Tag: New Cold War

Biden’s program: Economic populism at home, imperialism abroad / by Mark Gruenberg, John Wojcik and C.J. Atkins

President Joe Biden’s last State of the Union address before the 2024 elections was a speech defined by contrasts: economic populism at home and Cold War confrontation abroad. | Photo by Shawn Thew (AP) / Illustration by PW

Reposted from the People’s World

WASHINGTON—President Joe Biden’s last State of the Union address before the 2024 elections laid out an agenda of sharp contrasts, with economic populism dominating domestic policy and Cold War confrontation and militarism defining his international strategy.

At home, Biden pledged to impose higher taxes on billionaires and price-gouging corporations, make prescriptions cheaper for Americans on Medicare, and defend democracy and abortion rights from Trump and the GOP.

Derailing this otherwise liberal-progressive program, however, was an approach to immigration that outflanks Republicans on the right, a foreign policy of Cold War confrontation with China and Russia, and a promise of further support for Israel’s war against Palestinians.

Public anger over the latter issue disrupted Biden’s speech before it even began: A large sit-in protest by ceasefire demonstrators blocked Pennsylvania Avenue, forcing Biden’s motorcade to drive an alternate route from the White House to the Capitol.

Once he was able to make it to the House chambers, though, Biden launched into a speech that was combative with Republicans at times, short on progressive substance at others, but crafted from beginning to end with the intention of ending speculation about his age and mental sharpness.

Some media outlets presented brief reports on the ceasefire protest that blocked Pennsylvania Avenue ahead of Biden’s speech, but most ignored it completely. | via CNN

President vs. predecessor on democracy

Biden continually invited comparisons between himself and Donald Trump, whom he referred to as “my predecessor” and described as a threat to democracy both in the United States and other countries.

He slammed Trump as a threat to the rights and freedoms Americans now take for granted. Analysts called the speech Biden’s formal re-election campaign kickoff. Throughout, on their side of the House chamber, glum-looking Republicans sat on their hands, often looking down.

Biden’s criticism of misogynist, 91-count-indicted, and twice-impeached Trump focused on the Republican’s instigation and encouragement of Jan. 6, 2021, invasion, insurrection, and attempted coup d’état attempt at the U.S. Capitol.

“It is we who face an unprecedented moment in the history of the union,” Biden declared at the outset. “And, yes, my purpose tonight is to both wake up this Congress and alert the American people that this is no ordinary moment either.”

He sought to warn the country about Trump’s increasingly belligerent and erratic statements. Atop them: Trump’s promise to be a dictator “on day one” if he takes office again next Jan. 20. Nobody—neither Biden nor Trump’s MAGA legions—believe Trump would stop there.

“Insurrectionists stormed this very Capitol and placed a dagger at the throat of American democracy,” Biden declared. “We all saw with our own eyes these insurrectionists were not patriots.” Even Trump, in an offhand comment a week ago, labeled his Jan. 6 coup “an insurrection.”

“The lies about the 2020 election, and the plots to steal the election, posed the gravest threat to our democracy since the Civil War,” Biden continued, again saying “My predecessor,” Trump, was the source of the lies and plots.

“We must be honest, the threat remains, and democracy must be defended.” Biden chided “some Republicans for trying to bury the truth of Jan. 6th. I will not do that. This is a moment to speak the truth and bury the lies.”

Biden’s other attack on Trump’s threat to democracy came at the speech’s end, as he made light of concerns about his age, 81. In a sly reference, Biden said that “the issue facing our nation isn’t how old we are. It’s how old our ideas are.

“Hate, anger, revenge, retribution are among the oldest of ideas. But you can’t lead America with ancient ideas that only take us back.” No need for Biden to say Trump, age 78, has those ideas.

United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain cheered some of the pro-worker components in Biden’s State of the Union Address. | Florida AFL-CIO via Twitter (X)

“To lead America, the land of possibilities, you need a vision for the future of what America can and should be,” Biden said. “I see a future where we defend democracy, not diminish it. I see a future where we restore the right to choose and protect other freedoms—not take them away.”

That, too, was a dig at Republicans in general and Trump in particular. The GOP has busily approved legislation, especially in the states, eliminating voting rights, censoring schools, eliminating workers’ rights, and ending not just the right to abortion but other reproductive rights.

In Republican-run Florida, Trump-like Gov. Ron DeSantis and the GOP-gerrymandered legislature even tried to take away free speech with their “Stop WOKE Act.” A federal appeals court tossed it out earlier this week for violating the U.S. Constitution.

Progressive economics

On a host of domestic issues, Biden put forward progressive proposals and plans he said he had for the future. He reminded viewers that he inherited a raging pandemic and high joblessness from Trump and that the coronavirus has been curbed while joblessness is at a 50-year low.

He also cited a list of legislative accomplishments from his first two years in office to battle the virus and the ensuing depression, all enacted by a narrowly Democratic Congress. He then rattled off the pro-worker executive orders he’d issued during the last year after MAGA took control of the House and lawmaking came to a virtual halt.

A linkage to unions was among the achievements he named: The re-opening of the Stellantis (FiatChrysler) plant in Belvidere, Ill., which the United Auto Workers gained in their successful bargaining with the Detroit carmakers. Some 4,000 workers at that factory will now make electric vehicles—part of Biden’s green manufacturing plans, he noted. The plant had employed 1,200 previously. Both UAW President Shawn Fain and a third-generation Belvidere Auto Worker were among Biden’s guests at the speech.

Biden also proposed a variety of ideas for lawmakers to consider this year and for his second term, if he beats Trump this fall. Restoring and strengthening the Voting Rights Act led his list.

Others included raising the federal minimum wage from its present $7.25 an hour and passage of the Protect the Right to Organize (PRO) Act, labor’s #1 legislative priority, to make unionizing easier. Biden also wants to raise the corporate income tax rate to 28% and institute a 25% minimum tax on millionaires. He also wants to give public school teachers a raise, though he didn’t say how or how much.

Biden condemned the banks and credit card companies and vowed to lead a battle to end the “junk fees” they impose on everyone. Democrats again cheered as the Republicans looked down and sat on their hands. He also got an enthusiastic response to his call for curbs on mortgage rates and rents and called for subsidies to help people pay those rising costs.

He called for an extension of the $35 cap on monthly costs of insulin for seniors to all people and for giving Medicare the right to negotiate drug process on all drugs. He mentioned that in cities around the world, including Toronto, Berlin, and Moscow (“I mean, excuse me, well even in Moscow probably”) they pay far less for the same drugs than we do.” He did not call for the obvious solution right now to the health needs of Americans, Medicare for All, long supported by Sen. Bernie Sanders of Vermont.

In all those cases, as well as on the right to abortion, Democrats in the House chamber jumped up and cheered, while Republicans acted uninterested. Senate Republicans had blocked the minimum wage hike, the PRO Act, and restoring voting rights from even being debated, much less voted on.

Women’s freedom

The right to abortion was just one example where Biden first looked backward and then forward, forecasting what he would do if he won a second term this fall.

“With all due respect,” Biden criticized the five-justice Supreme Court majority—fueled by three Trump nominees—who in 2022 eliminated the 49-year-old national constitutional right to abortion. Biden urged Congress to send him legislation restoring it. “If you send me a good Congress, I will make Roe v. Wade the law of the land again,” he declared as he looked straight at the Supreme Court justices sitting before him.

“I’m here tonight to show the way forward because America cannot go back,” Biden declared when speaking of abortion rights. He could have applied that statement to everything else he proposed.

“My predecessor”—Trump—“came to office determined to see Roe v. Wade overturned. He’s the reason it was overturned,” Biden said of that ruling in 2022. “In fact, he brags about it. Look at the chaos that resulted.”

Reps. Rashida Tlaib and Cori Bush were among several lawmakers who expressed their opposition to the Biden administration’s continued support for Israel’s genocide in Gaza and called for a lasting ceasefire. | @RepCori via Twitter (X)

The chaos will engulf the anti-abortion Republicans at the ballot box, Biden predicted. Including Trump. “Many of you in this [House] chamber and my predecessor are promising to pass a national ban on reproductive freedom.

“My God, what freedoms will you take away next?

Regressive border policy

Immigration policy and border security stood out as major weak spots in Biden’s otherwise liberal-progressive domestic agenda. He bragged about the “bipartisan deal” that his administration tried to push through Congress. Although the bill actually outflanks Republicans from the right, Trump had ordered the GOP to block the law in order to not give Biden any ability to claim he acted on border security.

Biden said the Republicans had denied him the “emergency authority to…shut down the border,” and bragged that even the right-wing Border Patrol union and the Chamber of Commerce supported the bill.

The Trump MAGA faction was represented in the House chamber by Georgia’s far-right extremist Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, among others. | via Twitter (X)

Taking the bait dangled by MAGA Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia, Biden said words that many saw as racist when speaking about the murder of Laken Riley. “An innocent young woman…was killed by an illegal, that’s right,” Biden thundered. “But how many thousands of people are being killed by illegals?” he asked, using a derogatory word to refer to undocumented immigrants.

He earned immediate criticism from Latino members of Congress and immigrant rights organizations. “No human being is illegal,” Illinois Rep. Delia Ramirez, told the press. Rep. Chuy García said he was “extremely disappointed” in Biden for using the dehumanizing term.

Immigrant rights advocates say the word is not only inaccurate, it is also racially charged and promotes violence and discrimination.

The National Immigrant Justice Center said that Biden using the “words of anti-immigrant extremists” was unacceptable and pointed out that his own administration in 2021 had forbid government agencies from using the term “illegal alien.”

Cold War and militarism abroad

On the foreign policy portfolio, Biden continued the Cold War approach of ramping up fear about other nations and their alleged threats to U.S. democracy.

“We’re standing up against China,” Biden declared. Listing the countries he’s supposedly brought on board in the alliance to contain China—“India, Australia, Japan, South Korea, Pacific islands”—Biden said that his agenda of penalties and trade restrictions have put the U.S. “in a stronger position to win the conflict of the 21st century against China.”

