Reality Check: Part One | Critical Analysis |Axisoflogic.com

The material that follows comes from the foreign Ministry of the People's Republic of China. Unaccustomed as the West and its lickspittle press are to backing accusations with actual verifiable facts, we think PRC has done us all a favour by pulling back the curtain from the BS that flows out of nearly every nation in the West. This is quite detailed so, for easier reading, we have serialized the essay.

This is Part One of Four

- prh, ed.

Falsehoods in US Perceptions of China

Introduction
US Secretary of State Antony Blinken has recently delivered a speech at Asia Society outlining the US administration’s approach to China. With carefully calibrated language, he sought to promote the “China threat” narrative, interfere in China’s internal affairs, and smear China’s domestic and foreign policy, all in an attempt at full-blown containment and suppression of China.

In what is to follow, we will use facts and figures to show to the world how deceptive, hypocritical and dangerous the US’s China policy is.

*******

Falsehood 1: China poses the most serious long-term challenge to the international order and is undermining it. The US will defend the international law, agreements, principles, and institutions that maintain peace and security, and protect the rights of individuals and sovereign nations.

Reality Check: What the US has constantly vowed to preserve is a so-called international order designed to serve the US’s own interests and perpetuate its hegemony. The US itself is the largest source of disruption to the actual world order.

◆ China has been and always will be a defender of the international order. China is a founding member of the United Nations (UN) and the first country to put its signature on the UN Charter. China is committed to upholding the UN-centered international system, the international order underpinned by international law, and the basic norms governing international relations built on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. The Five Principles of Peaceful Coexistence jointly championed by China, India and Myanmar have been widely recognized by the international community and have become the basic norms guiding state-to-state relations.

China upholds true multilateralism and global strategic stability. China is the largest contributor of peacekeepers among the permanent members of the UN Security Council and the second largest contributor among all countries to the UN peacekeeping budget. China has taken an active part in international arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation processes. It has signed or acceded to more than 20 multilateral arms control, disarmament and non-proliferation treaties, including the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) and the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). China is against arms race.

In the wake of the international financial crisis of 2008, China adopted a responsible macro policy, remained a “stabilizer” for the world economy and made important contribution to global recovery. China actively provides international public goods to various countries, and has signed BRI cooperation agreements with 149 countries and 32 international organizations.

◆ In recent years, President Xi Jinping’s vision of building a community with a shared future for mankind has been warmly received by the international community. It has been written into multiple important documents issued by the UN, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization and other multilateral institutions. UN Secretary-General António Guterres hailed China as an important pillar for multilateralism, noting that the purpose for practicing multilateralism is to build a community with a shared future for mankind. Peter Thomson, president of the 71st Session of the UN General Assembly, said the vision of building a community with a shared future for mankind advocated by China is the only future for humanity on this planet.

In response to various new global challenges, President Xi Jinping put forward the Global Development Initiative (GDI) and the Global Security Initiative (GSI). They represent China’s proposals for making the global governance system fairer and more equitable, and have received positive response and wide support from the international community.

◆ The US has blatantly violated the purposes and principles of the UN Charter and the norms governing international relations. With its military might, the US has launched wars in numerous parts of the world, stoking divisions and conflicts and bringing huge turmoil and disaster to the world. Throughout the 240-plus-year history of the US, there were only 16 years in which the US was not at war. The US might as well be called the most belligerent country in the history of the world. US magazine The National Interest quoted Dakota Wood, senior research fellow for defense programs at the Heritage Foundation, who wrote that the US consistently needed to deploy military force every 15 years or so.

Since the end of World War II, the United States has either launched or participated in many wars overseas, including the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Afghan War and the Iraq War. Those wars caused extremely severe civilian casualties and property losses, and lead to colossal humanitarian disasters. Since 2001, US wars and military operations in the name of counterterrorism have killed more than 900,000 people, about 335,000 of whom were civilians, injured millions and displaced tens of millions.

