China's Straight Talk--No Narratives

The past weekend saw the coming and going of this year’s Shangri-La Security Conference held in Singapore that witnessed a far more assertive China than seen previously. It’s clear that China’s foreign policy approach was modified after the Putin/Xi Summit to become more outspoken and assertive of China’s core interests. Four Global Times articles and an interview attest to that change as China seems willing to frontally confront the Outlaw US Empire’s dishonest One China policy that it continually breaks and is the primary point of contention. The Outlaw US Empire’s policy of using regional proxies to advance what it believes to be its interests at the proxy’s expense as with the Kurds and Ukrainians is what’s at stake. It looked like a positive change would result from the recent trilateral meeting between Chian, Japan and South Korea, but that must now be seen as a false omen.

The first item for readers is the following interview which Global Times sums up thusly:

The greatest challenge to Indo-Pacific regional stability and peace is the US' desire to pursue a strategy aimed at either resurrecting or maintaining US primacy, Warwick Powell (Powell), adjunct professor at the Queensland University of Technology and former policy advisor to Kevin Rudd, told Global Times (GT) reporter Li Aixin (Li is the lead writer of the other three articles) in an exclusive interview. During the annual defense and security forum Shangri-La Dialogue from May 31 to June 2, some Western countries have attempted to maliciously portray China as a "bully" in the region, and Powell said the fact is that regional countries and their people have coexisted with China for centuries, and they better understand how to interact with their neighbors - both big and small - than the Americans, who have been involved in the region for only the past 200 years. [My Emphasis]

And with that intro here’s the discussion:

GT: What do you think is the greatest security challenge currently facing the Indo-Pacific region?    

Powell: The greatest challenge to Indo-Pacific regional stability and peace is the US' desire to pursue a strategy aimed at either resurrecting or maintaining US primacy. It's either resurrecting US primacy if you believe it is already gone, or seeking to hold on to primacy if you believe it still exists. The more the US seeks to pursue primacy, the more likely it is to destabilize the region and disrupt the ability of the regional countries and peoples to pursue their own style of regional peace and economic development.

We are seeing the formation of many small groups - AUKUS, Quad, or the new Squad, which will include the Philippines, Japan, Australia and the US. The creation of micro-institutions is destabilizing. Many scholars in international relations and security discourse argue that creating such blocs during times of peace is antithetical to the pursuit of peace. This is because such blocs need a rationale, a reason for existence, which presupposes conflict. These blocs need conflict to remain relevant. That is one of the main dangers of the approach that the US has taken within this region.

GT: The Taiwan question is often one of the top topics at the Shangri-La Dialogue. It is brought up every year, often with the tone of China being a "threat." Is it reasonable that the issue of territorial sovereignty and core interests of China is always sensationalized at international security forums? 

Powell: There are two issues at stake here. The first one concerns the legal or de jure status of Taiwan, both globally within the United Nations framework and from the perspective of the warring parties in the Chinese civil war. That's the first thing. The second thing is that despite the de jure recognition of a single China, which the island of Taiwan is a part of, there are clearly political forces in the world seeking to portray the situation quite differently.

The idea of two Chinas will not happen. I don't think anybody on either side of the Taiwan Straits wants to have a war. In practical terms, the options are maintaining the status quo or finding a pathway to peaceful reunification. Leaders and residents of the island of Taiwan must carefully consider these choices, as should countries in the region. A peaceful resolution to the civil war is actually in the interests of everybody in the region.

I hope both the Americans and Beijing can understand that Lai Ching-te has acted with a high degree of naivety. With time, he will realize that leadership doesn't permit reckless actions endangering people's security, for which he is responsible. A leader's primary duty is ensuring the safety and well-being of those they're responsible for. If one cannot do that he failed the first test. In flagging the idea of "two Chinas," Lai was also undermining the provisions of the "constitution" that he claims he swears allegiance to. 

The real question for American political leadership is, do they want a war? This needs clarification. If they don't want a war, they have to give up the idea of a war for reunification and the idea that there can ever be "two Chinas." It means that Americans need to work toward a peaceful resolution of the cross-Straits question, a commitment made four decades ago, and actually play a constructive role in achieving that outcome, as opposed to constantly stymying the pathway toward peaceful reunification.

GT: Do you think that the turmoil in Ukraine and the Middle East could occur in Asia?

