US-China Relations - 149. page

Red Flag Manuscript, a publication of the  Chinese Communist Party’s Central Committee, published an article "China Cannot Replicate the U.S. Model." The author is the executive editor of Ifeng Weekly, a magazine run by Hong Kong based Phoenix TV. The article starts by describing the U.S. as “claiming freedom, democracy, and justice domestically, and being militaristic and hegemonic externally.” “To China, today the U.S. uses the compliment of ‘strategic partner,’ and tomorrow brandishes its fist with the label of ‘China threat.’” The article argues that concepts of American freedom and democracy do not fit in China. The author further argues that the U.S. will not trust China no matter how its political system might change. “U.S. foreign policy is guided by pragmatism. Americans will view a strong China with suspicion, whether or not it is free and democratic. In the eyes of Americans and even other Westerners, China belongs in a different category.” The article concludes that China must continue in the direction of socialism. The U.S. model is not suitable for China, nor is it for other developing countries, whereas the path China is following can be a good example for other developing countries to learn from. 

Source: Red Flag Manuscript, March 7, 2011
http://www.qstheory.cn/hqwg/2011/201105/201103/t20110307_71237.htm

“The financial crisis gives the impression that U.S. military force is slowing down or contracting,” says a Xinhua commentary on the U.S.’s launch of a second X-37B space airplane. “However, the X-37B reminds us to look at the U.S. military from another angle. Since last year, the U.S. has started many projects featuring future military technologies, such as electromagnetic artillery, the X-37B space airplane, and the X-47 unmanned stealth bomber. … A deeper analysis tells us that U.S. military development is actually accelerating under the guise of reduction and withdrawal. When the U.S. develops certain advanced weapons, it often uses the excuse that it is in response to another country’s weapon. In reality, it is mostly to cope with the rapid progress of China’s military power.” “Foreign media claim that China’s intention is not clear and is worrisome. How about the U.S.? It is very clear; its intention is to start a war! Isn’t such a clear intention even more worrisome?” The article suggests that China’s military development still has a long way to go to catch up with the U.S. and warns the Chinese people of the potential danger. 

Source: Xinhua, March 11, 2011
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2011-03/11/c_121171401.htm

An article posted on the People’s Daily website and many other webistes in China accuses the U.S. of getting involved in Russia and Japan’s conflict over the Habomai Islands (in the southernmost Kuril Islands) and China and Japan’s conflict over the Pinnacle Islands (called the Senkaku Islands in Japan and the Diaoyu Islands in China). According to the article, the U.S. said it “will side with the Japanese on the Habomai Islands;” and in a conflict “will expel the Chinese from the East and South Sea.’’

The article noted that the U.S. will not get militarily involved in the Habomai issue, but will militarily intervene if China takes military action in the Pinnacle conflict. Commenting on U.S. involvement, a scholar from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences said, “U.S. overall power is disappearing; its original strategic position is also rapidly declining. In order to keep its military presence and leading position in the Asia Pacific, it has to use Japan and South Korea, making them shoulder more strategic tasks.” A professor from China’s National Defense University pointed out that U.S. involvement in the Pinnacle Islands is consistent with the “U.S. National Military Strategy Report” issued more than a week ago. The report indicated that the U.S. will shift its military emphasis to the Asia Pacific region.

Sources: People’s Daily, March 2, 2011
http://military.people.com.cn/GB/14040232.html

China Review News republished an article by a Chinese scholar nicknamed “Dong Shen" (meaning "Statement from the East") criticizing U.S. “Internet freedom.” The article stated, “There is a saying called ‘Internet freedom.’ It is said to have originated in the U.S. in February 2010. One year later, on February 15, 2011, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton issued a speech on ‘Internet Freedom,’ in relation to the political turmoil in North African and Middle East countries. She further explained ‘Internet Freedom’ in more detail, and specifically included it in the framework of U.S. foreign policy.” The article continued, “Every citizen on earth who knows a little about the various U.S. ‘freedoms’ understands that ‘Internet freedom’ is nothing new. It is, in essence, another U.S. trick to impose American values on other countries. The fundamental issue is that the U.S. wants to expand its interests around the world, using American values to control other countries.” The article concluded, “Facing ‘Internet freedom,’ we (Chinese) must resolutely walk the path of the ‘Chinese style Internet.’ A Chinese style Internet is the requirement of the Chinese style Socialist path.”

