Camp David "Summit" Results Mirror Biden's Dementia

Over the past week two Global Times editorials were the subject and content of two articles aimed at raising awareness of the event, its likely aims and consequences. A third Global Times editorial notes that the outcome isn’t at all close to what was planned. The editorial’s main target is the Summit’s resulting joint statement, “The Spirit of Camp David,” but there were also two other statements, “Camp David Principles” and “Commitment to Consult.” Another publication, The EurAsian Times, looks at the outcome thusly:

At first glance, the first standalone summit among US President Joe Biden, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida, and South Korean President Yoon Suk Yeol at Camp David on August 18,… reflects a broader approach to the building of rules-based order in the Indo-Pacific.

On closer scrutiny, however, questions arise as to whether the spirit that the three leaders displayed at the summit would be sustained in the days to come, given the bitter history involving Japan and South Korea on the one hand and the critical China factor on the other. [My Emphasis]

It then goes on to examine the three statements and examine the historical context. But the key resides within the bolded text above and what follows in the ensuing paragraph:

“As Indo-Pacific nations, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the United States will continue to advance a free and open Indo-Pacific based on a respect for international law, shared norms, and common values. We strongly oppose any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion”, a statement titled “Camp David Principles” issued at the end of the summit emphasized. [My Emphasis]

There’s no room in the world for a “rules based order” when International Law already exists that in many respects outlaws what that rules based order wants to implement. Plus, all three nations have nothing to do with the “Indo-Pacific” region or the region where the ASEAN resides. Plus, we see the Outlaw US Empire unilaterally trying to change the status quo by force/coercion as it continually violates China’s sovereignty over Taiwan and the Taiwan Strait—the prevailing International Law stipulates the One China Principle as the “shared norms, and common values” of the planet’s nations to which the Outlaw US Empire has agreed and continues to reiterate that it agrees despite violating it continually. As for “expressing worries over the Taiwan Strait,” there’s nothing for any nation to worry about since it’s an issue for China alone to solve since its sovereign over the island and the waters surrounding it. So, it’s easy to see where China will look at the three statements and not only see what’s written above, but much more.

Looking at the opening paragraphs of the two Camp David statements we see lies and falsehoods. From “Spirit”:

We, the leaders of Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the United States, convened at Camp David to inaugurate a new era of trilateral partnership. We do so at a time of unparalleled opportunity for our countries and our citizens, and at a hinge point of history, when geopolitical competition, the climate crisis, Russia’s war of aggression against Ukraine, and nuclear provocations test us. This is a moment that requires unity and coordinated action from true partners, and it is a moment we intend to meet, together. Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States are determined to align our collective efforts because we believe our trilateral partnership advances the security and prosperity of all our people, the region, and the world. In this spirit, Pre­sident Biden commended President Yoon and Prime Minister Kishida for their courageous leadership in transforming relations between Japan and the ROK. With the renewed bonds of friendship—and girded by the ironclad U.S.-Japan and U.S.-ROK alliances—each of our bilateral relationships is now stronger than ever. So too is our trilateral relationship. [My Emphasis]

In each of the bolded areas above resides a lie or misrepresentation. The economic situation within the USA is frightful for most people—70% think the nation’s going the wrong direction and about the same percentage oppose Biden’s economic plans. Russia didn’t start a war of aggression in Ukraine; the Outlaw US Empire did that in 2014 and deliberately broke International Law (Minsk 2) to ensure the current conflict occurred. The primary aim of US policy is to subjugate all nations to its will via Full Spectrum Dominance, so there’s no possible advancement of security and prosperity for anyone as long as that goal remains. Opinion polls show Koreans oppose Yoon’s current policy toward Japan, so relations aren’t being improved but worsened. And finally, the Outlaw US Empire occupies both Korea and Japan and as such neither nation is sovereign to even negotiate an “alliance”—their current condition was forced by the outcome of WW2. Now for “Camp”:

