجدّية فائقة مع الوباء بينما نظيراتها الغربية الأوروبية والأميركية تعاملت بخفة وبتجاهل أبعاد الوباء خاصة في ما يتعلّق بالصحة العامة. فالاهتمام الأوروبي والأميركي في المرحلة الأولى كان حول الكلفة الاقتصادية والمالية التي ستتكبّدها من جرّاء الوباء وليس صحة المواطنين. فتصريحات الرئيس الفرنسي ورئيس الوزراء البريطاني والرئيس الأميركي تؤكّد أنّ القوّامة هي للمال وليس للإنسان.

الدلالة الثانية هي الجهود التي بذلتها الحكومة الصينية في إعداد التجهيزات والمستشفيات الميدانية كالمستشفى بألف سرير المجهّز كاملاً في مدة عشرة أيام فقط، فهي نوع من الإعجاز وبالتالي قدوة في التعامل مع وباء من هذا النوع. كما أنّ إجراءات الحجر على أكثر من 60 مليون مواطن صيني وحملات التطهير والتعقيم لكلّ شيء في المدن والطرقات والمباني وداخل المنازل دليل على جدّية في التعامل مع الوباء دون استهتار ومكابرة. كما أنّ تلك الإجراءات رافقتها إجراءات لتأمين الحاجيات الضرورية للمواطنين خلال فترة الحجر والمتوقفّين عن العمل وكسب العيش ما يدلّ على أولوية قيمة الإنسان عند السلطات الصينية في زمن المحن الكبرى. والدلالة الثالثة هي استجابة المجتمع الصيني بأكمله لتلك الإجراءات التي صدرت عن حكومة متهمة بالتسلّط والاستبداد للحرّيات العامة ما يطرح تساؤلا ت حول النموذج الصيني مقارنة مع النموذج الغربي الذي سنعالجه في فقرة لاحقة.

أما وقد اتخذت تلك الإجراءات ونُفّذت بحذافيرها استطاعت الصين الخروج من عمق الزجاجة المتمثّل في وتيرة ارتفاع الإصابات. تبيّن من تلك الإجراءات أنّ تلك الوتيرة استقرّت ثم بدأت بالتراجع وصولاً إلى إعلان الرئيس الصيني أنّ الصين قد انتصرت على الوباء وإنْ كانت بعض الإصابات موجودة هنا وهناك. وما يدعم ادّعاء الرئيس الصيني أنه لم يتمّ تسجيل إصابات جديدة منذ عدّة أيام. فمهلة 14 يوم دون تسجيل إصابات جديدة قد تكون المؤشر الفعلي لنهاية الأزمة علماً أنّ المراقبين يعتبرون أنّ الخروج التامّ من الوباء لن يتمّ قبل آخر الصيف ولكن عودة الحياة إلى طبيعتها لن تكون بعيدة بعد الآن.

وما يجب التأكيد عليه هو أنّ الصين لم تعتبر نفسها منفصلة عن العالم فقد عرضت المساعدة لمن يريد مواجهة الوباء بينما ردّة الفعل الغربية خاصة في الاتحاد الأوروبي والولايات المتحدة كانت سلبية ولا تخلو من العنصرية. وقرار الإدارة الأميركية معاقبة كلّ من يساهم ويقدّم المعونة للجمهورية الإسلامية في إيران الذي أصابها بقوّة وباء فيروس الكورونا خير دليل على عنصرة الإدارة والافتقار إلى الإنسانية. فكيف يمكن لمن يعتبرّه الغرب “أقلّ رقياً” منه يستطيع تقديم المساعدة لمن هو “أرقى” منه؟ هذا ما يؤكّد موقفنا من الغرب أنّ تقدّمه وتطوّره لم يكن بسبب “قيمه” ولا بسبب “التنوير” ولا بسبب التفوّق التكنولوجي، ولا بسبب تفوّق عرقي كما ادّعى البعض، ولا بسبب الثورات الزراعية والصناعية وفي ما بعد التكنولوجية، بل بسبب الاستعمار. فعرق، ودموع، ودماء أصحاب البشرة السمراء والسوداء والصفراء هي من ساهمت في رخاء الغرب. واليوم أصحاب البشرة السمراء والصفراء والسوداء يشهدون تقدّماً رغم العراقيل التي يضعها الغرب في مسيرتهم. الصين اليوم نهضت وتقوم بدورها الإنساني في العالم عبر تقديم تجربتها في مواجهة الوباء. ترحيب رئيس صربيا بالعرض الصيني كان مثيراً حيث اعتبر الصيني ليس صديقاً فحسب بل شقيقاً له! في المقابل ندّد بالاتحاد الأوروبي حيث التضامن الأوروبي لم يكن موجوداً بل العكس الذي اعترض على اللجوء إلى خارج الاتحاد الأوروبي لمواجهة الوباء.

هذا يأخذنا إلى مقارنة النموذج الصيني الذي يتمّ شيطنته يومياً في الإعلام الغربي وعلى لسان المسؤولين في الاتحاد الأوروبي وخاصة في الولايات المتحدة في الإدارة الحالية. فالنموذج الصيني اعتبر أنّ الإنسان قيمة يجب احترامها بينما في الغرب الذي ادّعى ذلك فإنّ الإنسان تحوّل إلى سلعة في الحدّ الأدنى ومستهلكاً (بكسر اللام) فقط في الحدّ الأقصى لا قيمة له الاّ بمقدار ما يساهم في إثراء النخب الحاكمة. فالنموذج النيوليبرالي كرّس سيادة السوق على الوطن وسيادة رأس المال على الإنسان بينما النموذج الصيني الذي يدمج بين حكومة مركزية قوّية إلى حدّ التسلّط وتخطّط للمستقبل لمصلحة الوطن والمواطنين وبين اقتصاد السوق الخاضع لضوابط الوطن والمواطن والحريص على السيادة قبل أيّ شيء. فالسيادة في الغرب في النموذج النيوليبرالي القائم أصبحت وجهة نظر تآكلت بالتقادم وفقاً لتصريحات الرئيس الفرنسي ماكرون وعدد من المسؤولين في الاتحاد الأوروبي بينما ما زالت السيادة قيمة حيّة في النموذج الصيني.

فكيف نفسّر الانضباط الصيني وتقبّل الإجراءات الوقاية الصارمة لولا الشعور بالكرامة الوطنية ولولا لمس المواطن حرص الحكومة على سلامته؟ في المقابل وجدنا مواقف المسؤولين في الغرب من الوباء في المرحلة الأولى تتراوح بين الإنكار والاستهتار والحرص فقط على التداعيات المالية والاقتصادية فأحجموا عن اتخاذ القرارات الصعبة كوقف العجلة الاقتصادية وفرض الحجر وحملات التطهير والتعقيم المكلفة وإعداد أدوات الاكتشاف والوقاية وثمة المعالجة. لم توّفر الحكومة الصينية المجهود في النفقات لمواجهة الوباء. في المقابل كان المجهود الأميركي لمواجهة التداعيات الاقتصادية والمالية في الأسواق من جرّاء الوباء. فالرئيس الأميركي يريد رصد ما يوازي 1،2 تريليون دولار لإنعاش الاقتصاد ودرء وصول معدّل البطالة إلى 20 بالمائة وذلك في سنة انتخابات رئاسية. في المقابل الإنفاق المقرّر على مواجهة الوباء من الناحية الصحية ما زال هزيلاً مقارنة مع ما يبذل على الصعيد الاقتصادي ومقارنة مع ما أقدمت عليه الصين. فالدافع سياسي أولاً وأخيراً كما كان استغلال الوباء سياسياً بامتياز عبر اتهام الصين بنشر الوباء والتهرّب من مسؤولية التقاعس في مواجهته.

شيطنة النموذج الصيني في وسائل الإعلام الغربية يدلّ فقط على حقد وحسد يسيطر على عقل المسؤولين. فالصين استطاعت أن تحقّق أرقاماً قياسية في النمو الاقتصادي خلال العقود الثلاثة الماضية، كما استطاعت أن ترفع 250 مليون مواطن صيني من مذلّة الفقر. الإنجازات الاجتماعية في الصحّة والتربية والتعليم والإسكان لا تُحصى، بينما نرى الترهّل في تقديم تلك الخدمات في الغرب. البنى التحتية التي شيّدتها الحكومة الصينية أصبحت النموذج الذي يُقتدى به بدءاً بالقطار السريع إلى الطرق العريضة إلى الجسور التي تحقّق أرقاماً قياسية في العلو والطول إلى الطريق الذي يربط الصين بسائر دول آسيا. وهذا النمو يعتبره الغرب هزيمة له وتهديداً لاستمرار هيمنته المتلاشية. فالغرب لا يسلّط الأضواء إلاّ على الاحتجاجات السياسية في هونغ كونغ مثلاً، أو على مصير سكّان مقاطعة التيبت في غرب الصين أو مصير الاوغيور. كما لا يستطيع الغرب أن يقبل بمساكنة نظام سياسي يقوده الحزب الشيوعي مع اقتصاد السوق. فكلّ سردية الغرب مبنية على عدم المساكنة وإذ نرى النموذج الصيني يدحض المزاعم الغربية ويحقق نجاحات لم يحقّقها الغرب حتى الآن. ومن ضمن تلك النجاحات التفوّق التكنولوجي في التواصل وحرب الـ “جي” 5 منها والذكاء الاصطناعي. فذلك التفوّق الاصطناعي كان حكراً على الغرب وإذ نرى الصين متقدّمة عليه بأشواط. فاقتصاد الغرب المرتبط عبر سلاسل العرض والتموين (supply chains) الصينية أصبح أكثر تبعية للصين بسبب التفوّق التكنولوجي وبسبب الإنتاج الصيني بحدّ ذاته. ربما لن يبقى للغرب وخاصة الولايات المتحدة إلاّ الحرب المدمّرة على الجميع لمحو التقدّم الصيني. فالغرب وأنظمته السياسية والاقتصادية لا يعرف إلاّ الحرب على الآخرين لحلّ مشكلاته البنيوية.

