Part I 

The Puzzle of the Century
 
Why can't the U.S. led West accept China? This is the biggest puzzle in my mind. I have devoted more than a decade of my life to understand and resolve this puzzle. I have spent nearly a decade to observe the U.S.-China relations. I have worked very hard as a weekly columnist writing articles, English and Chinese, to analyze current events and issues related to the U.S. and China with the purpose of exposing, understanding and resolving this puzzle. However, China has been cast as a threat and designated as the most critical competitor of the U.S. today. The U.S. - China relations have gone from a drug trader-addict business relation to mutual recognition and respect over world wars to a serious engagement reaching a Chimerica symbiotic trade and finance relationship then to a ‘China Threat’ stance which is not only hostile but also brutal in diplomatic relationship leading to potential fatal consequences. Last month, I suffered a heart attack, although I was saved by a cardio-surgery but I was told that I had to avoid a stressful life. Therefore, I decided to write an open letter to the world about the burdensome and stressful puzzle in my mind, which is really a puzzle of the century: Why can't the West accept China? This has been the main source of my mental stress. I hope that I can relieve my stress by openly tossing the burden of solving this puzzle to the world, praying that it will be solved before my demise.
 
Starting from the Present
 
Presently the world is in great tension. The Russian-Ukraine war has lasted more than three  months still escalating with the threat of turning into a nuclear war. The background of the Russian-Ukraine confrontation is very complex involving race, religion, sovereignty and external influence from the U.S., NATO and EU, but the main issue is hinged on national security. Russia is concerned with NATO's continuous expansion encircling her with military bases and guided missiles. The fact that Ukraine, as a close neighbor of Russia, wants to become a NATO member certainly puts Moscow under a national security threat. Russia took advantage of the two states in the east of Ukraine (Donetsk and Luthansk), their seeking support for their Declaration of Independence after eight years of revolutionary war. Russia’s support for the two pro-Russia states are understandable but sending troops into Ukraine does raise international concern. What has followed causes more international dispute. Instead of seeking an immediate withdrawal of the Russian troops and a cease fire between Ukraine and Russia, the U.S.-NATO-EU cheered Ukraine on to engage Russia in war. Soon, the war spread out from the East to West and North to South. The Alliances tried to unite the world to sanction Russia with maximum strength from trade to currency transactions and continued with escalated military support to Ukraine. The objective became clear that is to prolong the war to make Russia cave under economic stress.
 
The U.S. Grand Strategy of ‘Targeting Enemy’
 
The U.S. has become a superpower since WW II and has taken on the role as the world leader for rebuilding the free world against the communists. She adopted the ‘targeting enemy’ as her national (security) strategy. She first targeted the Soviet Union as the enemy against the expansion of communism. In leading the fight, her ‘targeting enemy’ strategy evolved to include an element of ‘maintaining supremacy’ justified by the concept that maintaining the leadership requiring maintenances of supremacy. The concept may be plausible in principle, but in reality, there is limitation in maintaining supremacy since competition between nations always happens whether among ideologically friendly or hostile nations. A clear example is Japan. Japan was a defeated enemy of WW II, occupied by the U.S., but Japan was literally nursed back by the U.S. post WW II. With no defense burden, Japan focused all her energy on economic development. Japan worked hard and good at it by copying the U.S. in technology, marketing and enterprising soon with her GDP approaching a significant percentage of that of the U.S. That is why the Plaza Accord took place in 1986. Japan was forced to tailor her aggressive enterprising and conglomerate expansion and a currency appreciation. The U.S. maintained her supremacy and Japan’s economy stayed stagnant for decades to follow.
 
The Big Win over the Soviet Union
 
In late 1990, the Soviet Union was disintegrated as its economy collapsed despite of its strong military might with advanced technologies. This is the big victory for the West led by the U.S. It came in a long way with the ‘Targeting Enemy’ strategy. The U.S. had ignored the ‘ideology’ issue to ally with China and Asian economic power regions in her ‘Targeting Soviet’ strategy. Under decades of isolation, the Soviet Union struggled with its economy and some of her key leaders believed that their political federation system was to blame. They disintegrated the Union and wanted to join the West. However, the West welcomed the reunification of the West and East Germany but refused to accept Russia into the West, adopting a strategy of selectively absorbing the disintegrated former Soviet Union states into NATO as a military alliance against Russia even though the Warsaw Pact was disbanded. European Union was formed in November 1, 1993 and Russia was blocked to be a member. Yeltsin in 1992 has expressed desire to join NATO and Putin in his 2000 election for presidency had said: “Russia is part of European culture. And I cannot imagine my own country in isolation from Europe and what we often call the civilized world. It is hard for me to visualize NATO as an enemy.” Today’s Russian-Ukraine War is a direct consequence of a continued hostile NATO expansion policy based on the U.S. “Targeting Russia” strategy.

