“There are decades where nothing happens; and there are weeks where decades happen” —Vladimir Ilyich Lenin In certain aspects, China’s early “handling” of the Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak–in particular, its draconian lockdowns–set the tone for the erosion of civil liberties continuing across the world in the name of “pandemic response.” In this episode, I’m joined by veteran journalist and ‘The Epoch Times’ contributor, Lee Smith. We look at the mechanisms by which Western “democracies” have been steered towards negating the rights of citizens, and the Chinese Communist Party’s hand in this. “If you treat your populations like an occupied people, they will come to treat you like an occupying power.” What consequences await those governments and “leaders” who continue to override the rights of the people they’re intended to serve?
The United States reiterates its “rock solid” commitment to Taiwan’s defense. And the former Japanese prime minister said Japan and the United States could not stand by if China attacked Taiwan. Hundreds of Taiwan nationals abroad are being extradited every year—not to Taiwan, but to China. And it’s all linked to Beijing’s “One China policy.” U.S. Congress members are working to teach children about the truth of communism. They tell NTD why they see it as a bigger threat now than ever before. Facebook and Twitter are taking action on accounts linked to Chinese propaganda campaigns. Thousands have already been removed. The deaths of nearly 40 women prisoners of conscience over two decades have been linked to a single prison in China—most recently, a woman close to 80 years old.
The Chinese Communist Party says China is a democracy in its own form, as Beijing complains about a freedom summit hosted by the United States. One nation in Europe is boycotting the Beijing Olympics. Its announcement comes while China blocks exports from the country. iPhone sales have taken the lead in the Chinese market. Apple is snapping up market share left behind by Huawei, as the tech giant has remained on the decline for two years. A major Chinese company plans to delist from the New York Stock Exchange. It’s now feeling the pressure on two sides, from both the United States and China. Half of China’s workforce reports a monthly income of less than $160. Communist Party officials, on the other hand, are getting rich.
The Moral Imperative to End China’s Regime
“We do business in 100 countries,” said Jamie Dimon to Fox News Channel’s Maria Bartiromo in early August. “And we do, we do it under the laws of those lands and under the law of America as they apply.”
“Foreign policy is set by the American government, not set by JPMorgan,” Dimon, the chairman and CEO of JPMorgan Chase, argued.
Dimon is correct. The U.S. government does not prohibit banks or other companies from doing business in China.
Yet doing business in China strengthens a horrific regime, so the issue is not about legality, as Dimon suggests. It is about morality.
We must, therefore, ask: Is it moral to do business in the People’s Republic of China?
We begin in the metropolis of Wuhan. The world still does not know how COVID-19 started, but it is 100 percent clear that Beijing deliberately spread the disease beyond China’s borders. While lying about contagiousness for at least weeks—Chinese doctors knew it was highly transmissible human-to-human but officials said it was not—Beijing was busy locking down Chinese cities while pressuring other countries to not impose travel restrictions and quarantines on arrivals from China. Then, after finally admitting transmissibility, China’s officials said the disease would infect fewer than SARS, the disease at the turn of the century that sickened 8,400 people worldwide and killed 810.
Therefore, each of the more than 5.1 million COVID-19 deaths outside China should be considered a murder. The intentional spread of the disease is, so far, the crime of this century.
Also murdered are the tens of thousands of Americans who each year have overdosed on fentanyl compounds, which are formulated in China. The ingredients—and sometimes the final products—are made in that country. The Chinese fentanyl gangs are far-flung and international in scope. They have their money laundered by other Chinese gangs through China’s state banks.
The Communist Party, in its near-total surveillance state, knows about the activities of these gangs and therefore approves of them. Chinese officials undoubtedly profit from the fentanyl trade. The intentional killing of others without just cause—the inevitable result of Beijing’s protection of the fentanyl gangs—is also murder. In one year alone, from May 2020 to April 2021, fentanyl killed about 64,000 Americans, according to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
China, in addition to murdering foreigners, is “disappearing” and killing its own people, starting with critics and dissidents.
