War with China was Always the Goal: Bonus Warmonger Rapid-Fire Edition
In doing research for the first article, it was hard not to see the absolute pit of delusion and frothing-at-the-mouth warmongering behavior of the US corporate-owned media and politicians. Here I have summarized some of the headlines and quotes, so you can witness them in all of their terrible glory:
Rand Corporation was formed in the aftermath of WWII, and has become a centerpiece of US weapons manufacturing and consent shaping within the American public in both the original Cold War and the new Cold War (against China specifically). The Afghanistan War and ‘War on Terror’ finally came to an ‘end’ last year (US military and contractor presence remain active in the area), putting a large hole in the weapons manufacturers profits (will someone please think of the poor weapons manufacturers!) Well, no matter! RAND can simply post hypothetical war-games style journalism about war with US enemy states, buttering the public up for the massive transfer of wealth that occurs with most wars, where taxes levied against the working class fuel the bombs that indiscriminately rain down on innocents abroad. Most importantly, for these companies, they cannot allow a lapse in the *idea* of imminent war. That is not a good luck for them, as people begin to question why the military budget keeps going up in peacetime and under a Democratic president (the duopoly at work here people).
Quote from the RAND article: “Thus, while neither state wants war, both states’ militaries have plans to fight one. As Chinese anti-access and area-denial (A2AD) capabilities improve, the United States can no longer be so certain that war would follow its plan and lead to decisive victory. This analysis illuminates various paths a war with China could take and their possible consequences.”
This quote washes over the entirety of US stated policy goals, which unambiguously call for ‘Great Power Competition’ (read Conflict) and advocate for further arming of proxy areas like Taiwan in order to prepare for a conflict that is both ideological and economic. Let’s take a look at US base buildup around China:
ASPI is, on paper, an Australian outlet. In reality, however it accepts a large sum of money from the US state department to garner anti-China sentiment in Australia and advocate for regime change. It is a danger to the US if China-Australia relationships develop naturally and in a mutually beneficial way, since the US needs Australia as a base of operations if it decides to wage war 7,200 miles away.
Choice quotes: “In the wake of the U.S. withdrawal from Afghanistan, I argued over at the Washington Examiner that Taiwan needs nuclear weapons to deter China.” Just as I pointed out above, it was really after the Afghanistan war that the “war with China” push went from a simmer to a boil. Of course, proxy war with Russia via Ukraine was working fine for awhile…but unfortunately it seems a lot of that $50B+ didn’t really make it to the front lines! Despite all the anti-reality journalism about Ukraine winning, the US knows that situation is another embarrassment and is already working on another profit boosting, life destroying alternative.
“However, it is because Taiwan could never match China conventionally that Taiwan might need nuclear arms. Otherwise, Taipei will simply be the next ‘slice of salami’ after the South China Sea and Hong Kong.”
“ ‘A threat to visit a Hiroshima or Nagasaki on, say, Shanghai in retaliation for low-level aggression would be implausible.’ This is true but what Taiwan faces is not a “low-level aggression” but an existential threat to its existence as a free country.”
The absolute lack of care and thought the US uses when it comes to situations of mutually assured destruction ought to haunt your nightmares, as it does mine. When you start getting articles that revolve around the insane idea of winning a nuclear war, you can bet your political apparatus does not work for you.
It must be stressed that the differences between the Russo-Ukraine situation and China-Taiwan reunification situation are as immense as the distance between Washington and Beijing. Taiwan is part of an unfinished civil war, with the KMT nationalists retreating to the island after the communists won the mainland in the late 40s. The cultural and economic differences between the island and mainland have been fostered by the US, very intentionally, to maintain a wedge and client ‘state’ near China. This allows them the option of launching hybrid warfare if necessary. The only real similarity is that the US might use Taiwan in the same way it has used Ukraine — as cannon fodder in its desperate attempts to maintain hegemony.
First thing to notice here is that all of faces do not have pictures, and the ‘service years’ all seem to start in the heart of the Cold War. Paper tiger, anyone? I’m not sure there’s much to take seriously here, but the US certainly has a history of stay-behind armies and subversion of democracy using its military.
“In the 1970s, the United States used triangular diplomacy to gain leverage over the Soviet Union by opening relations with China and eventually switching diplomatic recognition from Taipei, which Washington had previously recognized as the seat of the legitimate Chinese state and government, to Beijing. Prior to this switch in 1979, the U.S. Military Assistance Advisory Group-Taiwan was the central hub for planning, coordinating, and executing defense cooperation initiatives. It served as the eyes, ears, and voice of the U.S. military to the Taiwanese armed forces. It possessed the requisite staff and planning horsepower to facilitate the large-scale military arms transfers, training, and advising that contributed to decades of Taiwanese military superiority over China, which has since evaporated.”
I’m sorry, let me recap that for you in non-capitalist jargon:
“In the 1970s, the United States used an ideological wedge to its advantage, forcing China and the USSR apart, and normalizing relations with Bejing in the hope that the FDI they sent to China would undermine communism. They also had entire squadrons dedicated to anti-communist activity and separatism! Since the economic efforts didn’t pan out, we better start with the military buildup again!”
Throughout the article, so sense of self-awareness is illustrated. At what point do we stop normalizing the interference with foreign affairs? A country that screams about ‘sovereignty’ when its convenient, but subverts it actively…the purest form of arrogance and exceptionalism.
These last few articles go to show the truly bipartisan nature of the war on China campaign in Washington. Obama began the Pivot to Asia in his terms, Trump continued it and gave it cultural relevance by blaming his spectacular coronavirus mishandling on the Chinese, ramping up sanctions and propaganda campaigns surrounding Hong Kong, Taiwan and Xinjiang, etc.
Biden has dropped the COVID blaming game in order to avoid scrutiny over the fact that even with the vaccine, more people have died under his watch, but has ramped up the efforts of the US regime with additional sanctions, the above mentioned weaponization of Taiwan, and $500M for propaganda against China. These funds typically go to CIA owned outlets abroad like RFA or RFE, which ‘train’ foreign journalists on how to talk about China. This is how you get to the point where even countries that would benefit from Chinese relations face a public pumped with misinformation and hesitant to engage.
As mentioned above, the buildup under Biden is of particular significance. It shows that neoconservative ‘century’ proposed by the PNAC think-tank just before 2000 still holds significant sway in the ideological persuasions of Washington officials. The American public won’t hear as much about this buildup, but they will hear an undue amount about how China responds with increased military spending. You’ll notice that this entire propaganda campaign has reached fever pitch following China’s abolishment of extreme poverty in 2019–2020. It is important to stress the class aspects behind these policies and rhetoric: Americans aren’t allowed to see clearly when an alternative model of development proves superior to capitalism, as this is an existential threat to the system itself. Even China’s incredible COVID response is painted as draconian and evil…please no one look at the one million dead bodies here in the US and tens of millions of disabled or struggling long COVID victims.
This article was very much intended to be less structured and more of a wide-lens view of US media and its relentless anti-China campaign of the last few years, and much much longer. No doubt we could find echoed sentiments all the way back to 1949 or before, if we wanted!
The more historical articles will make a return this weekend or next week, when I can get to them. For now, I hope you enjoyed this bonus round!
