Recently, the main topic regarding China-US military relations has been China's refusal to restore regular military exchanges between the Chinese and US militaries. Of course, even less so any military hotline.
On August 7, former director of US Naval Intelligence, Rear Admiral Michael Studeman, said at a Hudson Institute conference:
“China believes that having a hotline with the US military will make dangerous behavior more likely because that's a channel for resolving US military security concerns. As long as China does not give the US this security channel, the US military must restrain its own power and actions.”
Studeman’s intention in explaining this was to shift the blame for the interruption in China-US military exchanges onto China. But for people outside the US camp, isn’t it quite good that the US military in the Asia-Pacific region is a little more well-behaved, restrained, and less provocative everywhere?
The US military now recognizes that without normal military communication channels between China and the US, it would be detrimental to relations between the two countries, to peace in the Western Pacific, and even to world peace and stability.
China and the US are both nuclear powers, both possessing strategic nuclear strike capabilities that can completely destroy each other. So a military communication mechanism between China and the US is indeed necessary.
However, the actions of the US government and military have made China deeply feel that dealing with such an untrustworthy and two-faced adversary, there is really nothing to talk about, and no way to talk.
In fact, the Chinese side has repeatedly answered the main reason for the interruption in China-US military communications.
Under normal circumstances, the defense ministers of both militaries would be the first to engage in exchanges. But China’s defense minister is on the US sanctions list.
Without lifting these sanctions, there can be no military exchanges. China's position is entirely legitimate.
However, the top military and political leadership in the US, especially the US Department of Defense and the US military have consistently turned a blind eye to China's solemn position, and remained unmoved.
Most egregiously in recent years, the US military has constantly dispatched ships and aircraft to carry out normalized surveillance, harassment, and provocative transit near China's territorial waters and airspace. It has even created dangerous situations in the air and at sea on multiple occasions, forcing the PLA to take interception actions. Afterwards, the US publicly accused the PLA of being unprofessional and dangerous.
How could the increasingly powerful PLA tolerate such hegemonic actions by the US military?
The level of confrontation between the Chinese and US militaries at sea and in the air is becoming more and more intense. The distance between the confrontations of both sides is getting closer and closer. The US military has probably truly felt the danger and threat, and wants to talk with China.
For China, talking is not out of the question, but some sincerity must be shown first, and an environment and conditions for dialogue must exist. At the very least, the US military should restrain its provocative behavior somewhat and reduce surveillance harassment around China's coastal periphery. Otherwise, getting into an argument as soon as meeting, what's the point of such a dialogue?
It seems now that this is not how the US side is thinking.
Daniel Kritenbrink, the U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, recently testified at a House hearing that
"We are engaging with China based on the work we've done over the past two and a half years from a position of strength and confidence. From that position, we are very confident in engaging with our Chinese counterparts."
Clearly, the US still believes it has strength and still intends to bully others. Moreover, the congressmen of the US House of Representatives actually felt that such a stance was not tough enough, not gratifying enough.
Congressman Carlos Giménez repeatedly questioned Kritenbrink on whether it was the US who took the initiative to request meetings with senior Chinese officials.
He said, "Doesn't it look weak to the whole world that we keep asking to meet with senior Chinese officials? Is the US the junior partner?"
So it seems that in the near term, it will be difficult for the U.S. political and military circles to have a correct understanding of the nature of China-US military relations.
Quite a few Americans, including veteran diplomats like Kissinger, have been reminding the U.S. military and Biden administration, whether directly or indirectly, that China will not give in to power on issues in its relationship with the U.S., and the current policy of engagement cannot continue.
But the mainstream of U.S. politics has long been immersed in its own global empire dreams, believing that the Chinese government and military are pushovers and that any interception by the PLA in the air or at sea is just empty bluster of personal heroism.
These people now dominate the U.S. political arena, which has resulted in those who truly understand China and are willing to tell the truth having no opportunity to speak up.
Nikki Haley, former U.S. ambassador to the UN and one of the Republican presidential candidates for the 2024 election, even stated publicly in speeches that if she becomes president, she will turn the Chinese regime to ashes.
The harm these people cause to U.S. politics and the toxicity they bring to China-US relations exists objectively and is also difficult to reverse. Against this backdrop, there really is no way for the PLA and US military to open a military hotline or engage in rational dialogue.
Since the US side still emphasizes considering China-US relations from a position of strength, let them take stock of their own strength first. I believe the results of the stocktake will dishearten and dismay the US government or military.
Comments
Post a Comment