 
Part II

 The Post Cold War Extension of “Targeting Enemy” Strategy and Expansion of NATO
 
The U.S. has continued her national security strategy of targeting enemy. The collapse of the Soviet Union supposedly would make NATO unnecessary post-Cold War, but the concerns of nuclear power threat from Russia and the emergence of European Union for self-determination diluting the U.S. influence in Europe essentially won over the arguments that NATO was needed despite of the disbanding of the WARSAW pact. President Clinton proposed the Partnership for Peace (PFP) plan to pivot the old NATO to a new NATO under the leadership of the U.S. by absorbing more members. The ‘Targeting Russia’ strategy was continued with new NATO members being recruited even though Russia was under an economic stress. When the 9-11-2001 terrorist attack hit the U.S. soil (New York World Trade Center), the U.S. foreign policy pivoted to fighting the spread of terrorism which placed the U.S. attention, (President Bush) to Middle East and Afghanistan but NATO were continued to expand with 3 (by 1997) and 7 more (by 2004) new members, a total of 30 members today from America, Europe, Africa and Asia. This expansion of NATO under the ‘Targeting Enemy’ strategy not only triggered the Russia-Ukraine war but also raised the danger of a world war, a nuclear world war.
  
‘Targeting Enemy’ to ‘Targeting Enemies’
 
9-11 tragedy destined 21st century to be a treacherous century, the U.S. has added ‘terrorism’ in addition to ‘Russia’ as the U.S. national targeted enemies. When the financial crisis occurred in 2008-2009, the U.S. was nearly bankrupt, China as the largest creditor of U.S. debt came to her rescue. In return, the U.S. recognized China as her competitor. President Obama initiated the ‘Pivot to Asia’ foreign policy with the goal of ‘balancing the power’ in Asia. President Trump followed the ‘targeting China” strategy but with his personal style of tactics focusing on balancing trade and economic expansion with technology and industrial sanctions. President Biden, differed from Trump in nearly all domestic issues, selected to maintain ‘targeting China’ as the U.S. national security strategy with a significant twist on tactics. Instead of going it alone as Trump did it, Biden tried to orchestrate an alliance approach to unite all her Allies to form an anti-China group in trade, technology, military and all aspects of economic development and geopolitical matters. Hence, China has in reality become one additional enemy in the U.S. ‘Targeting Enemy’ strategy even though diplomatically China is officially termed as the most critical competitor. From targeting enemy (Russia) to targeting enemies requires a deep commitment of the entire nation which may not be prepared to accept it psychologically. The Biden Administration seems to be successful in mobilizing the U.S. media forces to support such a strategy.
 
“The Present Danger” Drives An Open Confrontation - A Warm War
 
Defining China as ‘the present danger’ essentially declares an open confrontation with China, a warm war worse than the Cold War. However, the rationale behind that definition was false. Obama made the statement that if all Chinese people were living a better life, the Earth could not sustain it. (He meant the U.S.) A discriminatory remark came from a black America president really illustrated that the racial discrimination problem was deep rooted in the U.S. Why shouldn’t the Chinese and all people in the developing countries live a better life? The Chinese leaders did use ‘better life’ to inspire their people to work hard to earn their better living. They did stand behind the third world to collaborate with them in economic development. But they are crushed by the West media’s ‘China Threat’ narrative. Perhaps, the Chinese people must present a more effective counter argument to the U.S. led narrative. Instead of begging for Justice by saying that ‘we are people too, we also deserve to strive for middle class living and we are peaceful people with no intention of colonizing others', they should speak bluntly with the language that the West can easily understand.
 
China is not afraid of a warm war, win or lose!
 
