Who Is the US Trying To Intimidate with Its Double-Dealing in the South and East China Seas?

On Feb. 7, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry announced to both the Japanese foreign minister and local media that the U.S. neither recognizes nor accepts China’s establishment of an air defense identification zone in the East China Sea. Moreover, he said that the U.S. will protect the Japanese islets claimed by China in the event of any attack on them. Only a few days earlier, U.S. officials openly called into question China’s “nine lines” policy for the South China Sea and strongly condemned Beijing over rumors that China would establish an air defense identification zone over the area. The U.S. has clearly announced its intentions here, and this has left China disgusted; throughout every province, Chinese people are in utter astonishment.

It must be pointed out that no one in Asia desires or intends to go to war. This is a result of friction amid those who have the capacity to start a conflict. Japan, the Philippines and others have created this concept of a “rising China threat” for the purposes of their own personal gain, and with one glance, the U.S. can see their games for what they are. But for Washington to play along by tolerating their displays of pathos — this turns fantasy into reality. This is dangerous.

The U.S. has sent the wrong message here. This act will possibly fuel Japan and the Philippines continuing to pursue their ambitions. It will increase the probability of violent confrontations in Asia. Moreover, it will admit further confusion into U.S.-China relations and will erode the fragile trust that exists between these two great nations. If the White House thinks these recent acts are a convenient strategy for solving East Asia’s issues, then the U.S. is a warped superpower — at its core, barely superior to either Japan or the Philippines.

The U.S. has never left the Asia-Pacific region, yet it has clearly proclaimed its intentions for a “return to the Asia-Pacific.” By the looks of things, the U.S. is somewhat befuddled here.

Does the U.S. want to hedge itself against China’s rise? Well, it is becoming clearer and clearer that China cannot be contained. So in the end, what does America want? Does it want peace in East Asia? Does it want to increase hostilities between China, Japan, the Philippines and others? Or does it want these countries to have neither peace nor war? The White House is sending out contradictory signals. The U.S. has yet to make itself any clearer than these utterly perplexed countries in East Asia.

China has been nothing else but the one East Asian country most supportive of shelving war plans in order to promote joint progress. In the series of clashes at hand, the first country to trigger a confrontation will definitely not be China. China’s goal is not to use arms to solve disputes within the East Asia seas; it is instead to promote an attitude of genuine respect throughout East Asia for the issues at stake. It wants to stop any country from again recklessly pushing agendas that could spark conflicts.

If the U.S. thinks itself the stabilizing hand here, then it’s being highly naive. If its intent is to instead apply pressure in some preferred direction, then it will only introduce further chaos into the Asia-Pacific. In trying to weaken the political orderliness here, all that will remain will be fierce rivalries and deadly scheming.

China will show no toleration for America’s troublemaking and the dangers it will cause. China has never considered going to war with anyone, but it will insist upon its position and rights in the situation at hand. It does not fear the friction its stance creates with Japan, the Philippines or other countries. We also trust that neither Japan nor the Philippines have the fortitude for starting a war with China. We revile them both for all the diatribes they direct at us.

As for the White House’s tirade against China, we also express our mutual contempt. The U.S. has thoroughly shredded Washington’s political credibility in Chinese society. From these acts, the Chinese people can only conclude that America’s benevolence is mere double-dealing. When doing business with a country like America with one hand, we ought to keep the other hand free to protect ourselves.

Along with the increase of China’s strength, we should also seek methods for countering America’s leverage so we can respond tit-for-tat to further provocations from the U.S. [and] seek different degrees of countermeasures that we can use against America’s ploys in the region. Though we yet lack the power in full, we will not fail to respond powerfully to Washington’s provocations. Relations between China and the U.S. are very important, but when Washington kicked us from under the desk like this we could not respond in kind.

The U.S. is helping Japan, the Philippines, the Dalai Lama and Rebiya Kadeer, and Washington is hot for helping anyone else in China that is a “public figure with a different viewpoint.” In doing all this, the U.S. still cannot shake China. All the U.S. has done is instead shown the Chinese people that [the U.S.] seeks to play a confounding role in China’s road to revival. This is the reality that faces us now — whether it is best for us to decrease our power in the East and South China Seas or to increase it.