Red China vs The United States = Clarity vs Confusion
Communist China’s dictator President Xi Jinping spoke recently to the Chinese Communist Party’s 20th Congress. Xi’s two-hour speech, which roughly coincided with the release of the
Biden administration’s National Security Strategy (NSS), was a frightening look into Red China’s doctrine of all domain warfare, and in its clear statement of Communist China’s goals it contrasted alarmingly with the muddled platitudes of Biden’s strategy.
Whereas Biden sees competition with Red China as merely one of many items on the American national security agenda, in his remarks Xi made it clear that Communist China views everything, from COVID-19 response to green energy, as a battlefield for competition with the West in general, and the United States in particular.
As our friends at the Center for Security Policy explained in their analysis of Biden’s NSS:
Reading the document, one is reminded of the old W.C. Fields’ joke about the contest where the first prize is a week in Philadelphia and the second is two weeks—all should be thankful that the NSS is not longer. It is a profoundly flawed document regarding the China threat. Its vices are anchored in an inability to recognize the size and scope of the threat from the Chinese regime to the U.S. homeland and the U.S. and allied interests.
At best, the rhetoric of NSS on the China threat and of the Biden administration since it entered office is a faint echo of former President Donald Trump’s. Unlike Trump, Biden does not implement the rhetoric but rather sustains the failed policies of the administrations before Trump—all of which sought to accommodate and support China’s rise.
The NSS states that the United States will work with China on issues like climate change and “coexisting peacefully” rather than confronting and defeating it.
The notion of “peaceful coexistence” takes us back to the pre-Ronald Reagan thinking on our relations with aggressive totalitarian dictatorships.
Where America’s other mid to late twentieth century Presidents – Johnson, Nixon, Ford and Carter – accommodated and even helped preserve tottering Communist dictatorships through trade and disadvantageous arms control treaties, Ronald Reagan had a different view.
As Reagan told his first National Security Advisor, Richard Allen, his national security strategy was simple: “We win, they lose.”
That is more or less what Communist dictator Xi said in his remarks to the 20th Chinese Communist Party Congress – except he wasn’t talking about just military or diplomatic competition with the United States.
Xi listed at least seven areas of competition with the United States and the West; Foreign Policy, Military Power, Common Prosperity, COVID Response, the Economy, Taiwan, Hong Kong, and Green Energy, and he committed Red China to being the world’s preeminent power in each of those domains.
In contrast to Xi’s goal-oriented clarity, the Biden NSS doesn’t even identify the Faustian bargain between Wall Street and Communist China as a threat, let alone one that must be confronted and terminated.
As Bradley Thayer, the Center for Security Policy's Director of China Policy explained, the Biden administration’s failure to identify the Chinese regime as a threat and act boldly to counter it ensures that the future will be plagued by the absence of strategic clarity concerning the nature and gravity of the United States’ enemy, as well as the urgent need to respond immediately. The response needed includes informing Wall Street, Silicon Valley, media, universities, and the public about the nature of the threat, its adaptability, the need for perpetual awareness regarding it, and ensuring that they do not act contrary to U.S. interests.
So, instead of direct statements that the United States would confront and defeat Red Chinese attacks on us, including, but not limited to the CCP’s technology thefts, deadly fentanyl smuggling, farmland acquisition and direct espionage, the Biden administration laid out a vague threefold strategy toward Red China: 1) to invest in the foundations of American strength at home; 2) to align efforts with allies and partners; 3) to” compete responsibly” with China to defend U.S. interests.
“Competing responsibly” with Red China, when their stated goal is to defeat us in every domain of competition is like following the Marquis of Queensbury rules in a bar fight.
Red China is THE existential threat to constitutional liberty, and any American President who does not recognize that AND commit himself to Ronald Reagan’s “We win, they lose” strategy is unworthy of the office, and is in his own right a threat to our future as a free people.
Control of Congress
Drugs on the southern border
Chinese Communist Party