فأزمة فيروس كورونا كشفت الفرق في النظرة للإنسانية بين الغرب والصين. فمناقشات مجلس العموم الذي يسيطر عليه حزب المحافظين أثار النظرة الملتوسية للأزمة (أي نظرة روبرت ملتوس (1766-1834) الذي اعتبر زيادة السكّان في العالم أسرع من زيادة الموارد الغذائية بالتالي مستقبل البشرية مهدّد. فما جرى من مناقشات في مجلس العموم أفاد أنّ هناك من يعتبر وباء كورونا نعمة تخفّف من زيادة السكّان في العالم. وبما أنّ الصين هي أكثر الدول سكّاناً فتخفيف حجم السكان في الصين وفي العالم قد يكون عاملاً إيجابياً. هذه هي عنصرية بامتياز حيث حياة الرجل الأبيض أهمّ من حياة الرجل صاحب البشرة المختلفة.

كلّ ذلك لا يعني انّ النظام الصيني نظام مثالي وأن لا عيوب فيه. لكن شيطنة الصين عير مفيدة بل مغرضة لأنّ تجربة الصين جديرة بالدرس. النموذج الصيني قد يكون قدوة لدول العالم التي تريد الخروج من الهيمنة الغربية. فرفض النموذج الغربي قد يكون شرط ضرورة ولكنه ليس شرط كفاية. الصين تقدّم نموذجاً مختلفاً عن النموذج الغربي في تساكن سلطة مركزية قوية إلى حدّ التسلّط والاستبداد ولكن مكافحة للفساد، وقد يكون ذلك ضرورة وليس عائقاً لنهضة البلاد، وتفاعل مع اقتصاد السوق دون الوقوع في مطبّات اللامساواة والفساد الموجود في الغرب.

على صعيد آخر ذكرنا في مقال سابق أنّ روسيا دولة عظمى لأنها تستطيع ان تؤثّر بالعالم دون بذل أيّ مجهود يذكر. وفي قراراها بإغراق السوق النفطي لضرب قطاع النفط الصخري الأميركي الذي يشكّل ثلث الإنتاج الأميركي استطاعت روسيا أن توجّه ضربة موجعة جدّاً في فترة الحملة الانتخابية الرئاسية الأميركية إلى ذلك القطاع ومن وخلاله إلى مصدر القوّة الفعلي الأميركي أيّ التحكّم بأسواق المال. فتزامن أزمة فيروس كورونا كانت فرصة استغلّتها روسيا لتوجيه تلك الضربة التي أصبحت ضربة مزدوجة، مالية وصحيّة في آن واحد. هذا لا يعني أن روسيا بمنأى عن وباء كورونا لكنها على استعداد وتأهّب والاستفادة من شريكتها وحليفتها الصين لمواجهة الوباء ولمواجهة أيّ حماقة ممكنة أن تصدر عن الحكومات الغربية. فروسيا قدّمت للصين هدية ثمينة جدّاً وهي الحصول على كميات من النفط بأسعار منخفضة جدّاً ما يساعدها على استئناف مسيرتها المتقدّمة في النمو والتقدّم بينما تشهد الاقتصادات الغربية تراجعاً وانكماشا قد يصل إلى كساد كبير تعجز عن معالجته.

الصين العظيمة وروسيا العظمى يشكّلان محوراً يصعب اختراقه على الأقلّ في المدى المنظور لعدّة أسباب منها الترهلّ السياسي في دول الغرب، وخاصة في الولايات المتحدة، ومنها التراجع الاقتصادي حيث العالم بما فيه الغرب والولايات المتحدة أصبح بحاجة لما تنتجه الصين والمحور الذي تنتمي إليه تحت مسمّيات مختلفة كـ “بريكس” أو الكتلة الأوراسية. أخطأت الولايات المتحدة عندما اتخذت القرار في إعادة توطين قاعدتها الإنتاجية خارج حدودها وفي بلدان نامية لا قيود فيها على النشاط الاقتصادي من نظم وتشريعات في البيئية وحقوق العمل والعمّال. وسبب هذا الخطأ اعتقادها أنه بإمكانها السيطرة والهيمنة على اقتصادات العالم بسبب ما اعتبرته التحكّم بالنظم المالية وشرايين المال والتفوّق التكنولوجي الذي كان حكراً لها.

غير أنّ العالم رفض تلك الهيمنة وفي مقدمّته الصين التي استطاعت ان تحلّ مكان الولايات المتحدة في توريد السلع الصناعية للعالم وبالتالي أصبحت متحكّمة بسلاسل التموين والعرض. وفي التفوّق التكنولوجي لم تعد الولايات المتحدة المتقدّمة على سائر الدول فالصين قد تكون سبقتها في مجالات عديدة منها الذكاء الاصطناعي في ما يتعلّق بالتواصل. الحرب الأميركية على شركة هواوي دليل على عجز الولايات المتحدة في مواجهة التقدّم الصيني. أما على صعيد التحكّم في شرايين المال فكلّ من الصين وروسيا تعملان على التخلّص من هيمنة الدولار عبر خطّة محكمة تبدأ بتخفيف اللجوء إلى الدولار لتخفيف الطلب عليه للوصول إلى نظام مالي مواز للدولار ولا يعتمد على الدولار كوحدة قيمة أو تسعير. في التسعينات في ذروة الانفراد الأميركي في التحكّم بالعالم صرّحت وزيرة الخارجية الأميركية آنذاك مادلين اولبرايت أنّ الأمة الأميركية هي الأمة التي لا يمكن أن يستغنى عنها العالم (indispensable nation) لكن بعد ثلاث عقود تقريباً تكاد تصبح الولايات المتحدة الأمة التي لا تصل بعلاقة مع العالم (irrelevant nation) إذا ما استمرّت في سلوكها الحالي. هذا هو التحوّل المفصلي الذي حصل، هبوط الولايات المتحدة وصعود المحور الروسي الصيني. والنخب العربية مدعوة لإعادة نظر شاملة وجذرية بعلاقاتها مع الغرب والتوجّه بجدّية نحو الشرق. سورية قامت بتلك المراجعة فمتى تقوم جامعة الدول العربية بذلك وما تمثّله من نظام موروث من الحقبة الاستعمارية؟

*كاتب اقتصادي سياسي والأمين العام السابق للمؤتمر القومي العربي

CAN CHINA CONFRONT AND DEFEAT THE U.S. NAVY?

South Front

This video is based on the analysis “Can China Confront and Defeat the U.S. Navy?” released by SouthFront on January 4, 2020

China is on pace to achieve regional naval supremacy by the year 2025. This has been a long-term goal of the Chinese national and military leadership, the foundations of which were laid out in the early 1990s.

Chinese naval supremacy, and the absolute necessity of it on at least a regional basis, is tied not only to the development and security of the maritime segment of One Belt-One Road, but also access to China’s growing presence on the African continent. The modernization and expansion of the Peoples’ Liberation Army Navy (PLAN) has been conducted in parallel with the fortification of islands in the South China Sea and the establishment of military bases in and around the strategic Horn of Africa and the Strait of Hormuz. After centuries of isolationism, internal strife, a devastating cultural revolution and later an economic boom, China is now on the cusp of global expansion. This will not just be a limited or one-dimensional expansion, but one of economic, military and even cultural dimensions.

In contrast to the U.S. leadership of recent decades, the national and military leadership of the Chinese Communist Party has been diligent and focused on implementing long term programs. While both the military industrial complex of the U.S. and the authoritarian communist systems of government of these respective nations both breed rampant corruption, social and economic inequality, and a multitude of dysfunctionalities, the Chinese system is inherently more singular in focus, as all authoritarian regimes are. While one could reflect on U.S. foreign policy over the past forty years and determine that it has been quite haphazard, disjointed and even schizophrenic in nature, the opposite must be said of China. This fact becomes readily apparent when contrasting the development and expansion of the PLAN and that of the U.S. Navy.

A U.S. Navy in Disarray

It can rightly be asserted that the U.S. Navy is a force struggling to define its core mission and strategic focus as the year 2020 begins. Since the dissolving of the Soviet Union, the U.S. military industrial complex has encouraged a wasteful bureaucracy, an inept and overly confident civilian and military leadership, to invest vast sums of money in a growing wish list of high-tech weapons aimed at achieving full spectrum dominance over every possible adversary. Little thought was apparently given to the opportunity cost of investing in such programs, and how they would be employed in a broader national defense strategy. The U.S. Navy stands out as the worst example of these failures and is poised at a crossroads today.

After the Soviet Union disappeared as its chief adversary on the high seas, the U.S. Navy maintained its age old obsession with the aircraft carrier, and utilized its many aircraft carrier strike groups (ASG) to great effect in attacking any disobedient nation that lacked a robust navy or air defense system. While the modern ASG proved effective at power projection against weaker adversaries, its viability in a modern maritime environment heavily contested by a peer adversary has yet to be established. The U.S. Navy has decided to ignore this obvious fact and has continued to embrace the ASG as the cornerstone of naval strategic planning well into the future.

The U.S. Navy has maintained ten ASGs and launched the latest generation of aircraft carriers in the form of the Gerald R. Ford CVN-78 in 2013. Although commissioned in 2017, the carrier has yet to reach operational readiness and has been plagued by many technical problems with its most essential combat systems. The CVN-78 is the most expensive warship ever constructed, with current unit cost approaching $14 billion USD.