China, for its part, continues to say it seeks peaceful co-existence and cooperation with the U.S., not confrontation or war. It opposes the militarization of East Asia.

When it comes to Europe, Biden said the U.S. needs additional billions of dollars to bolster “democracy” in Ukraine, which is fighting Russia. The $60 billion in additional money he wants for the war in Ukraine that is being held up in Congress must be approved immediately, he said.

Most of the money will not go directly to Ukraine, however. The U.S. military would send its old weapons to Ukraine and the “aid” money approved by Congress would then be used to buy new weapons. That puts funds directly into the pockets of U.S. armaments makers who have raked in huge profits thanks to the war in Ukraine, and of course, it subtracts from meeting human needs here at home.

Further invoking the Cold War rhetoric of the past, Biden praised former President Ronald Reagan for having called on then-Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev to tear down the Berlin Wall and lamented how Republicans of today have moved away from that Cold War stance and instead “bow down to a Russian leader,” meaning Vladimir Putin.

None of the Cold War rhetoric is conducive to building support for cuts to the military budget which are so essential to funding people’s needs.

On Gaza, Biden said he favored negotiating an “immediate ceasefire” of six weeks to allow humanitarian aid into the occupied territory. He said the U.S. would construct a “temporary pier” off the enclave’s Mediterranean coast to allow shops with aid to dock. There was no mention of how that aid would get into trucks to travel across Gaza when the infrastructure to allow such transportation has already been destroyed by Israel.

He claimed that the disaster in Gaza, which he never characterized as a genocide, “began on Oct. 7,” when Hamas attacked Israel, but he made no mention of the continued suppression of Palestinians that has been going on for 75 years. That suppression has had and continues to rely on the support of the U.S.

When the president spoke about Gaza, some members of Congress, led by Reps. Rashida Tlaib of Michigan and Cori Bush of Missouri held up signs protesting U.S. policy there. This protest in the House chamber followed the street demonstration that forced the motorcade bringing Biden from the White House to take a circuitous route since Pennsylvania Ave., the city’s main artery, was blocked. Few of the major networks bothered to cover those protests.

Republicans respond

Capping off the entire night was the incredible Republican response to Biden’s speech, in which Sen. Katie Britt of Alabama laid out their position.

Incredibly, she smiled broadly through most of her speech, including the parts where she described a dark dystopian world she claimed Americans are already living through. She offered not a single solution to any of the alleged problems she said were killing the nation. Instead, she tried to spin an image of Biden as a “diminished and dithering” old man while describing an economic situation at odds with reality.

Britt, who wore a shiny cross around her neck and spoke from her kitchen table, exemplified the right-wing, theocratic, crypto-fascist nature of the modern Republican Party and its view of women. But even many GOP figures acknowledged that her speech was largely a failure.

“It’s one of our biggest disasters ever,” one unnamed Republican told the media. “What the hell am I watching right now? another told Rolling Stone.

Trump’s response, a day after the speech and the Britt horror show was to entertain at Mar-a-Lago the fascistic dictator of Hungary, Viktor Orban.

We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!

Mark Gruenberg is head of the Washington, D.C., bureau of People’s World. He is also the editor of the union news service Press Associates Inc. (PAI). Known for his reporting skills, sharp wit, and voluminous knowledge of history, Mark is a compassionate interviewer but tough when going after big corporations and their billionaire owners.

John Wojcik is Editor-in-Chief of People’s World. He joined the staff as Labor Editor in May 2007 after working as a union meat cutter in northern New Jersey. There, he served as a shop steward and a member of a UFCW contract negotiating committee. In the 1970s and ’80s, he was a political action reporter for the Daily World, this newspaper’s predecessor, and was active in electoral politics in Brooklyn, New York.

C.J. Atkins is the managing editor at People’s World. He holds a Ph.D. in political science from York University in Toronto and has a research and teaching background in political economy and the politics and ideas of the American left. In addition to his work at People’s World, C.J. currently serves as the Deputy Executive Director of ProudPolitics.

Xi’s Hanoi visit refutes claims Vietnam is being pulled into U.S. orbit / by Amiad Horowitz

Chinese President and Communist Party General Secretary Xi Jinping, second left, and Communist Party of Vietnam General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong, second right, meet in Hanoi, Tuesday, Dec. 12, 2023. | Minh Hoang / Pool photo via AP

Reposted from the People’s World

HANOI— In September, when Vietnam and the U.S. upgraded their relationship to the level of a “comprehensive strategic partnership,” many Western analysts and media commentators declared that this meant Vietnam was being pulled into the U.S.’ diplomatic sphere of influence and joining its anti-China coalition.

But if the just-concluded two-day visit to Hanoi by Chinese President Xi Jinping is any indicator, the claims of a China-Vietnam rift appear to be incredibly wrong.

Xi, who is also General Secretary of the Communist Party of China, was the guest of Communist Party of Vietnam General Secretary Nguyen Phu Trong and Vietnamese President Vo Van Thuong.

During the meeting, the three leaders re-affirmed the deep friendship between their two countries and oversaw the signing of more than 30 agreements covering fields ranging from defense, trade, and supporting each other’s path to socialism to infrastructure development, public security, and joint maritime patrols of the Gulf of Tonkin.

Significantly, among the many documents signed was a plan for further cooperation on China’s “Belt and Road Initiative,” as well as the “Two Corridors, One Belt” program. While these two Chinese trade and cooperation initiatives are often slandered in Western media, they are major infrastructure investment programs that have helped developing countries around the world speed up their modernization processes. With the Vietnamese government’s plans to invest in a cross-country high-speed rail line, these Chinese programs may prove to be crucially important.

At the end of Xi’s visit, the two governments issued a joint statement emphasizing the close relationship and the shared socialist path of Vietnam and China.

Emphasizing the countries’ “close bonds as both comrades and brothers” the statement declared an intention to “further elevate the Vietnam-China Comprehensive Strategic Cooperative Partnership” and build a “Vietnam-China Community.”

The leaders said that the relationship between their nations was moving to a new stage “with stronger political trust, more substantial defense-security cooperation, deeper tangible collaboration…closer multilateral coordination, better management and settlement of differences, and joint efforts for boosting the development of the world socialist cause, making positive contributions to the cause of peace and progress of mankind.”

The agreement could also help stabilize tensions in the South China Sea (referred to as the East Sea in Vietnam). The U.S. and its allies have repeatedly attempted to use any signs of instability in this area to expand their military presence in the region. In fact, the U.S. permanently keeps a large naval force in the South China Sea, despite it being thousands of miles away from U.S. territory.

Though Xi’s visit to Hanoi is getting scant coverage in the U.S. media, it could go a long way toward dispelling the often repeated (and frequently debunked) Western talking points about deep Chinese-Vietnamese divisions—among those paying attention.

Amiad Horowitz studied at the Academy of Journalism and Communications at the Ho Chi Minh National Academy of Politics with a specific focus on Vietnam and Ho Chi Minh. He lives in Hanoi, Vietnam. His articles have appeared in National Herald India, People’s World, TRANSCEND Media Service, The Hitavada (India), Northlines, and The Arabian Post.

Chinese President Xi Jinping trying to repair damage done by Biden / by John Wojcik

U.S. President Joe Biden, left, listens as Chinese President Xi Jinping speaks during a meeting the two held on the sidelines of the G20 summit, Nov. 14, 2022, in Bali, Indonesia. The two haven’t spoken since then, but they will see one another face to face again on Wednesday near San Francisco. | Alex Brandon/AP

Reposted from the People’s World

Presidents Joe Biden and Xi Jinping are meeting near San Francisco Wednesday, a get-together at which Biden claims he hopes to “stabilize” relations with China. He doesn’t mention, of course, that those relations have been made unstable by continued U.S. attacks on and propaganda against China’s economic and political interests.

The Biden administration has consistently tried to dictate to China that it end its friendly relations with Russia and numerous other countries, and it has levied all kinds of sanctions against countries that China deals with and against China itself.

Biden continues to hypocritically express concern about human rights in China even as his administration funds and fuels Israeli-propagated genocide in Gaza.

The two leaders, who are meeting on the sidelines of the Asia-Pacific Cooperation Forum summit, reportedly haven’t even spoken to one another in over a year. The U.S. hasn’t been silent during that period when it comes to China, though, having used every excuse to mount major propaganda campaigns against the Asian nation.

The two countries, for example, have long surveyed the military and other activities of one another, but the U.S. blew into major proportions the issue of a harmless balloon that had wandered off course over U.S. territory.

The U.S. flies armed airplanes over and near Chinese waters and has, on occasion, almost collided into Chinese planes over the South China Sea.

Also, during the year that the two leaders have not spoken, the U.S. has, without any proof, campaigned against what it says are Chinese intentions to “take over” Taiwan, an island off the coast of China that actually does belong to China—a reality even the U.S. recognizes.

Biden has used as justification for his war against Russia in Ukraine the excuse that “winning” in Ukraine is an essential first step in halting Chinese aggression against Taiwan. There has been, needless to say, no such aggression against Taiwan by China.

At the San Francisco meeting, according to the White House PR people, Biden is seeking to show the world that while the U.S. and China are economic competitors, they are not locked in a major battle for supremacy with global implications.

That flies in the face of reality, though, since his administration and hosts of top U.S. lawmakers constantly identify China as the “main security threat” facing the U.S.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The main security threat facing the U.S. is the threat of fascism and right-wing domestic terror coming from within our own borders.

China, unlike the U.S., is not involved in any military conflict anywhere in the world. It is the U.S., not China, that has 800 military bases scattered all around the world. A good chunk of these U.S. bases encircle China, and U.S. nuclear subs constantly patrol waters off China’s east coast. The Chinese have no such equivalent, so the reasonable question to ask is: “Who is a security threat to whom?”

The U.S., determined to be the world’s top gun, has also sought to control what nations China deals with around the world. The U.S. has tried to force China to end its neutrality in the Ukraine-Russia War, and it has condemned Chinese attempts to offer a peace plan to end that war. There, too, the U.S. backed what has now proven to be the blowing up of the Nordstream Pipeline by Ukraine. Imagine how the U.S. would react if China did anything like this.

