The Absurd Logic of the United States’ Investment in War

A Western proverb says that if you regard a person as an enemy, he will definitely become your enemy. China also has a saying: You reap what you have sown. These two sayings mean that if a person follows his psychological expectations [and acts accordingly], he is likely to get that kind of result.

Applying this logic to war and peace among nations means that if one country sees another country as its enemy, it will guard itself like a thief and invest heavily in careful preparation for war with that country. A fierce war between these two countries is likely to eventually erupt. On the contrary, if a country does not suspect another country of malice and invests money and effort in peaceful operations, then these two countries are likely to be on friendly terms for generations to come.

The history of European war and peace of the past century vividly illustrates this logic to the world. Seventy years ago, Britain, France and Germany saw one another as their greatest threat and strove to contain each other through military expansion and the use of various diplomatic tactics. The result is the outbreak of two tragic world wars. Drawing on the lessons before the war, Europe began to change its mentality from preparing for war to managing peace post-World War II. First, it resolved the dispute over resources between France and Germany by joint operation of coal and steel communities. On this basis, it built a unified European Union while reducing the national level of armaments and hostility, basically leading Europe to bid farewell to war and walk toward peace.

　　

Unfortunately, the European experience and lessons learned did not become the experience and lessons of the Asia-Pacific region, to say nothing of the experience and lessons of the United States. Whether the annual China’s Military Strength Report recently published by the U.S. Department of Defense or the report called A Strategic Net Assessment: China’s Military and the U.S.-Japan Alliance in 2003 released by the famous U.S. think tank the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, the core idea is in the operation of and investment in war.

First, the officials and the public of the United States, still holding onto a Cold War mentality, see China as an enemy that must be contained due to its different political system and ideology. Second, the United States’ techniques to contain China still follow the old superstition that “might is right” and center on deterring China through the strengthening of its military presence.

It is precisely this set logic about the investment in war that led to the ramping up of issues in certain regions. Also, because the United States has the world’s strongest military power, especially given America’s military strategy of containment, a considerable number of countries including China feel threatened. With these annual military reports the U.S. files against China, finding faults in China’s proper and normal national defense construction and spreading the “China’s military threat theory,” how can these two sides build mutual trust and cooperate?

Going back to the old saying, you reap what you have sown, if the United States really wants to establish a new military relationship with China, it should abandon the absurd logic of “investment in war” and genuinely build mutual respect, equality and trust to ensure pragmatic cooperation with China.