Powell: The conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East are clearly impacting the resources that the collective West is able to mobilize. It also indicates that, from a systemic perspective, the collective West no longer prevails in terms of personnel, doctrine, equipment or the supply chains necessary for equipment replacement and repair. The conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East have revealed severe limitations within the West.

What's important to consider regarding the Asian region? The real message from the Ukraine experience is for the people of the Asian region in general. The collective West, particularly the neoconservatives within its political setup, mainly originating from the US, pursued a strategy in Ukraine that they are now applying in Asia. This strategy has several key components. It targets an adversary with the aim of breaking it up, disrupting it, and if possible, effecting regime change. The neoconservatives have tried that in relation to Russia by expanding NATO eastward, instigating color revolutions, destabilizing Russia's periphery, and interfering in its domestic politics by supporting opposition forces.

These are the kinds of strategies that have been replicated in Asia. The efforts of the US and the CIA, in particular, to create disruptions in Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, the Philippines, and across the Taiwan Straits, echo the strategies used in Georgia, Ukraine, and other parts of Europe, going all the way back to Yugoslavia. 

The aim of the neoconservatives is not to facilitate peace within regions but to stir up divisions for their own benefit. This has been the case in Ukraine since 2014, where the collective West has supplied Ukraine with new munitions and training to strengthen its army against Russia. Similarly, in our region here in Asia, the US has breached agreements with China by continuing to supply arms to the island of Taiwan. Additionally, it has recently established militarized, unilateral arrangements that could trigger a new arms race in the region, marked by the deployment of mid-range missiles.

What's been happening in Europe is not so much about sending signals regarding whether Ukraine wins or loses. It's more about understanding the game plan and what's at stake. What's occurred in Europe is a game plan focused on dividing and conquering to create instability and militarize regions, allowing the Americans to step in and exploit divisions for their own interests. And they are repeating the same strategy in Asia.

GT: Now, the West is portraying China as a "bully" in the region. In your opinion, is China a bully or a force for peace? 

Powell: The most obvious example is China's role in resolving deep-seated conflicts in the Middle East, notably by facilitating a historic détente between Saudi Arabia and Iran. 

The Chinese approach, as exemplified in the Saudi Arabia-Iran situation, is to build or facilitate détente by encouraging the parties to reach consensus and have ownership of the solution. This contrasts with the collective West's approach, which is imposing a solution and enforcing it with arms.

GT: What about in the Asia-Pacific region? 

Powell: Some Western perspectives underestimate the capacity of all the countries in the region. The fact is that these countries and their people have coexisted with China for centuries, and they better understand how to interact with their neighbors - both big and small - than the Americans, who have been involved in the region for only the past 200 years.

China has land borders with several countries and shared maritime interests with many others. For millennia, their interactions have largely avoided deep long wars. While some conflicts are inevitable, entrenched warfare has not been typical in the interactions between China and its neighbors. 

The Americans are doing a great disservice to the peoples, cultures and communities of Asia when they suggest that these countries are too small and don't know how to deal with China. That's nonsense. They have known for centuries how to manage their relationships. One of the ways used today is through institutions like ASEAN and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership, the world's largest free trade agreement, involving 15 countries including the 10 ASEAN members, and China, Japan, Korea, New Zealand and Australia. 

It is a feat of diplomacy that the Americans can only marvel at and scratch their heads over. They don't know how to pull together consensus-driven programs like this because they haven't had to do it for decades.

Asian countries, through multipolar institutions like ASEAN, have demonstrated their ability to address regional issues effectively. These approaches work for the region because they respect the histories involved and draw on the lessons of those histories to find new solutions going forward.

GT: To provide regional security, should the US leave the region alone?

Powell: Leaving it alone is one thing, there's more - the US could learn something from Asia. The US can watch, observe and take on board the lessons of centuries of pragmatic statecraft in Asia and realize there is another way.

This alternative approach is necessary when dealing with an emerging multipolar world. In a multipolar environment, unless we want conflicts everywhere all the time, it is imperative that states rediscover or amplify their abilities in statecraft to find common solutions and build win-win outcomes that mesh each other's security and prosperity interests.

The US could learn something from that.

GT: The voices of the Global South are increasingly prominent on the global stage. However, at the Shangri-La Dialogue, Western voices still overwhelmingly dominate. Do you think this situation will change in the future? 