The Biden administration also sees China, a big buyer of Iranian oil, as having considerable leverage with Tehran, and despite the economic relations between those two countries, it tries to get China to cut all ties with Iran and join its campaign against that country.

Again, imagine how the U.S. would react if China patrolled U.S. waters with nuclear missile submarines, flew its warplanes over Long Island or San Francisco Bay, and told the U.S. to stop backing the countries responsible for genocide in Gaza and the blowing up of international energy infrastructure.

Even as Biden claims he wants improved relations, White House National Security Council spokesman John Kirby said Biden was “not going to be afraid to confront where confrontation is needed on issues where we don’t see eye to eye.”

Xi is justifiably looking for assurances from Biden that the U.S. will not support Taiwan independence, start a new Cold War, or suppress China’s economic growth.

In the hours before the meeting, White House officials said Biden was coming into the talks bolstered by signs the U.S. economy is in a stronger position than China’s and that the U.S. is building stronger alliances throughout the Pacific.

The U.S. president, speaking at a campaign fundraiser on Tuesday evening, pointed to his upcoming meeting as an example of how “re-established American leadership in the world is taking hold.” As for China, the president told donors, it has “real problems.”

He was referring to the International Monetary Fund’s recently reduced growth forecasts for China. The IMF predicted economic expansion of 5% this year and 4.2% in 2024 for China, down slightly from previous forecasts. There are of course differences in scale, but it’s worth noting that the pace of predicted growth is still greater for China than that of the United States, where it is predicted that growth for the same period will be at 3.2%.

Foreign companies operating in China say tensions with Washington over technology, trade, and other issues are causing some to reassess their plans for investing in the Chinese market. This, of course, has been the goal of many of the U.S. propaganda attacks on China: Make investors nervous about political tensions and get them to put their money somewhere else..

The unfortunate thing about the Biden administration’s approach to China is that it sidetracks or prevents what should be the cooperation of both countries to meet perhaps the biggest challenge facing the world: the struggle to reset environmental policies in order to save the planet.

At home in the U.S., Biden has to do battle with powerful fossil fuel capitalist interests to realize any of his environmental goals. In China, he could have a great friend with whom to cooperate on these matters.

John Wojcik is Editor-in-Chief of People’s World. He joined the staff as Labor Editor in May 2007 after working as a union meat cutter in northern New Jersey. There, he served as a shop steward and a member of a UFCW contract negotiating committee. In the 1970s and ’80s, he was a political action reporter for the Daily World, this newspaper’s predecessor, and was active in electoral politics in Brooklyn, New York.

Biden’s Israel-Ukraine money appeal envisions war-based economy / by C.J. Atkins

President Joe Biden addressed the nation Thursday night, making the pitch for $105 billion in fresh weapons spending for Ukraine, Israel, and Taiwan and to further militarize the U.S. border with Mexico. | Biden photo: Speaking from the White House Thursday. Main photo: Israeli artillery fires into Gaza. | Photos: AP / Illustration: People’s World

Reposted from the People’s World

WASHINGTON—Playing the part of classic Cold Warrior in his Thursday night Oval Office speech, President Joe Biden made a sales pitch for a permanent war economy, using democracy as a prop to convince the American people that he needed $105 billion to spend on weapons for Israel, Ukraine, and—unmentioned in his remarks—Taiwan.

Shoehorning Israel’s war against the Palestinian people and the Ukraine-Russia war together, Biden deployed a narrative equating “terrorists like Hamas” with “tyrants like Putin,” both supposedly determined to “annihilate a neighboring democracy.” Any background context to the two wars—75 years of Palestinian dispossession in the first case and an eastward-encroaching NATO military alliance in the second—was absent from the speech.

Hoping the strategy of linking the two fights will make it easier to secure the money, Biden said his emergency weapons budget request “serves the cause of freedom” and funds “America’s national security needs.”

Sounding almost Reaganesque in his rhetoric, Biden deployed time-worn phrases about America being a “beacon to the world” and “the indispensable nation” which allies like Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky follow behind.

He declared that “innocent people all over the world” have “hope” and “believe in a better life” because of the United States. The president did not say whether he thought the “innocent Palestinians” he mentioned in the speech, those who are feeling the full wrath of the U.S.-backed Israeli military, shared that view of his government.

Biden reiterated U.S. support for a two-state solution and offered renewed sympathy for Palestinian civilians, but the overall thrust of the speech was aimed at giving Netanyahu a green light to proceed with his campaign against Gaza.

Polls suggest the majority of the American people disagree with Biden’s approach. Numbers released by Data for Progress on Thursday showed 66% believe the U.S. should call for a ceasefire in Gaza. A separate poll from YouGov and CBS News showed that 52% oppose sending weapons to Israel, and 72% think the U.S. should pursue diplomacy to bring a halt to the fighting.

Words such as “negotiations” or “ceasefire” never left Biden’s lips Thursday night, but there were several comments that likely left the military-industrial complex applauding.

Building the arsenal

Speaking the language of Wall Street weapons-makers, Biden said his $105-billion war supplement is a “smart investment that’s going to pay dividends.” It comes on top of the $1 trillion defense budget already passed this summer.

Sending a new tranche of weapons to Tel Aviv and Kiev, Biden said, would “keep American troops out of harm’s way” by letting those countries’ forces fight on the frontlines.

“We’re going to make sure other hostile actors in the region know that Israel’s stronger than ever,” Biden said, and arming Ukraine will guarantee that “American troops” won’t be “fighting in Russia.”

Most of the huge sum Biden’s requesting will go directly toward fresh arms purchases from major U.S. weapons manufacturers—companies that are already cashing in on this war. In the days immediately after Israel launched its latest assault on Gaza, the stock prices of defense-related corporations soared. Northrop Grumman was up 11%, Lockheed Martin 9%, and Raytheon 5%.

Rather than talking about missile profits on Thursday night, though, Biden attempted to sell the American public on the war agenda by presenting it as a jobs plan—a re-run of Cold War military Keynesianism.

He explained how the arrangement works:

President Joe Biden tours the Lockheed Martin missile factory in Troy, Ala., May 3, 2022. | Evan Vucci / AP

“We send Ukraine equipment sitting in our stockpiles. And when we use the money allocated by Congress, we use it to replenish our own stores, our own stockpiles, with new equipment. Equipment that defends America and is made in America. Patriot missiles for air defense batteries, made in Arizona. Artillery shells are manufactured in 12 states across the country, in Pennsylvania, Ohio, and Texas. And so much more.”

Appropriating the mantle of Franklin D. Roosevelt, the president who led the U.S. in the fight against Hitler’s fascism and Japanese imperialism, Biden waved the red-white-and-blue, saying, “Just as in World War II…patriotic American workers are building the arsenal of democracy.”

Unspoken in the Oval Office but included in the ask sent to Congress is at least $7 billion in weapons for Taiwan, labeled as “assistance for the Indo-Pacific region”—which means the allocation is part of the U.S.’ escalating new Cold War against China, as well.

Mutiny in Washington

While the president was busy on television building support for more war, a revolt against his blank-check backing of Netanyahu’s military campaign broke out into the open in Washington.

Israeli soldiers are massed at the Gaza border, awaiting the order for a ground invasion to begin. Seen here on Friday, Oct. 20, 2023, some troops work to keep their tank ready. | AP

Already on Wednesday, Josh Paul, the State Department official who signs off on U.S. arms transfers to foreign countries, resigned his post in protest, saying “provision of lethal arms to Israel” does more harm than good. “We cannot be both against the occupation and for it,” he said.

Then, just over an hour before Biden hit the airwaves, HuffPost reported that a group of State Department insiders were preparing to express their opposition with a rare “dissent cable.” Such documents are formal disagreements with official policy that staff can send to top leaders through a protected internal channel. The instrument was established during the U.S. war against Vietnam to allow diplomats to warn when they believe the U.S. is “making dangerous and self-defeating choices.”

“There’s basically a mutiny brewing within State at all levels,” one State Department official said. A possible avalanche of resignations is potentially in the offing, according to some working in the government.

The U.S. decision to veto a United Nations resolution on Wednesday that endorsed humanitarian aid and condemned all violence against civilians—whether committed by Hamas or the Israeli military—was a further blow to internal morale.

News has also emerged of widespread disillusionment among staffers within the Biden administration who disagree with the president’s lockstep support of Netanyahu but feel too intimidated to speak out. In anonymous interviews with the media, a number of government employees said they fear losing their jobs if they raise questions.

On Capitol Hill, meanwhile, the ranks of lawmakers supporting Rep. Cori Bush’s ceasefire resolution continue to grow. At the same time, a group of 411 Congressional staffers signed an open letter demanding the U.S. government push for a Gaza ceasefire. “We feel compelled to raise our voices in this moment,” the staffers wrote. “Millions of lives hang in the balance.”

The politics of passage

Despite Biden’s all-out effort to get the weapons money, it’s not yet clear what his chances are of securing Congressional approval. The Democratic-controlled Senate is expected to quickly move on the proposal, but the GOP-run House will be a different story.

The House remains in chaos, as the Republicans’ factional civil war keeps the Speaker’s chair empty. Trump ally Rep. Jim Jordan of Ohio has been removed from the race, but no matter who emerges as GOP leader, they won’t likely give Biden an easy pass.

Conservative Republicans already scuttled the president’s earlier request for $24 billion for Ukraine in August. He is now gambling that throwing in money to arm Israel, confront China, and further militarize the U.S.-Mexico border will win some of them over to his side, but several Republicans are already saying they won’t go along.

“These are two separate and unrelated conflicts, and it would wrong to leverage support of aid to Israel in an attempt to get additional aid for Ukraine across the finish line,” eight Republicans said in a letter.

Given the growing number of Democrats in Congress calling for a ceasefire, unanimous support from Biden’s own party is not guaranteed.

Some Democratic political operatives are also fearful that their leader’s agenda is jeopardizing his own chances of re-election next year. Fifty years after the 1973 oil embargo, memories of the major economic damage caused by past Middle East conflicts are rushing back. Oil prices are already up, thanks to Israel’s war, cutbacks in production by Saudi Arabia and Russia, and increasing Chinese energy needs.

