In the last Cold War, people couldn’t agree on who started it. But with the new one against China, there isn’t much doubt.
Let’s go back to the last Cold War where people did not know about the culprit and who started it. But this time the new one against China, the things are pretty clear.
Foreign affairs and foreign policy are the two major American issues across the globe. By keeping in mind these issues many influential writers are openly saying that they are the opponents of the Chinese government and want to bring it down. They are pushing for this to help maintain America’s declining power.
Atlantic Council, a well-known think tank, describes its latest view that proves not good for people living in East Asia. Before it, they have enjoyed decades of peace and prosperity. In their article “Against China, the United States Must Play to Win,” authors Matthew Kroenig and Dan Negrea argue that the United States should aim for regime change in China.
According to them, this might not bring democracy and human rights to the Chinese people but it definitely weakens the Chinese ability to threaten the United States.
In their view, the fall of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) would likely cause domestic chaos in China, making it less capable and willing to challenge the US-led global order.
Their messages are direct and sound clear. They believed that failure of China could negatively impact the Chinese people and also China’s global partner. And the global South is on the top of the list. They also suggest that Chinese people get alot of advantages from new China. The new nation is less repressive internally and more cooperative internationally.
Matt Pottinger, a former deputy national security adviser, and Mike Gallagher, an ex-chairman of the US House Select Committee on the Chinese Communist Party, argued in a recent Foreign Affair article. According to them, the United States should aim to win against China rather than just focus on winning the competition. They believe that Chinese people would be inspired by the American’s victory. And this victory also led to Chinese people to adopt new, non-repressive models of development and governance. But the question is, is it true and real?
This perspective seems out of touch, always pushing the idea of rallying allies, especially those in the Pacific, to sacrifice their own people for America’s interests.
Many Southeast Asian countries like Indonesia, the Philippines, and Vietnam should find Americans as the great supporters. According to Trump’s former security adviser, Robert O’Brien these countries get military support from the United States the same as Israel got. Some influential Americans now see Israel as more of a problem than a help.
Vietnam’s Prime Minister, Pham Minh Chinh, seems to support China’s growing influence. He praised China for taking a leadership role in solving global issues at a recent forum. This raises questions about how Southeast Asian countries might react to O’Brien’s ideas about military buildup.
The Newly elected President of Indonesia visited Beijing after the victory against many opponents. His aim is to increase the annual economic growth by about 7%. The main purpose of this aim is to boost Indonesia’s economy rather than building up its military.
Meanwhile, in the Philippines, President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. has close ties to the U.S., but his administration is facing challenges, including the resignation of Vice-President Sara Duterte. The Duterte family, a major political force opposed to the Marcoses, tends to align more with other ASEAN countries than with China.
Unlike the United States, many countries in Asia and the Global South prefer peaceful solutions to conflicts and aren’t eager for war.