While the U.S. has invested vast sums of money, energy and focus in developing a massive new class of aircraft carrier, it has done very little to improve the one asset most crucial to the carrier, the carrier airwing that it carries into battle. Instead of committing to develop aircraft tailored to specific functions, the Navy chose to embrace the one-size-fits-all concept of the F-18 Super Hornet. In addition, the service also committed to this concept to a much larger degree, in throwing its support behind the F- 35 Joint Strike Fighter. Neither the F-18 nor the F-35 rectify rectifies the combat range deficiency now inherent in the aircraft carrier airwing. In short, an ASG will become a target of both land-based anti-ship ballistic missiles (ASBM) and even land-based Chinese aircraft equipped with anti-ship guided missiles, long before the ASG can achieve striking distance with its carrier borne aircraft. This problem becomes even more glaring when one considers the scenario of a Chinese battle group forward deployed and operating within range of its own land-based Anti-Air Warfare assets.

What has the U.S. Navy done to modernize and improve its surface warfare vessels over the past two decades? Not surprisingly, the service embraced new ship designs that were long on high-tech promise, yet did not fit into a specific, traditional and vital function within the broader strategic framework of the service. The Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) program and Zumwalt DDG-1000 programs were ill-conceived at the outset and resulted in two classes of vessels that consumed vast amounts of funding, time and energy that could have been used to improve upon traditional, proven warship designs. At an approximate unit cost of $350 million USD per LCS and $8 billion per DDG-1000, both vessels have proven long on cost and short on capability.

The Arleigh Burke class DDG is arguably the backbone of the U.S. Navy and is a highly effective and proven warship. The latest upgrade to the design, the Flight III, will not begin production until sometime between 2023 and 2029. A multi-purpose frigate vessel program known as the FFG(X), meant to pick up where the LCS failed, has yet to reach an advanced design phase. There are currently five contenders for the new FFG(X) proposal.

At the same time, there is no replacement at all planned for the aging Ticonderoga CG-47 class cruiser. The Ticonderoga class CGs perform a vital AAW and surface warfare function in the established U.S. Navy carrier strike group structure. The only other navy in the world fielding a similar warship is China’s, with the introduction of the first Type 055 class in 2018.

A Chinese Navy in Ascent

While the United States Navy struggles to identify its purpose and maintain its preeminence in the 21st century, the PLAN has embarked on a robust program of modernization and expansion based on sound strategic principles and proven technology.

China has produced a long list of modern, capable classes of warships in recent years. Not only has the PLAN designed, constructed and put a new generation of warships into operational service in the past two decades, it has engaged in an ambitious ship building program that has seen these vessels fielded at an unprecedented rate. Standardized designs for corvette, guided missile frigate (FFG), guided missile destroyer (DDG), large guided missile destroyer/cruiser (CG), landing platform dock (LPD), landing helicopter dock (LHD), and logistical support vessels of multiple classes have all been adopted and fielded in significant numbers in the past 20 years. Running in parallel to this, the PLAN has also developed a fledgling aircraft carrier program, including the 100% indigenous Type 001A Shandong. Such a feat is unparalleled in modern naval history.

The question must immediately be asked; why would a nation engage in such an ambitious program to transform and expand its naval warfighting capabilities in such totality? The answer is obvious. It intends to use this capability. But in what fashion and to what end?

In order for the Chinese nation to complete and secure the ambitious Old Belt-One Road economic trade corridor and to ensure the economic prosperity of the country into the next century, a sizeable navy of unparalleled capability will be required. Such a naval force is currently in an advanced state of completion, yet a further 5 years are likely required before the PLAN will be in a position to fight and win against a determined U.S. naval effort to confront it through force of arms.

If current production levels are maintained, the PLAN will field an impressive force of major surface warfare, amphibious warfare and aircraft carriers by 2025. By this time, major surface warfare combatants will include 50 x Type 056 Corvettes, 30 x Type 054A Frigates, 18 x Type 052D Destroyers, and 8 or more Type 055 Destroyers. The amphibious warfare fleet will be comprised of approximately 38 x LSTs, 8 x Type 071 LPDs, and at least 2 x Type 075 LHDs. The Type 001 Liaoning and Type 001A Shandong will both be operational, while the first of the much more capable Type 002 CATOBAR carriers will likely have reached operational status as well. These warships will be supported by no less than eleven logistics support and underway replenishment vessels and four garrison support vessels of modern design.

A major strategic advantage that China has achieved over the United States is that it has built the most robust and productive shipbuilding industry in the world. China has been ranked as the world’s top shipbuilder for 5 years now. The United States by contrast, ranks tenth. The gross tonnage of vessels of all types produced in Chinese shipyards; however, is 77 times greater than the total produced by U.S. shipyards.

The Greater Strategic Picture

It is important to view the development of both navies within the larger context of the respective geopolitical strategic positions of both countries. China undoubtably enjoys a stronger position today than it did a decade ago, while the opposite must be said for the United States. Not only has China gained greater political and economic influence on a global scale, but it has moved to secure military supremacy in all areas along its national borders, and increasingly within its expanding maritime territory. By contrast, the United States has lost both political and economic influence in many regions of the world, largely through its own failed policies

China has managed to develop greater economic ties with nations that have decided to participate in the One Belt-One Road project, which has also afforded them a greater political influence over these nations. China has negotiated the establishment of military bases, mostly logistical support facilities for its growing navy, which will also allow for the deployment of rapid reaction forces to deter and interdict threats to the One Belt-One Road trade corridor. China continues to solidify its presence on the Africa continent. The military base established in Djibouti, and fleet support agreements established in Gwadar, Pakistan and the African nation of Tanzania provide the resources needed to be able to exert military force if required to back up Chinese economic and political efforts on the continent.

Although the U.S. maintains numerous military bases and facilities in Africa to secure its own strategic interests in the region, it lacks the same political and economic influence that China has established. The U.S. military has been aiding a number of nations in Africa to battle Islamic extremist insurgents, but has made little investment in those nations in a broader sense, and thus exerts far less influence.

Although outside of the maritime sphere of influence of China, the nations of Europe have increasingly responded favorably to the promised benefits of the One Belt-One Road trade project. On a political and military level, China has largely remained out of European affairs. The same cannot be said for the United States.

While the Obama administration began the disastrous, multifaceted war against the Russian Federation, the Trump administration has only expanded it, while antagonizing its most traditional European allies in the process. The Trump administration appears to have doubled down on the failed Ukraine policies of its predecessor, increased U.S. military presence on the European continent, and has leveled trade tariffs on key allies. By propping up the phony Russian threat narrative with increased military deployments, the United States is squandering vast sums of money and diverting large contingents of front-line fighting forces to confront an enemy it knows to be a threat conceived through its own propaganda alone.

China has responded to the U.S. led effort to internationally isolate Russia, by leveraging its position to provide an alternate market for Russian goods. It has supplied political support for Russia on the world stage and has increased military cooperation with Russia in key regions where both nations share an interest and are forced to confront the United States. Both nations have increased bilateral cooperation in developing the northern arctic shipping route and have conducted joint naval exercises in the maritime regions of Europe, Asia and the Indian Ocean. Iran most recently joined the two in joint exercises in the Indian Ocean.

Can the PLAN Win?

A scenario where the PLAN and U.S. Navy engage in open conflict is improbable at present, yet not impossible. Although China has strengthened its position to such a degree in the South China Sea that no other nation, including the United States can change the strategic realities that exist there today, increasing interaction between PLAN and U.S. warships may lead to a tragic encounter. U.S. freedom of navigation patrols are largely symbolic in nature and do not present any real threat to Chinese interests in the region, yet they do require a response Such a situation could lead to a confrontation where an accident occurs, or an overzealous vessel commander makes a decision that leads to a military engagement which could escalate in a very short window of time.

It is most probable that China will do everything possible to avoid such a situation at present. This may not be the case after 2025, when the PLAN enjoys a much stronger position relative to the U.S. Navy and its allies in the Asia Pacific. China will occupy the central position, enjoy regional guided ballistic missile supremacy and be able to take advantage of land-based air assets in support of its navy. Surveillance and early warning facilities established on various artificial island and atolls will by then be fully operational.

If fire was exchanged between a U.S. warship and PLAN warship in the South China Sea, and the incident was not immediately deescalated, the U.S. vessel would inevitably be destroyed. The PLAN would suffer significant casualties in the exchange without doubt. China would immediately move to deny all access to the region through its already robust Anti-Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) capabilities. The United States would then have to decide what level of sacrifice would be acceptable to the state and the American public in rapidly deciding upon its level of military response. The authoritarian Chinese state would find this decision much easier to make.

The U.S. seventh fleet would be hard pressed to mount any immediate military response, beyond mounting a retaliatory attack via attack submarines forward deployed in the region. Any large effort mounted to attack Chinese island garrisons in either the Spratly or Paracel islands would be met with overwhelming force by a combination of anti-ship guided ballistic missiles, submarine, surface and air attack. It is hard to see any such scenario taking place, without the confrontation elevating to a full-spectrum war of global proportions. Most regional allies of the United States would calculate that such an outcome would render overwhelmingly negative results and would not outweigh the tragic loss of one or two U.S. warships and their crews.

Assuming that a hot war could be avoided, a new cold war would inevitable result between an ascendant China and a U.S. in decline. If current military, economic and political trends continue from the present through 2025, China will only strengthen its strategic position both regionally and globally, while the opposite will likely be the case for the United States. It is important to note that the leadership of both nations see such a conflict as undesirable and not inevitable, yet miscalculations, mistakes and poor judgement can scuttle any grand plans. History is unequivocal in this regard and must be analyzed and understood to avoid repeating disaster. We ignore the lessons of history at our peril, yet a current period bereft of insightful, measured and reasonable leadership in Washington, does not bode well for avoiding what may prove to be an unavoidable conflict between two global superpowers.

U.S. Relations with China Were Just Destroyed, and Nothing Will Ever Be the Same Again

Global Research, November 21, 2019
The Most Important News 19 November 2019

Our relationship with China just went from bad to worse, and most Americans don’t even realize that we just witnessed one of the most critical foreign policy decisions of this century. The U.S. Senate just unanimously passed the “Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019”, and the Chinese are absolutely seething with anger.