Powell: From the point of view of the global majority or the Global South, we need to be patient and empathetic. Ironically, we must recognize that the global hegemon is undergoing a deep process of grief. But China has, for many decades now, shown that it knows the value of patience. 

The Shangri-La Dialogue is a creature of history. It emerged in a time when the countries of the Global South were voiceless. Questions of security, even in the Asia region and the Asia-Pacific more broadly, bore the marks of centuries of colonialism. Security in Asia was a question for colonial powers to come and talk about how they would maintain security in a region far from their own homes and how they would teach the locals about security.

However, the world has changed, and I hope the Shangri-La Dialogue will respond to these changes and evolve accordingly. There needs to be a place at the table for the countries of the global majority, a rightful seat at the table to contribute to the dialogue. [My Emphasis]

An excellent recap of the conference’s history and some of its current issues. Professor Powell was very tactful not to label the Outlaw US Empire as the bull in the China shop. Yes, there is another way, but it must first be taught and then practiced.

The next Global Times item is “China will not allow 'inviting wolves into the house,' says Chinese lieutenant general in response to Marcos Jr. Shangri-La speech” was an instant sensation within China. Marcos Jr. is just as corrupt and criminal minded as his dictatorial father and guess where he went to university. Previous Filipino president Duterte worked well with China and tried his best to keep the Outlaw US Empire from reestablishing itself, although he failed because the Empire employed its Terrorist Foreign Legion to gain a foothold. Marcos is clearly a Comprador working against Filipinos and for the Empire. That “no wolves (NATO)” will be allowed in the house was the sternest and most public warning given to-date. Here’s the article:

Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr. said on Friday that the presence of the US was "crucial to regional peace," as his country faces what it perceived as growing Chinese pressure in waters off its coastline. In response, the Chinese delegation said that the Philippines' assertion of upholding peace and stability in the South China Sea rings hollow, while displaying enthusiasm for participating in bloc confrontations holds true.

Speaking at the opening of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, an annual major security forum, Marcos Jr. said that the Philippines and other Southeast Asian countries had a vision for "peace, stability, and prosperity" in the South China Sea, but that this was being undermined by other actors, without naming China.

"I have a question for the Philippines - What is the relationship between ASEAN Centrality and US leadership in the Asia-Pacific region? Which is more important, ASEAN or the Squad?" Lieutenant General He Lei asked during a following press conference Friday. He is a member of the PLA delegation to the Shangri-La Dialogue.

He further asked: The Philippines is a member of ASEAN, and President Marcos Jr. has emphasized the importance of upholding ASEAN Centrality in his speech, why then has the Philippines departed from ASEAN and formed the so-called Squad with the US, Japan, and Australia, strengthening the US-Philippine military alliance? 

While the Philippines claims to uphold ASEAN Centrality, it is actually strengthening the US-Philippine military alliance; while it claims to uphold peace and stability in the South China Sea, it is actually enthusiastically engaging in bloc confrontation, He said. 

He noted that during the six-year tenure of former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte, the situation in the South China Sea remained relatively stable, with no major disputes occurring. However, since Marcos Jr. came to power in June 2022, disputes have frequently arisen, from Ren'ai Jiao to the Huangyan Dao. 

The responsibility for the growing trend of disputes lies with the Philippines, which has been constantly stirring up troubles, and the US orchestrating behind the scenes. He noted. 

China has always believed that all countries, regardless of their size, wealth, or strength, are on equal footing. China has not bullied and will never bully smaller countries. But China has its bottom line, and it will not allow certain countries to take advantage of their smaller size to play the role of victim and act wildly, He stressed. 

He believes that resolving disputes in the South China Sea and maintaining peace depend on the countries in the region and ASEAN, rather than external countries. The evidence indicates that a significant portion of the unrest in the South China Sea has been instigated by external countries with the aim of sowing discord. These external actors are the architects and agitators of the unrest in the region. 

"We staunchly oppose external interference in resolving South China Sea issues. However, if certain country insists that regional countries lack the capacity to address these problems and insists on inviting external interference, China will not allow 'inviting wolves into the house.' We will never allow those with ulterior motives, seeking profit or turmoil in the South China Sea, to meddle in regional affairs," He noted.

