Washington Is Determined to Sucker Punch China into Submission
No matter what Western media source you would choose to read, you are compelled to come across the rhetorics about the persistent “Chinese aggression,” the notion that has already become the dominant narrative in the US. In fact, American Sinophobes claim that China doesn’t simply pose a military threat to the US, they argue that it represents an existential threat to the American way of life.
However, one is compelled to recognize that ever since WWII Beijing has been adhering to the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of other states, while Washington’s track record is riddled with instances of meddling in other nations’ internal affairs.
Is it of any wonder then that the most commonly discussed topic in the MSM these days is an all-out opposition that Washington is planning to mount against China. Against this background, it’s only logical that Stratfor would argue that the global competition between the US and China will become the defining feature of modern geopolitics, since those developing countries are about to find themselves hard-pressed between the two. Therefore, trade wars, cyberattacks and military races are not just here to stay, they are a form of today’s geopolitical reality, which transforms the international arena into a rather uncomfortable place to be in.
That is precisely why American intelligence agencies would look fairly concerned by the rapid pace that China managed to maintain in developing its defence capabilities, as it’s clear that in the foreseeable future Beijing will be capable to deploy cutting-edge military technologies in massive numbers due to its unparalleled production capabilities. This state that is for some vague reason is still being described as the second economy in the world has managed to outpace Washington in military capabilities due to its devotion to keeping all of its production at home.
It’s curious that China doesn’t try to create a larger military that the US has, instead it puts an emphasis on keeping its servicemen well-equipped and well-trained. Those are the conclusions that the Defense intelligence agency of the United States (DIA) made after analyzing an extensive amount of data. Those conclusions can be found in a report titled China Military Power: Modernizing a Force to Fight and Win.
In a bid to provide an answer to the question “What are Beijing‘s strategic intentions?” DIA comes to a number of conclusions that can be described as both shocking and alarming for Western propagandists. In particular, this report states that as a result of “acquiring technology by any means available,” especially in the areas of naval and missile systems, China‘s defense tech is not only at the cutting edge but “in some areas, it already leads the world.”
As it’s been announced in the annual posture statement delivered by the US admiral Philip Davidson, China is “eroding” the United States’ “relative competitive military advantage” in the Indo-Pacific region. This statement came as a part of the comprehensive report on Washington’s plans and intentions in the region, and was presented to the Senate armed services committee in the form of written testimony.
In turn, US deputy secretary of defense Patrick Shanahan revealed that among the top priorities of the Pentagon the goal of containing China ranks first, while adding that he would focus on implementing the National Defense Strategy drafted by former defense secretary Jim Mattis and approved by Donald Trump.
Is it any wonder that under those circumstances, as it’s been reported by the Washington Times, US special ops turn their focus from the so-called War on terror to China. It’s been revealed that special operations fighters will be taking a larger role in cyber-warfare, information and “influence” — digital age propaganda — operations, sources say, as well as training allies in the new skills. It’s been added that in a major shift of mission, officials at US Special operations command are drafting new guidance to reorient its cadre of top-tier military units to fight the expanding armies and navies of what US strategists call “near-peer” powers.
Further still, it’s been revealed by the chief of staff of the US Air Force, general David Goldfine that Washington is developing a new strategy for waging war against China, the essence of which is “hidden invasion” deep into enemy territory and attacking its weak points. During his speech at the Brookings Institute in Washington, the official confined to the general public that the cost of creating a strategy could reach 135 billion dollars. As it’s been explained by German sources, this new strategy will be reminiscent of the Trojan horse tactic, when under some peaceful pretext Washington would try to locate and attack the weak points of its adversaries, instead of trying to play against its strengths.
In the fourth iteration of the National Intelligence Strategy, released by the Office of the director of national intelligence, Beijing is described as the enemy of the United States, the fact that sparked a lot of discontent in China. In this document China is expected to continue to modernize its military and pursue “economic and territorial predominance in the Pacific region and beyond.” However, it’s been pointed out by a former senior NATO official and the sitting president of the Chicago council on global affairs, Ivo Daalder that Washington has lost its primacy in the world of geopolitics and there’s no easy way to reconquer it back.
With all of the above mentioned facts taken into consideration, it’s safe to say that the hybrid war that Washington has been waging against China for quite some time will intesify in the forseable future. Each consecutive incident in the Asia-Pacific region is going to be even more widely discussed with both Beijing and Washington taking even harsher stances on each of them, which means that the two leading geopolitical players are going to edge towards a brink of mutual nuclear annihilation, a price that humanity just can’t pay for one’s inflated geopolitical ambitions.
By Jean Périer
Source: New Eastern Outlook
