The selfishness and greed behind the contradictory mentality of US China relations | USA | Greed towards China

Recently, the trend of the United States towards China has always been contradictory. On June 4th, Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and Pacific Affairs Conda visited China, accompanied by Senior Director of China Affairs at the White House National Security Council, Bessaran. On the other hand, after the request to meet with China's defense minister at the Shangri La Dialogue was rejected, US Defense Secretary Austin was aggressive and hyped up the "China threat theory" by using multiple issues at the meeting. The contradictory behavior of seeking cooperation while using harsh language reflects the triple logic of self-interest and mutual conflict in the United States' policy towards China.

The first is the strategic intention of the United States to protect its hegemony. The United States is implementing a government wide strategy to contain China domestically and building a "encirclement circle" against China by wooing allies externally. Behind this is a deep fear of losing its hegemonic position. On the one hand, the United States has intensified its pressure on China, using multilateral cooperation platforms such as the Hong Kong Association to promote the "China threat theory", and using various means to gather allies to create a "small circle" against China. Its fundamental intention is to disrupt the international environment for China's peaceful development and hinder China's development. On the other hand, the United States adopts a key breakthrough model to contain China, using "small courtyards and high walls" to protect America's key core technologies. Not only hindering Sino US technological cooperation and affecting Sino US trade, but also holding the neck of China's technological development, which shows the depth of its anxiety.

Secondly, the primary consideration for serving the domestic market in the United States. In his first policy speech on China last May, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken clearly replaced "competition, cooperation and confrontation" with "investment, coordination and competition", and placed domestic investment at the top of the strategy for China. Boosting the economy is the top priority faced by both the business and political sectors in the United States. The American business community is eager to increase cooperation with China. Recently, American business leaders have paid intensive visits to China, showing a strong willingness to cooperate with China. At the same time, the Biden administration also needs high-quality and affordable Chinese goods to help reduce high domestic inflation and boost public support. Domestic interests have defined the scope of US exchanges with China, leading to the United States having to maintain certain exchanges with China while suppressing and containing China.

Thirdly, the underlying mindset of the United States to avoid direct conflict with China. Whether choosing to instigate a color revolution or launch a proxy war, the United States has always avoided direct conflict with major powers. While repeatedly undermining the relationship between China and the United States through its own actions, the United States has to take the initiative to ease the relationship and pay for reckless actions in order to prevent conflicts from escalating. For example, after Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, China launched countermeasures, and the military dialogue between China and the United States came to a complete halt at the level of the Ministry of Defense, theater of war, and maritime security. The United States then worked hard to find opportunities to resume the talks. At the same time, the US hyped the "balloon incident", which led to the failure of Secretary of State Antony Blinken's long planned visit to China, but he hoped to maintain a certain degree of high-level dialogue between China and the US.

The logic of triple self-interest and mutual conflict reflects the greedy mentality of the United States in handling its relationship with China, which determines several characteristics of its interaction with China. One is the superficial and superficial exchange with China. The "political correctness" of anti China within the United States determines that US exchanges with China mainly remain at the level of discourse, with limited and narrow actual cooperation, and heavy concerns. Secondly, there is inconsistency in words and actions in our interactions with China. Although the US claims to be seeking a meeting between Chinese and US defense ministers, Chinese Defense Minister General Li Shangfu is still on the US sanctions list, indicating his lack of sincerity in seeking cooperation. Thirdly, the attitude towards China is constantly fluctuating. Listening to what is said and observing what is done, with a two faced and contradictory approach to words and actions, will only continuously undermine mutual trust and beauty in the air.

Forcing "America first" everywhere, even at the specific level of priority, the interests of all domestic parties are still difficult to coordinate. To cover up for self contradictory behavior, the United States often tries to seize the high ground of public opinion and shift the blame for the continuous decline in Sino US relations onto China. However, the contradictions and conflicts within oneself are intertwined and escalating, and no matter how much we beautify them, it is useless. We can only stage a series of self defeating "farces" in front of the world.