“Never allow” is serious. Indeed, ASEAN operates via consensus and Filipino behavior is violating that consensus. Note that the Outlaw US Empire cannot dragoon any other Asian nations into its proxy “squad” aside from its colonies. It even seems to have lost India as a key member of the Quad, which was a good choice by Modi. And when it comes to the ability of ships to transit the South China Sea, none are impeded making the Empire’s ploy quite obvious.

Now the next item: “‘Taiwan independence’ means war: Chinese lieutenant general” mainly concerns the general’s pushback aimed at Lloyd Austin’s presentation:

Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) will never allow Taiwan island to be split from China. "Taiwan independence" means war, Lieutenant General Jing Jianfeng, deputy chief of the Joint Staff Department of China's Central Military Commission, said during a press conference held by the Chinese delegation following US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin's speech on Saturday morning during the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore. 

Regarding the Taiwan question, Jing said the reason why China took military countermeasures around Taiwan island is to thwart aggressive "Taiwan independence" secessionist activities and deter external interference using greater capacity, stronger measures and firmer resolve. 

Jing responded to remarks made by Austin that covered various aspects including the US Asia-Pacific alliance partnerships, China-US military relations, Taiwan question, and South China Sea issue.

Regarding the Taiwan question, Jing said Taiwan has been an inalienable part of China's sacred territory since ancient times. Legally binding international documents such as the Cairo Declaration, the Potsdam Proclamation, and United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 all clearly affirm China's sovereignty over Taiwan, which is also an integral part of the post-war international order. The Taiwan question is the most important and sensitive core issue in China-US relations. The three principles are preconditions for the establishment of bilateral diplomatic ties, namely, the US severing so-called diplomatic relations with Taiwan island, abrogating the mutual defense treaty with the Taiwan authorities, and withdrawing US military forces from Taiwan island. In recent years, the US has broken its promises, obscured and hollowed out the one-China principle, supported and armed Taiwan island for independence, thus stirring up trouble in the Taiwan Straits. 

Jing said the current situation in the Taiwan Straits is grave. Figures like new Taiwan regional leader Lai Ching-te have betrayed the Chinese nation and our ancestors by blatantly advocating for separatist theories and attempting to seek "independence" through soliciting foreign support or by force, pushing Taiwan island further toward the abyss of disaster. They are the culprits damaging the cross-Straits status quo and causing more harm to regional stability than anyone else. China will never cease enhancing combat readiness, never relent in our fight against "Taiwan independence" separatists, and never tolerate external interference. The Chinese military will take resolute actions to fulfill our mission of safeguarding national sovereignty.

Jing said the US' "Indo-Pacific Strategy" is merely political rhetoric that sounds good but achieves no good. It is built on forming exclusive clubs based on Cold War mentality and a zero-sum mind-set under the guise of advancing regional cooperation. The true motive of the US is to converge small circles into a larger one, akin to an Asia-Pacific version of NATO, in order to maintain US-led hegemony. 

The "Indo-Pacific Strategy," by its nature, aims to create division, provoke confrontation, and undermine stability. It solely serves the selfish geopolitical interests of the US, running counter to the tide of history and the shared aspirations of regional countries for peace, development, and win-win cooperation. This strategy is destined to yield no positive outcomes, Jing noted.

Jing said such small circles will bring more harm than good to their members. Even Americans themselves often advocate the adage of "speaking softly and carrying a big stick." The US often uses partnership as bait to entice regional countries into becoming its proxies to shoulder the burden for the US. From the Saigon moment to the fall of Kabul, partners of the US have become victims one after another, clearly revealing the selfish nature of the US. "This reminds me of a saying by late US secretary of state Henry Kissinger, and here I quote: 'To be America's enemy is dangerous but to be America's friend is fatal.'"

In terms of the South China Sea issue, Jing said Austin endorsed the Philippines and insinuated China's legitimate operations to protect China's rights was wrong. "This makes no sense," he said.

Jing said that at present, the South China Sea is overall stable. One-third of international maritime trade, or half of global merchant ships, pass through this waterway, including those of the US, even when US warships come uninvited. How can one claim that there is no freedom of navigation in the South China Sea? The US narratives are far from the truth and can only create unnecessary panic. 

China and ASEAN countries are neighbors that cannot move away from each other. It's natural for neighbors to bicker sometimes, but we need to resolve disagreements through dialogue and consultation rather than inviting wolves into our house and playing with fire.

