US-China Relations - 22. page

China’s state-run media Global Times published an opinion article expressing concern over the U.S. attempt to expel Russia from international communities. The following is a translation of the article:

After the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the United States and the West imposed multiple sanctions on Russia and attempted to isolate Russia internationally. The latest move is that the United States and other Western countries called on most of the G20 members to work together to remove Russia from the organization.
The United States is attempting to undermine international law and the multilateral order through the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. This is a trend that deserves the international community’s high vigilance … In fact, this pan-politicized operation by the U.S. has neither a solid legal basis nor wide support from the international community.

First, from the perspective of international law, it is difficult to find a legal basis for expelling Russia. Membership in an international organization is not determined by one or two countries, but by the constitution of the international organization. If the articles of an association have relevant provisions, the procedures shall be performed in accordance with the provisions of the articles. In general, international organizations do not have the right to directly expel or suspend membership if the constitution does not provide for it.
As the main forum for international economic cooperation, the G20 needs to follow the principle of consensus. Trying to deprive a member of its membership is bound to undermine the unity of the G20 and impact global economic governance, which is not in the interest of any party.

Second, international mainstream voices do not actually support the expulsion of Russia. Although the United Nations General Assembly passed a resolution to suspend Russia’s membership in the Human Rights Council, after the vote, Serbian President Vucic said that Serbia voting in support of the resolution was out of fear of the threat of sanctions if Serbia voted no. This fully shows that under the coercion and inducement of the U.S. and the West, a large part of the true voice of the international community has been silenced in the hustle and bustle of the U.S. and the West. So to what extent can such voting results reflect the mainstream understanding of the international community? Moreover, many G20 member countries such as China and Indonesia have expressed their opposition to the remarks about boycotting Russia in the G20. The Brazilian foreign minister severely criticized the way Western countries handled the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and opposed the expulsion of Russia from the G20. Even in the World Tourism Organization, many member states disapprove of suspending Russia’s membership. Under the discourse hegemony and selective reporting of the United States and the West, the voice of expelling Russia seems to be very loud, but in fact most countries are the “silent majority.”

Third, international organizations do not want to expel Russia. In the context of the prolonged epidemic and intensified conflicts, what international organizations need more is solidarity and cooperation to overcome difficulties, rather than widening the gap and deepening the estrangement. Therefore, it is not difficult to understand that few international organizations openly support the expulsion of Russia.

In a word, to a large extent, “expelling Russia” in the international system is actually just a false proposition that American and Western politicians have made. The reality is that economic globalization has made the international community highly interconnected. This move by the U.S. side will not only tear apart the international system, but will not help resolve the current Ukraine crisis; nor is it in line with the general trend of the era of globalization. In the end, the era when one country or several countries have the final say has passed. The U.S. and the West should carefully reflect on what rights they have and what qualifications they have to issue orders to other countries.

Source: Global Times, April 25, 2022
https://opinion.huanqiu.com/article/47k9g3kLjhr

Luo Siyi, a Senior Researcher at the Chongyang Financial Research Institute, Renmin University of China, published an article on Guancha.cn (the Observer) discussing the intentions of the U.S.  in the context of the Russia-Ukraine war. Some excerpts from the article follow:

“For more than 20 years, the foreign military expansion of the United States has been obvious. Even so, the occurrence of the Ukraine war also represents a qualitative change in U.S. military policy. Before the Ukraine war, the United States had only taken military action against developing countries that were far weaker in military power and did not possess nuclear weapons.”

“However, the U.S. threat to bring Ukraine into NATO, triggering a war in Ukraine, shows that U.S. military policy is not limited to attacking developing countries that are far weaker than itself. Although the United States knew in advance that its eastward expansion of NATO into Ukraine would affect Russia’s most important interests (a move that clearly crossed Russia’s red line when Russia’s extremely powerful military and nuclear capabilities are on par with the United States),  it was still prepared to take the risk.”

The U.S. is combining its basic political stance (the U.S. insists that Ukraine ‘has the right’ to join NATO) along with the military facts (the U.S. provides arms to Ukraine). It clearly shows that the U.S. has deliberately provoked a confrontation between Russia and Ukraine, even though this will inevitably lead to the United States and Russia being in a direct conflict. Therefore, when assessing the Ukraine crisis, it should be noted that the U.S. escalated its military threats from targeting developing countries. Such threats are unjust but without the direct risk of triggering a world war — to targeting a powerful country like Russia, which may lead to a global military conflict.”

”The United States is fully aware that the one-China policy involves China’s most important national interests and is the foundation of U.S.-China relations. To abandon the one-China policy is to cross China’s red line, which is more dangerous than trying to incorporate Ukraine into NATO. So it is clear that the U.S. is trying to undermine the one-China policy in a provocative way, just as it deliberately decided to cross Russia’s red line on Ukraine.

“On the question of whether the U.S. provocation against China and Russia is temporary or long-term and permanent, the clear conclusion of this article is that the U.S. military escalation trend will continue.”

Source: Guancha.cn, April 22, 2022
https://www.guancha.cn/LuoSiYi/2022_04_22_636204.shtml