The China threat theory the U.S. led media promotes is quite overwhelming despite of the fact that China does not initiate wars nor expand in military bases. Her Belt and Road initiative (BRI) was better than the Marshall plan and any Western AID that left military bases behind or strings attached. China should challenge the West narrative to think about the consequences of the ‘targeting China’ strategy. If China were defeated, what would happen to the world? The Chinese people not only is a large percent of the world’s population, they are known to be the most diligent and resilient people when comes to stress and oppression. When China fails, for sure several other countries will fail together, the third world will be far worst off. The world economy will collapse. No one including the West will have a better life. What if China wins the confrontation? Chinese people are no longer living in 19th century, there are more Chinese educated people attuned to twenty first century than the entire continent of America or Europe, just counting the college graduates they have each year. It is no accident that China has the best national infrastructure in the world. What if the U.S. loses in the warm war? The Chinese would not colonize any other country but the losers would go backwards decades economically. If China wins, the third world will win as well. The Earth will be saved in a faster pace if China wins, simply judging on her environment and climate policies striving for efficiency and limiting waste.
 
Accepting China May Be A Blessing
 
The current narrative on ‘China Threat’ has no rational basis but selfish and discriminatory notions. China’s rise is as natural as the U.S. has risen in the last two centuries. In the twenty first century, the world has changed naturally as well as culturally. The rise of China is hinged on her history, culture and human characteristics. China’s fast rise is not a result of war or aggression. China’s success is a good example for the world. China is a savior of the mankind (lifting nearly a billion people above poverty and exporting infrastructure technology to the developing world) and not a demon of the world (never initiated a war). We may conclude with the following statements to say that accepting China May be a blessing for the world:
 
I. China’s rise is not a threat environmentally or ideologically (she never exported ideology). With her large population and dedicated effort, China may save the world. Her BRI program, desert to forest conversion, growing crops in salt-water, renewable energy projects, … are just few examples. 

II. China rose despite of the West media’s smear and discrimination. Her success stories are inspiring the third world and only making small-minded nations jealous. China is the number one trading partner with over one hundred nations. 

III. The motive of the West in promoting Anti-China campaign is ill grounded. Accepting China and her success will help eliminating selfishness and racial discrimination that are the twin evils in human society. 

IV. China’s strive for better life is not based on suppressing others’ chance for living a better life. Mutual prosperity based on mutual collaboration is their motto as can be seen from many collaborative developmental projects. 

V.  China’s notion that all humankind is ‘one body’ with a ‘common destiny’ is a sacred philosophy for her and the world, compared to many empty slogans on human rights. The world should embrace the concept of one body and common destiny. China’s ability in lifting millions from poverty and developing space program for peaceful purpose may be examples for steering the world to cooperation than focusing on military competition or Space War.


 

​ 
The Trump presidency (1/2017 – 1/2021) was an unusual one. Donald Trump, as a wealthy real estate developer and TV show (Apprentice and Celebrity Apprentice 2004-2015) host, had no political baggage. He does have a strong personality in approaching matters and making decisions. His victory of the 45th U.S. presidency by first defeating more than a dozen seasoned Republican rivals and later won over Democrat former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton surprised many domestic and international political analysts as well as the general public.  His campaign slogan, “Make America Great Again” and “Buy American and Hire American” resonated with the working class. Trump brought in a group of conservative staff but not well coordinated as a team. He quickly signed a major tax reform bill and directed the reduction of federal regulations for sustaining long-term economic growth and low unemployment rate. Trump was eager to win foreign policy marks with unilateral approach and quick decisions, such as pulling out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, Paris Climate Accord and Iran nuclear agreement and applying tariffs on foreign aluminum and steel and kicking off a series of trade negotiations.
 
Trump's commitment to “America First” not only shaped his trade policies but also his approach to immigration, building walls at the border, and to U.S. Alliances, asking NATO allies to increase their contributions to the alliance. Trump's recognition of Israel's sovereignty over the Golan Heights and his personal direct dealing with North Korea leader Kim Jong-un on nuclear proliferation problem most likely will leave tacky issues for the next Administration to handle, but the most serious foreign relation matter is his anti-China policy. Since his presidential campaign, Trump blamed China for U.S. economic problems. His Tariff war with China created only a tentative phase one trade agreement leaving many fundamental issues unsolved, sorting out what and how U.S. shall engage competition or cooperation with China. In the 2020 November presidential election, Trump lost to Biden with a small margin. His accusation of an unfair election caused a sour 'storming the Capitol' event (Jan. 6, 2021) which was unprecedented in the history of U.S. democracy. Biden has been sworn into the Whitehouse but Trump seems to be working on a come back.
 