We, Prime Minister Kishida Fumio, President Yoon Suk Yeol, and President Joseph R. Biden, Jr., affirm a shared vision for our partnership as well as for the Indo-Pacific and beyond. Our partnership is based on a bedrock of shared values, mutual respect, and a unified commitment to advance the prosperity of our three countries, the region, and the globe. As we move forward, we intend our partnership to be guided by these principles:
 
As Indo-Pacific nations, Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK), and the United States will continue to advance a free and open Indo-Pacific based on a respect for international law, shared norms, and common values. We strongly oppose any unilateral attempts to change the status quo by force or coercion.  
 
The purpose of our trilateral security cooperation is and will remain to promote and enhance peace and stability throughout the region.

As you read, it’s almost the same as “Spirit” and contains most of the same distortions of fact. Commitment to Consult is just two paragraphs:

We, the leaders of Japan, the Republic of Korea, and the United States, commit our governments to consult trilaterally with each other, in an expeditious manner, to coordinate our responses to regional challenges, provocations, and threats affecting our collective interests and security.  Through these consultations, we intend to share information, align our messaging, and coordinate response actions.

Our countries retain the freedom to take all appropriate actions to uphold our security interests or sovereignty.  This commitment does not supersede or otherwise infringe on the commitments arising from the Treaty of Mutual Cooperation and Security Between Japan and the United States and the Mutual Defense Treaty Between the United States and the Republic of Korea.  This commitment is not intended to give rise to rights or obligations under international or domestic law.

Again, only the Outlaw US Empire is sovereign in this case as the other two are occupied vassals and have no sovereignty. Thus, “consultations” are usually diktats to ensure the correct narrative—”align our messaging”—is being followed: Russia invaded; it’s all Russia’s fault; we didn’t blow up Nord Stream; we didn’t engineer the 2014 coup; we haven’t been supporting Nazis since 1945, nor did we keep Japanese War Criminals from facing justice or adopt their biological warfare and other criminal experiments for our own use. What was it Obama said about history? The USA didn’t wage a war of genocide on Southeast Asian peoples that was a massive crime the region is still recovering from. ASEAN has no reason to fear the Outlaw US Empire as long as they target China and refuse to trade with it despite China being ASEAN’s largest trading partner.

How does China see the outcome of this Summit? Here’s the content of the editorial linked up top. The two major statements are linked so they can be referred to. Is China correct in addressing the fact that the ASEAN nations are the target of this Summit without their participation? Given the level of its deindustrialization and related inability to produce the required volume of STEM graduates, is the intertwining of technological cooperation with security a way for the Outlaw US Empire to exploit Japanese and Korean expertise? How honest is this excerpt from “Spirit”?

Together, we are committed to accelerate the clean energy transition; mobilize financing for quality infrastructure and resilient supply chains, including through trilateral collaboration among our development finance institutions as well as through the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII); and promote sustainable economic growth and financial stability, as well as orderly and well-functioning financial markets.

How many similar vows over the last decade failed to produce the announced goals, and decades before that? Generally one every year at G-7 meetings. And then we have talk of “information sharing” which is a hoot coming from the Global Spy. Now, China speaks:

The US-Japan-South Korea Camp David summit was completed in just half a day, but its impact on world peace and regional stability continues to ferment. International public opinion was surprised to note that the joint statement signed by the three parties, titled "The Spirit of Camp David," extensively mentioned the ASEAN and Pacific island countries, and talked about the South China Sea issue "using their strongest language yet." Even American experts interviewed by Western media expressed "surprise" at the arrangement in the statement. 

One of the three countries, the US, is purely an extra-regional country, while the other two are Northeast Asian countries. In a gathering that promotes a "new cold war," the fact that the three countries focused on the situation in another region cannot be simply dismissed as "meddling in others' affairs." The general impression on the summit in international public opinion is "addressing the challenge from China." During the joint press conference after the summit, US President Joe Biden ambiguously stated that "This summit was not about China… But it did come - China obviously came up."