Most notably, it has, in the horribly misnamed Xinjiang Uygur Autonomous Region, built a chain of concentration camps that have held an estimated three million Uyghurs, Kazakhs, and other Turkic minorities. Minorities are dying in those camps in large numbers. We know this because officials built a crematorium and cemetery between two of their internment camps, in Aksu City.
Inside those facilities, inmates are systematically tortured. Beijing has institutionalized slavery, offering the labor of tens of thousands of minorities to domestic and foreign companies. The Chinese state maintains a policy promoting the rape of Uyghur and other Turkic women. Officials are organ-harvesting minorities and imprisoning children in “orphanages” resembling prisons. Policies imposed on Tibetans appear to be similar in many respects to those forced on the Turkic peoples.
These crimes against humanity in Xinjiang constitute “genocide” as defined in Article II of the Genocide Convention of 1948. Both the Trump and Biden administrations have declared that China is committing this unspeakable crime.
The Genocide Convention, in Article I, requires signatories such as the United States, “to prevent and to punish” acts of genocide.
Preventing and punishing does not include strengthening the despicable ruling group by, for instance, buying Chinese products. “We are each responsible for our actions, whether they’re in our backyard or an ocean away,” Jonathan Bass, CEO of Los Angeles-based WhomHome.com, told Gatestone. “In 2010, I realized that the way Chinese factories treated workers was not in line with the values that America represented. Slave labor in any form is unacceptable.” Bass then moved high-value jobs to North America and assembly jobs to Mexico.
Is there a moral imperative to leave China, like Bass? There is such an imperative if the Chinese regime cannot be dissuaded from committing atrocities.
Those impossible-to-justify crimes have been the work of one of the most dangerous figures in history, Xi Jinping, the current Chinese ruler. Some have suggested that Xi is merely an aberration of China’s communism, implying that his crimes are his doing, not inherent in the communist system.
Xi’s era, marked by an attempt to return to totalitarianism, resembles that of Mao Zedong, the founder of the People’s Republic. Mao turned what was supposed to be a regime run by a committee into a regime run by one man, and then he almost destroyed the Chinese state with ruinous campaigns such as the Cultural Revolution and the Great Leap Forward.
Mao’s eventual successor, Deng Xiaoping, normalized politics. Deng started institutionalizing the Communist Party by developing norms, guidelines, understandings, and rules. Foreign observers gushed over the rise of what they called a “meritocratic” system.
Xi, in a Mao-like grab, has reversed the process, deinstitutionalizing the Party by seizing power from just about everyone else. Mao has also been called an aberration, but he was not. China has been ruled by strongmen both at the beginning of the Communist period and now. That system, which from its Maoist beginning has idealized struggle, demands a strongman. It is Deng and his two successors who are the aberration.
The Chinese communist system, by its very nature, demands uniformity, and to further its goals justifies the elimination of all refusing to conform. All China’s communist leaders, but especially Mao and Xi, are blood-soaked.
If there is now no reasonable hope for a benign Chinese communism—almost all observers and political leaders once thought the system would evolve in a welcomed direction—then we must not tolerate the regime, which means we have, in the first instance, a moral imperative to cut ties with it.
Cutting ties would result in ending the reign of the Communist Party, which has always been dependent on continual infusions of foreign cash. Among other things, ending Chinese communism would make Jamie Dimon, who quipped last month that his bank would outlast the Communist Party, look prophetic.
From the Gatestone Institute
Communist China Declared War on the US Long Ago: Part 3
Incredibly, many Americans and others still believe Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s propaganda about “shared futures,” “whole democracy,” and “Chinese benevolence.”
So far—and thanks to relentless coordinated propaganda by Chinese diplomats and state-run Chinese media—the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has not completely lost control of the COVID-19 narrative, including success in delinking the virus itself from its human-engineered origins in Hubei Province.