◆ The US habitually puts its domestic law above the international law, and selectively applies international rules as it sees fit. Since the 1980s, the US had once withdrawn from 17 international organizations and treaties, including the United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC), the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), the Paris Agreement, the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT), the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty and the Treaty on Open Skies.

Although the current US administration declared that “America is back” and the US has rejoined some international organizations and agreements, the administration has in essence not abandoned the “America First” policy, and is advancing “selective multilateralism”. The current administration has stayed out of institutions and agreements considered harmful to US interests such as the Treaty on Open Skies. European media have described it as “America First 2.0”.

◆ The US has abused its financial hegemony and technological clout and engaged in economic coercion in the name of protecting national security. The US has enacted some domestic laws, such as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, the Global Magnitsky Human Rights Accountability Act and the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act, and issued a series of executive orders to target and sanction specific countries, entities or individuals. The ambiguous rules contained in these acts and executive orders, such as the “minimum contacts principle” and “doctrine of effects”, are a willful expansion of the jurisdiction of US domestic laws. The US also abuses its domestic channels of prosecution to exercise long-arm jurisdiction over entities and individuals in other countries.

For more than 60 years, in total disregard of the many resolutions of the UN General Assembly, the US has continued its comprehensive blockade against Cuba based on its embargo policies and domestic laws such as the Torricelli Act and the Helms-Burton Act. The Cuba blockade is the longest and cruelest systemic trade embargo, economic blockade and financial sanctions in modern history. The blockade has been gravely detrimental to Cuba’s economic and social development, causing over 100 billion US dollars of direct losses to Cuba’s economy.

The US has carried out blockade and sanctions against Iran since late 1970s. In May 2018, the US government announced its unilateral withdrawal from the JCPOA, and soon after resumed and expanded sanctions against Iran. Many countries and relevant entities have been forced to give up their cooperation with Iran. A large number of foreign oil enterprises left the country. Iran’s manufacturing industry can hardly sustain normal operation. The country has suffered economic slowdown, coupled with heightened inflation and massive currency depreciation.

The US has imposed unilateral sanctions on Belarus, Syria and Zimbabwe, among others, over the years, and ratcheted up “maximum pressure” against the DPRK, Venezuela, etc.

◆ Statistics show that the previous US administration had imposed over 3,900 sanction measures, which means it wielded its “big stick” three times a day on average. As of fiscal year 2021, the entities and individuals on US sanction lists topped 9,421, which was 933 percent higher compared to the fiscal year 2000.

The US’s illegal unilateral sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction have gravely undermined the sovereignty and security of other countries and severely impacted their economic development and people’s wellbeing. The sanctions and long-arm jurisdiction also constitute a gross violation of international law and basic norms of international relations.

In an article published in the September/October 2021 issue of Foreign Affairs, Daniel Drezner, Professor at Tufts University and Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution, criticizes successive US administrations for using “sanctions as the go-to solution for nearly every foreign policy problem.” He notes that sanctions not only are ineffective, but also “exert a humanitarian toll”, and that the United States of America has become the “United States of Sanctions”.

◆ The “rules-based international order” championed by the US is in fact another version of power politics. This is an attempt to impose one’s own will and standards on others, and to replace the commonly accepted international laws and norms with the house rules of a few countries.

In the world, there is only one international system, i.e. the international system with the UN at its core. There is only one international order, i.e. the international order underpinned by international law. And there is only one set of rules, i.e. the basic norms governing international relations underpinned by the purposes and principles of the UN Charter.

Before wanting to discuss rules and order, the US should first pay up its arrears of one billion US dollars for the UN’s regular budget and 1.4 billion US dollars peacekeeping assessments, ratify in a timely manner the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child and the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women, stop single-handedly blocking the negotiations on a verification protocol under the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), lift illegal unilateral sanctions, earnestly fulfill its international obligations and set a good example for others in respecting laws and norms.

