Hillary’s Words Lack Grace

Hillary Clinton, when heading to Myanmar, stated that developing nations should be smart shoppers and said, “Be wary of donors who are more interested in extracting your resources than in building your capacity. Some funding might help fill short-term budget gaps, but we’ve seen time and again that these quick fixes won’t produce self-sustaining results.”

Without doubt, the media around the world believes that Hillary’s statements regarding China. As the U.S. Secretary of State, Hillary has made these statements without wariness. The United States has lost its dominance and confidence, the Secretary of State has started to slander China. Hillary’s statements have given us a completely different impression about America. She is ruining the great figure of the U.S. and leads the U.S. to show the real face of meanness.

We cannot say that China’s foreign aid does not have deficiencies, but at least China’s foreign aid is more unadulterated than U.S. aid. The U.S.’s foreign aid usually involves military aid and adds straining political conditions that seldom care about the civil society of the recipient nations. In other words, the U.S.’s foreign aid is its political weapon. The U.S. doesn’t have the qualification to utter such words as “improve the ability of recipient countries.”

Also, the U.S.’s aid always changes. If the U.S. is not satisfied with the behavior of the recipient countries, the aid will be terminated. Hillary’s words, “won’t produce self-sustaining results,” probably describe the U.S. itself.

On the contrary, most of China’s foreign aid is invested in infrastructure and the infrastructure industry and is developed based on the needs of the civil society. China’s aid dabbles in industry, transportation, agriculture development, medicine, education, etc. This aid not only transmits “blood,” but also improves the function of “producing blood.” The fundamental reason is that China’s foreign aid respects recipient countries, but the U.S.’s aid is the “carrots” of “carrots and big sticks”.

Hillary’s fomentation seems to treat recipient countries as fools, not as smart. Maybe she believes that “smart power diplomacy” has unlimited power. She only needs to move her mouth to enhance the U.S.’s global influence without paying the price.

The lack of grace in Hillary’s words and the uproar of “jealous hatred,” in diplomacy, is almost equal to uttering bad words. Since her becoming the Secretary of State, she has been offensive to China more than once.

Maybe Hillary is trying to compensate for the deficiencies in the U.S.’s practical methods. The financial deficit has become astronomical, while trade competition is at a low point, and the nation has to borrow money from everywhere else. Now, one more dollar to aid means one more dollar added to the deficit. From the budgetary perspective, the U.S. has lost some of its privileges as a superpower country.

In this situation, Hillary is fully using “smart power diplomacy,” but this also means that the U.S. needs to tiptoe to fool Asia, because the U.S. has lost its tremendous power in Asian diplomacy. Now, the U.S. can only do the long-sleeved dance to stabilize the minds of Asian countries.

No other developing countries think that U.S. aid is more sincere than China’s aid. Many nations hope that the U.S. increases aid to Asia and Africa. However, it is still impossible for the U.S. to exclude China by increasing aid. If the U.S. only orally promises aid to Asia and Africa and never takes action to realize it, the bad reputation with which it describes China will finally reflect back onto itself.

Hillary should be clear that what China does nowadays seldom points to the U.S., but the U.S.’s return to Asia directly points to China. China keeps going naturally, while the U.S. keeps going on purpose. Therefore, it is predictable who will be more tired and who will last longer.