Violent protests have been rocking Hong Kong for months, and the Chinese have repeatedly accused the United States of being behind the protests. Whether that is true or not, the U.S. Senate has openly sided with the protesters by passing this bill, and there is no turning back now.

The protesters in Hong Kong have been waving American flags, singing our national anthem and they have made it exceedingly clear that they want independence from China. And all of us should certainly be able to understand why they would want that, because China is a deeply tyrannical regime. But to the Chinese government, this move by the U.S. Senate is essentially an assault on China itself. They are going to argue that the U.S. is inciting a revolution in Hong Kong, and after what the Senate has just done it will be very difficult to claim that is not true.

The Chinese take matters of internal security very seriously, and the status of Hong Kong is one of those issues that they are super sensitive about. China will never, ever compromise when it comes to Hong Kong, and if the U.S. keeps pushing this issue it could literally take us to the brink of a military conflict.

And you can forget about a comprehensive trade agreement ever happening. Even if a Democrat is elected in 2020, that Democrat is going to back what the Senate just did. That is why it was such a major deal that this bill passed by unanimous consent. It sent a message to the Chinese that Republicans and Democrats are united on this issue and that the next election is not going to change anything.

And the trade deal that President Trump was trying to put together was already on exceedingly shaky ground. “Phase one” was extremely limited, nothing was ever put in writing, and nothing was ever signed. And in recent days it became quite clear that both sides couldn’t even agree about what “phase one” was supposed to cover

A spokesperson for China’s Commerce Ministry said earlier this month that both countries had agreed to cancel some existing tariffs simultaneously. Trump later said that he had not agreed to scrap the tariffs, lowering hopes for a deal.

“They’d like to have a rollback. I haven’t agreed to anything,” the president said.

On Tuesday, Trump was visibly frustrated by how things are going with China, and he publicly warned the Chinese that he could soon “raise the tariffs even higher”

President Donald Trump threatened higher tariffs on Chinese goods if that country does not make a deal on trade.

The comments came during a meeting with the president’s Cabinet on Tuesday. The U.S. and China, the world’s two largest economies, have been locked in an apparent stalemate in trade negotiations that have lasted nearly two years.

“If we don’t make a deal with China, I’ll just raise the tariffs even higher,” Trump said in the meeting.

Unfortunately, raising tariffs isn’t going to fix anything at this point.

In fact, Trump can raise tariffs until the cows come home but it isn’t going to cause the Chinese to budge.

That is because on Tuesday evening everything changed.

When they passed the “Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act of 2019” by unanimous consent, the U.S. Senate essentially doused our relationship with China with kerosene and set it on fire. The following comes from Zero Hedge

In a widely anticipated move, just after 6pm ET on Tuesday, the Senate unanimously passed a bipartisan bill, S.1838, showing support for pro-democracy protesters in Hong Kong by requiring an annual review of whether the city is sufficiently autonomous from Beijing to justify its special trading status. In doing so, the Senate has delivered a warning to China against a violent suppression of the demonstrations, a stark contrast to President Donald Trump’s near-silence on the issue, the result of a behind the scenes agreement whereby China would allow the S&P to rise indefinitely as long as Trump kept his mouth shut.

As we reported last week, the vote marks the most aggressively diplomatic challenge to the government in Beijing just as the US and China seek to close the “Phase 1” of their agreement to end their trade war. The Senate measure would require annual reviews of Hong Kong’s special status under U.S. law to assess the extent to which China has chipped away the city’s autonomy; in light of recent events, Hong Kong would not pass. It’s unclear what would happen next.

I am finding it difficult to find the words to describe what this means to the Chinese.

We have deeply insulted their national honor, and our relationship with them will never be the same again.

Many will debate whether standing up to China on this issue was the right thing to do, but in this article I am trying to get you to understand that there will be severe consequences for what the U.S. Senate just did.

There isn’t going to be a comprehensive trade deal, the global economy is going to suffer greatly, and the Chinese now consider us to be their primary global adversary.

Shortly after the Senate passed the bill, a strongly worded statement was released by the Chinese government. The following excerpt comes from the first two paragraphs of that statement

On November 19th, the US Senate passed the “Hong Kong Bill of Rights on Human Rights and Democracy.” The bill disregards the facts, confuses right and wrong, violates the axioms, plays with double standards, openly intervenes in Hong Kong affairs, interferes in China’s internal affairs, and seriously violates the basic norms of international law and international relations. The Chinese side strongly condemns and resolutely opposes this.

In the past five months, the persistent violent criminal acts in Hong Kong have seriously jeopardized the safety of the public’s life and property, seriously trampled on the rule of law and social order, seriously undermined Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability, and seriously challenged the bottom line of the “one country, two systems” principle. At present, what Hong Kong faces is not the so-called human rights and democracy issues, but the issue of ending the storms, maintaining the rule of law and restoring order as soon as possible. The Chinese central government will continue to firmly support the Hong Kong SAR Government in its administration of the law, firmly support the Hong Kong police in law enforcement, and firmly support the Hong Kong Judiciary in punishing violent criminals in accordance with the law, protecting the lives and property of Hong Kong residents and maintaining Hong Kong’s prosperity and stability.

For a long time I have been warning that U.S. relations with China would greatly deteriorate, and this is the biggest blow that we have seen yet.

The U.S. and China are now enemies, and ultimately that is going to result in a tremendous amount of pain for the entire planet.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Michael Snyder is a nationally-syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is the author of four books including Get Prepared NowThe Beginning Of The End and Living A Life That Really Matters. His articles are originally published on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News

China’s Participation in US Mission in Persian Gulf ‘Wishful Thinking’: Paper

US Navy destroyer

The damaged US Navy destroyer USS Fitzgerald is towed back to Yokosuka Naval Base by a tugboat on Saturday after its collision with the container ship ACX Crystal off the coast of Yokosuka, Japan.

Source

August 17, 2019

A state-run Chinese newspaper says it is “wishful thinking” to expect that Beijing will join a US-led naval mission purportedly aimed at protecting shipping lanes in the Persian Gulf.

The Global Times reported that the US bid to form a coalition of escorting vessels through the Strait of Hormuz is actually part of Washington’s strategy “to comprehensively crack down” on Iran.

However, only “a handful of countries” have responded to the US propaganda campaign against the Islamic Republic, the paper added.

Some Americans wish China would participate in the mission in a bid to mitigate tensions between the two sides, but such an expectation is very unlikely to happen as it would endanger the interests of both Beijing and Tehran, according to the report.

“This is obviously wishful thinking. Iran is a comprehensive strategic partner of China and China is dedicated to safeguarding peace and stability in the Persian Gulf. Such a coalition would only damage Iran’s interests and thus China’s,” it said.

It further highlighted China’s close cooperation with Iran in fighting pirates and its attempts to maintain regional stability and security.

China has sent naval fleets on escort missions to the Gulf of Aden as well as waters off Somalia and established a support base in Djibouti for the People’s Liberation Army ships, the report said.

“There should be a maritime coalition, but definitely not one led by the US or one meant to serve US strategies. The coalition should actually safeguard the interests of Persian Gulf countries and their legitimate trading partners,” it pointed out.

The Global Times report also complained about “Washington’s arrogance and reckless moves” which have caused turmoil in the Persian Gulf.

The United States has been trying to persuade its allies into joining a coalition with the declared aim of providing “security” for merchant shipping in the Strait of Hormuz through which about a fifth of all oil consumed globally passes.

Only Israel and the UK have welcomed the call, which has not been well received among Washington’s other allies.

The US is trying to project its campaign as a bid to secure the Persian Gulf, but “the Europeans argue that Washington created the problem in the first place by trying to kill off Iran’s oil exports”, the New York Times wrote this month.

China Just Went Nuclear in the Trade War, and There Is No Turning Back Now

Global Research, August 07, 2019

When will Americans start to wake up and realize what is happening?  At the end of last week, President Trump announced that the U.S. would be imposing a 10 percent tariff on 300 billion dollars worth of Chinese imports, and that marked a dramatic escalation in our trade war with China.  This move by Trump came as a total shock to Chinese officials, and global financial markets were thrown into a state of turmoil.  Since that announcement, we have been waiting for the other shoe to drop, because we knew that the Chinese would retaliate.  But honestly, very few of the experts expected something like this.  On Monday, China announced that it is going to completely stop buying U.S. agricultural products

China confirmed reports that it was pulling out of U.S. agriculture as a weapon in the ongoing trade war.

A spokesperson for the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said Chinese companies have stopped purchasing U.S. agricultural products in response to President Trump’s new 10% tariffs on $300 billion of Chinese goods.

This is essentially a trade war equivalent of a nuclear bomb.

If the Chinese would have slapped U.S. agricultural products with tariffs, that would have been a proportional response.  But to quit buying them entirely is an unprecedented escalation in a trade war that is really starting to spiral out of control.

And it is also clearly a political attack on President Trump.  The Chinese know that Trump is highly popular in rural areas, and this ban on U.S. agricultural products is going to severely hurt farmers in rural areas all across the United States.

U.S. voters tend to be more influenced by their bank accounts than by anything else, and so this is a smart strategic move by the Chinese if they would like to see a Democrat get elected in 2020.

In 2017, the Chinese bought 19.5 billion dollars worth of U.S. agricultural products, and that number dropped to just 9.1 billion dollars in 2018.

Now that number is going to zero, and according to Farm Bureau Federation President Zippy Duvallthis latest move by China is going to be “a body blow to thousands of farmers and ranchers who are already struggling to get by.”

Please say a prayer for our farmers, because they really need it.

In addition to ending purchases of U.S. agricultural products, the Chinese also allowed the value of the yuan to decline dramatically on Monday.  This really rattled global financial markets, and shortly thereafter U.S. Treasury officials formally designated China as a “currency manipulator”.  The following comes directly from the official website of the Treasury Department

The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988 requires the Secretary of the Treasury to analyze the exchange rate policies of other countries. Under Section 3004 of the Act, the Secretary must “consider whether countries manipulate the rate of exchange between their currency and the United States dollar for purposes of preventing effective balance of payments adjustments or gaining unfair competitive advantage in international trade.” Secretary Mnuchin, under the auspices of President Trump, has today determined that China is a Currency Manipulator.