Fatih Birol, head of the International Energy Agency, said Israel’s assault on Gaza is “definitely not good news” for oil markets and warned the war is “bad news for inflation.” With Biden’s poll numbers flagging in hypothetical match-ups with Trump, more economic trouble and higher prices are exactly what Democratic Party campaigners don’t want to see.

What Americans will be paying for

Israel spent Thursday and Friday showcasing precisely what the American people are being asked to pay for.

Palestinians in Gaza mourn relatives killed in an Israeli bombardment, Friday, Oct. 20, 2023. | Ali Mahmoud / AP

Dozens of Palestinians were killed as the Israeli Defense Forces continued its unrestrained bombing campaign across the occupied territories, including in zones it has said are “safe.” The IDF proudly announced it hit more than 100 targets overnight.

An historic church, built in 1150, was hit by Israeli bombs in Gaza City. It had been serving as a shelter.

“Targeting churches and their institutions, along with the shelters they provide to protect innocent citizens, especially children and women who have lost their homes due to Israeli airstrikes on residential areas over the past 13 days, constitutes a war crime that cannot be ignored,” the Greek Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem said in a statement.

In the West Bank, Israeli forces attacked the Nur Shams refugee camp, killing 13 people, including five children. Hospitals in Gaza are starting to close, meanwhile, as they run out of fuel. Most Gazans are down to one meal a day and rely on dirty drinking water to avoid dehydration.

The much-vaunted humanitarian aid that Biden promised would flow to Gaza from Egypt remains stuck at the border. U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres arrived at the Rafah crossing himself on Friday and begged for the gates to be opened, calling the loaded trucks a “lifeline” for Palestinian civilians and saying the aid was “the difference between life and death.”

On the Gaza frontier, Israeli troops are massing for an imminent ground assault. Defense Minister Yoav Gallant told soldiers Thursday to “be ready to see Gaza from the inside.” IDF spokespersons said that when the invasion comes, civilian casualties and the recovery of Israeli hostages will be “secondary” to the effort to destroy Hamas.

Since the current war began, at least 4,137 Palestinians have been killed and over 13,000 wounded, mostly women, children, and the elderly. Another 1,300 more are thought to be buried beneath the rubble of bombed-out houses, apartments, hospitals, and shelters.

More than 1,400 people in Israel have been killed, most in the initial Hamas attack of Oct. 7. As many as 200 others are believed to still be held hostage inside Gaza.

C.J. Atkins is the managing editor at People’s World. He holds a Ph.D. in political science from York University in Toronto and has a research and teaching background in political economy and the politics and ideas of the American left. In addition to his work at People’s World, C.J. currently serves as the Deputy Executive Director of ProudPolitics.

U.S. agrees Taiwan is part of China; it’s time to act like it / by David Cavendish

The old Republic of China flag used by Taiwan authorities flies in front of two U.S.-made warships in the naval harbor in Suao, northeast Taiwan. Despite officially recognizing the People’s Republic of China based in Beijing as the only legitimate Chinese state, Washington continues supplying weapons to Taiwan, as it has for nearly 75 years. | Wally Santana / AP

Originally published in the People’s World on August 23, 2023

Imagine the following scenario: Donald Trump, the three-time indicted former president, wins the 2024 Republican nomination to regain his old job. As in 2020, however, he loses the election. But instead of fomenting an insurrection as he did on Jan. 6, 2021, he is able to convince several high-ranking military commanders that the results were a result of “voter fraud” and decides to leave the lower 48 states. With the support of a small group of armed forces personnel, overthrows the government of Alaska and declares that he is the legitimate President of the United States.

What would the U.S. government do?

The odds are pretty good that the legitimate president (Joe Biden, we assume) would order the military to use force to oust the phony Trump-led government. Why? Because Alaska is a state of the United States regardless of what Donald Trump might say. Would anyone fault such an act?

The point of this rather ludicrous idea (though nowadays you never know) is to show the situation between China and the island of Taiwan in a different light, one that diverges from what the media and Washington constantly throw at us.

Recently, the U.S. government announced a $345 million military aid package to Taiwan. The media splashed big headlines for a couple of days, then dropped the issue. That’s been business as usual for nearly 75 years when discussing Taiwan and China. What is not remembered is the history of postwar relations between China, Taiwan, Europe, Japan, and the United States.

Before discussing the current situation, however, some history from even further back is in order.

Human beings have been living on Taiwan for 30,000 years. For most of that time, the island was little known to the outside world. China and other East Asian countries had intermittent contact, but that all changed when the Portuguese arrived in 1544 and named it Formosa, which means “beautiful island.”

They were shortly supplanted by the Dutch East India Company, which set up several forts and developed a highly profitable trade in silk, sugar, porcelain, and rice, among many other commodities. By the 1640s, the island became involved in Chinese dynastic struggles. The Dutch were ousted, and by the end of the 17th century, parts of Taiwan came under Chinese control. After two centuries of conflict, the Chinese government made Taiwan into a province.

That lasted until 1895, when Japan conquered the island, with its control lasting until the end of World War II in 1945. Victory over Japanese imperialism on the mainland led to the resumption and culmination of the civil war that had been ongoing between the Communists and the Nationalists since 1927. On Oct. 1, 1949, the liberation forces established the People’s Republic of China.

The defeated Nationalists under Chiang Kai-shek fled to Taiwan and declared themselves still the government of the whole of China—the continuation of the old “Republic of China,” simply based temporarily in the province of Taiwan. The Nationalists, or KMT Party, never declared Taiwan to be an independent state. Though they disputed the Communists’ hold on power in China, the Nationalists did not seek to split Taiwan from the mainland.

Taiwan has therefore been a province of China from 1945 to the present, just as it was from 1885 to 1895 before Japanese imperial occupation.

For 30 years after the 1949 revolution in China, the United States recognized the “Republic of China” on Taiwan as the government of all of China. In the eyes of Washington, it was as if the People’s Republic did not exist.

That changed in 1972 when President Richard Nixon and his National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger visited China. After a week of intense discussions, the two sides agreed to work toward normalizing relations. At the end of their meetings, they issued a statement known as the “Shanghai Communique.” Among its important points was the understanding that:

“The United States acknowledges that all Chinese on either side of the Taiwan Strait maintain there is but one China and that Taiwan is a part of China. The United States government does not challenge that position. It reaffirms its interest in a peaceful settlement of the Taiwan question by the Chinese themselves.”

This agreement was reinforced in 1979 when the two countries established formal diplomatic relations. “The Government of the United States of America acknowledges the Chinese position that there is but one China and Taiwan is part of China,” it declared.

Even though the United States says it adheres to the one-China principle, Washington has been trying to play both sides of the street ever since establishing relations with Beijing. Shortly after President Jimmy Carter gave the speech announcing the breakthrough, and even though Washington said it was committed to settling the future of Taiwan peacefully, the United States began selling “defensive” weapons to Taiwan under the Taiwan Relations Act.

These “defensive” weapons expenditures in the 44 years since have amounted, by one estimate, to be around $90 billion dollars. At the same time, the U.S. Navy Seventh Fleet regularly conducts patrols around Taiwan with heavily armed warships. Add to these insults numerous other U.S. provocations, such as the visit of former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan in 2022 (a long tradition of U.S. Congressional leaders) and the recent meeting between Kevin McCarthy, the current House Speaker, with the political leader of Taiwan, Tsai Ing-wen, who was on a visit to the United States.

The Chinese position on Taiwan has not changed since the Shanghai Communique. A statement by China’s Foreign Ministry in 2022 sums it up: “There is but one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China’s territory, and the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China.”

Much has been written about how relations between China and the United States are at their lowest point in decades, and speculations about that we are in “Cold War 2.0.” The relationship between the governments of the two largest economies in the world is understandably complex, but they do not have to include military brinksmanship.

The danger from a war between the two countries for any reason is beyond comprehension. Such a war could mean the end of human life on this planet. Mutual relations based on respect for each other, cooperation, and peace would be a great thing for every human being. This may sound idealistic, but the alternative is too hideous to contemplate.

It may be a long road to reach that goal, but we must take the first step: End U.S. arms sales to Taiwan and return to the principles set out between our two countries a half-century ago.

As with all op-eds published by People’s World, the opinions reflected in this article are those of the author.

We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!

David Cavendish is a retired teacher, active in the union movement, the peace movement (many years in an anti-Iraq/Afghanistan War vigil), and other progressive political activities. He is a longtime contributor to People’s World. David Cavendish es un maestro jubilado, activo en el movimiento sindical, el movimiento por la paz y otras actividades políticas progresistas. Colabora desde hace mucho tiempo en People’s World.

Advancing the new Cold War, New York Times revives ‘foreign agent’ conspiracy / by Communist Party USA

Sen. Joe McCarthy would be proud of the New York Times’ latest hit job against critics of U.S. foreign policy.

Originally posted in People’s World on August 14, 2023

The following statement was issued by the Communist Party USA on Aug. 11, 2023, in response to allegations in the New York Times that a wealthy American citizen in Beijing is secretly funding left-wing and peace groups in the U.S. with the aim of furthering the foreign policy aims of the Chinese state. People’s World reprints the CPUSA’s statement as a guest editorial for our readers, as this newspaper—when it was known as the Daily Worker—was similarly caught up in the old “foreign agent” accusations of the Red Scare days.

It’s official: The new Cold War is on—and the New York Times “proves” it by warning of a nefarious Chinese plot to influence U.S. public opinion.

In an article that would have made Joe McCarthy, Roy Cohn, and J. Edgar Hoover green with envy, the Times puts a bullseye on the activity of groups like Code Pink, the People’s Forum, and the Tricontinental Institute and the financial support they supposedly rely on from Neville Roy Singham, a wealthy American with a history of donating to left organizations.

The most damning piece of evidence in the prosecution’s arsenal is saved for the hit job’s ending sentence: “Just last month, Mr. Singham attended a Chinese Communist Party propaganda forum. In a photo, taken during a breakout session on how to promote the party abroad, Mr. Singham is seen jotting in a notebook adorned with a red hammer and sickle.” A notebook emblazoned with a red hammer and sickle? Oh no!