Co-opted Westerners and others still champion the theory of a “natural” jumping of the virus from bat (not pangolin) to human, but scientific and other evidence has been shooting a lot of holes in that theory lately. Americans are also finally waking up just a little bit to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) intimidation of Taiwan, India, the Philippines, Japan, and others.
Financial warfare being conducted by the CCP against the West is closely related to economic warfare. Despite the best intentions of Westerners who were hoping for more when China was “opened” in 1972, China remains mercantilist to the core, having manipulated its currency since the country was “opened” by former President Richard Nixon and former Secretary of State Henry Kissinger in 1971.
China’s economy is opaque, Byzantine, and authoritarian capitalist, and the Chinese yuan is the very definition of a fiat currency that is manipulated through devaluation when deemed necessary for economic advantage by the CCP. The Chinese communists (Chicoms) seek to challenge the U.S. dollar as the key international currency underlying the world trade system, and eventually supplant it with the Chinese yuan as the world’s primary reserve currency. The yuan has already achieved official reserve-currency status from the International Monetary Fund, but for now “the yuan’s share in global payments and central bank reserves remains low, at about 2%,” according to Bloomberg.
The key to displacing the dollar is convertibility of the yuan. If/when the yuan achieves full convertibility, then Chinese overseas investments under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) can be flexibly implemented, and China can nudge other countries away from the dollar and toward the yuan. Also, the convertibility of the yuan and an accompanying digital exchange and payment capability with the Chinese central bank would enable the Chicoms to extend their financial empire worldwide. The aim would be to decouple Western companies and banks from global capital markets and money flows, making it easier for the yuan to prevail as the top world reserve currency.
Another key financial warfare objective is to entice Western capital and financial institutions to China. Hong Kong—long a banking and financial capital of the world—has already been absorbed into communist China, and the CCP has a long-standing goal to make Shanghai the world’s top global financial center for both prestige and financial control purposes.
The CCP has long been engaged in cyber warfare against the United States. According to the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA): “Malicious cyber activities attributed to the Chinese government targeted, and continue to target, a variety of industries and organizations in the United States, including healthcare, financial services, defense industrial base, energy, government facilities, chemical, critical manufacturing (including automotive and aerospace), communications, IT (including managed service providers), international trade, education, video gaming, faith-based organizations, and law firms.”
Most Chinese cyber operations, which consist of economic espionage against U.S. private industry that have been detected, are focused on cleared defense contractors or IT, and communications firms whose products and services support government and private sector networks worldwide.
Chinese cyber attacks have targeted U.S. trade secrets, science and technology data, and proprietary information, as well as classified military and intelligence community networks to access and/or corrupt tactical, operational, and technical databases.
In one example, members of “Advanced Persistent Threat 10, or APT 10, a hacking group associated with the Chinese government,” were indicted in 2018 for “conspiracy to commit computer intrusion, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, and aggravated identity theft,” according to the FBI.
In another example, links have been found between Chinese cyber actors and a back door in the popular CCleaner application that allowed the actors to target U.S. companies, including Google, Microsoft, Intel, and VMware. And Chinese cyber attacks continue, as a recent report by the cybersecurity firm Palo Alto Networks stated, “In the U.S. alone, hundreds of organizations were targeted by hackers as part of an espionage effort that took place between late September and early October.”
Finally, a Nov. 22 report from the Congressional Research Service listed a number of Chinese cyber attacks against U.S. entities over the past decade.
These are just the tip of the iceberg of ongoing CCP-directed cyber warfare against the United States.
Is the COVID-19 pandemic actually CCP biowarfare in practice?
The PLA has been conducting biological warfare research for decades. Since the Chinese were themselves victimized by Japanese biological warfare in World War II, it is no surprise that they began research into the development of bioweapons, as well. It is alleged that the Wuhan National Biosafety Laboratory is just a cover for the research and development of Chinese bioweapons being conducted under the direction of the PLA. There have been open-source signs of the results of that research—as well as its purpose—for several years.
