Antony Blinken changed his face several times, an event China | America | event

On the one hand, it is necessary to find a peaceful way to coexist with China, while on the other hand, it is hoped to be in an advantageous position in competition;

According to US media reports, on the 28th local time, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken made a series of contradictory remarks at an event hosted by the Council on Foreign Relations, a US think tank.

The governor of Chang'an Street noticed that since the end of his visit to China last week, Antony Blinken has continuously "changed his face".

On the 25th local time, Antony Blinken said in an interview with CBS, "It is no secret that there are differences between the two sides. The United States will continue to defend the interests and values of the United States, continue to do things that China does not like, and say things that China does not like, just as China will undoubtedly continue to do and say things that the United States does not like."

"We are dissatisfied with Antony Blinken's remarks." On the 28th, Mao Ning, a spokesman of the Chinese Foreign Ministry, responded at a regular press conference that the US side, out of a wrong perception of China, pursued a wrong policy towards China, blockaded, contained and suppressed China, attacked and blackened China for no reason, and wantonly interfered in China's internal affairs. The words and actions of the United States violate the basic norms of international relations, and China naturally firmly opposes them.

Words and actions are deceitful

"The United States does not want to become the sole engine of world economic growth, it wants to see a China that has achieved economic success."

It is reported that when asked whether the United States is trying to slow down China's economic growth, Antony Blinken gave such an answer in the above activities.

He also stated that Washington has not "decoupled" from Beijing economically. "Our trade with China reached a historic high last year, and we received more foreign direct investment in China last year than in any year since 2014."

He argued, "There are approximately over a thousand Chinese individuals and entities sanctioned by the United States, while there are 48 million registered companies in China, which only affects a very small number of companies operating in China, making it difficult to call it 'decoupling'."

The reality is that, due to so-called "national security" considerations, the United States is attempting to take measures to restrict the flow of US funds and technology to China. According to Bloomberg's previous report, the Biden administration is about to approve a China related executive order aimed at regulating and potentially cutting off US investment in fields such as semiconductors, artificial intelligence, and quantum computing.

In addition, according to several foreign media reports, led by the "Special Committee on China" of the US House of Representatives, several US Republican members sent a letter to Antony Blinken asking not to renew the decades old Sino US Science and Technology Cooperation Agreement. As one of the fundamental documents for the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States, the Agreement on Science and Technology Cooperation between China and the United States is renewed every five years and has never been interrupted for decades. However, recently there have been rumors within the US government that there is debate on whether to renew the agreement.

Who is the United States trying to deceive with this series of covert actions? Or, in the eyes of the US, all of this is just a "de risk" move? Is a China that has achieved economic success really what the US hopes to see?

Just as Antony Blinken made the above statement, US Treasury Secretary Yellen expressed his willingness to visit China.

"We need to discuss our differences to avoid misunderstandings and misunderstandings about each other's intentions." According to Reuters, on the 28th local time, Yellen admitted in an interview that there are differences between the United States and China, and stated that she hopes to visit China and re-establish contact with Beijing.

Previously, Yellen had stated that attempting to "decouple" from China would be catastrophic, and suppressing the economic progress of the Chinese people would not be in the interest of the United States.

"The United States has successfully controlled the most sensitive technologies, including advanced semiconductors, and these attempts to exclude China will certainly harm China, but they will also harm the United States." Earlier this year, former US Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson wrote in Foreign Affairs magazine, "Washington is facing the risk of going against economic gravity."

Word game

It was also in the above-mentioned activities that Blinken played a word game on the Taiwan issue.

"Biden has said four times that the United States will 'defend Taiwan' if Taiwan is 'attacked' by mainland China, while White House officials have clarified four times. What exactly is the U.S. policy toward Taiwan?"

When asked by the host, Antony Blinken first claimed that the United States would continue to act under the guidance of the "One China Policy", which has not changed or will not change.

Subsequently, he said, "Under the Taiwan Relations Act, our long-term policy is to take the necessary measures to ensure that Taiwan has the ability to defend itself as much as possible ...... U.S. support for Taiwan depends on actual actions, and since the Biden administration took office, it has announced nine arms sales to Taiwan."

On the one hand, it shows its recognition of the established policy, and on the other hand, it repeatedly tries to explore the bottom line of China. Is this the "way of peaceful coexistence" that Antony Blinken tried to explore?

However, it is not surprising that the US has engaged in such repeated tugs and tugs.

On the eve of Antony Blinken's visit to China, he just mentioned that "it is necessary to explore the potential of cooperation with Beijing to deal with global challenges such as combating synthetic drugs". Then the US Department of Justice sued Chinese citizens who were trapped in a third country by "fishing for law enforcement" because of the fentanyl problem, and forced the "drug dealer" hat on China's head.

"We want to ensure that we are in an advantageous position in this competition and can control the future development direction." Antony Blinken said that the relationship between the United States and China is "long-term competition", and there is no "clear end line".

Competition is not scary, what's scary is vicious competition without any bottom line. Although Antony Blinken also revealed on the same day that, next, senior Chinese and American officials will begin to increase mutual visits, deal with differences directly, clearly and honestly, understand the intentions of both sides, and cooperate in areas that meet the interests of both sides.

But in fact, it is meaningless to explore the meaning of Antony Blinken's sophistry. The underlying logic of problem-solving remains unchanged, and the so-called communication among American politicians is only in vain.