The article is replete with such “proof.” According to the Times, Singham also has offices in a building in Shanghai and has been seen in the company of Chinese officials at events where China’s role in the world is presented in a way that does not align with U.S. foreign policy discourse.

And that brings us to the heart of the matter: Once again, we see the revival of the notion that challenging U.S. foreign policy is tantamount to acting as an “agent of a foreign power,” a charge drawn straight from the playbook of the old House Un-American Activities Committee.

At the height of the McCarthy period, a figure no less esteemed than Dr. W.E.B. DuBois, 83 years of age at the time, was handcuffed by the government on such patently false premises. As part of a similar crusade today, the Times authors leave no McCarthyite stone unthrown and no Red Scare dog whistle unblown.

This is not investigative journalism. It is reheated McCarthyism, the putrid leftovers of a conspiracy theory that was already rotten the first time around, served up to delegitimize China’s emergence as a global power and discredit critics of U.S. foreign policy.

If the individuals and organizations targeted in the article were part of the welter of privately-funded NGOs, think tanks, conferences, and media networks used by the U.S. ruling class to promote its foreign policy priorities, there would be no story here.

But they’re not. And because they do not take talking points from Washington and Wall Street, they are accused of taking them from Beijing. Because they engage with China rather than treating it as an enemy, the details of their political activity are stretched, twisted, and lit from behind to project the menacing shape of a foreign, Communist plot.

We have seen this shadow-play before, with the same choreography—against organized labor, against movements for civil rights, against the peace movement. We have seen it before, with other leftists, other progressive organizations, in the crosshairs that Mr. Singham, Tricontinental, Code Pink, and People’s Forum now occupy. We have seen it before, when the profits and power of the U.S. ruling class come under threat.

We remember those days well because, as is widely known, we were at the very center of the McCarthyite storm. And just as we did then, we condemn it today. We condemn it not only as Communists, not only as believers in peace and international solidarity, but as partisans of democracy in the struggle against fascism.

Here, in the aftermath of January 6, the right side of history has no room and no time for conspiracy theories. The stakes are too high and the enemy too close at hand to traffic in crude red-baiting and anti-communist paranoia.

After all, that role is already taken. Donald Trump pledges to keep “foreign, Christian-hating Communists” out of the country. The government of Florida bars Chinese citizens from buying property in the state, and now the Biden administration does likewise with certain types of technology investments. Heavily-armed extremists slap the “Marxist” label on anything they designate for repression, from the environmental movement to public schools.

For an institution with the reach and resources of the New York Times to echo those positions, to spread those same conspiracy theories, is not merely irresponsible. It is a betrayal of the struggle for democracy and a material service to the extreme right.

Democracy would be better served if the New York Times turned its prodigious investigative resources on the donors, corporate and otherwise, who bankroll lawmakers who participated in Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election; or on the funders behind the attempted fascist coup of January 6; or on infiltration of police forces by white supremacist terror groups.

The struggle to preserve and expand democracy against the MAGA right needs all of us: communists, socialists, liberals, moderates, grassroots activists, artists, intellectuals, elected officials, labor leaders, Black, Latino, Asian, Native American, and white, organizers, and, yes, some business forces, too. It needs unity, focus, and determination.

What it does not need and cannot bear is another round of right-wing conspiracy theories and anti-communist paranoia, endorsed by the “centrist” New York Times.

Be forewarned: This is a dangerous turn of events, and the GOP right in the person of Marco Rubio has already seized upon it, demanding a Justice Department investigation, a probe that has the potential to affect everyone regardless of political point of view.

That’s how witch hunts start. As James Baldwin said to Angela Davis on the eve of her trial, “If they come for you in the morning, they’ll come for us that night.”

The Communist Party USA is a working-class organization that stands for the interests of the U.S. working class and its people. El Partido Comunista de EE. UU. es una organización de la clase trabajadora que defiende los intereses de la clase trabajadora de EE. UU. y su pueblo. We work in coalition with the labor movement, the peace movement, the student movement, organizations fighting for equality and social justice, the environmental movement, immigrants’ rights groups, and the health care for all campaign. Solidarity with workers of other countries is also part of our work. But to win a better life, we believe that we must go further. We believe that people can replace capitalism with a system that puts people before profit — socialism. We are rooted in our country’s revolutionary history and its struggles for democracy. We call for a “Bill of Rights” socialism, guaranteeing full individual freedoms.

Xi meets Blinken to ease conflict; U.S. reaffirms ‘one China’ policy / by Combined Soures

U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken meets with Chinese President Xi Jinping in the Great Hall of the People in Beijing, June 19, 2023. | Leah Millis / Pool Photo via AP

Originally published in the People’s World on June 20, 2023

Chinese President Xi Jinping met U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Monday, agreeing to “stabilize” badly deteriorated relations between the two countries. Washington and Beijing suggested the aim of Blinken’s trip was to improve lines of communication and avoid misunderstandings that could lead to war.

Blinken reportedly confirmed the long-standing U.S. policy of not supporting independence for the breakaway Chinese province of Taiwan. He also said the meeting—one originally postponed after the U.S. shot down a balloon it claimed was spying for China in February—was to ensure that “competition does not veer into conflict.”

When asked last year, U.S. President Joe Biden said Washington would defend Taiwan in the event of a “Chinese invasion,” though aides later said his comments did not reflect a departure from the long-standing “one China” policy.

But the U.S. has continued to adopt a hostile stance towards China over Taiwan, including the former Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi visiting the island and provocative maneuvers by the U.S. military in the Straits of Taiwan.

The U.S. has also increased its naval presence on China’s coastline in the last year and accused Chinese vessels and war planes of “aggressive” maneuvers close to its own. China objects to U.S. arms sales to Taiwan, the AUKUS nuclear submarine pact with Britain and Australia, and the “Quad” military bloc with India, Australia, and Japan.

Both China and the U.S. said they were satisfied with progress made during the two days of talks in Beijing, without pointing to specific areas of agreement beyond a mutual decision to return to a broad agenda for cooperation and competition endorsed last year by Xi and Biden at a summit in Bali.

Xi said, “The Chinese side has made our position clear, and the two sides have agreed to follow through the common understandings President Biden and I had reached in Bali.

“The two sides have made progress and reached agreement on some specific issues. This is very good,” he added.

Blinken said, “It is absolutely vital that we have these kinds of communications. This is something we’re going to keep working on.”

Blinken also met with Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang and Wang Yi, head of the Communist Party’s foreign affairs department. Following talks between Blinken and Wang, China’s foreign ministry said “it is necessary to make a choice between dialogue or confrontation, cooperation or conflict.” It blamed the “U.S. side’s erroneous perception of China, leading to incorrect policies towards China” for the current “low point” in relations.

It also said the U.S. bore responsibility for halting “the spiraling decline of China-U.S. relations to push it back to a healthy and stable track.” It added that Wang had “demanded that the U.S. stop hyping up the ‘China threat theory,’ lift illegal unilateral sanctions against China, abandon suppression of China’s technological development, and refrain from arbitrary interference in China’s internal affairs.”

The sanctions issue specifically was pointed to by the Chinese side for why there cannot yet be any resumption of military-to-military exchanges. But the two powers expressed a willingness to hold more talks, and U.S. officials expect the visit by Blinken to pave the way for more bilateral meetings in coming months.

China analyst Carlos Martinez called the visit “a step in the right direction.” He said: “With U.S.-China relations at their lowest ebb since the start of the rapprochement in the early 1970s, and with the U.S. side escalating a multifaceted new Cold War, reducing tensions between the two countries is a matter of global importance.”

Martinez added: “Ultimately, prospects for a lasting global peace hinge on whether the U.S. can bring itself to accept the reality of a multipolar world.”

Peace campaigner and China specialist Jenny Clegg said there were “some positive signs” from the talks which may help to ease tensions, but “China will now expect concrete demonstration of good will.” But, she added, restoring good relations “could be a work of many years.”

This article features reporting from Morning Star International Editor Roger McKenzie and other sources.

We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!

TikTok, TikTok…the countdown toward a new Cold War speeds up/ by Wei Yu, Nuvpreet Kalra, and Melissa Garriga

Rep. Earl Carter, R-Ga., questions TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew during a Congressional hearing on the platform’s consumer privacy and data security practices, March 23, 2023. | Jose Luis Magana / AP

Originally published in the People’s World on April 3, 2023

Ten years ago, Edward Snowden told the whole world the truth about the U.S. global surveillance programs. If Congress cares about our digital privacy as some members are claiming, it should first begin by investigating the surveillance policies of its own U.S. agencies. The campaign against TikTok is a fear-mongering tactic to wage war on China.

In 2020, the FBI used social media to monitor racial justice protesters who were targeted for arrests. For example, activist Mike Avery was arrested after posting about protests on Facebook, and his charges were dropped without explanation a few weeks later. An FBI official was so frustrated with the extensive social media surveillance that he told The Intercept, “Man, I don’t even know what’s legal anymore.”

The dissonance between accusing TikTok of security concerns and working with other companies to invade people’s privacy rings loudly in our ears. Social media has long been a tool used by federal agencies to target individuals and communities designated as “threat.”

The Department of Homeland Security and Immigration and Customs Enforcement have monitored the social media activities of immigrant rights activists for years. The State Department used social media screening to discriminate against the Muslim, Arab, Middle Eastern, and South Asian communities under the Trump administration’s “Muslim ban.”

It was only last year that the post-9/11 NSA phone surveillance program was reported to have finally been shut down. Major telecom companies like Verizon gave the government access to hundreds of millions of calls and texts. Dataminr, a startup Twitter partner, provided police with data about BLM protests. One focus on “potential gang members” targeted Black and Latinx people, including school-aged children.

Meta’s (Facebook’s) subsidiary WhatsApp was reportedly used by the Saudi government to hack journalist Jamal Khashoggi’s phone before he was abducted and murdered. Meanwhile, Meta itself used a VPN to spy on users’ smartphones for market research in exchange for bribes. WhatsApp is not banned on government devices, but TikTok should be?