The PLA has long-held plans to use bioweapons in a future conflict, according to a May 2021 news report: “Chinese scientists have been preparing for a Third World War fought with biological and genetic weapons including coronavirus for the last six years.”
A novel coronavirus research report from 2015 declared: “Researchers inserted a protein from a Chinese rufous horseshoe bat into a SARS virus from 2002–resulting in a new pathogen which could infect human cells.”
The Smithsonian Magazine published an article about the bird flu in 2017 that is almost a precursor of the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus. The article was titled, “Is China the Ground Zero for a Future Pandemic?” And this is the money quote (emphasis added): “Western experts say Chinese officials have come a long way since their wobbly handling of the 2002 outbreak of SARS, the severe respiratory disease caused by a previously unknown coronavirus; Chinese apparatchiks initially tried to cover up the epidemic, creating a worldwide scandal.”
In 2018, the Chemical and Biological Intelligence Unit of the FBI’s Weapons of Mass Destruction Directorate (WMDD) disclosed in an unclassified report that U.S. Customs and Border Protection agents at Detroit Metro Airport stopped a Chinese biologist who was carrying vials containing “Middle East Respiratory Syndrome (MERS) and Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS) materials.”
Since its appearance in China’s Hubei Province in late 2019, there has been much speculation in open sources about the specific origin of the SAR-CoV-2 virus, with the two main theories being a zoonotic event (animal-to-human) or a bio-engineered virus deliberately created in a laboratory.
In June 2021, The Wall Street Journal reported that the CGG-CGG amino acid sequence found in the virus is manmade and can only have been inserted through gain-of-function research, as the CGG-CGG sequence is not found in nature.
Whether purposely or inadvertently released, the CCP has exploited the virus by sowing fear that draconian lockdown measures are “justified,” it withheld details on the virus genome that could have facilitated a much better medical response, and exploited the lockdowns around the world for crass economic advantage.
Capability, intentions, a past cover-up, illegal smuggling of bio-agents into the United States, scientific evidence pointing to a human-engineered virus in a laboratory run by the PLA, and purposeful exploitation—all of this points directly to biowarfare being conducted by the CCP against the United States and the world.
Xi Jinping is leading the CCP in the three threes of warfare against the United States and the world with a goal of achieving global supremacy and world leadership by the Party’s centenary celebration in 2049. Nine avenues of ongoing CCP warfare were summarized in this three-part series. The evidence is overwhelming that the CCP is at war with the United States on multiple fronts. Will the luck of the threes prevail for Xi and the CCP, or will the United States finally awaken to the total threat posed by the Chinese regime?
Milley’s Sputnik Moment and China’s Nukes
Joint Chiefs of Staff Chairman General Mark Milley called it a “Sputnik” moment, recalling the time when the Russians were the first to put a satellite in orbit.
Milley was talking about China’s test of a space launched nuclear hypersonic glide vehicle, a fractional orbiting hypersonic bombardment system. But, in fact, it was not a Sputnik moment. Russia’s satellite did not pose any strategic or existential threat. What Milley should have said is that the Chinese test of a space launched hypersonic glider was a “Cuban Missile Crisis” moment.
The Cuban Missile Crisis was an attempt by the Soviet Union to put on Cuba a nuclear strike capability made up of missiles and nuclear bombers. On Sept. 4, 1962, President John F. Kennedy warned the Russians about putting “offensive” weapons on Cuba.
But the deployment continued with additional missiles and warheads en route to Cuba and launching sites on the island were made ready (some of them already operational). That led to the confrontation in October when the United States demanded the withdrawal of the missiles and warheads and put in place a quarantine of the island. Finally the Russians agreed and pulled them back (the United States was secretly obliged to pull 100 Jupiter missiles and warheads from Turkey as part of the deal).