Source: China Review News, March 2, 2011
http://gb.chinareviewnews.com/doc/1016/1/4/1/101614142.html?coluid=148&kindid=0&docid=101614142&mdate=0302004203

Guangming Daily published an opinion article dealing with the “China Internet Threat” allegations that have appeared in Western media. The article claimed that, since Google gave substantial publicity to its being “attacked by Chinese hackers,” the Western media have regularly reported on China’s “Internet surveillance,” “Internet hacking,” and “establishing an Internet army." The article also mentioned that Hillary Clinton attacked China when she gave a speech about Internet freedom. Canadian media also reported that the Canadian government website had been hacked recently; hackers obtained some highly confidential information. The hack was traced to a server in China. It seems that the “China Internet Threat” allegation is heating up again. The author claimed that the above accusations are groundless and listed the following rebuttals. 1) It is a custom that every country administers its necessary controls. 2) Each year over 100 countries’ intelligence departments attempt to get U.S. government and corporation’s information. Why single out China as a threat? 3) As early as 2009, the United States had already set up an Internet war headquarters. It was the first country to include a war organization as part of its Internet strategy.

Source: Guangming Daily, February, 23, 2011
http://view.gmw.cn/2011-02/23/content_1643325.htm

Xinhua quoted an article from a Russian media report with the same title as above to hint that the United States instigated the recent Egyptian riots. The article stated that the dramatic events happening in the Arab countries in recent weeks once again demonstrate that the United States has never observed the principle of not interfering in a sovereign country’s internal affairs. It (the U.S.) gets rid of the “dictators” from the list of its past friends in order to arrange newly “elected” dictators. As long as it can help solve the problems facing the United States, the U.S. State Department is willing to see crowds and blood in the squares belonging to other territories. Secretly starting a revolution “from within" is an ideal tool. The article quoted a report from the U.K.’s Telegraph claiming that the United Stated secretly supported the Egyptian dissidents who, three years earlier, had promised Washington they would organize a “power turnover” campaign.

Source: Xinhua, February, 23, 2011
http://news.xinhuanet.com/2011-02/23/c_121115542.htm

After the United States witnessed the critical role that Facebook played in assisting people to bring down the totalitarian regimes in Tunisia and Egypt, it began using Twitter to encourage the opposition in Iran, said Xinhua in an article titled “The U.S. Uses Twitter to Stoke Fires in Iran.” “On February 13, the U.S. Department of State started posting messages in Persian to two Twitter accounts. One message said, ‘We hope to join your dialog.’ The other said, ‘The U.S. calls on Iran to allow people the universal right to peaceful assembly and to hold protests.”

Source: Xinhua, February 16, 2011
http://news.xinhuanet.com/mil/2011-02/16/c_121087738.htm

On February 8, 2011, the U.S. Department of Defense published the National Military Strategy of United States of America 2011. Xinhua published several articles discussing the book. One review stated that in its military strategy, the U.S. will focus on Internet wars and on the Asia-Pacific region. Regarding an Internet war, the article gave the following summary: In developing the future armed forces, the new strategy stresses the “threat of an Internet war,” and for the first time lists “coping with the threat of an Internet war” as a separate military strategy. (1)

Another article was titled, “The U.S. National Military Strategy Report Is Meant to Target China.” The article said, “The report didn’t overtly mention China, but China’s influence is obvious in the text.” “Even when it’s not talking about Asia, the main focus is not too far away from China’s military expansion.” The article relied heavily on foreign media reports to make its point. (2)

Sources: Xinhua, February 10, 2011
(1) http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2011-02/10/c_121059545.htm
(2) http://news.xinhuanet.com/world/2011-02/10/c_121062092.htm