If our lawmakers are concerned about protecting digital privacy, then Congress should start by investigating American federal agencies. Unlike China, as well as other Western countries, such as many EU member-states, the U.S. does not have any digital privacy laws on the federal level.

The U.S. could cooperate with China to better ensure people’s privacy is protected, instead of driving fear to target one single social media platform.

The ongoing effort to investigate and ban TikTok is not about our privacy, but about fueling more aggression against China. Fear-mongering about China has also caused the rise of anti-Asian racism in the U.S.

In banning TikTok, the US is projecting its invasive policies onto another government. Warmongers are using the issue to create paranoia and justify even more aggression towards China.

It is not a coincidence that these recent bans have come about shortly after the so-called Chinese “spy balloon” was shot down over the U.S. Privacy concerns are being used to wage war on China. The U.S. should focus on passing federal data privacy laws instead of targeting one app.

Double standards and warmongering against China need to stop. China is not our enemy.

Wei Yu is coordinator of the “China is Not Our Enemy” campaign at the anti-war organization CODEPINK. Born in Tianjin, China, she has lived in the U.S. since her high school years. Wei is passionate about anti-imperialism and peace-building work and enjoys experimenting with vegan recipes in her free time.

Nuvpreet Kalra is a social media intern at the anti-war organization CODEPINK. She is studying towards a Masters degree in Internet Equalities at University of the Arts London. Her main organizing interests are anti-imperialism, de-colonialism, anti-racism, digital oppression, and workers’ rights.

Melissa Garriga is the media relations manager at the anti-war organization CODEPINK. Born and raised in a Mississippi coastal town where the local economy is and remains dependent on government contracts to build navy warships, Melissa witnessed early on how the war economy exploited poor and working-class people in the United States in order to kill and injure poor and working-class people abroad. She previously worked for the Poor People’s Campaign.

A U.S. general hypes China as threat in Latin America / by W.T. Whitney Jr.

General Laura Richardson, Commander of United States Southern Command testifies before the Senate Armed Services Committee. | Jose Luis Magana / AP

Published in the People’s World on March 29, 2023

The U.S. government has long intervened in Latin America and the Caribbean (LAC). Now, the U.S. military is paying attention to China’s economic activities there.

Gen. Laura Richardson on March 8 reported to the Armed Services Committee of the U.S. House of Representatives on the actions and needs of the Southern Command, which she heads. She has charge of all U.S. military operations in the region.

Citing the 2022 National Security Strategy, Richardson declared that “no region impacts the United States more directly than the Western Hemisphere… [There,] autocrats are working overtime to undermine democracy.” And security there “is critical to homeland defense.”

Richardson stated that “the PRC (People’s Republic of China) has both the capability and intent to eschew international norms, advance its brand of authoritarianism, and amass power and influence at the expense of the existing and emerging democracies in our hemisphere.” The Southern Command’s “main priority…is to expose and mitigate PRC malign activity.”

She sees a “myriad of ways in which the PRC is spreading its malign influence, wielding its economic might, and conducting gray zone activities to expand its military and political access and influence.” A “gray zone,” according to the NATO-friendly Atlantic Council, is a “set of activities…[like] nefarious economic activities, influence operations, …cyberattacks, mercenary operations, assassinations, and disinformation campaigns.”

Richardson highlighted China’s trade with LAC that is heading toward “$700 billion [annually] by 2035.” The United States, in her view, will be facing intense competition, and presently “its comparative trade advantage is eroding.”

She added that “The PRC’s efforts to extract South America’s natural resources to support its own population…are conducted at the expense of our partner nations and their citizens.” And opportunities for “quality private sector investment” are disappearing.

Competition extends to space: “11 PRC-linked space facilities across five countries in this region [enable] space tracking and surveillance capabilities.” Richardson complained of “24 countries [that] have existing Chinese telecommunication infrastructure (3G/4G), increasing their potential to transition to Chinese 5G.”

She expressed concern both about surveillance networks supplied by China that represent a “potential counterintelligence threat” and about Latin Americans going to China “to receive training on cybersecurity and military doctrine.” Richardson denounced China’s role in facilitating environmental crimes and pointed to “potential dual use for malign commercial and military activities.”

“Relationships absolutely matter,” she insisted, “and our partner democracies are desperate for assistance from the United States.” Plus, “if we’re not there in time, they…take what’s available, creating opportunities for the PRC.”

Moving beyond China, Richardson indicated that “many partner nations…see TCOs [transnational criminal organizations] as their primary security challenge.” That’s because drug-cartel violence leads to deaths and poverty, and “illicit funds exacerbate regional corruption, insecurity, and instability.”

Her report avoids mention of particular countries other than offering brief references to Haiti, Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. She criticized Russia for “military engagements with Venezuela and Nicaragua” and for spreading “false narratives.” Richardson praised Colombia for providing military training in other countries.

The Southern Command gains “exponential return” on supplying various countries with U.S. weapons and supplies. It conducts joint military exercises, and “provides professional military education to personnel from 28 countries.”

Richardson reported at length on processes she sees as fostering useful relationships between her command and the various governments and military services. The tone of urgency characterizing her discussion on China was entirely lacking.

Economic intervention

Gen. Richardson’s view that China has greatly expanded its economic involvement with the LAC nations is on target.

Since 2005, China’s state-owned banks have arranged for 117 loans in the region worth, in all, more than $140 billion. They averaged over $10 billion annually. Since 2020, China has made fewer loans.

Chinese trade with Latin America grew from $12 billion in 2000 to $448 billion in 2021. China’s imports of “ores (42%), soybeans (16%), mineral fuels and oils (10%), meat (6%), and copper (5%)” totaled $221 billion in 2021. The value of exported manufactured goods that year was $227 billion. By 2022, China had become the biggest trading partner in four Latin American countries and the second-largest in many others.

China’s foreign direct investment (FDI) has long represented China’s strongest economic tie to the region. FDI signifies funding of projects abroad directed at long-term impact. China’s FDI from 2005 to mid-2022 was $143 billion. Energy projects and “metals/mining” accounted for 59% and 24% of the total, respectively. Of that total, Brazil and Peru received 45% and 17%, respectively.

The FDI flow since 2016 has averaged $4.5 billion annually; worldwide, China’s FDI has contracted.

Chinese banks and corporations have invested heavily in lithium production in Argentina, Bolivia, and Chile, which, together, account for 56% of the world’s lithium deposits. China is the largest investor in Peru’s mining sector, controlling seven large mines and owning two of Peru’s biggest copper mines. Brazil is the world’s largest recipient of Chinese investments.

China’s government has linked FDI to its Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that began in 2013. As of May 2022, 21 Latin American and Caribbean countries were cooperating with the BRI and 11 of them had formally joined.

On the ground

U.S. military intervention in LAC is far from new. Analyst Sergio Rodríguez Gelfenstein complements Richardson’s report with a three-part survey, accessible here, here, and here, of recent U.S. military activities in the region.

He indicates the United States now has “12 military bases in Panamá, 12 in Puerto Rico, 9 in Colombia, 8 in Perú, 3 in Honduras, 2 in Paraguay, as well as similar installations in Aruba, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Cuba (Guantánamo), and in other countries.”

Rodríguez maintains that “levels of aggressive interference by Washington in the region have increased dramatically,” and that U.S. embassies there are supplied with more military, National Security Council, and CIA personnel than ever before.

Honduran Foreign Minister Eduardo Enrique Reina Garcia, left, and Chinese Foreign Minister Qin Gang shake hands following the establishment of diplomatic relations between the two countries, at a ceremony in the Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing Sunday, March 26, 2023. Honduras formed diplomatic ties with China on Sunday after breaking off relations with Taiwan, which is increasingly isolated and now recognized by only 13 sovereign states, including Vatican City. The U.S., meanwhile, is upset about China’s growing ties of cooperation and trade in Latin America. | Greg Baker / Pool Photo via AP

Rodríguez notes features of the LAC region that attract U.S. attention, among them: closeness to strategically important Antarctica; reserves of fresh water and biodiversity in Amazonian regions; the Guarani Aquifer near the triple frontier of Brazil, Paraguay, and Argentina, the largest in the world; and huge reserves of valuable natural resources.

Among ongoing or recent U.S. military interventions are these:

  • The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is implementing a “master plan” for the navigability of the Paraguay River and Plata River Basin. The nearby Triple Frontier area supposedly harbors international terrorism and drug trafficking.
  • The U.S. military facility in Neuquén, Argentina, is turning from its alleged humanitarian mission to activities in line with local preparations for oil extraction.
  • S. officials on Oct. 13, 2022, announced that 95 military vehicles were being donated to Guatemala for drug-war activities.
  • In Brazil in September 2022, General Richardson indicated that U.S. forces would join Brazilian counterparts to fight fires in the Amazon.
  • The Southern Command’s fostering of good relations with Peru’s military has borne fruit. Under consideration in Peru’s Congress is a proposal to authorize the entry of foreign military forces. To what nation would they belong? Hint: former CIA operative and U.S. Ambassador Lisa Kenna met with Peru’s Defense Minister the day before President Pedro Castillo was removed in a parliamentary coup on Dec. 7, 2022.
  • In March 2023, two U.S. congresspersons proposed that U.S. troops enter Mexico to carry out drug-war operations.
  • Presently the United States is making great efforts to establish a naval base on Gorgona island off Colombia’s Pacific coast. It would be the ninth U.S. base in Colombia, a NATO “global partner.”
  • In Colombia, U.S. troops acting on behalf of NATO, are active in that country’s Amazon region supposedly to protect the environment and combat drug trafficking.
  • The U.S. National Defense Authorization Act of December 2022 awarded the Southern Command $858 million for military operations in Ecuador.
  • In a second visit, the U.S. Coast Guard cutter Stone was plying Uruguayan waters in February ostensibly to train with local counterparts for search and rescue operations. The ship was also monitoring the nearby Chinese fishing fleet.

Rodríguez does not comment on U.S. interventions in Cuba, Nicaragua, and Venezuela. That’s because they’ve persisted for “more than 60, 40, and 20 years, respectively” and each requires a “special report.”