Falsehood 2: The US is not looking for conflict or a new Cold War. It doesn’t seek to block China from its role as a major power, nor to stop China from growing its economy or advancing the interests of its people.

Reality Check: Despite its claims that it doesn’t seek to block China from its role as a major power, nor to stop it from growing its economy, the US is actually deploying its domestic and external resources to unscrupulously contain and suppress China .

◆ Without producing any credible evidence, the US government uses national security as a catch-all pretext and all its apparatus to wantonly suppress and sanction Huawei, restricting its products’ entry into the US market, cutting off its access to chips and operating system, and coercing countries around the world into banning Huawei from their 5G rollout. The US also orchestrated and pressured Canada to hold Huawei’s CFO for nearly three years without cause.

◆ In violation of the principle of fair competition and market economy and international trading rules, the US seeks to hamstring competitive Chinese hi-tech companies under all kinds of trumped-up charges. To date, it has placed over 1,000 Chinese companies on various sanctions lists, subjected biotechnology and artificial intelligence technologies to enhanced export controls and stringent investment review, and sought to ban Chinese social media platforms including TikTok and WeChat.

◆ Under the pretext of protecting human rights, the US has fabricated misinformation and disinformation concerning Xinjiang such as the existence of “forced labor” and, on the basis of those unfounded stories, has adopted the Uyghur Forced Labor Prevention Act which maliciously targets Xinjiang’s competitive cotton, tomatoes and solar photovoltaic sectors to contain China’s growth. This has disrupted the international trade order and destabilized global industrial and supply chains.

◆ The previous US administration, in grave violation of WTO rules, waged a massive trade war on China. Based on its own Section 301 investigation, it imposed three rounds of steep tariffs on about 360 billion US dollars’ worth of Chinese imports. In September 2021, the current US administration initiated a Section 232 investigation to determine the effects on US national security from imports of neodymium-iron-boron permanent magnets at a time when global commodity prices were hovering at elevated levels.

◆ The US has a record of grossly interfering in China’s domestic affairs on issues concerning China’s core interests, including Taiwan, Xinjiang, Tibet and Hong Kong. It seeks to undermine China’s security and stability by, both overtly and covertly, condoning and supporting separatist activities.

◆ The bipartisan innovation bills being debated in the US Congress, while professing to enhance US competitiveness, see China as a perceived rival. “China” appears more than 800 times in the text, which is packed with provisions detrimental to China’s interests.

◆ In a bid to maintain its power and predominance in international institutions, the US has attempted to smear and block the vision of building a community with a shared future for mankind and the initiative of advancing Belt and Road cooperation, among others, in multilateral fora and also to remove references to them in UN and other international documents.

◆ Clinging to a Cold War mentality and the hegemon’s logic, the US pursues bloc politics, concocts the “democracy versus authoritarianism” narrative, cajoles other countries into forming exclusive cliques, strengthens the Five Eyes, peddles the Quad mechanism, puts together AUKUS with the UK and Australia and ramps up bilateral military alliances, in a clear attempt at countering China.

◆ The US pushes NATO to insert itself in Asia-Pacific affairs, fan the “China threat” narrative in the bloc’s new strategic concept, and include in its Madrid Summit such US allies in the Asia-Pacific as Japan, the Republic of Korea (ROK) and Australia, in a bid to build an “Asia-Pacific version of NATO”, which would disrupt security and stability in the Asia-Pacific region.

◆ The development of state-to-state relations should be based on equality, mutual respect and win-win results. China-US relations have reached an important crossroads. The US should stop viewing this relationship through a Cold War, zero-sum mindset, follow the three principles of mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation, and reflect in its action the five assurances it has made to China (i.e. the US does not seek a new Cold War with China, the US does not seek to change China’s system, the revitalization of US alliances is not against China, the US does not support “Taiwan independence”, and the US is not looking for conflict with China) .

Falsehood 3: Our diplomacy is based on partnership and respect for each other’s interests, while China practices coercive diplomacy against other countries and retaliates recklessly. Our task is to prove once again that all countries will be free to chart their own paths without coercion.

