China Reacts to World – USA Gov Policy

For the past four decades China has gone unchecked by the international community of nations. It openly violates internationally-accepted standards for human rights, steals intellectual property from the West, threatens its neighbors in Asia, limits the right of free passage in and above the South China Sea, and imperils the people and security of Taiwan. The list is almost endless. Like a spoiled child not given its way for the first time, China is throwing a “hissy fit” now that the Trump Administration is holding it accountable for its past actions and future threats to the stability of the region and global commerce.

Attempts to commandeer the South China Sea through the building of artificial and heavily-armed islands is only one example of China’s hegemonic effort to exert its influence beyond its shores. This past week the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) leadership in Beijing literally fumed when US Health and Human Services Secretary Alex Azar spent four days in Taiwan meeting with Taiwanese President Tsai Ing-wen and other government officials in the highest US Cabinet-level visit to the island in 40 years.

In a tit-for-tat response to the US-Taiwan meetings, Beijing created military exercises close to the north and south ends of the island. Senior PLA Colonel Zhang Chunlian of the Eastern Theatre Command said the drills were to “safeguard the national security situation” in the Taiwan Strait. Secretary Azar was in Taiwan to talk about the pandemic and to convey Washington’s “admiration for Taiwan and to learn about how our shared democratic values have driven success in healthcare,” he said.

In a tantrum befitting a hellbent toddler, China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs Spokesman Zhao Lijian, demanded the US stop any form of official exchanges with Taiwan and called for Washington to “stop enhancing the substantive relationship between the US and Taiwan.” He went as far as to falsely call the visit a violation of a US promise on the Taiwan issue. On Thursday Taiwan’s cabinet voted to increase its military budget by more than 10% to US $15.43 billion to help deter China’s aggressive behavior toward the island further upsetting Beijing.

While the “hot peace” was playing out in Asia things also heated up in Washington this week as the US held China accountable for its US-based propaganda operation run by the Confucius Institute US Center (CIUS) by naming it a “foreign mission.” By declaring CIUS a diplomatic mission the US can require more transparency about its personnel and origins of funding. The CCP’s malign influence campaign spends millions each year establishing and supporting centers on US university campuses, in American K-12 schools and as stand-alone offices.

It uses coercion to push its agenda and has intensified its operations in recent years. When the University of California – San Diego invited the Dalai Lama to give its commencement address China actively pressured the school to disinvite him. At Savannah State University, at the demand of the co-director of the Confucius Institute, a keynote speaker had her introduction edited to eliminate the fact that she previously studied in Taiwan.

But http://www.learningworksca.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/007-ATD_WhereToBegin_050213.pdf viagra online discount in case of oral jelly or other kind of treatment as kamagra is easy to obtain an erection quickly and effortlessly. Sildamax pills are taken with generic cialis no rx water that are swallowed and become effective within an hour. It also helps people to sleep off pfizer viagra tablets have a peek here their migraines. It has not been studied for discount viagra no prescription use by females.

Dozens of US schools, finally, are delinking from the Confucius Institute and its extensive donation operation. Many US schools, however, continue their relationship unimpeded although they are aware it is funded by the PRC and the Chinese Communist Party. The US Government knows of over 500 Confucius K-12 classrooms in the US. Each is linked directly with a Confucius Center on a nearby college campus and funded by the CCP. The government also is tracking 75 of the Centers, of which 65 are active on university campuses. This is a large, multi-million dollar propaganda campaign which Beijing uses to actively pursue its global agenda.

If the Chinese Communist Party doesn’t like Americans exercising free speech in America it acts aggressively to stop it and counter with its own point of view. These types of incidents are increasing in recent months. Not long ago, Cambridge University Press was “told” to delete 250 articles the CCP found offensive. It threatened the Press with economic reprisals if it failed to comply.

In the West free speech, individual freedom, private property, and the right to assemble make up only a few of the differences from what one finds in China today. Dreams in the West of a non-belligerent giant have dimmed to a faint memory while Beijing’s leadership continues attempting to extinguish the western rules-based international system. It leaders employ a grand strategy with the end goal of remaking the world in its image. It is up to the West in 2020 to decide if it wants to kowtow to the communist giant or if it is ready to join the United States in holding China accountable.