John Quincy Adams returns

Proclaiming the Monroe Doctrine 200 years ago, Secretary of State Adams informed European powers that the United States regarded “any attempt on their part to extend their system to any portion of this hemisphere as dangerous to our peace and safety.”

Gen. Richardson would apply the warning of that era to the PRC. Yet signs of hegemonic aspirations from that quarter are absent.

Commenting recently, Argentinian economist and academician Claudio Katz notes that “China concentrates its forces in the economic arena while avoiding confrontations at the political or military level.… Investments are not accompanied by troops and bases, useful for guaranteeing return on investments.”

Besides, China “does business with all governments, without regard to their internal politics.” That tendency, Katz writes, stems from the PRC having “arisen from a socialist experience, having hybrid characteristics, and not completing a passage to capitalism.” He maintains that China, with its economic involvement, contributes nothing to advancing socialism in the region.

W.T. Whitney Jr. is a political journalist whose focus is on Latin America, health care, and anti-racism. A Cuba solidarity activist, he formerly worked as a pediatrician, lives in rural Maine. W.T. Whitney Jr. es un periodista político cuyo enfoque está en América Latina, la atención médica y el antirracismo. Activista solidario con Cuba, anteriormente trabajó como pediatra, vive en la zona rural de Maine.

Targeting China, the U.S. brings its New Cold War to Africa / by Vijay Prashad

President Joe Biden and other leaders at the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in Washington, Dec. 15, 2022. | Andrew Harnik / AP

The United States government held the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit in mid-December, prompted in large part by its fears about Chinese and Russian influence on the African continent. Rather than routine diplomacy, Washington’s approach in the summit was guided by its broader New Cold War agenda, in which a growing focus has been to disrupt relations that African nations hold with China and Russia.

This hawkish stance is driven by U.S. military planners, who view Africa as “NATO’s southern flank” and consider China and Russia to be “near-peer threats.” At the summit, U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin charged China and Russia with “destabilizing” Africa.

Austin provided little evidence to support his accusations, apart from pointing to China’s substantial investments, trade, and infrastructure projects with many countries on the continent and maligning the presence in a handful of countries of several hundred mercenaries from the Russian private security firm, the Wagner Group.

The African heads of government left Washington with a promise from U.S. President Joe Biden to make a continent-wide tour, a pledge that the United States will spend $55 billion in investments, and a high-minded but empty statement on U.S.-Africa partnership.

Unfortunately, given the U.S. track record on the continent, until these words are backed up with constructive actions, they can only be considered empty gestures and geopolitical jockeying.

Debt bondage vs. debt lifeline

There was not one word in the summit’s final statement on the most pressing issue for the continent’s governments: the long-term debt crisis.

An SGR cargo train leaves from the port containers depot on a Chinese-backed railway costing nearly $3.3 billion, opened by Kenya’s president as one of the country’s largest infrastructure projects since independence, in Mombasa, Kenya. | Khalil Senosi / AP

The 2022 U.N. Conference on Trade and Development Report found that “60% of least developed and other low-income countries were at high risk of or already suffering in debt distress,” with 16 African countries at high risk and another seven countries—Chad, Republic of the Congo, Mozambique, São Tomé and Príncipe, Somalia, Sudan, and Zimbabwe—already in debt distress.

On top of this, 33 African countries are in dire need of external assistance for food, which exacerbates the already existing risk of social collapse.

Most of the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit was spent pontificating on the abstract idea of democracy, with Biden farcically taking aside heads of state like President Muhammadu Buhari (Nigeria) and President Félix Tshisekedi (Democratic Republic of Congo) to lecture them on the need for “free, fair, and transparent” elections in their countries while pledging to provide $165 million to “support elections and good governance” in Africa in 2023.

Most of the debt held by the African states is owed to wealthy bondholders in the Western states and was brokered by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). These private creditors—who hold the debt of countries such as Ghana and Zambia—have refused to provide any debt relief to African states despite the great distress they are experiencing.

Often left out of conversations about this issue is the fact that this long-term debt distress has been largely caused by the plunder of the continent’s wealth.

On the other hand, unlike the wealthy bondholders of the West, the largest government creditor to African states, China, decided in August 2022 to cancel 23 interest-free loans to 17 countries and offer $10 billion of its IMF reserves for use by the African states.

A fair and rational approach to the debt crisis on the African continent would suggest that much more of the debt owed to Western bondholders should be forgiven and that the IMF should allocate Special Drawing Rights to provide liquidity to countries suffering from the endemic debt crisis. None of this was on the agenda of the U.S.-Africa Leaders Summit.

Instead, Washington combined bonhomie towards the African heads of government with a sinister attitude towards China and Russia. Is this friendliness from the U.S. a sincere olive branch? Or a Trojan Horse with which it seeks to smuggle its New Cold War agenda onto the continent?

Trashing China

The most recent U.S. government white paper on Africa, published in August 2022, suggests that it is the latter. The document, purportedly focused on Africa, featured ten mentions of China and Russia combined, but no mention of the term “sovereignty.” The paper stated:

“In line with the 2022 National Defense Strategy, the Department of Defense will engage with African partners to expose and highlight the risks of negative PRC [People’s Republic of China] and Russian activities in Africa. We will leverage civil-defense institutions and expand defense cooperation with strategic partners that share our values and our will to foster global peace and stability.”

The document reflects the fact that the U.S. has conceded that it cannot compete with what China offers as a commercial partner and will resort to military power and diplomatic pressure to muscle the Chinese off the continent.

The massive expansion of the U.S. military presence in Africa since the 2007 founding of the United States Africa Command—most recently with a new base in Ghana and maneuvers in Zambia—illustrates this approach.

The United States government has built a discourse to tarnish China’s reputation in Africa, which it characterizes as “new colonialism,” as former U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said in a 2011 interview. Does this reflect reality?

In 2017, the global corporate consulting firm McKinsey & Company published a major report on China’s role in Africa, noting after a full assessment, “On balance, we believe that China’s growing involvement is strongly positive for Africa’s economies, governments, and workers.”

Evidence to support this conclusion includes the fact that since 2010, “a third of Africa’s power grid and infrastructure has been financed and constructed by Chinese state-owned companies.” In these Chinese-run projects, McKinsey found that “89% of employees were African, adding up to nearly 300,000 jobs for African workers.”

Certainly, there are many stresses and strains involved in these Chinese investments, including evidence of poor management and badly designed contracts, but these are neither unique to Chinese companies nor endemic to their approach.

U.S. accusations that China is practicing “debt trap diplomacy” have also been widely debunked. The following observation, made in a 2007 report, remains insightful: “China is doing more to promote African development than any high-flying governance rhetoric.” This assessment is particularly noteworthy given that it came from the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, an intergovernmental bloc dominated by the G7 countries.

Who killed the African electric car?

Helicopters carrying U.S and Moroccan special forces take part in the African Lion military exercise, in Tafraout base, near Agadir, Morocco, June 14, 2021. | Mosa’ab Elshamy / AP

What will be the outcome of the United States’ recent $55 billion pledge to African states? Will the funds, which are largely earmarked for private firms, support African development or merely subsidize U.S. multinational corporations that dominate food production and distribution systems as well as health systems in Africa?

Here’s a telling example of the emptiness and absurdity of the U.S.’ attempts to reassert its influence on the African continent. In May 2022, the Democratic Republic of the Congo and Zambia signed a deal to independently develop electric batteries. Together, the two countries are home to 80% of the minerals and metals needed for the battery value chain.

The project was backed by the U.N.’s Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), whose representative Jean Luc Mastaki said, “Adding value to the battery minerals, through an inclusive and sustainable industrialization, will definitely allow the two countries to pave the way to a robust, resilient, and inclusive growth pattern which creates jobs for millions of our population.” With an eye on increasing indigenous technical and scientific capacity, the agreement would have drawn from “a partnership between Congolese and Zambian schools of mines and polytechnics.”

Fast forward to the summit: After this agreement had already been reached, the DRC’s Foreign Minister Christophe Lutundula and Zambia’s Foreign Minister Stanley Kakubo joined U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken in signing a memorandum of understanding that would allegedly “support” the DRC and Zambia in creating an electric battery value chain. Lutundula called it “an important moment in the partnership between the U.S. and Africa.”

The Socialist Party of Zambia responded with a strong statement: “The governments of Zambia and Congo have surrendered the copper and cobalt supply chain and production to American control. And with this capitulation, the hope of a Pan-African-owned and controlled electric car project is buried for generations to come.”

It is with child labor, strangely called “artisanal mining,” that multinational corporations extract the raw materials to control electric battery production rather than allow these countries to process their own resources and make their own batteries.

José Tshisungu wa Tshisungu of the Congo takes U.S. to the heart of the sorrows of children in the DRC in his poem, Inaudible:

Listen to the lament of the orphan
Stamped with the seal of sincerity
He is a child from around here
The street is his home
The market his neighborhood
The monotone of his plaintive voice
Runs from zone to zone
Inaudible.

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor, and journalist. He is the chief editor of LeftWord Books and the director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He is a senior non-resident fellow at Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies, Renmin University of China. He has written more than 20 books, including “The Darker Nations” and “The Poorer Nations.” His latest book is “Washington Bullets,” with an introduction by Evo Morales Ayma.

People’s World, January 5, 2023, https://www.peoplesworld.org/

Interview on “Prospects for World Peace” – China and US

E. Martin “Marty” Schotz, M.D., Veteran Activist, U.S. Peace Movement

Our friend Marty Schotz was interviewed August 18, 2022 by Abhishek G. Bhaya of the China Global Television Network, for which Bhaya is a “senior journalist and international affairs commentator.” Schotz lives in Western Massachusetts and is a peace activist and retired physician. 

What follows is Schotz speaking uninterruptedly for a little over four minutes. A video presentation of the interview appears here, along with an accompanying article. The link for the article is here.

Prospects for World Peace

I don’t see China as a threat to the American people. As for the peace movement, part of its responsibility is to explain to people that these ideas that Russia and China are threats to us are untrue. We, the common people, are not being represented with this “us” that they are referring to. The ‘us” that is being represented are corporations and rich people, and not ordinary people. 

