How Will Hillary Clinton ‘Book’ China?

According to an April 7 BBC Chinese report, while campaigning in Pennsylvania on April 6, Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton fiercely criticized China and said that if she were president, China would have to “strictly follow rules”* and that she would “throw the book at China for its illegal actions.” Clinton said, “I’ve gone toe-to-toe with China’s top leaders on some of the toughest issues we face, from cyberattacks to human rights to climate change to trade and more.” She continued, “I know how they operate and they know if I’m your president they are going to have to toe the line, because we are going to once and for all get fair treatment or they’re not going to get access to our markets.” That day Clinton gave a speech at an AFL-CIO convention in Philadelphia. This speech contained some of the fiercest attacks on China since the presidential race began.

Clinton’s statement about “throw[ing] the book at China for its illegal actions” drew many angry responses from Chinese people. However, from Clinton’s perspective, the angrier they get the better, because her whole purpose in saying such things is to elicit a Chinese reaction in order to pander to the American people. You have to understand that if you want to be president of the United States, there are certain things you must do in regards to China because American governments have always viewed China as a stumbling block to their rise. Therefore, Clinton’s intense criticism of China in this case is nothing more than attention-seeking and letting the American people know how much Hillary hates China. She is telling them that if they elect her as president, she’ll force China to submit to “strictly following the rules.”* Knowledgeable observers know that Clinton is speaking this way simply in order to build political capital and help her get the votes she needs to become president; thus, they see attacks like this one by Clinton as a joke.

Yesterday, someone on the Internet told me, “That crazy old lady Hillary is speaking nonsense again. She attacked China again.” I told him, “Don’t be angry; it’s not worth the harm it does you. This isn’t the first time Clinton’s attacked China, is it? This is simply her political task. If she doesn’t attack China, what else can she do to create political capital as she vies for the presidential throne? Currently, Bernie Sanders has her backed into a corner without a chance to catch her breath. She can only trot out China to vent against a bit.” I’ve said in the past that neither presidents nor presidential candidates can ever promise too much improvement in relations with China, and that includes everyone — from former President Bill Clinton to today’s President Obama — and the attitude of the U.S. government toward China will be the same whether Clinton or Sanders takes office. And Clinton’s poisonous tongue does not merely reflect her personal feelings, but also the feelings of the U.S. government! Do you think that Obama doesn’t want to punish China right now? He would love to, but he just doesn’t have the chance because he knows very well that China will not take it lightly; today’s China is no longer the China of the past. And yet Clinton still trots it out for political advantage.

In reality, what could Clinton possibly do to punish China? Perhaps she has no aces up her sleeve: Although she served as secretary of state, she can’t very well talk about her experience as an example of throwing the book at China for its illegal actions; she herself might find that laughable! Perhaps this is just the style politicians are used to: They talk a good game, but no one knows whether they can actually realize their promises. The U.S. election is quite competitive, but the presidential candidates’ statements have been ignoring her; who knows what the case will be in the future? Still, there is a little evidence. It appears that all presidential candidates are hardworking, not only having to give speeches in person but also having to rack their brains to come up with outrageous statements for political gain! And it so happens that Clinton’s talent for such statements comes in the form of criticizing China to flatter the United States. Surely, her current brazen attacks against China are only the result of her feeling like she is running out of options!

You must know that we don’t feel like Clinton’s continuous attacks against China are strange, because attacking China is her pet project. She has done this many times in the past, as I’m sure readers are aware, and this instance of her attacking China is without a doubt a case of her trying to get attention in light of recent poor campaign performance. Out of seven elections, she lost six to Sanders, including the Wisconsin primary on April 5. Once again, Clinton hopes that by bringing up her experience as secretary of state, she can convince voters that she has a strong influence over China. This instance of attacking China in Pennsylvania is due to pressure from Sanders. Only such pressure could make her come out with such extreme statements to get the American public to see her in a new light. But even if she is currently the ideal presidential candidate, the reason she keeps losing is because her heart is so set on attaining the presidency that she loses control of the situation. Consider, for example, her email scandal or the fact that Bill Clinton is helping her campaign; not only have these failed to achieve a positive response among the public, they have incited much suspicion and and have even compromised her presidential candidacy.

And now, Clinton appears to be attacking China in order to gain the “trust” of the American public. The result, however, will be the opposite — she has criticized China so often without anything coming of it. A Chinese saying holds that “effort and effectiveness dry up after repeated attempts.” Will Hillary’s one-trick criticism of China fail to gain the trust of the American people? You see, it’s not necessary to be angry at Clinton. Just sit back and watch the show!

*Editor’s note: Correctly translated, these quotes could not be verified.