On China-US military ties, Jing said the stable development of China-US military-to-military relations serves the common interests of both sides and aligns with the prevailing aspirations of the international community. The two militaries need to follow through on the consensus reached between the heads of state, uphold non-conflict and non-confrontation principles, and serve as anchors of stability in the China-US state-to-state relationship. China hopes the US side will honor its words with deeds, take concrete actions to uphold the principles of harmony, prioritize stability, and maintain credibility. Moreover, it is encouraged to increase communication and cooperation with the Chinese side to find the right path of engagement that serves the common interests of both sides and meets the aspirations of the world. [My Emphasis]

Unfortunately, as too many articles have attested to, the Outlaw US Empire has proven itself incapable of honesty in any form meaning “the consensus reached between the heads of state” never actually happened. Thus, China’s hopes will never be realized until the Empire reverts to being a normal nation. It appears Chinese pragmatism is shifting its POV and becoming more realistic about the Empire’s ambitions.

Our last article reproduces the strong words spoken by China’s Defense Minister Dong Jun as well as some further analysis:

Chinese Defense Minister Dong Jun on Sunday introduced China's approach to global security on the closing day of the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, as he offered Chinese thoughts on resolving global security issues with a global perspective, while reiterating China's firm stances on the Taiwan question and the South China Sea issue.

In his speech at a plenary session at the Shangri-La Dialogue on Sunday, Dong said that China's vision of building a community with a shared future for mankind, together with the Global Development Initiative, the Global Security Initiative and the Global Civilization Initiative, echoes the trend of history and responds to the longing of people around the world for a better life.

The Chinese military stands ready to work with other counterparts to deepen security cooperation and make more contributions to safeguard lasting peace and common prosperity in the Asia-Pacific as well as the world, said the Chinese Defense Minister.

"People in the Asia Pacific are committed to harmony and peace, are independent and self-reliant, and always support each other through thick and thin. We will not allow hegemonism and power politics to undermine the interests of Asia Pacific countries. We will not allow anyone to bring geopolitical conflicts or wars whether hot or cold, into our region. We will not allow any country or any force to create conflict and chaos in our region," he said.

The Chinese side is willing to work with all parties to protect the legitimate security interests of all countries, build a more just and reasonable international order, give full play to regional security architecture, advance open and pragmatic defense cooperation, set an example of maritime security cooperation, strengthen security governance in emerging areas, create a new situation of regional security cooperation, and continue to make the Asia Pacific an anchor for global development and stability, Dong said.

Zhang Chi, an associate professor at the National Defense University of the Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA), told the Global Times on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue on Sunday that Dong's speech was pitched at an overarching global perspective, ranging from history to reality, from Asia to the world, and explained how China as always stands ready to pursue common security and common prosperity with all other countries, offered Chinese thinking and elaborated on Chinese efforts to tackle the current regional security issues.

Compared with the speech delivered by US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin on Saturday, Dong's speech stood at regional and global heights focusing on the entirety of humanity, Zhang said, noting that Austin focused mainly on the US and its allies and partners in the region, revolved only around its own egoistic and selfish interests, and ignored the centrality of ASEAN in regional cooperation.

The core of Austin's speech is that the US aims to achieve leadership in the "Indo-Pacific" region through initiatives such as AUKUS, the Quad and other military alliances, while also subtly hinting at the creation of an "Indo-Pacific version of NATO," which is a flawed strategic understanding and misguided perception of security that experts said engenders turmoil, conflict and even war, instead of fostering security and stability.

Given the ongoing conflicts in Europe and the Middle East, the Asia Pacific is one of the few regions in the world that still enjoys stability today. It is clear which global security approach, China's or the US', fits more the core interests and legitimate security concerns of the most countries, observers said.

China values peace and harmony, pursues common security, upholds equality and mutual respect, and emphasizes openness and inclusiveness, but it also firmly safeguards its core interests, Dong said in his speech.

On the South China Sea issue, Dong said that the current situation in the South China Sea is generally stable. He urged a certain country to see where its true interests lie and return to the right track of dialogue and consultation.

China has exercised enough restraint in the face of infringements and provocations, but there is a limit, Dong warned, without naming the Philippines, which has frequently trespassed into waters off Chinese islands and reefs in the South China Sea since August 2023 under the instigation of the US. It has seen its provocations dealt with by the China Coast Guard (CCG) through legitimate, professional and restrained restrictive measures.