Reality Check: It is the US that invented “coercive diplomacy” and excels at coercing countries. Over the years, by imposing economic blockade, unilateral sanctions and other means, the US has practiced coercive diplomacy around the world with textbook examples.

◆ In 1971, American scholar Alexander George first put forward the concept of “coercive diplomacy” to summarize the US policy toward Laos, Cuba and Vietnam at that time. The US government forced the military government of Haiti to step down in 1994, and referred to that as “a textbook example of coercive diplomacy”. In 2003, it explicitly characterized 30.3 billion US dollars additional military expenses for “coercive diplomacy” as incurred expenses.

The US government froze seven billion US dollars assets of the Afghan central bank on the grounds of punishing the Afghan Taliban and even claimed the “life-saving money” of the Afghan people as its own, which resulted in the deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Afghanistan. Mohammad Naeem, spokesman of the Taliban Political Office in Doha, said the seizure is “indicative of the lowest level of human and moral decay of a country and a nation”.

In order to force the Nepalese parliament to approve the Millennium Challenge Corporation (MCC) agreement, the US openly issued an “ultimatum”, saying that the US will review its ties with Nepal if it fails to ratify the compact.

After the outbreak of the Ukraine conflict, the US Justice Department established the “Task Force KleptoCapture” to find, freeze and seize the yachts, apartments, private jets and huge deposits of Russian citizens in the US and Europe. This fully shows that the US-touted “inviolable and sacred right to property” is just a lie. The US has forced other countries to pick sides and pressured them to join sanctions against Russia. And those who refuse to do so will pay a “price”.

After China and the Solomon Islands had signed a framework agreement on bilateral security cooperation, the US sent senior officials of the National Security Council to the country, doing whatever it can to obstruct the legitimate cooperation between China and Solomon Islands. A Solomn Star article pointed out, “Washington DC, which has literally forgotten Solomon Islands since World War II, has finally woken up and is applying the heat on the Solomon Islands to abandon the security pact.”

In May 2022, on the eve of the High-Level Virtual Meeting of the Group of Friends of the GDI, the US exerted pressure on multiple UN development agencies to obstruct their attendance and threatened to “cut funding”.

◆ The “Clean Network” program launched by the previous administration is another textbook example of US coercive diplomacy. Under the pretext of upholding US national security and citizens’ privacy, the program explicitly requires that Chinese companies such as Huawei, Baidu and Alibaba to be purged from five areas: telecom operators, mobile app stores, mobile apps, cloud services and submarine optical cables. The then US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and other US politicians lobbied all around the world, coercing countries and regions to join its so-called “Network”. A US senior official even threatened Cyprus and other countries not to work with Chinese 5G suppliers, or they would bear the consequence. Former UK Business and Industry Minister Vince Cable said the government’s decision to ban Huawei’s 5G equipment and services “had nothing to do with national security”, and was because “the Americans told us we should do it”.

◆ The US shows no mercy in coercing its allies. Out of its geopolitical and energy interests considerations, the US has imposed sanctions on the Nord Stream 2 natural gas pipeline project since December 2019. Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US has imposed new sanctions on related companies and personnel even though Germany had announced the suspension of the certification process for the project.

◆ A US scholar pointed out that American foreign policy since World War II has been based on a simple idea: “Either you are with us or against us. America should lead, allies should follow, and woe be to countries that oppose its primacy”. His words lay bare the nature of US coercive diplomacy.

◆ China never engages in coercive diplomacy and firmly opposes coercive diplomacy by other countries. China never threatens other countries with force, never creates military alliance, never exports ideology, never meddles in others’ domestic affairs, never seeks a trade war, and never imposes unjustified oppression on foreign enterprises. That said, however, China has the right to make necessary and legitimate responses to actions that undermine China’s sovereignty, security and development rights and interests.

