In his famous 1947 article “Sources of Soviet Conduct”, American diplomat and historian George Kennan described the “spontaneous opposition” between socialism and capitalism and how it became “deeply embedded” in the foundations of Soviet rule, leading to peaceful Co-existence became difficult between the Soviet Union and the West.
“This means that there can never be an honest assumption on the part of Moscow about the community of the target between the Soviet Union and the capitalist powers,” he wrote.
Kennan’s observation comes to mind when we look at how things have unfolded between China and the West, particularly Canada.
Sensations of widespread euphoria spread across Canada last week as Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor were finally released after spending more than 1,000 days in captivity in China, with Washington set to release Meng Wanzhou just after Was released due to an agreement.
The speed with which Beijing released the two Michaels – which, potentially perpetuating state propaganda, was coincidental and unrelated to Meng’s release – serves as a tacit acknowledgment that the two Canadians were actually political pawns.
Furthermore, it shows that when it comes to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), it does not hold back. The regime continues to show us that it doesn’t care much about what the democratic world thinks and will continue to use these kinds of tactics to get what it wants, because this kind of bullying has worked.
The question being asked in every field is where do we go from here in our relationship with Beijing.
In his address at the recent 76th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Xi Jinping laid out his usual thick declarations that China wants to help build a world that emphasizes “dialogue and cooperation … on confrontation and exclusion”. gives. and create “a new type of international relations” that will “expand the convergence of our interests and achieve the greatest synergy.” Because, after all, “China has never invaded or threatened others or sought hegemony.”
The entire speech, as are all of Xi’s speeches in international forums, is an attempt to project China as a more virtuous partner and custodian of the international order than the domineering, manipulative aggressors in Washington. Meanwhile, Chinese state propaganda has issued an equal amount of threats against countries such as Canada.
A September 26 Global Times article accused Ottawa of “serving as the lap of the US government” in the Meng case and said that good-natured Canada-China relations depend on Ottawa’s “strategic autonomy”. This essentially means that Canada must take Beijing’s side over Washington if peaceful relations after the Meng case are to be pursued.
Disappointingly, some Chinese enthusiasts in Canada are echoing this line, arguing that our trouble with Beijing stems not from the CCP’s ruthlessness but from our relationship with Washington. Academician Wenran Jiang—who emphasized close ties with China and defended Beijing’s Confucian institutions—weirdly said in a column over the weekend that “the United States, aided by Canada, took Meng hostage” and implied that we should try to reset the relationship. China went out of the way to get out of this problem rather than in a hurry based on “the lessons we’ve learned”.
It’s all bilge, of course. Besides the fact that Meng’s time in Canada was more akin to an extended luxury vacation than the harsh conditions of the two Michaels in China, Column framed the retaliatory capture of the two men at first as a humiliating response. considered injustice. Canadian Falun Gong businessman Sun Qian and Uighur Canadian Hussein Cecil, as well as more than 100 other Canadians illegally imprisoned in China will beg to be separated, their stories are testament enough to the customary nature of the practice.
The lesson that should have been learned long ago, and that must be reiterated, is that the CCP is at its core the most disruptive force in the world today and our policy towards it should reflect this now more than ever.
However, the Trudeau government’s public announcements give no indication of imminent changes. Foreign Minister Mark Garneau said on 26 September that Canada’s “eyes are open” with regard to China but maintained that the government would practice a policy that oscillates between coexistence, competition, cooperation and challenging.
This approach will continue to result in the same reluctance to take adequate action on Beijing’s crimes, lest it offend the Ottawa regime and jeopardize its cooperation on priority issues such as climate change.
However, the CCP has made it clear that it does not separate perceived mutual concerns such as climate change from the broader geopolitical agenda. Like everything else, its claims to the contrary are a cynical ploy.
In his meeting with US President Joe Biden’s climate envoy John Kerry on 1 September, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi explicitly stated that cooperation on climate change “probably cannot be divorced” from other problems.
“The US side hopes that climate cooperation can be an ‘oasis’ in Sino-US relations, but if that ‘oasis’ is surrounded by desert, that too will sooner or later become a desert,” Yi said.
In other words, Beijing’s cooperation on climate change depends on whether the United States and the West are willing to surrender to Taiwan and other issues such as human rights. The cynic has been laid bare.
All this underscores once again that, like the Soviet Union during the Cold War, it is unrealistic to expect that there will be an honest “community of purposes” between China and the West. And given what we know about the nature of CCP and how it works, this is unlikely to change anytime soon.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.
This News Originally From – The Epoch Times