At the time Russia had around 300 to 500 nuclear weapons on missiles (mainly in Russia and on submarines) while the US had 3,500. A key advantage to the Soviets was to balance out their deficiency with a near-the-US Cuban nuclear capability. In September/October 1962 around 20 nuclear warheads had been delivered to Cuba and another 20 were on their way. At the end of the day, looked at only from the perspective of numbers, the Soviets got the better of the final deal given that the US pulled 100 Jupiter missiles from Turkey.
Fast forward to China today. China is in the midst of a major increase in its nuclear strike missile capability. China is aiming to have a stockpile of 1,000 nuclear weapons by 2030 which is still far below the United States (5,550 nuclear weapons) and Russia (6,255 weapons).
Even with its rapid nuclear expansion, China remains well enough behind that Chinese strategists no doubt realize that if a major conflict came about, China would be at a severe disadvantage and could suffer from a first strike from the United States or, for that matter, from Russia (which in future may not be so friendly with China).
China cannot depend on Russia, where the two countries are strengthening their defense relationships, in the case of a nuclear attack. That helps explain why China has been looking for fast ways to neutralize the U.S. nuclear threat by acquiring a novel kind of first strike capability.
When Nikita Khrushchev planned to move R-14 intermediate and R-12 short range missiles and Ilyushin Il-28 bombers to Cuba the objective was to create a credible first strike Soviet capability on that island. The R-12’s got there (range 1,292 miles capable of hitting New York or Dallas) but the R-14’s were en route (range 2,500 miles covering most of the United States).
The United States in 1962 had numerous air defenses mainly based on the Nike, Nike Ajax and Nike Hercules systems. Nike Hercules had a range of around 90 miles and its solid-fueled rocket could reach 150,000 feet. It carried a nuclear warhead (the smallest was the W-31, which was a boosted fission nuclear explosive which could be set with a yield of 2, 20 or 40 kilotons—Hiroshima was around 16 kilotons).
Unfortunately, the Nike system was not capable either of reliably detecting or destroying a ballistic missile warhead. The Nike missile defense series was designed against Russian bombers, not missiles (which is one of the important reasons why in the 1970s most of the Nikes were decommisioned).
Had the United States not responded to the Soviet challenge, the nuclear balance would have changed decisively because the missiles in Cuba would give the United States very little warning time to respond to any attack by the USSR.
It isn’t clear whether the Cuban missiles alone would constitute a first strike capability, but it would have certainly enhanced that possibility. In any case it obliged the United States, as part of a Kennedy-Khrushchev agreement, to pull its nuclear missiles out of Turkey, a major victory for the Soviets.
China’s Hypersonic Missile
A fractional orbiting hypersonic nuclear weapon offers China similar advantages for a number of cogent reasons. First off it shortens U.S. response times, perhaps dramatically, unless the United States can field new space-based sensors and orbiting satellite killers that can find and remove China’s space-based threats.
The likelihood of space-based missile defenses being deployed anytime soon is unlikely, although China’s demonstration of a fractional orbiting hypersonic bombardment system (FOHBS) and its demonstration of new killer satellites suggests the United States is going to have to move forward with countermeasures sooner, rather than later.
Existing U.S. missile defenses (which are few and far between) probably cannot intercept hypersonic glide vehicles, possibly not even detect them.
A second advantage for China is for them to have credible leverage over the United States, making it easier for China to pursue non-nuclear aggressive operations primarily in the Pacific. This means the First Island Chain and its crown jewel Taiwan, but beyond that with China making an effort to push the United States forward-deployed forces back from Japan, Okinawa, and possibly even Guam.
China is looking to dominate Asia economically, politically, and militarily. A hypersonic weapons capability like FOHBS demonstrates Chinese technological and military superiority, at least in the eyes of those nations bordering China, but also increasingly in U.S. defense circles, including the Defense Department.
The United States has been very slow in responding to the rise of China’s military power. U.S. force deployments have remained more or less the same and few improvements have been made in firepower for U.S. ground, air, and naval forces.