As a result of this determination, Secretary Mnuchin will engage with the International Monetary Fund to eliminate the unfair competitive advantage created by China’s latest actions.

This is the first time since the 1990s that the Treasury Department has used this designation on any of our trading partners, and it is the kind of move that would not be made unless all hopes for a trade deal were completely gone.

Of course the Chinese wouldn’t have made the moves that they made either if they were still holding out hope for a negotiated solution.  According to one market analyst that was quoted by CNBC, the Chinese are “signalling that they have lost confidence that they can reach an agreement with Trump.”

So what this means is that in the short-term things are going to get bad for the global economy.

Really bad.

In the longer term, the structure of the entire global economic system could change dramatically, and this will especially be true if Donald Trump emerges triumphant in 2020.  According to economist Neil Shearing, we could literally be looking at “the end of the world as we know it”…

Among the implications for more deterioration in the global picture that Shearing cites are the “disintegration of the rules-based system” that has governed international commerce since the end of the World War II, and a potential “Balkanization” of the world economy as the U.S. and China develop their own standards, tech platforms and payment systems.

“It’s too soon to say exactly how events will pan out, but this casts the escalation in the US-China trade war over the past year in an altogether more ominous light. We may be witnessing the end of the world as we know it,” he wrote.

It is difficult to imagine a world in which there is no trade between the United States and China, and many would argue that we would be far better off today if we had never gone down that road in the first place.

But now that our two economies are so deeply integrated, trying to decouple is going to be an exceedingly painful process.

If you are familiar with my work, than you already know that I am not a fan of the Chinese government at all.  Something needed to be done about China, because they have been brazenly taking advantage of us and flouting the rules for decades.

Having said that, it is imperative that the American people understand that a messy breakup with China is going to cause an extraordinary amount of pain for us, for them and for the whole world.

It looks like this trade war could be the spark that plunges the global economy into utter chaos, and right now very few Americans seem to understand the true scope of the economic nightmare that appears to be headed our way.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Michael Snyder is a nationally-syndicated writer, media personality and political activist. He is the author of four books including Get Prepared NowThe Beginning Of The End and Living A Life That Really Matters. His articles are originally published on The Economic Collapse BlogEnd Of The American Dream and The Most Important News.

Featured image is from Foreign Policy

تجدّد الفشل الأميركي في مواجهة التنين الصيني وقنابله الدخانية في الخليج تذروها الرياح

أغسطس 10, 2019

محمد صادق الحسيني

بداية لا بدّ من القول إنه يجب على كلّ متابع للشأن الصيني، وبالتالي لجهود الصين المشتركة مع روسيا وإيران وغيرهما من الدول لإنهاء سيطرة القطب الأميركي الواحد على العالم، ان يتذكر أنّ ما ينفذه الرئيس الأميركي ترامب ضدّ الصين، من إجراءات اقتصادية/ مالية وسياسية وعسكرية، ليست بالإجراءات الأميركية الجديدة إطلاقاً.

اذ انّ العداء الأميركي لجمهورية الصين الشعبية قد بدأ منذ نشأة هذه الدولة، سنة 1949، ومنذ أن قام الجنرال تشين كاي تشيك، زعيم ما كان يُعرف بالكومينتانغ واثر هزيمة قواته امام قوات التحرير الشعبيه الصينية، بقيادة الزعيم الصيني ماوتسي تونغ في نهاية الحرب الأهلية الصينية، التي استمرت من سنة 1945 حتى 1949، نقول حيث قام زعيم الكومينتانغ، مع فلول قواته، بالهرب من البر الصيني المحرر الى جزيرة فورموزا تايوان وسيطر عليها، من خلال وحدات الكومينتانغ العميلة للولايات المتحدة، والتي تمكنت من ذلك بمساعدة عسكرية أميركية مباشرة.

وقد تمادت الولايات المتحدة في عدوانها على جمهورية الصين الشعبية بدعمها هذا الكيان اللقيط، الذي أطلقت عليه اسم تايوان، ومنحته ليس فقط عضوية الأمم المتحدة، وإنما عضوية دائمة في مجلس الأمن الدولي. أيّ انها أصبحت دولة تتمتع بحق الفيتو في ما كانت جمهورية الصين الشعبية محرومة من حق العضوية في منظمة الامم المتحدة بالمطلق، وذلك حتى سنة 1971 عندما بدأت الولايات المتحدة بتطبيق سياسة انفتاح مبرمج على الصين.

ولكن المخططات الأميركية، المعادية لاستقلالية القرار الصيني والهادفة الى وقف التطور الاقتصادي الصيني، لم تتغيّر مطلقاً، طوال سبعينيات وثمانينيات القرن الماضي التي شهدت إقامة علاقات دبلوماسية بين الدولتين. وقد وصلت مؤامرات الولايات المتحدة، ضدّ الصين، قمتها في ربيع سنة 1989، عندما أطلقت واشنطن حملة سياسية وإعلامية دولية ضدّ جمهورية الصين الشعبية، تحت حجة دعم مطالب شعبية صينية، كان قد طرحها محتجون صينيون عبر تظاهرات في عدة مدن صينية، خاصة في ميدان تيان ان مين، الذي شهد احتجاجات وصدامات، منذ أوائل شهر نيسان وحتى أواسط حزيران سنة 1989، بين المحتجين وقوات الأمن الصينية. تلك الصدامات التي انتهت بإعادة فرض النظام في كلّ مكان والقضاء على ظاهرة الثوره الملوّنة في مهدها.

وها هي الولايات المتحدة، ومعها بقايا ما كان يطلق عليه مسمّى بريطانيا العظمى، تحاول إثارة المتاعب أمام الحكومة الصينية المركزية، وذلك عبر إثارة الشغب وحالات الفوضى في جزيرة هونغ كونغ، التي اضطرت بريطانيا الى إعادتها الى الوطن الأمّ، الصين الشعبية، عام 1997، مستخدمة مجموعات محلية مرتبطة بمخططات خارجية، يتمّ تسييرها وتوجيهها من قبل أجهزة مخابرات أميركية وبريطانيا منذ ما يقارب الشهرين، دون أن تقوم قوات الأمن الصينية بأكثر من الحدّ الأدنى لحفظ النظام.

ولكن استمرار هذه السياسة الانجلوأميركية وتزامنها مع استمرار التحشيد العسكري الأميركي، في البحار القريبة من الصين كشرق المحيط الهندي وبحر الصين الجنوبي وخليج البنغال وبحر اليابان وغيرها من البحار، وصولاً الى إرسال حاملة الطائرات الأميركية رونالد ريغان الى بحر الصين الجنوبي، في خطوة استفزازية للصين، نقول انّ استمرار هذه السياسة الأميركية، الى جانب العقوبات الاقتصادية والمالية التي فرضت على الصين، وفِي ظلّ قدسية الحفاظ على وحدة وسيادة جمهورية الصين الشعبية على كافة أراضيها، فقد أصدر المتحدث باسم مكتب شؤون هونغ كونغ وماكاو تصريحاً شديد اللهجة قال فيه: بودّنا التوضيح لمجموعة صغيرة من المجرمين العنيفين عديمي الضمير ومن يقف وراءهم انّ من يلعب بالنار سيُقتل بها.لا ترتكبوا خطأ في تقييم الوضع. ولا تعتبروا ممارستنا لضبط النفس ضعفاً .

إذن… هذه رسالة صينية نارية واضحة وصريحة، لا بل أمر عمليات، موجّه لليانكي الأميركي، وليس فقط لبعض أذناب الاستعمار في هونغ كونغ، من سواحل بحر الصين الجنوبي، مفادها: لا تلعبوا بالنار…

وما يزيد أمر العمليات الصيني هذا زخماً وقوة، هو صدوره بعد الجولة الفاشلة، التي قام بها وزيرا الحرب والخارجية الأميركيان، في استراليا وعدد من دول المحيط الهادئ، في محاولة منهما لإقناع تلك الدول بالموافقة على نشر صواريخ أميركية، موجهة الى الصين، على أراضيها ورفض جميع الدول المعنية لهذه الفكرة الأميركية الهدامة. كما انّ أمر العمليات هذا قد تزامن مع وصول حاملة الطائرات الأميركية، رونالد ريغان، الى بحر الصين الجنوبي كما أسلفنا.

إذن وكما جرت العادة فإنّ الولايات المتحدة، ممثلة برئيسها ورئيس دبلوماسيتها، تمارس الكذب والتضليل بشكل فاضح وخطير. ففي الوقت الذي تشنّ فيه إدارة الرئيس ترامب حملتها التضليلية الكاذبة، حول ضرورة الحفاظ على أمن الخليج ومضيق هرمز، وحماية السفن التجارية التي تبحر فيهما فإنها تطلق قنابل دخانية للتغطية على خطواتها الأكثر خطورة على الأمن الدولي، المتمثلة في تعزيز الحشد العسكري الاستراتيجي ضدّ كلّ من روسيا والصين الشعبية، وذلك من خلال:

1 ـ مواصلة إرسال حاملات الطائرات، ابراهام لينكولن ورونالد ريغان، ومجموعتيهما البحريتين الى مناطق عمليات أكثر قرباً من الصين.

2 ـ سحب قاذفات القنابل الأميركية الاستراتيجية، من طراز /B 52/ التي كانت ترابط في قاعدة العيديد القطرية ونقلها الى قاعدة دييغو غارسيا في المحيط الهندي، غرب المحيط الهندي.