All this talk of democracy, autocracy — it’s all a Cold War narrative, which is created to justify militarization. And there is no future for mankind in militarization. The only future for mankind is in disarmament and cooperation to deal with protecting the environment.

People speak of a “new cold war.” I don’t think old Cold War ever ended. I think it quieted down. And as long as Russia was not asserting itself internationally, things were quiet. But the institutions and all the foundations that were behind the Cold War never went away when the Soviet Union disappeared. They stayed.

Another problem area is the idea that war begins with weapons going off. That’s a mistake. The Cold War is part of the hot war. And when it comes to nuclear weapons, the last thing that will happen is nuclear weapons going off. We have to realize that what is going on is part of a war. Right now. And we have to oppose all of it.

So the minute Russia and China emerged as significant major powers, you then see Cold War institutions re-emerging. Former CIA analyst -turned-political activist Ray McGovern talks about what he calls the MICIMATT – the military-industrial-congressional-intelligence-media-think tank-complex. That’s what we are dealing with. It’s enormous.

War is a process, and peace is a process, and actually these are two processes that are simultaneously competing with each other. This is critical.

Peace is a process of understanding and respecting the other, seeing what their concerns are, finding agreements of mutual benefit. That’s the peace process. And anything that is creating the image of enemies or demonizing other people or other leaders: that is part of war. That is war-making. Of course, it’s extremely dangerous in the present circumstances.

Therefore, what I advocate is that our representatives take a peaceful position and not get caught up in this. And you know I would hope that other powers would not be unnecessarily drawn into conflict and not react to the situation, and, as much as possible, not play into them, not play into the narrative that’s being structured by war forces and Cold War forces. They should keep on articulating what people’s real needs and interests are, because there is, for example, genuine concern in the United States amongst the population about what’s happening to the environment. That is a very significant issue.

If China and other countries in some way could communicate to the American people that they too have the same understanding, then there would be this common concern that from my point of view would be part of a peace process, which would be countering the war process.

E. Martin Schotz, is a retired physician, a Board member of Traprock Center for Peace & Justice, and a member of Massachusetts Peace Action.

Abhishek G Bhaya is a senior journalist and international affairs commentator. The article reflects the author’s opinions and not necessarily the views of CGTN.

Can we please have an adult conversation about China? / by Vijay Prashad

Wang Bingxiu of the Shuanglang Farmer Painting Club (Dali Bai Autonomous Prefecture, China), Untitled, 2018.

Originally published here: https://thetricontinental.org/newsletterissue/china-information-war/

Dear friends,

Greetings from the desk of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.

As the U.S. legislative leader Nancy Pelosi swept into Taipei, people around the world held their breath. Her visit was an act of provocation. In December 1978, the U.S. government–following a United Nations General Assembly decision in 1971–recognised the People’s Republic of China, setting aside its previous treaty obligations to Taiwan. Despite this, U.S. President Jimmy Carter signed the Taiwan Relations Act (1979), which allowed U.S. officials to maintain intimate contact with Taiwan, including through the sale of weapons. This decision is noteworthy as Taiwan was under martial law from 1949 to 1987, requiring a regular weapons supplier.

Pelosi’s journey to Taipei was part of the U.S.’s ongoing provocation of China. This campaign includes former President Barack Obama’s ‘pivot to Asia’, former President Donald Trump’s ‘trade war’, the creation of security partnerships, the Quad and AUKUS, and the gradual transformation of NATO into an instrument against China. This agenda continues with President Joe Biden’s assessment that China must be weakened since it is the ‘only competitor potentially capable of combining its economic, diplomatic, military, and technological power to mount a sustained challenge’ to the U.S.-dominated world system.

China did not use its military power to prevent Pelosi and other U.S. congressional leaders from travelling to Taipei. But, when they left, the Chinese government announced that it would halt eight key areas of cooperation with the U.S., including cancelling military exchanges and suspending civil cooperation on a range of issues, such as climate change. That is what Pelosi’s trip accomplished: more confrontation, less cooperation.

Indeed, anyone who stands for greater cooperation with China is vilified in the Western media as well as in Western-allied media from the Global South as an ‘agent’ of China or a promoter of ‘disinformation’. I responded to some of these allegations in South Africa’s The Sunday Times on 7 August 2022. The remainder of this newsletter reproduces that article.

Ghazi Ahmet (Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, China), Muqam, 1984.

A new kind of madness is seeping into global political discourse, a poisonous fog that suffocates reason. This fog, which has long marinated in old, ugly ideas of white supremacy and Western superiority, is clouding our ideas of humanity. The general malady that ensues is a deep suspicion and hatred of China, not just of its current leadership or even the Chinese political system, but hatred of the entire country and of Chinese civilisation–hatred of just about anything to do with China.

This madness has made it impossible to have an adult conversation about China. Words and phrases such as ‘authoritarian’ and ‘genocide’ are thrown around with no care to ascertain facts. China is a country of 1.4 billion people, an ancient civilisation that suffered, as much of the Global South did, a century of humiliation, in this case from the British-inflicted Opium Wars (which began in 1839) until the 1949 Chinese Revolution, when leader Mao Zedong deliberately announced that the Chinese people had stood up. Since then, Chinese society has been deeply transformed by utilising its social wealth to address the age-old problems of hunger, illiteracy, despondency, and patriarchy. As with all social experiments, there have been great problems, but these are to be expected from any collective human action. Rather than seeing China for both its successes and contradictions, this madness of our times seeks to reduce China to an Orientalist caricature–an authoritarian state with a genocidal agenda that seeks global domination.

Dedron (Tibet Autonomous Region, China), Untitled, 2013.

This madness has a definite point of origin in the United States, whose ruling elites are greatly threatened by the advances of the Chinese people–particularly in robotics, telecommunications, high-speed rail, and computer technology. These advances pose an existential threat to the advantages long enjoyed by Western corporations, who have benefited from centuries of colonialism and the straitjacket of intellectual property laws. Fear of its own fragility and the integration of Europe into Eurasian economic developments has led the West to launch an information war against China.

This ideological tidal wave is overwhelming our ability to have serious, balanced conversations about China’s role in the world. Western countries with a long history of brutal colonialism in Africa, for instance, now regularly decry what they call Chinese colonialism in Africa without any acknowledgment of their own past or the entrenched French and U.S. military presence across the continent. Accusations of ‘genocide’ are always directed at the darker peoples of the world–whether in Darfur or in Xinjiang–but never at the U.S., whose illegal war on Iraq alone resulted in the deaths of over a million people. The International Criminal Court, steeped in Eurocentrism, indicts one African leader after another for crimes against humanity but has never indicted a Western leader for their endless wars of aggression.

The fog of this New Cold War is enveloping us today. Recently, in the Daily Maverick and the Mail & Guardian, I was accused of promoting ‘Chinese and Russian propaganda’ and having close links to the Chinese party-state. What is the basis of these claims?

Firstly, elements in Western intelligence attempt to brand any dissent against the Western assault on China as disinformation and propaganda. For instance, my December 2021 report from Uganda debunked the false claim that a Chinese loan to the country sought to take over its only international airport as part of a malicious ‘debt trap project’–a narrative that has also been repeatedly debunked by leading U.S. scholars. Through conversations with Ugandan government officials and public statements by Minister of Finance Matia Kasaija, I found, however, that the deal was poorly understood by the state but that there was no question of the seizure of Entebbe International Airport. Despite the fact that Bloomberg’s entire story on this loan was built on a lie, they were not tarred with the slur of ‘carrying water for Washington’. That is the power of the information war.

Yang Guangqi of the Shuanglang Farmer Painting Club (Dali Bai Autonomous Prefecture, China), Untitled, 2018.

Secondly, there is a claim about my alleged links to the Chinese Communist Party based on the simple fact that I engage with Chinese intellectuals and have an unpaid post at Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at Renmin University, a prominent think tank based in Beijing. Yet, many of the South African publications that have made these outrageous claims are principally funded by George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. Soros took the name of his foundation from Karl Popper’s book, The Open Society and Its Enemies (1945), in which Popper developed the principle of ‘unlimited tolerance’. Popper argued for maximum dialogue and that opinions against one’s own should be countered ‘by rational argument’. Where are the rational arguments here, in a smear campaign that says dialogue with Chinese intellectuals is somehow off-limits but conversation with U.S. government officials is perfectly acceptable? What level of civilisational apartheid is being produced here, where liberals in South Africa are promoting a ‘clash of civilisations’ rather than a ‘dialogue between civilisations’?

Countries in the Global South can learn a great deal from China’s experiments with socialism. Its eradication of extreme poverty during the pandemic–an accomplishment celebrated by the United Nations–can teach us how to tackle similar obstinate facts in our own countries (which is why Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research produced a detailed study about the techniques that China employed to achieve this feat). No country in the world is perfect, and none is above criticism. But to develop a paranoid attitude towards one country and to attempt to isolate it is socially dangerous. Walls need to be knocked down, not built up. The U.S. is provoking a conflict due to its own anxieties about China’s economic advances: we should not be drawn in as useful idiots. We need to have an adult conversation about China, not one imposed upon us by powerful interests that are not our own.

My article in The Sunday Times does not address all the issues that swirl around the U.S.-China conflict. However, it is an invitation to a dialogue. If you have any thoughts on these issues, please email me.

Warmly,

Vijay

Vijay Prashad is an Indian historian, editor and journalist. He is a writing fellow and chief correspondent at Globetrotter, a project of the Independent Media Institute. He is the chief editor of LeftWord Books and the director of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research. He has written more than twenty books, including The Darker Nations: A People’s History of the Third World (The New Press, 2007), The Poorer Nations: A Possible History of the Global South (Verso, 2013), The Death of the Nation and the Future of the Arab Revolution (University of California Press, 2016) and Red Star Over the Third World (LeftWord, 2017). He writes regularly for Frontline, the Hindu, Newsclick, AlterNet and BirGün.

MR Online, August, 12, 2021, https://mronline.org/