At home the United States is seriously behind both Russia and China in developing and fielding hypersonic weapons, and the United States is not known to be working on a space launched hypersonic glider.
While the United States retains a strong nuclear deterrent, it urgently needs to address how to support and help much weaker U.S. allies who do not have strong military capabilities. While the United States has helped Japan by F-35 sales and coproduction, it has not done very much for Taiwan which lacks stealth jets, submarines or even a first rate coastal defense capability. It appears there is no urgent plan of any kind to build up pro-U.S. forces in the Pacific.
The Pentagon covered up China’s FOHBS. China conducted two tests, one in July and the other in August. It wasn’t until mid-October when the Financial Times told the world about the Chinese tests and only on Oct. 28 when Milley told Bloomberg Television about the “Sputnik” moment.
Certainly the Pentagon knew about the tests because all space events are carefully tracked and analyzed. And even with the confirmation of the revelations, the administration is silent about what to do about the new threat.
Now there is increasing evidence that “experts” are claiming the Chinese FOHBS is nothing to worry about and “don’t have to be a Sputnik moment.” Washington’s response so far is to maybe “talk” to China and even proposing setting up a “nuclear hotline” as if that would be of any use. It appears the administration is not seriously thinking about any challenge from China.
The lack of any U.S. administration policy and the Pentagon cover up are reasons for profound concern, as is the lack of a coherent U.S.-China policy that can deter China.
Why has the WHO designated the new, heavily-mutated, Coronavirus variant, Omicron, a “variant of concern?” How is it that the next-in-line letters of the Greek alphabet, Nu and Xi, were skipped in the naming of this strain? Observing the different responses around the world to Omicron, triggers recollection of the ‘early days’ of Coronavirus. Has the world learnt from those early mistakes (and the misplaced trust) that potentially cost millions of lives? This new, possibly more infectious strain, arrives at a time of already heavy global tension. The questions of whether Peng Shuai is really safe and how likely (and imminent) a CCP-invasion of Taiwan is remain as burning as ever.
Beijing is pushing a unique financial campaign—urging Chinese citizens and businesses to start using #DigitalCurrency across the nation. And once that’s done—it has plans to promote that digital currency worldwide. It may be part of Beijing’s long game—to challenge the U.S. dollar on the global stage. An episode from a famous TV show has disappeared from Disney’s streaming platform in Hong Kong. Its plot features a touchy subject for China’s Communist regime: the 1989 Tiananmen square massacre. And the Women’s Tennis Association gives up hundreds of millions of dollars, suspending all tournaments inside China. The bold move comes amid fears for Chinese tennis star Peng Shuai and her safety.
Communist China Declared War on the US Long Ago: Part 2
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is partial to the number three for cultural and superstitious reasons. As it turns out, that would appear to apply to Xi Jinping, too, as noted in part one of this three-part series.
A few of his “campaign of threes” have included:
- Three major economic initiatives.
- The historic third resolution at the sixth plenum of the 19th Central Committee of the CCP.
- A campaign for a rare third five-year term as communist leader.
- An effort to be elevated to the personal status of “third paramount leader” with Mao Zedong and Deng Xiaoping.
But Xi’s most grandiose leveraging of the number three has been the initiation and/or furtherance of the three threes of warfare against the United States (and, by extension, the rest of the world) in a dramatic departure from the relatively peaceful policies of Deng and his successors. Xi’s three threes of warfare are directly aimed at elevating China to world leadership while destroying its primary adversary, the United States.
Part one of this series summarized the first three warfares; below are the next three.
Data and information are the lifeblood that control modern society. All sorts of industries, government organizations, and militaries are dependent on timely and accurate information to support decision-making processes, including societal infrastructures such as electric power production, money flow, air traffic, oil and gas, manufacturing, logistics, transportation, and many other industries.
To control data and information—and to be able to corrupt it and gain economic and geopolitical advantages—is a primary objective of the CCP’s information warfare campaign that is being waged against the United States and other countries.