3 ـ مواصلة الولايات المتحدة لمناوراتها المشتركة مع كوريا الجنوبية والتي لا تشكل استفزازاً لكوريا الشمالية فحسب، وإنما لجمهورية الصين الشعبية أيضاً، وذلك لأنها تفضي إلى مزيد من الحضور العسكري الأميركي في المحيط القريب من الصين.

وفي إطار قنابل الدخان هذه، فإنّ القنبلة الأكثر إثارة للسخرية هي الهراء الذي أطلقه وزير خارجية نتن ياهو، ايسرائيل كاتس، يوم امس الأول حول احتمال مشاركة إسرائيل في التحالف البحري الذي دعت الولايات المتحدة لإقامته في الخليج.

ولكن هذا الوزير نسي انّ دولته لا تعتبر دولة تملك قوة بحرية ذات قيمة على الصعيد الدولي، على الرغم من امتلاكها غواصات دولفين، الألمانية الصنع، والقادرة على حمل رؤوس نووية، والخاضعة لمراقبة سلاح البحرية الإيراني على مدار الساعه والعديمة القدرة على المناورة ضدّ إيران في أيّ من بحار المنطقة، لأسباب لا مجال للتوسع في شرحها.

اذن هذه التصريحات الإسرائيلية لا يمكن اعتبارها أكثر من قنبلة دخان انتخابية لصالح نتن ياهو ليس إلا. ولا تدخل حتى في استراتيجية الولايات المتحدة الأكثر شمولية. ولمزيد من التوضيح فانّ هذا الوزير، كاتس، كان كمن أراد الاستجارة من الرمضاء بالنار، أيّ أنه أراد أن يغطي على فشل كيانه في مواجهة حلف المقاومة وعلى رأسه إيران بحشر أنف إسرائيل في وضع الخليج، مستنداً الى الوجود الأمني الإسرائيلي الواسع في السعودية ودول الخليج العربية الأخرى.

هذا الوجود الذي تعود جذوره إلى أكثر من عشرين عاماً، أيّ إلى نهاية تسعينيات القرن الماضي، حيث بدأت السعودية والإمارات بإبرام عقود حماية أمنية، للمنشآت النفطية في البلدين، مع شركات أمن إسرائيلية، وهو الأمر الذي مكَّن هذه الشركات الإسرائيلية، وهي في الحقيقة أذرع لجهاز الموساد الإسرائيلي، من إقامة بنية تحتية استخبارية كاملة تخدم الأهداف الإسرائيلية. علماً أنّ هذا الوجود الاستخباري الإسرائيلي الكثيف لا يمثل أيّ قيمة لها تأثير على موازين القوى في ميادين القتال. حيث انّ مناطق هذا الوجود، أيّ السعودية ودوّل الخليج، لم يكن يوماً جزءاً من ميادين القتال ضدّ الجيش الإسرائيلي ، وعليه فإنه وجود لا يختلف عن وجود العصافير في القفص، لا قيمة له ميدانية أو عملية إطلاقاً.

لكلّ نبأ مستقرّ.

بعدنا طيبين قولوا الله…

Related Videos

Related Posts

The Dragon lays out its road map, denies seeking hegemony

July 29, 2019

By Pepe Escobar – posted with permission

The Dragon lays out its road map, denies seeking hegemony

The key merit of China’s National Defense in the New Era, a white paper released by the State Council in Beijing, is to clear any remaining doubts about where the Middle Kingdom is coming from, and where it’s going to by 2049, the mythical date to, theoretically, be restored as the foremost global power.

Although not ultra-heavy on specifics, the white paper certainly should be read as the Chinese counterpoint to the US National Security Strategy, as well as the National Defense Strategy.

It goes without saying that every sentence is being carefully scrutinized by the Pentagon, which regards China as a “malign actor” and “a threat” – the terminology associated with its “Chinese aggression” mantra.

To cut to the chase, and to the perpetuating delight of China’s supporters and critics, here are the white paper’s essentials.

What global stability?

The Beijing leadership openly asserts that as “the US has adjusted its national security and defense strategies, and adopted unilateral policies” that essentially “undermined global strategic stability.” Vast sectors of the Global South would concur.

The counterpart is the evolution of “the China-Russia comprehensive strategic partnership of coordination for a new era,” now playing “a significant role in maintaining global strategic stability.”

In parallel, Beijing is very careful to praise the “military relationship with the US in accordance with the principles of non-conflict, non-confrontation, mutual respect and win-win cooperation.” The “military-to-military relationship” should work as “a stabilizer for the relations between the two countries and hence contribute to the China-US relationship based on coordination, cooperation and stability.”

Another key counterpart to the US – and NATO – is the increasingly crucial role of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which is “forging a constructive partnership of non-alliance and non-confrontation that targets no third party, expanding security and defense cooperation and creating a new model for regional security cooperation.”

The white paper stresses that “the SCO has now grown into a new type of comprehensive regional cooperation organization covering the largest area and population in the world”, something that is factually correct. The latest SCO summit in Bishkek did wonders in featuring some of the group’s much-vaunted qualities, especially “mutual trust,” “consultation,” “respect for diverse civilizations” and “pursuit of common development.”

On hot spots, contrary to Western skepticism, the white paper asserts that, “the situation of the South China Sea is generally stable,” and that a “balanced, stable, open and inclusive Asian security architecture continues to develop.”

There should be no illusion regarding Beijing’s position on “Taiwan independence” – which will never deviate from what was set by Little Helmsman Deng Xiaoping in the late 1970s: “Separatist forces and their actions remain the gravest immediate threat to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait and the biggest barrier hindering the peaceful reunification of the country.”

And the same applies to “external separatist forces for ‘Tibet independence’ and the creation of ‘East Turkestan’.” How Beijing dealt with – and economically developed – Tibet will continue to be the blueprint to deal with, and economically develop, Xinjiang, irrespective of the Western outcry over China’s subjugation of more than a million Uighurs.

In regard to the turmoil Hong Kong and the degree it reflects interference by “external forces,” the white paper shapes Hong Kong as the model to be followed on the way to Taiwan. “China adheres to the principles of ‘peaceful reunification,’ and ‘one country, two systems,’ promotes peaceful development of cross-Strait relations, and advances peaceful reunification of the country.”

On the South China Sea, the white paper notes that

“countries from outside the region conduct frequent close-in reconnaissance on China by air and sea, and illegally enter China’s territorial waters and the waters and airspace near China’s islands and reefs, undermining China’s national security.”

So there won’t be any misunderstanding, it says: “The South China Sea islands and Diaoyu Islands are inalienable parts of the Chinese territory.” ASEAN and Japan will have to deal with what Beijing says are facts.

Chinese soldiers in the PLA Hong Kong Garrison take part in a drill during an open day on June 30 to mark the 22nd anniversary of the return of the city from Britain to China. Photo: AFP

No hegemony, ever

While noting that “great progress has been made in the Revolution in Military Affairs with Chinese characteristics” – the Sino-version of the Pentagon’s – the white paper admits that “the PLA still lags far behind the world’s leading militaries. The commitment is unmistakable to “fully transform the people’s armed forces into world-class forces by the mid-21st century.”

Special emphasis is placed on China’s relatively quiet, behind-the-scenes diplomacy. “China has played a constructive role in the political settlement of regional hotspots such as the Korean Peninsula issue, the Iranian nuclear issue and Syrian issue.” The corollary could not be more clear-cut. “China opposes hegemony, unilateralism and double standards.”

Arguably the most important point made by the white paper – in stark contrast with the “Chinese aggression” narrative – is that “Never Seeking Hegemony, Expansion or Spheres of Influence” is qualified as “the distinctive feature of China’s national defense in the new era.”

This is backed up by what could be defined as the distinctive Chinese approach to international relations – to respect “the rights of all peoples to independently choose their own development path,” and “the settlement of international disputes through equal dialogue, negotiation and consultation. China is opposed to interference in the internal affairs of others, abuse of the weak by the strong, and any attempt to impose one’s will on others.”

So the road map is on the table for all to see. It will be fascinating to watch reactions from myriad latitudes across the Global South. Let’s see how the “Chinese aggression” system responds.

زخمٌ جديدٌ في «طريق الحرير» الصينية: مواجهة لـ«الحمائية» الأميركية

Image result for ‫منتدى الحزام والطريق‬‎

الأخبار

 الثلاثاء 30 نيسان 2019

انتهت أعمال قمة «منتدى الحزام والطريق»، التي عُقدت في بكين بحضور أكثر من 37 من رؤساء دول وحكومات ووفود، مسجّلة صفقات يزيد إجمالي قيمتها على 64 مليار دولار أميركي

اختتم الرئيس الصيني شي جين بينغ، قبل يومين، قمة «منتدى الحزام والطريق»، بحضور قادة من 37 دولة ومنظمة دولية، من بينهم الرئيس الروسي فلاديمير بوتين. القمة، وهي الثانية للمنتدى، شكّلت مرحلة جديدة في مسيرة مبادرة «حزامٌ واحد وطريقٌ واحد» التي أطلقتها بكين قبل ستة أعوام، وتهدف إلى إعادة إحياء طريق الحرير التاريخي، الذي كان يربط الصين بعشرات الدول تجارياً.

شي أعلن في نهاية القمة التي احتضنتها بكين لمدة ثلاثة أيّام، التوصل إلى توافقات واسعة بشأن تدعيم «التعاون العالي الجودة» في إطار المبادرة، مع سعيٍ لطمأنة المتشككين في أن مشروع البنية التحتية الهائل سيركز على «تنمية مفتوحة ونظيفة وصديقة للبيئة» مع الأطراف المختلفة، التي تُجري «مشاورات على قدم المساواة»، مؤكداً أن مزيداً من الدول ستنضم إلى هذا المشروع لإنشاء بنى تحتية تربط بين آسيا وأوروبا وأفريقيا. وفي مؤتمر صحافي، أكد الرئيس الصيني أن مبادئ السوق ستطبق في جميع مشاريع التعاون التي تتضمنها المبادرة التي تهدف إلى إحياء «طريق الحرير» القديم الذي كان يربط بين الصين وآسيا وأوروبا، مشيراً إلى أن الشركات هي المحرك الأساسي لكل مشاريع المبادرة التي ستطبق عليها كل مبادئ السوق، فيما تلعب الدول دوراً داعماً.