 Joe Biden, the 46th U.S. president, showed a significant contrast with Donald Trump. Biden is a career politician with 16 years of experience with the Senate Judiciary Committee, 12 years with the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and 8 years as the U.S. Vice President convening sessions of the President’s Cabinet, led inter-agency efforts, and worked with Congress in his fight to raise the living standards of middle-class Americans, reduce gun violence, address violence against women, and 'end cancer as we know it' (Cancer took the life of his elder son Beau). President Biden relates to American citizens as an average American, he has chosen to work as a public servant after an average public education and become a Senator at age of 29. In his life, he had endured a tragic car accident that had killed his first wife Neila and daughter, Naomi; he remarried Jill Jacobs, an educator. As a senior most experienced Democrat, Joe Biden was his party's choice as the presidential candidate to challenge Donald Trump in 2020.
 
Biden won the presidential election more on 'half of the country did not like Trump's harsh behavior especially on foreign affairs' than on his brilliant ideas. He did contrast Trump with his desire to work with allies rather than taking harsh unilateral actions in the international arena. Hence his presidential bid was not a clear-cut victory which was amply shown by the January 6th 'Storming the Capitol' event and Trump's unwillingness to accept defeat and continuing his effort to make a comeback. President Biden filled his cabinet and appointees adhering to 'identity politics' closely, that is placing high importance on his staff's identity, race, gender, etc. Of course, he also inherited and took advantage of his experience in the Obama Administration. After a year into his presidency, one can see that he is trying to reverse some of Trump's executive orders and apply his skills in leveraging alliances to foreign affairs. However, the continuing COVID pandemic has occupied a large amount of his energy. On the crucial U.S. - China relations, unfortunately, Biden and his team essentially followed the U.S. legacy of ideology, 'anti-communism' with no reflections and no new thinking on the change of the so-called communist world. More unfortunately, Biden and his team has essentially followed Trump's anti-China strategy without review or projection into the future. Biden doubled down on anti-China by trying to leverage the U.S. allies.  Thus, we see the development of QUAD+ and AUKUS. How will these actions pan out must be closely monitored since the early signs are ominous.
 
The recent Ukraine crisis is the result of U.S. legacy of anti-communism, in this case, anti-Russia following the collapse of the Soviet Union. This crisis is obviously the result of the continuous expansion of NATO presenting a threat to Russia approaching a boiling point. Trump Administration did not want to play the Russia card but to focus  on anti-China is because it has placed the trade issue on the fore front of their foreign affairs agenda. Even though Trump's anti-China tactics were not necessarily working but his staying away from two enemy fronts was smart. Trump even uttered that the NATO was obsolete. In contrast, Biden Administration fueled the NATO expansion by attempting to lure Ukraine into it. Before Putin sent the troops in Ukraine to support the two newly independent nations in East Ukraine, he made a long speech to his congress and the world, essentially pleading and explaining from historical perspective and current situation in EU and NATO that don't choke the Russians to death. Russia wants to live and develop her economy with Europe. The U.S. may question Russia's past aggressive behavior and sincerity for future peaceful co-existence, but she must accept today's reality that EU intrinsically depends on Russia's energy and will have mutual prosperity if they indeed cooperate. EU and Russia's prosperity may not be beneficial to the U.S. but leading NATO and Ukraine to war is not the smart way of helping the U.S. What if the war leads to WW III or even a limited nuclear war? The U.S. can not afford it nor can bear that on her conscience.
 
The Ukraine crisis should be managed to stop as the only acceptable solution, that is Russia promising to keep Ukraine neutral, safe and peaceful and NATO removing threat to Russia. The U.S. and China are crucial in arriving at the above solution. Hopefully, they will work together towards that goal to avoid a serious war. As a history lesson, the Ukraine crisis should be used to guide the U.S. to rethink her China policy, encroaching like NATO is not a good strategy to deal with economic competition from China. Hence the U.S. needs to rethink QUAD+ and AUKUS. Let's hope Ukraine crisis will be a good educational lesson at the end helpful to guide a U.S. - China relation for mutual benefits and world prosperity.  Biden should not follow the Trump anti-China strategy since there was no evidence it would lead to productive results.       



​