In a sense, the "Spirit of Camp David" is ridiculous. It was originally a feast set by the US for Japan and South Korea, hoping to hand them the knife of the "new cold war." But neither Japan nor South Korea took it, and in the end, the three countries together tried to pass the knife to a third party, the ASEAN and Pacific island countries, who were not present at the summit and had no connection to it. The US, Japan, and South Korea, through this document that was supposed to guide their cooperation, called out to ASEAN and Pacific island countries, expressing their willingness to support them in confronting China. Did the US, Japan, and South Korea consult with ASEAN countries and Pacific island countries in advance about this forced drama? Did they ask for their consent?

While the three countries publicly avoid China, they secretly put ASEAN and the Pacific island countries on the front line of containing China, using them as pawns. The "Spirit of Camp David" is filled with malicious calculations to turn these countries into cannon fodder for the "new cold war." In the earlier years, there were some regional countries which hoped to "play balance" between major powers to strive for more resources. In recent years, more countries are expressing concerns about conflicts between major powers. In ASEAN, including traditional security ally of the US, Singapore, and countries like Vietnam that the US is trying to win over, have expressed on multiple occasions that they are unwilling to "take sides," while Pacific island countries have been more straightforward, saying that they "don't have any problems or concerns" with regards to their relations with China. 

The US has been trying to draw ASEAN to its side for a long time, and it is still stepping up efforts to do so, which indicates that its previous efforts were not successful. Even if it manages to bring Japan and South Korea on board now, it cannot change the ultimate outcome of failure. The fundamental reason is that the US has ignored the history and reality of ASEAN and disregarded the regional countries' insistence on independent and autonomous diplomacy. ASEAN countries have the most profound negative memories of the Cold War and are highly vigilant against attempts to start a "new cold war." During the Cold War, the US intervened in the domestic politics of countries like Vietnam and Cambodia, instigated proxy wars, and even directly got involved in, bringing the people of the region historical wounds that are difficult to heal. This region is one of the most averse to major powers engaging in group politics and camp confrontation.

No matter how fancy the bottle the US presents, as long as it pours out the old wine of the Cold War, no one will be willing to drink it all. The Camp David summit has had a strong "new cold war" color since its design, and it should be easy to predict the attitude of countries in the Asia-Pacific region toward it. It is clear to discerning people that when it comes to an ASEAN-centered approach, there is a vast difference between China and the US. The US attempts to place ASEAN at the center of the "Indo-Pacific Strategy," which is essentially putting ASEAN on the fire; while China truly regards ASEAN as the center of regional cooperation and is a firm practitioner of cooperation for win-win outcomes with ASEAN. The contrast between the words and actions of the US itself, combined with the actual comparison between China and the US, provides the most vivid display for ASEAN and other countries around the world.

It is not difficult to judge whether the US, Japan, and South Korea truly "support" ASEAN and Pacific island countries. The key lies in whether their actions have promoted local livelihood development, created new development opportunities for those countries, and contributed to creating a more stable external development environment for them. Judging from the divisive and confrontational remarks displayed by the "Spirit of Camp David," the "support" of the US, Japan, and South Korea is clearly hypocritical. Regional countries need to be more vigilant about this. [My Emphasis]

Yes, the proof is in the pudding as the saying goes. We’ll get to see a very different Summit when the BRICS meet next week. But we can already get a sense of the great difference between the two thanks to an article Lavrov wrote for publication in South Africa that will be the subject of the next article. There are two other worthy analyses published by Global Times readers will want to access, “Camp David statement splits China-Japan-S.Korea economic and trade ties,” and “Camp David summit serves as hypocritical anti-China pantomime with a 'mini-NATO' in the making.”

Like what you’ve been reading at Karlof1’s Substack? Then please consider subscribing and choosing to make a monthly/yearly pledge to enable my efforts in this challenging realm. Thank You!