أكّد شي أن المبادرة ستواصل رفض «الحمائية» في انتقاد لواشنطن التي تتبع سياسة حمائية (أ ف ب )

وفي تصريحات خلال الجلسة الختامية للقمة، قال شي إن «المزيد من الأصدقاء والشركاء سينضمون إلى المبادرة»، موضحاً أن «الجميع دعم فكرة تطوير شراكة، واتفقوا على تعزيز آليات التعاون». ووُقّعت اتفاقيات تعاون بقيمة تزيد على 64 مليار دولار أميركي في مؤتمر للمديرين التنفيذيين خلال المنتدى. كذلك، أشار البيان الختامي المشترك إلى أن الزعماء اتفقوا على أن يحترم تمويل المشاريع الأهداف العالمية المتعلقة بالديون، وعلى الترويج للنمو الاقتصادي الصديق للبيئة». من جهتها، أعلنت الصين، في بيانٍ منفصل، أنها وقّعت مذكّرة تفاهم مع دول عديدة، من بينها إيطاليا وبيرو وباربادوس ولوكسمبورغ وجاميكا.

أمّا على صعيد مهاجمة الولايات المتحدة المبادرة الصينية، واتهامها بإيقاع الدول النامية في ديون بعرض تمويل رخيص لا يمكنها تحمّله، فقد حاول شي في خطابه تبديد هذه المخاوف. وقال: «هذا العام، يرسل المنتدى رسالة واضحة: المزيد من الأصدقاء والشركاء سينضمون إلى دائرة الحزام والطريق»، مؤكداً أن المبادرة ستواصل رفض «الحمائية»، في انتقاد لواشنطن التي تبنّت سياسات حمائية في عهد الرئيس دونالد ترامب.

والمبادرة التي تم اقتراحها عام 2013، امتدت من آسيا وأوروبا إلى أفريقيا والأميركيتين وأوقيانوسيا، لتفتح مساحة جديدة للاقتصاد العالمي بنتائج أفضل من المتوقع. ووقّع أكثر من 150 دولة ومنظمة دولية على وثائق تعاون مع الصين في إطار المبادرة. واللافت أنه خلال السنوات الخمس الماضية، تجاوز حجم التجارة بين الصين والدول الأخرى المشاركة في المبادرة 6 تريليونات دولار أميركي، فيما تجاوزت استثمارات الصين في الدول المشاركة في المبادرة 90 مليار دولار. كذلك، حظيت المبادرة بدعم قوي من قبل القادة ورجال الأعمال الأجانب. وقد تمظهر ذلك في الكلمات الافتتاحية للرؤساء.

تم توقيع اتفاقيات تعاون في القمة بقيمة تزيد على 64 مليار دولار أميركي

من جانبه، دعا بوتين الدول المشاركة في المنتدى للانضمام إلى مشروعي الطريق البحري الشمالي و«طريق الحرير». وفي كلمته، أوضح الرئيس الروسي أن بلاده تولي اهتماماً كبيراً لتطوير الطريق البحري الشمالي، مضيفاً: «نحن نفكر في إمكانية ربطه بطريق الحرير الصيني، وبالتالي إقامة طريق نقل عالمي وتنافسي، يربط شمال شرق، وشرق وجنوب شرق آسيا بأوروبا». وأكد بوتين أن هذا المشروع الضخم يعني قيام تعاون وثيق بين دول أورآسيا لزيادة حركة الترانزيت وبناء محطات استقبال البضائع والحاويات في الموانئ، وكذلك المراكز اللوجيستية.

يُذكر أن الطريق البحري الشمالي هو وجهة نقل تمتد من المحيط الأطلسي إلى المحيط الهادئ على طول سواحل شمالي روسيا في الدائرة القطبية الشمالية. ويعبر هذا الطريق بحور الشمال بمحاذاة سيبيريا إلى الشرق الأقصى الروسي على الحدود مع اليابان وكوريا، وصار متاحاً أمام حركة الملاحة البحرية مع ذوبان الجليد في القطب الشمالي.

Related Videos

Trump’s Trade War May Be His Waterloo

Trump’s Trade War May Be His Waterloo

MATTHEW JAMISON | 16.12.2018

Trump’s Trade War May Be His Waterloo

With the passing of former American President George Herbert Walker Bush we have been reminded of what a sincere and good friend President Bush was of China and the Chinese people, and how after President Nixon’s seminal opening to China, Bush played a pivotal role in cementing the burgeoning diplomatic relationship between the USA and PRC, for the benefit of the planet as a whole.

This wise and enlightened statesmanship and with it the careful and thoughtful management of the Sino-American alliance stands in stark contrast to the reckless and bewildering management (or mismanagement) of American-Chinese relations under the Trump administration. The Trump administration have taken US-China relations to their worst state of being since Nixon and Kissinger’s historic founding of modern diplomatic relations between the two global giants in the 1970s with Chairman Mao.

By initiating a bewildering and highly damaging, plus needless, trade war between the Earth’s two largest economies Trump squandered much good will that existed after his election to attempt to work in a serious and statesmanlike fashion for the betterment of the Washington-Beijing relationship – the most important strategic state on state diplomatic relationship of the 21st century. The appointment of the Trade advisor Peter Navarro has also been extremely nauseating and disturbing for the overall direction of the Trump administration’s policy regarding China.

It has been bewildering because the tariffs the Trump administration have introduced on American-Chinese trade have badly hit American businesses and consumers, not that a person and shabby con artist business merchant such as Trump could care less about that, he has after all spent his entire life sticking it to working class folks. There has always been a natural, organic synergy to US-China relations with a mutual win-win for both countries rather than a zero-sum game. That is why the Tariffs have been so disruptive, damaging and discouraging for the symbiotic nature of the Washington-Beijing alliance, and it is an alliance, that when a good and healthy state of relations between DC and Beijing has existed has always been of the greatest benefit for the American and Chinese peoples united in friendship and cooperation and for the world as a whole.

That is why the management of the American-Chinese relationship is of the greatest strategic global geopolitical importance, especially as this century the PRC will be an incredible economic superpower that will drive and influence a huge amount of global economic growth. With this the management and handling of the relationship between America and China is a top tier significant planetary and historical matter alongside such pressing global challenges of our age like climate change. By behaving so badly and acting in such an immature, petty and irresponsible way in conducting Superpower diplomacy with a pre-eminently ancient, supremely wise and magnificent civilization such as China, Donald Trump may just finally have met his Waterloo. Unless Trump changes tack immediately matters will only get worse for the Trump administration, and indeed further down the line in years to come, the Trump organisation.

Trump must sack Peter Navarro and have a shake up and overhaul of the Office of US Trade Representative. Protectionists must be junked and a preference for free trade restored. Trump must also stop his anti-China rhetoric which is not helpful and only serves to whip up unfounded prejudice and paranoia among his supporters. Trump must also desist immediately from pursuing the CFO of Huawei and shut that appallingly politically motivated case down. The Trump Trade Tariffs must go with normalcy returning to US-China trade which was the case before Trump instigated these disgusting tariffs. And Trump must rein in his Vice-President Mike Pence who has been making matters worse and increasing tensions with ignorant, inflammatory and stupid comments regarding the rightful Chinese sovereignty over the South China Sea. Trump is fundamentally a non-serious spoilt brat showman who has never really had to work hard for anything in his life but rather has had it handed to him on a plate. As a politician, apart from getting some groups whipped up and putting on one heck of a tour de force in modern American political campaigning, Trump has shown little real appetite or knowledge or skill for actually running a Government and a country with far too much of his time spent on twitter or watching the media. Yet patience is starting to wear very thin for this Trump clown circus act that passes for a Superpower Government.

Photo: Flickr

The “Punishing Truth” About Donald Trump’s Policies

Source

TR454363232

Before long the world will act typically numb when President Donald Trump announces a “hit” on a prominent public figure via his Twitter account. The American administrations of the past few decades have already made an art out of the mafia-like military and economic sanctions on people from Kiev to Kandahar, so it’s only a question of who’s going to get “whacked” next these days. My prediction will be China, here’s why.

A New York Times story the other day told the world the Trump administration had authorized a hit on China’s most successful communications conglomerate Huawei. Trump has already put the squeeze on the Canadians so that officials there could arrest the CFO and daughter of the company founder, Meng Wanzhou for extradition to the U.S. for undisclosed wrongdoings. Trump-China relations of late remind me of the mafia gangland 60s TV shows and the movie The Godfather; only American presidents play with live bullets and real bagmen. Look at the wording from the NYTs story with regard to Huawei competitor ZTE and Trump’s anti-China penchant:

“Eventually, the Trump administration decided to ease its punishment of ZTE, in an effort to cool tensions with China’s leader, Xi Jinping, ahead of a historic North Korea meeting.”

My point is hidden in plain sight in the media narrative, you see? Our newspapers and TV shows now reflect our common acceptance of a strange truth. Can’t you detect it in this passage? We elect presidents these days so that they can “punish” foreign companies that compete with us. We elect officials that punish and sanction people and nations that run contrary to their policies. And make no mistake, Trump’s policies have nothing whatsoever to do with the best interests of the people of the United States of America.

I am no fan of the Chinese leadership or any leadership driven by the businesspeople who stand behind wringing their bloody hands. But arresting foreign business persons based on whether or not their technology is being used to spy on us? Hell, Bill Gates and the rest of the American oligarchs had best stay home from now on. For those who’ve forgotten Snowden and the NSA revelations, I think you needn’t worry about your spanking new Huawei P20 Pro with the magical Leica cameras. It’s no more likely to be a listening ear than the iPhone or Samsung, and I can attest to the fantastic imagery from the cameras – WOW. Oh, but Apple is a U.S. company, my bad. I did not mean to be a traitor. I’d better shut up before I get whacked next.