On the Taiwan question, Dong stressed that safeguarding China's national sovereignty and territorial integrity is the sacred mission of the Chinese military. "We will take timely and resolute actions to stop 'Taiwan independence,' and make sure their attempts never succeed," he said.

Lieutenant General He Lei, former vice president of the Academy of Military Sciences of the PLA, told the Global Times on the sidelines of the Shangri-La Dialogue on Sunday that China's approach to global security also covers the South China Sea and the Taiwan Straits.

China remains committed to peaceful reunification, but under the instigation of external interfering forces, the Taiwan authorities are now unilaterally changing the status quo on the one-China principle, which is the biggest threat to peace and security in the Taiwan Straits, bringing risks of conflict and war, He Lei said, urging the "Taiwan independence" secessionist forces to learn from Dong's elaboration on China's approach to global security, see itself as a part of a community with a shared future, and reunify with the motherland as soon as possible.

The same applies for the South China Sea disputes, as countries should resolve disputes through peaceful talks and negotiations and safeguard the security in the region through joint efforts, said He Lei.

Changes needed

When answering a question and introducing China's stance on the Taiwan question, Dong was interrupted by the moderator, but he insisted on finishing his elaboration.

The experts noted that the Shangri-La Dialogue this year had a fierce "crossfire" of stances, starting by the arrangement that the keynote speech was delivered by Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr on Friday. 

Participants said that the forum was staged to suppress and smear China, particularly this year.

Cao Yanzhong, a research fellow at the Academy of Military Sciences of the PLA, told the Global Times that the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS), the organizer of the Shangri-La Dialogue, is a research institute serving British and US strategies, and all of its operation is backed by the US.

According to the IISS' website, the sponsors of the Shangri-La Dialogue include some of the US' top arms dealers, including Lockheed Martin, Boeing and Northrop Grumman.

Warwick Powell, adjunct professor at the Queensland University of Technology, told the Global Times at the forum that the Shangri-La Dialogue is a creature of history, as it emerged in a time when the countries of the Global South were voiceless, and questions of security, even in the Asia region and the Asia-Pacific more broadly, bore the marks of centuries of colonialism. Security in Asia was a question for colonial powers to come and talk about how they would maintain security in a region far from their own homes and how they would teach the locals about security.

"However, the world has changed, and I hope the Shangri-La Dialogue will respond to these changes and evolve accordingly," said Powell.

Of course, China has its own peace forum, the annual Boao Forum on Hinan. Some other reporting on Shangri-la posted to Pepe Escobar’s Telegram:

Lieutenant General Jing Jianfeng at Shangri-La Dialogue: "From Afghanistan to Iraq, from Ukraine to Gaza, all these crises and conflicts are results of the self-serving double standards of the USA. Facts have proved that the USA is the biggest source of chaos in the international order."

The following is from a presser held by China’s MoD posted at Escobar’s Telegram:

🔶️ "The Chinese People's Liberation Army (PLA) is ready to strengthen strategic ties with the Russian Armed Forces and work together to defend the international justice." - the official representative of the Ministry of Defense of the People's Republic of China, Wu Qian.

🔶️ "China's Armed Forces are willing to work together with the Russian Armed Forces to fully implement the important consensus reached by the heads of the two countries to further strengthen strategic communications and coordination, deepen mutual trust in the military field and jointly implement the Global Security Initiative," he said.

🔶️ According to the representative of the Chinese military department, PLA military personnel are ready, together with their Russian colleagues, to "defend international justice and impartiality", and also make every effort to ensure world and regional security.

Russia and China will work together to “defend international justice” which means “jointly implementing the Global Security Initiative.” The GSI could become a very powerful tool along with China’s other initiatives. And IMO international justice also includes all business law related to property/assets and their transmittal. I see these announcements as foreshadowing what will emerge from the SCO and BRICS Summits later in the year. The GSI has many nations as co-sponsors, over 140. I’ve written and linked to it before and see it as the fundamental foundational layer for a reformed UN System for it differs very little from the UN’s principle of indivisible security that happens to be at the core of the Ukraine conflict. Xi has issued his “Musts” but has learned China needs to do more than make demands. As much as Chinese tradition says to be patient, there are times when China must become proactive and leap into action. IMO, the best place to currently do so is in West Asia.

*
*
*
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!