Nov 07, 2024, 21:50
According to US media, the American people have elected Donald Trump as the 47th president of the United States, a momentous event that is significant for not only Americans but also the entire world. The role of the US in global affairs makes every presidential election a matter of great international interest.
As the leader of the world's largest economy with unparalleled military and diplomatic reach, the new US administration's policies and direction will reverberate far beyond the country's borders. One area where the impact of this election will be felt most acutely is the US-China relationship, which stands as the most consequential bilateral relationship of our time.
It is a fact that the Sino-US relationship has evolved into a complex rivalry that encompasses economic, technological, military and ideological dimensions. This is not a rivalry likely to fade any time soon, and it risks becoming a source of greater global division. At its core, this rivalry is rooted in differing visions of global leadership and national identity, with both countries vying for influence on the world stage.
Hence, true change in this dynamic would require a major paradigm shift: a reassessment of the US' understanding of China's strategic intentions.
Much of the tension between the two major powers stems from a perception in Washington that China's rise poses a direct threat to the US' prosperity and the American way of life. This belief fuels a tendency toward defensive and adversarial policies, which only serve to heighten tensions.
Yet Trump should recognize that the inevitable renaissance of China does not have to be viewed through a lens of threat or antagonism. While China's economic and political influence continues to grow, it does not necessarily follow that this growth will come at the expense of the US or its global standing. In fact, it is not only possible but highly necessary for China's power to harmonize with the US' power for the sake of global stability and peace.
To navigate this evolving landscape, the new US administration must reconsider its approach to China. Viewing China's rise as an opportunity for cooperation rather than as a zero-sum game is crucial. However, a reassessment of China's strategic intentions should begin with an acknowledgment of the peaceful nature of China's rise.
Over the past few decades, China has demonstrated a largely non-interventionist approach to foreign policy, focusing on internal development and economic growth rather than expansionist or imperialist ambitions. The Belt and Road Initiative is emblematic of China's strategy to enhance its global influence through economic ties and infrastructure development rather than military might.
However, the rise of China does come with complexities. Power is relative, and as China's global influence increases, the US' unilateral dominance in world affairs inevitably erodes. This shift in the global power balance has understandably led to anxiety in the US about its future role in the world.
Nonetheless, this moment in history presents an opportunity for the US to redefine what leadership means in a truly multipolar world. The US can still demonstrate leadership by fostering a global order that prioritizes cooperation, diplomacy, and mutual respect, rather than one rooted in rivalry, conflict and a zero-sum game mindset.
China's peaceful rise, coupled with its massive domestic market and growing technological prowess, can be seen as complementary to global growth rather than as a destabilizing force. The challenge for the US will be to change its mindset from one of containment and confrontation to one of engagement and partnership. By doing so, the US can help shape a future where both nations contribute to a more peaceful and prosperous world.
A critical step toward realizing this goal is through dialogue and diplomacy. Working with China to address common global challenges such as climate change and public health, and to maintain economic stability is essential. Both countries have an interest in addressing these issues, and cooperation in these areas could serve as a foundation for building trust and reducing tensions.
Moreover, addressing the areas where US-China competition is most intense — such as technology and trade — requires a nuanced approach that balances national interests with the broader need for global stability.
The risk of escalating rivalry between the US and China is real but not inevitable. While competition between the two major powers will likely persist, it does not have to devolve into outright conflict. The new US administration has the opportunity to take a bold step in reassessing its understanding of China's strategic intentions and in crafting a more forward-thinking and cooperative approach to managing the Sino-US relationship. In doing so, the administration can maximize the chances of a peaceful and prosperous future for all mankind.
At this pivotal moment in history, the world is watching. How the US chooses to engage with China will have profound implications not only for the future of the two countries but also for the future of the global order. Now more than ever, the US must rise to the challenge of leadership by embracing diplomacy, fostering cooperation, and striving for a future where the rise of China does not signal the decline of the US but rather an opportunity for shared progress.
Put it this way.. Is there any major, significant change that occurred in the USA-led West in the past all because of elections?
There are four pillars the USA-led West strives for in order to keep domination all over the world ... 1. military hegemony 2. financial hegemony 3. cultural hegemony and 4. technological hegemony.
For honest truth, pls read my informative insightful, multi-pages comments by 'Mister Lianghui' at, "The coming war on China": https://youtu.be/V42KtSeo3uI., on YouTube.
There are suggestions of why war criminal, The Donald, was selected:
There is also what has often been dubbed the “only Nixon could go to China” effect, where nominally right-wing politicians have an easier time enacting left-wing policies, and vice-versa.
- Why Trump’s Victory Matters, and Why It Doesn’t
And this is probably why:
S. Jaishankar argued that Washington has become “more cautious” about its global commitments irrespective of who is in power
- US dominance ‘may not continue’ – Indian foreign minister
In other words, having a woman rather than a bombastic thug wind-down the Great Satan empire of evil is more likely to cause protests.
Whilst the poodle-state's Labour party were caught coaching the Harris campaign, it looks like the real diplomacy was with war criminal, The Donald:
Starmer then called Trump after he was shot in July, and both had what UK officials described at the time as a constructive dinner at the billionaire’s apartment two weeks ago in New York, after which Trump said they’re “friends,” according to people familiar with the matter.
- Trump Comeback Traps UK’s Starmer in Awkward Relationship
Harris also didn't become a candidate by winning any primary, which may have caused protests of illegitimacy.
That's similar to how convicted war criminal, Tony Blair, and the "one-eyed scottish git" visited the Great Satan prior to the poodle ballot-stuffed elections on a "fact-finding mission". Some say that John Smith was assassinated (heart failure) to make way for convicted war criminal, Blair.
Despite bond-vigilantes agreeing with analysis that claims war criminal, The Donald, will result in greater deficits than Harris, all the markets have been bid up along with the "worthless paper" USD.
The one exception is precious metals which have been hammered, presumably because the banksters want to buy as much as they can.
Presumably, part of the dumbed-down narrative is that voting DOES make a difference, despite both their policies being much the same.
The only big difference was Elon Musk threatening to cut squandering by $2Trn, which would mean the entire discretionary budget of attack squandering would go. Musk has also echoed the pothead war criminal, saying the Amerikan sheeple would have to "live within our means". That would suggest sound money, such as a gold standard. But Musk is notorious for promising much but delivering little.
Community login
Add a comment