Crime Bosses, Zealots, and Factions

Our own NSA develops a vast surveillance network underneath our own noses, they even create a catalog for ways to spy on us, and somehow we are supposed to shudder in fear if the Russians or Chinese know our bank details. Excuse me; I don’t get it. We cannot even seem to find one decent human being to vote for these days, and Russia in Russian speaking Crimea is something we should go to war over. I could list a thousand bits of strangeness here, but my point is well made. Who cares if my Huawei P20 Pro is a security risk? None of us is safe anyhow. We’re in protection racked, we’re running the numbers, and each and every one of us lives under a crime boss. You can be Russian, Italian, or from Sumatra – nothing you have is secure. Vladimir Putin may smear VX Gas gel on your doorknob. Barack Obama leftovers may order a drone strike on your SUV. Hillary Clinton’s Arkansas mob may snuff you out in your sleep. The world is just not safe.

But by God, you’d better let your bank details flow through that iPhone because America has to be great again. Here, read about the worst crimes of Apple from 2013 and be amazed Donald Trump has the unmitigated gall to arrest a Huawei exec. Remind yourself about Microsoft handing over your perceived personal security to the NSA.

Turning to Trump and the insinuation he’s a captain of the new organized crime web of this world, a Washington Post story from some time back paints this picture for me. Imagine a U.S. president tied to such names as Fat Tony Salerno and Carmine Galante! Donald Trump is connected, sure enough, through his  political mentor and personal lawyer Roy Cohn, who was the consigliere for those mafiosos. And you thought I was just blowing off steam comparing Trump policy to gangland tactics. Hell, his construction firms bought expensive concrete from the Gambino crime family, for crying out loud. Read the WaPo piece, do the research, and understand the Australians would not let Trump build in Sydney because of his “mob connections.” This Vice story by Tom Robbins loosely aligns Donald Trump with some of the most notorious crime bosses in modern history. No wonder the Trump narrative and policy sounds so “punishing.”

Trump or the Triad?

Back in the day, I used to know these “made guys” put in place by a couple of labor unions I was close to. Heck, I even had a cousin who ran drugs for the mob back in the 70s. From those experiences I know this, business is all a racket and politicians are the paid pawns that help grease the wheels. You all know this, but society has conditioned us to lay off the conspiratorial talk. We Americans like our crime squeaky clean, you know? Admitting that each and every one of us has been in bed with the mob in one way or another, it’s just uncomfortable. I understand you. Factions, crime families, and our zealous clinging to the fantasy we want people to see as America – I am still amazed when my friends feign ignorance. Trump and all those fellows of his up in Washington, they’re dirty as hell. Let’s just be real with one another. Once you sit in a room and hear the deals being made, after your pal the city mayor confides his duplicity to you when your father the doctor or lawyer gives you the score – don’t you know the score from then on?

We’re going to punish those Russians and the Chinese. But who will punish us and how harshly? For my part, after decades of deliberation, I choose the Huawei P20 Pro even though it costs €1,000 euro. I chose it because it takes great selfies and the touch screen is flawless. I pick the Chinese manufacturer because I am less afraid of the Communists spying on me than I am of our own leadership. At least the Triads are not threatening to “punish” us for being Americans.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Xinjiang : The New Great Game

The world crossed a geopolitical watershed at the end of 2017. That was when the American Empire officially declared China its No.1 national-security threat, alongside Russia.

Since then, Washington has spared no effort to confront and contain China on multiple fronts. These include an intensifying trade war, bans on Chinese acquisitions of US assets, a witch-hunt against Chinese companies and individuals in America, military and political provocations in the South China Sea and relating to Taiwan, and whipping up Sinophobic activity among US allies (translation: vassals). And playing a key role in fanning and marketing these efforts, as usual, are the Western corporate media.

The latest such assault centers on Xinjiang’s sensitive Uighur issue. With the Empire’s support, Uighur radicals have in recent years stirred tensions in the Western Chinese region, even as foreign-trained Uighur militants staged high-profile terror attacks in various parts of the country. Chinese authorities’ efforts to defuse such tensions and combat the violence are being mendaciously depicted as systematic, large-scale repression of one of China’s biggest ethnic minorities.

The recent spate of Western media reports alleging brutal repression of Uighurs in Xinjiang marks a new phase of a propaganda drive to demonize China and destabilize its periphery. Highlighted by screaming headlines in Western corporate media are accounts of a million Uighur Muslims (or 2 in 5 Uighur male adults!) being interned in concentration camps and subject to torture, such as waterboarding. The suggestion or assertion is that Xinjiang has become an open-air prison (which actually reminds one of the real one operated by Washington’s ally Israel in Palestine).

That bald and barefaced accusation was made with nary a shred of supporting evidence by the lone American on an external committee (with no representation from UN officials) of the UN Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR). Western media such as Reuters went to town with the allegation, misrepresenting it as a charge levelled by OHCHR against China. An OHCHR spokesperson denied that the UN agency had made that finding and criticism against Beijing.To cover up the lie, Reuters cited reports issued by an anti-China, extreme right wing group based in Washington and funded by the American government and NGOs such as National Endowment for Democracy.

That’s not the first time allegations of Beijing’s repression of Uighur Muslims were made by western media . Previous provocative and unsubstantiated claims of Chinese authorities banning fasting by Uighurs during Ramadan had surfaced periodically. Furthermore, malicious and ludicrous lies that Uighur Muslims were forced by the government to eat pork and drink alcohol were making the rounds in Western press and social media last year.  In recent times, China-hating lies fabricated and spread by western corporate media have become more vile and venomous. The intent is to demonize China, incite hatred and instigate violence and even Jihad by Uighur militants in Xinjiang and Islamic State terrorists outside China.

It’s the third time in as many decades that the CIA has sought to dominate Central Asia (the Great Game), with Afghanistan as the core and other parts of Central Asia including Xinjiang in the Empire’s cross hairs.

The first attempt was in the 1990s, after the dissolution of the Soviet Union but before the 9/11 cataclysm. The CIA worked hand in glove with the mujahideen in Afghanistan as well as Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda. Boot camps were set up in Afghanistan to train Uighur separatists, in much the same way as Islamic State extremists were trained and armed to overthrow the Syrian government a decade later. CIA-instigated destabilization culminated in the bombing of three public buses in Urumqi in February 1997. Nine people died and more than 70 were injured. Chinese authorities swiftly put down the insurrection and stabilized the situation.

In 2007-08, Uighur separatists saw and seized a historic opening — the 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing — to internationalize their cause. An attempted suicide bombing on a China Southern Airlines flight was thwarted. The terrorist attack in Kashgar in southern Xinjiang resulted in the death of 16 police officers four days before the start of the Games. In July 2009, riots by Uighur extremists in the provincial capital Urumqi caused the death of nearly 200 people, mostly Han Chinese. True to the imperial double standard, Washington didn’t consider and characterize such calamitous riots and other deadly attacks by Uighur militants as acts of terrorism.

The orgy of violence continued through to 2014. There were two more failed hijackings of commercial planes as well as scores of bombings, killing tens of civilians each time. The knife attack at the southwestern China city of Kunming railway station in March 2014 was a watershed, resulting in 31 dead and 141 injured.

Faced with such armed insurrections, many sovereign states would have imposed martial law or declared a state of emergency nationwide or in the affected region, suspending the rule of law. That was the case in southern Thailand and Indonesia’s Aceh province. Even peninsular Malaya’s British colonial rulers imposed emergency rule from 1945 to 1957 when confronted with a communist insurgency. And post-9/11, US authorities enacted a draconian security law (the Patriot Act) and implemented other measures that stripped away civil liberties in the name of anti-terrorism.

China has done nothing of that sort. It has stepped up security, including armed patrols and checkpoints in hot spots. The objective is clear and transparent: to restore law and order, and go after terrorists and prevent them from inflicting more violence. Chinese authorities describe their action as high-intensity regulation. The strategy has succeeded in containing the spread of terrorism beyond Xinjiang and purging religious extremists and separatists from the civil society. Beijing’s counter-terrorism efforts have been helped by Shanghai Cooperation Organization members like Kyrgyzstan, as well as President Erdogan of Turkey, who has stopped acting as the Empire’s proxy in Xinjiang by funnelling money and providing a secret corridor for Uighur terrorists to flee China.

Almost a decade after the Urumqi riots, China has turned its anti-terrorism focus to undoing the toxic brainwashing of ordinary Uighurs by extremists. Neighborhood religious institutes have been set up to educate citizens on the perils of religious extremism (these community centres where classes are held to detoxify radical Wahhabism were labelled “re-education camps” or concentration camps by the western press, and those attending the classes claimed to be “incarcerated”!) Programs to eradicate poverty are implemented to train and prepare Uighurs for jobs in towns and cities. Some 600,000 Uighurs were lifted out of poverty in 2016, and another 312,000 in 2017. More than 400,000 have been relocated from remote villages to places where they are gainfully employed.

The Chinese government, through various programs, has been winning the hearts and minds of ordinary Uighurs. That is bad news for the US Empire and the Uighur separatists. They are making a desperate, all-out bid to unravel the good work done by Beijing to eradicate religious extremism and poverty in Xinjiang. The deluge of fake news from Western corporate media since the beginning of this year seeks to demonize the Chinese government, painting it as a gross violator of human rights, when the truth is the exact opposite.

It would be funny if it wasn’t serious that Washington has taken up the cudgels against unproven abuses and repression of Uighurs in Xinjiang when the American Empire and its allies, under the guise of War on Terror and humanitarian intervention, have droned, bombed and killed millions of Muslim children, women and civilians in a dozen of countries from Afghanistan to Yemen, and displaced millions more.

By THOMAS HON WING POLIN – GERRY BROWN
Source

%d bloggers like this: