THE CHINESE AFFAIR

Why will the US elections in November not be a solution to resolve the instability between Washington and Beijing?

 

By Sidney Hey 

In the midst of the financial tremors that are shaking the whole world and which are most likely controlled by the same centres of power that are affected, the Chinese giant continues to do what it knows how to do, work patiently and quietly.

This Asian power is the great protagonist of this century and its rivals in Washington and Brussels know it and do not like it at all. Its most feared potential is commercial and technological, even more so than military, given that the Anglo-Saxons have been doing everything they can to try to co-opt Asian markets or, at worst, destroy them even at the risk of military friction in the South Sea.

While the Western media distract the public with the latest news about the Ukrainian (NATO) incursion into the Russian Oblast of Kursk and the terrorist drone attacks on Moscow, the brains at the CIA, the Pentagon and the top strategists in Brussels are closely and intently following the unrest and changes in the Indo-Pacific countries. Obviously because of their interest in the outcome they expect.

Certainly, the Russian Federation is one of the indisputable geopolitical rivals and a thorn in the side of the hegemonic ambitions of the decadent Anglo-American potential that is trying to break Moscow with the proxy war in Ukraine, but the People's Republic of China is the jewel in the crown of these same ambitions, although much more difficult to conquer. To this end, Washington disguises these intentions under the guise of the much-vaunted ‘national security’ or, more recently, a supposed concern for ‘international security’, to which it has done a disservice with its shenanigans (colour revolutions, false flags and black operations) and military interventions to change regimes. All the turmoil around South Asia and, coincidentally, in the countries bordering the South Sea are nothing more than the product of CIA dirty operations.

For the Americans, China is a powerful rival that has a very different global vision and is therefore counterproductive to the geopolitical interests of the collective West. Even within that mindset, they suspect the Chinese of seeking to wrest global leadership from them. Those who think this do not seem to realise that it has been their own governments (especially the US) over the years that have undermined that leadership through their own inconsistencies. The values that are often claimed from the White House have then been trampled underfoot, so who can speak of values and their credibility in their invocation? It has nothing to do with whether one is a so-called democracy and the other a so-called autocracy, and who is qualified to make such disquisitions on morality? The underlying dilemma is (as it has always been) economic profit and its financial clout.

For the US establishment, the question that gnaws at its brains and evidences this fear of competition is: How long will China continue to grow?

The fear of the US Establishment (the true holder of power) is to control and take over everything, a vision diametrically opposed to that of its Asian adversary, which engages in relations with partners from all latitudes on the same level. While the US philosophy is to destroy the adversary, China's is to compete for the benefit of all. China, on the other hand, seeks competition based on hard work, cooperation and a win-win relationship between states. It is in this opposing vision that the US sees an enemy that endangers its financial system centred on the dollar as the currency of exchange, which, it should be noted, seems to be crumbling day by day and which, with the option of the growing BRICS+, becomes more possible.

One of the fears of the US elite is losing the technology race -as in the case of semiconductors- which, like it or not, is two steps behind its Asian rival. Just mentioning developments in digital communications and artificial intelligence already leaves bureaucrats in Washington who did not expect such a leap in technological development pale in comparison. It is in this matter that the State Department has positioned Taiwan -while putting the island at risk of war- as one of its pins in the region as a factor and a gateway for US policies to be deployed against Chinese interests. The reverse is not the case, i.e. China is not using Mexico or Canada to deploy covert actions aimed at creating subversion on its territory in order to take away its markets or steal its technological advances. Because not only does it not need to, but there is nothing to take.

The fear felt by the US elite is such that they even speculate (not to say wish) on the impact of China's falling birth rate as a consolation that would force a decline in its potential.

But deep down they know that this is a vain hope. Their efforts to destabilise China are outsourced (as they do in Ukraine against Russia) by using regional actors. For these purposes, the CIA pulls its strings and recruits useful elements from among the dregs of these societies to use them when it suits them best. In this case, two of the strategic actors best suited for this purpose are undoubtedly Singapore and Australia. The former lends its cooperation in communications, logistical support and human intelligence (humint) to operate in places such as Malaysia, the Philippines, Bangladesh (where the US wants to take over St. Martin's Island) and Myanmar (where it operates on two sides). Australia's role is strategically important in two ways: its geographic location as a platform for projecting NATO operations on the Chinese mainland and the importance of its fleet, which is central to providing strategic naval intelligence for NATO. 

The bottom line is that China is a real boogeyman for the Anglo-American elite, and not because it is an autocracy or has a one-party system of government. All this nonsense that the media repeat like parrots is only for idiots. The problem is that it is a model that works and that, to make matters worse, will eventually displace the US. That is why Washington will try to do the only thing it has been able to do for the last thirty years, and that is to attack what it fears and destroy what does not suit it.