DARIA NOVAK served in the United States State Department during the Reagan Administration, and currently is on the Board of the American Analysis of News and Media Inc., which publishes usagovpolicy.com and the New York Analysis of Policy and Government. Each Friday, she presents key updates on China.

Picture: Tianamen (Pixabay)

Quick Analysis

Ukraine’s Frozen Conflict

As we approach winter in the northern hemisphere, the war in Ukraine is beginning to resemble a “frozen conflict” from many perspectives. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky recently told the media he hopes the war will end faster once President-elect Trump takes over in January. Opinions in Moscow, however, differ from that of the Ukrainian leader. Russian President Vladimir Putin argues that the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) needs to exclude Ukraine from joining in “exchange” for peace. If it does not, he says, then no end to the war is in sight. So far there is no Christmas solution. Several NATO countries, according to Vladimir Socor of the Jamestown Foundation, are tentatively considering “coalitions-of-the-willing” to provide security for Ukraine outside of the formal NATO framework. There is, however, no collective mechanism today under which such an arrangement is viable. According to the NATO Charter, while Ukraine is a NATO partner country, it may not join as a full member since it has not fulfilled the requirements for membership. That has not stopped NATO and allies from continuing “to provide Ukraine with unprecedented levels of support, helping to uphold its fundamental right to self-defence,” according to the organization. Socor says that keeping Ukraine out of NATO will not advance peace with Russia. Waiting for a peace settlement, he suggests, would only serve to encourage Moscow to continue the war indefinitely. Although the Biden Administration officially withdrew its support for Ukrainian membership in 2021, NATO maintains an “open door” policy toward membership-seeking countries. The current White House position led the way for European states to oppose Ukraine’s membership saying that a decision should be delayed until “conditions are met.” Biden pushed for changing “open door” to a “bridge” metaphor. It is not intended as an across-the-board NATO policy and has been implemented in the past on a case-by-case basis, says Socor. “The alliance’s open-door policy was not fully insulated from Russia’s non-statutory blocking power, and NATO-aspirant countries’ path toward membership was not always irreversible.” Russia has successfully blocked states like Georgia from joining, first in 2008 and again after the war in Ukraine began in 2014. Russia recognizes the value add of Ukraine to NATO is enormous and that Kyiv has a better case than some other nations. Putin’s invasion was, in part, intended to foreclose that option. By 2021, Moscow was pushing hard to maximize its war objectives, which included further annexations of Ukrainian territory. A main goal for Putin was, and is, to ensure there is no Ukraine left to join NATO. As President-elect Trump prepares to assume office in January, he is faced with the historical challenges presented by the war. Post-conflict security guarantees were the center of several proposals made during the 2023 military stalemate. The incoming Trump Administration has yet to outline how it intends to handle the Russia-Ukraine war. Analysts in Washington believe that the new Administration will expect its European allies to guarantee the majority of Ukraine’s security needs. As we approach 2025, several European nations have acknowledged that they do not view Ukraine as eligible for NATO membership as it would draw the organization into the middle of the conflict. Others want to wait until the war is over or pending a “peace” settlement before considering Ukrainian membership. Socor reports that some “influential voices” are suggesting that “Kyiv should join NATO after “freezing” the war along a stable armistice line, de facto accepting Ukraine’s partition, with NATO security guarantees applying de jure to the government-controlled territory only.” This would mean starting accession talks soon with the actual talks to commence only after a ceasefire is in place. Trump arrives in Washington at a time when Putin’s hybrid strategies of war in Ukraine have eviscerated commonly-held differences between war and peace. “Absent a political consensus in NATO over Ukrainian membership, certain European allies, including France’s President Emmanuel Macron, are holding informal consultations about post-conflict security guarantees to Kyiv by NATO members outside of NATO’s framework,” according to the Jamestown Foundation. The Biden Administration downplayed the discussions on possible forms of military assistance and defense industry cooperation by sending only an Assistant Secretary of State. For a European peace to hold the Trump Administration would need to formally extend the United States’ nuclear deterrence to Ukraine. Options under discussion in Europe include a “coalition of the resolute” to deploy forces to Ukraine as part of a possible armistice package, deterring further Russian attacks, says Secor. European officials are also debating, without any agreement, whether its military forces could perform non-combat logistical roles to free Ukrainian forces to fight. None of the possible courses of action has moved forward as all eyes are waiting on the incoming Trump Administration for clues about its intended level of support for a NATO framework and other non-NATO proposals. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.