Falsehood 4: The US democracy is one of the most powerful assets in this contest. Our task is to prove once again that democracy can meet urgent challenges and that the future belongs to those who believe in freedom.

Reality Check: The US sets standards for democracy after its own system, does not allow other systems, paths and models to exist, and gangs up with others to wantonly interfere in other countries’ internal affairs in the name of democracy. This not just contravenes the spirit of democracy, but also spells disaster for democracy.

◆ The American-style democracy is a rich men’s game based on capital. Money politics penetrates the entire process of election, legislation and administration in the US. People in fact only have a restricted right to political participation. The inequality in economic status has turned into inequality in political status. According to statistics, winners of 91 percent of US congressional elections are the candidates with greater financial support. Big companies, a small group of rich people, and interest groups are more generous to offer financial support and have become the main source of electoral funding. The so-called representatives of people’s will, once elected, often serve the interests of their financial backers, and speak for vested interests rather than the ordinary people. A US Senator had a sharp observation, “Congress does not regulate Wall Street. Wall Street regulates Congress.”

US Republican congressman from Alabama Mo Brooks publicly denounced “corruption” of the US Congress in a video on social media. “If you want to be chairman of a major committee, you have to purchase it.” The purchase price depends on how important the committee is, with the minimum bid for a major committee being one million US dollars. Those who cannot afford it have to accept the contributions of special interest groups and then give “quid pro quos” to the lobbyists. “Special interest groups run Washington. I don’t mean that metaphorically, I mean that literally.”

◆ According to a scholar in Singapore, the United States is clearly not functioning as a democracy. It is functioning as a plutocracy. A democracy is a government of the people, by the people, for the people. A plutocracy is a government of the one percent, by the one percent, for the one percent.

◆ The US presidential election follows the Electoral College system, where the president and vice president are elected by the Electoral College. The flaws of such an electoral system are self-evident. First, as the president-elect may not be the winner of the national popular vote, there is a lack of broad representation. Second, as each state gets to decide its own electoral rules, confusion and disorder often occur. Third, the winner-takes-all system exacerbates inequality among states and between political parties. It leads to a huge waste of votes and discourages voter turnout. Voters in deep blue and deep red states are often neglected, while swing states become disproportionately more important where both parties seek to woo more supporters. There have been five presidential elections in US history in which the winner of nationwide popular vote was not elected the president.

The gerrymandering is widely recognized by the US public as a flaw of the electoral system. It refers to an unfair division of electoral districts in favor of a particular party to win as many seats as possible and cement its advantage. The US conducts a census every ten years. Following the completion of the census, redistricting or the redrawing of electoral district boundaries will take place under the principle of maintaining roughly equal population in every voting district while considering demographic shifts. Under the US Constitution, each state legislature has the power to redistrict. This leaves room for gerrymandering by the majority party in a state legislature. According to a YouGov poll in 2021, only 16 percent of US adult citizens say they think their states’ congressional maps would be drawn fairly, while 44 percent say they think the maps would be drawn unfairly and another 40 percent of adults say they are unsure if the maps will be fair.

◆ The American-style democracy is “one person one vote” in name, yet “rule of a dominant minority” in reality. Political pluralism is only a facade. A small number of elites dominate the political, economic and military affairs. They control the state apparatus and policy-making process, manipulate public opinion, dominate the business community and enjoy all kinds of privileges.

According to the Associated Press, 18.8 million people were missed in the 2020 US census. The black population had a net undercount of 3.3 percent, while it was almost five percent for Hispanics and 5.6 percent for American Indians and Native Alaskans living on reservations. The undercount robs them of their equal share of federal resources including in education, health care and housing and puts them in an unfavorable condition as to congressional apportionment. It reveals the hypocrisy in the US democracy and its “perpetuating systemic racism”.

Noam Chomsky, a political commentator and social activist from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, points out that the US is a “really existing capitalist democracy”, where there is a positive correlation between people’s wealth and their influence on policy-making. For the lower 70 percent on the wealth/income scale, they have no influence on policy whatsoever. They are effectively disenfranchised.

Wertheimer, President of the non-profit US organization Democracy 21, says that corruption in the US is systemic corruption of the process itself. “When you are dealing with billions and billions of dollars, much of that focused on buying influence, it overwhelms the system, and it is much harder to defend against and maintain representation for ordinary Americans.”

Danny Haiphong, an independent journalist in the US, believes that Western-style democracy views the election itself as the highest achievement. The question of whether this system serves the needs of the broad masses of people is generally ignored in order to obscure the fact that powerful corporate interests set the policy agenda well before votes are cast.

◆ The checks and balances in the American-style democracy have resulted in a “vetocracy”. American political scientist Francis Fukuyama points out in his book Political Order and Political Decay that there is an entrenched political paralysis in the US. The US political system has far too many checks and balances, raising the cost of collective action and in some cases making it impossible altogether. The US democratic process is fragmented and lengthy, with a lot of veto points where individual veto players can block action by the whole body. The function of “checks and balances”, which was purportedly designed to prevent abuse of power, has been distorted in American political practice. Politicians in Washington, D.C. are preoccupied with securing their own partisan interests and no longer care about national development. The two parties are addicted to vetoing and caught in a vicious circle. The government efficacy is inevitably weakened, law and justice trampled upon, development and progress stalled, and social division widened.

According to a Pew Research Center report in October 2021 based on a survey of 17 advanced economies including the US, Germany and the ROK, the US is more politically divided than the other economies surveyed. Nine in ten US respondents believe there are strong conflicts between people who support different political parties, and nearly 60 percent of Americans surveyed think their fellow citizens no longer disagree simply over policies, but also over basic facts.

As political and partisan polarization continues to grow, more “opposition for opposition’s sake” is seen among Democrats and Republicans. Under its influence, voters of the two parties are increasingly antagonized over gun policy. Among Republican voters, 76 percent support the right to possess guns, while 81 percent of Democratic voters see gun control as more important. Hijacked by interest, partisan conflict and the public opinion, the legislation and law enforcement process of gun control is fraught with difficulties. For the past ten years, Democratic congressmen put forward dozens of bills on gun violence and gun control every year, but due to the continued obstruction from the Republican Party, only a handful of them successfully entered the plenary deliberation and debate stage at the Senate or the House of Representatives.

The US National Rifle Association (NRA) has five million members and spends hundreds of millions of dollars on advertising and lobbying every year. Its tentacles penetrate deep into the fabric of the American society. The NRA is an important funder of the Republican Party. Since its establishment in 1871, the NRA has successfully attracted nine US presidents to join it. According to CNN statistics in 2018, 307 of the 535 US congressmen have received either direct campaign contributions from the NRA and its affiliates or benefited from independent NRA spending like advertising supporting their campaigns. In the face of huge profits, all kinds of gun control efforts have ended up in vain.

◆ The US is not a straight A student when it comes to democracy. Its practice of democracy has been messy and chaotic. On 6 January 2021, thousands of Americans gathered on Capitol Hill in Washington, D.C. and stormed the Capitol building in a bid to stop the joint session of the Congress from certifying the newly-elected president. The incident interrupted the transfer of US presidential power, leaving five dead and over 140 injured. It is the worst act of violence in Washington, D.C. since 1814 when the British troops set fire to the White House, and it sent shock waves throughout the international community. The US Senate Republican leader described it as a “failed insurrection”.

A scholar from the US Council on Foreign Relations says that the US is not nearly as unique as many Americans believe, and that the Capitol riot should put an end to the notion of American exceptionalism, of an eternal shining city on a hill.

An American expert on international issues wrote in The New York Times that while the US leader has reunited the West, he may not be able to reunite America. Trump and his supporters would be willing to depart from established constitutional rules and norms with his Big Lie. This may undermine the ability of the US government to transfer power peacefully and legitimately. Consequently none of the institutions will work for long, and the people will be thrust into political and financial chaos.

◆ The dysfunctional American-style democracy has triggered a trust crisis. Public commitments to the people come with behind-the-scene deals. Political infighting, money politics, and vetocracy make it virtually impossible for quality governance to be delivered as aspired by the general public. Americans are increasingly disillusioned with the US politics and pessimistic about the American-style democracy.

A Gallup survey in October 2020 shows that only 19 percent of the Americans surveyed are “very confident” about the presidential election, a record low since the survey was first conducted in 2004. According to a poll conducted by The Wall Street Journal in June 2022, six out of 10 Americans feel pessimistic about achieving the American dream.

A Pew Research in 2021 shows that 65 percent of Americans see a need for major reform to the American democracy. People’s confidence in the American democracy dropped in 16 developed countries, and 57 percent of respondents think that the American democracy is no longer a good example to follow.

The Democracy Perception Index released in 2021 by a German polling agency reveals that 44 percent of respondents in the 53 countries surveyed are concerned that the US threatens democracy in their country.

◆ Over the years, despite the structural flaws and problematic practice of its democratic system, the US has been touting the “alliance of democracies” and hyping up the narrative of “democracy versus autocracy”. It is in essence attacking those who hold different views under the banner of democracy, using ideology and values as a tool to suppress others and advance its own geopolitical strategies. This is hegemony in the guise of democracy. A former CIA official openly stated: “We will intervene whenever we decide it’s in our national security interest to intervene. If you don’t like it, lump it.”

The US has pushed for the neo-Monroe Doctrine in Latin America under the pretext of promoting democracy, incited color revolutions in Eurasia, and remotely controlled the Arab Spring in West Asia and North Africa. These moves have brought chaos and disasters to many countries, gravely undermining world peace, stability and development. As suggested by the French website Le Grand Soir, democracy has long become a weapon of massive destruction for the US to attack countries with different views.

◆ Whether a country is democratic or not depends on whether its people are truly the masters of the country. It depends on whether the people have the right to vote, and more importantly, the right to participate; what promises they are given during elections, and more importantly, how many of these promises are delivered after elections; what kind of political procedures and rules are set through state systems and laws, and more importantly, whether these systems and laws are truly enforced; and whether the rules and procedures for the exercise of power are democratic, and more importantly, whether the exercise of power is genuinely subject to public oversight and checks.

◆ The Communist Party of China (CPC) leads the Chinese people in carrying out the whole-process people’s democracy in China. It has not only a complete set of institutions and procedures, but also full-fledged civil participation. A comprehensive, extensive, and well-coordinated system of institutions has been formed to ensure that the people run the country, and diverse, open, and orderly channels for democracy are put into place. This allows the entire people to engage in law-based democratic elections, consultations, decision-making, management, and oversight and to manage state as well as economic, cultural, and social affairs in various ways and forms and in accordance with the law. The whole-process people’s democracy integrates process-oriented democracy with results-oriented democracy, procedural democracy with substantive democracy, direct democracy with indirect democracy, and people’s democracy with the will of the state. It is a model of socialist democracy that covers all aspects of the democratic process and all sectors of society. It is a true democracy that works. China’s whole-process people’s democracy is gaining wider recognition and acclaim from the international community.

A British scholar says that electoral democracy does not breed a close relationship with the people and government, because the people are only called upon to be involved whenever to make elections take place. The Chinese approach is different in that there is a very important consultative component in the way China operates.

◆ Democracy is a concrete phenomenon that is constantly evolving. Rooted in history, culture and tradition, it takes diverse forms and develops along the paths chosen by different peoples based on their exploration and innovation. China stays committed to respecting the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all countries, uphold non-interference in internal affairs, and respect the independent choices of development paths and social systems made by people in different countries. China has no intention to engage in systemic rivalry or ideological confrontation with the US. China never exports ideology, never interferes in other countries’ internal affairs, and never seeks to change the system of the US.

Source URL