The result of such control is “information dominance.” Information dominance in a military context means to achieve a superiority over an adversary in knowledge and understanding of the battlefield at the strategic, operational, and/or tactical levels of war. Extended to other spheres of human endeavor—for example, economic, political, and geopolitical—the concept can be used in virtually any context to gain advantage over a competitor, as all decision-making is founded on knowledge and understanding of relevant data, including that related to competitors and adversaries.
The Chinese communists (Chicoms) recognize this full well and have invested enormous resources to gain total information dominance in the international arena in order to improve decision-making related to the achievement of all of their geopolitical and economic goals and objectives.
Another key objective of CCP information warfare is to simply control all data and information everywhere, which amounts to limiting the exchange of data and information among citizens and entities to that which is approved by the Chinese state—and only the state.
Domestically, the free exchange of ideas is antithetical to the CCP and cannot be tolerated because free information exchange undermines CCP control and authority. For example, domestic Chinese tech companies are being forced to comply with a harsh new data security law that will also create problems for U.S. and multinational companies doing business in China. As with other aspects of Chinese legal warfare discussed in the first part of this series, the CCP seeks to extend that data security law to the rest of the world.
The CCP uses all means to influence and shape public opinion to accomplish communist geopolitical and domestic objectives, including state-run media, movies, documentaries, podcasts, books, pamphlets, leveraging of “purchased” foreign media, etc.
A good example of an integrated campaign is the ongoing CCP exploitation of COVID-19 to shape world opinion. The CCP early on decided to exploit the pandemic for its own advantage: economic, geopolitical, and psychological.
The coordinated covid-related messages to the world have been relentlessly repeated to shape the regime’s desired pro-CCP narrative. There has been a constant deluge of agitprop from state-run media covering every facet of the coronavirus “pandemic” over the last 18 months: fear-mongering, social distancing advocacy, mask mania, feigned CCP altruism, condemnation and undermining of the United States on all topics, blame-shifting on the origins of the virus, exportation of “Chinese methods” in handling the virus, claiming leadership on pandemic response (regarding vaccines, personal protective equipment, testing, etc.), exploitation of international institutions like the World Health Organization, pushing multilateralism, and other messaging aimed at showcasing CCP leadership to Chinese citizens and the rest of the world.
Xi’s premier strategic initiatives are in the economic arena, with a principal goal being China’s ascendancy as the dominant producer of industrial goods in the world. Xi envisions communist China as the world’s economic superpower, with his personal prestige tightly intertwined with the success of the nearly $1 trillion Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) that, so far, involves debt-trap investment in 138 countries around the world.
The BRI goal is to develop a global infrastructure controlled by the Chinese regime. The infrastructure elements are largely focused on the development of transportation assets that can later be exploited by Beijing to transport the resources and raw materials needed to fuel Chinese manufacturing concerns, as well as support the exportation of finished Chinese goods to overseas markets around the world, including roads, ports, railroads, bridges, etc.
BRI investments also include renewable energy projects, communications infrastructures, and cultural exchanges. BRI-related infrastructure investments—in reality, these are loans from CCP-controlled state banks and not grants—come with strings attached. Those loans must be paid back. Frequently, the provisions of those loans allow China to gain control of a country’s BRI-funded infrastructure and/or natural resources if/when loans are defaulted, generally through long-term leases of those assets. And that is CCP economic warfare!
There are other facets of Chinese economic warfare, including a continuing push to control and manipulate the world’s strategic commodities. A strategic commodity is a raw material or agricultural product that is considered critical to a nation’s economy, such that the economy would suffer significantly if that commodity’s trade and supply is interrupted in any way. Strategic commodities are the natural resources that fuel a nation’s economy. Examples include rare earth elements, oil, natural gas, gold, silver, copper, livestock, rice, wheat, and corn.
The Chicoms have been successfully acquiring control of strategic commodities for years, while building up strategic reserves as both an inflation hedge and also as a means of market manipulation to influence targeted countries like the United States. Gaining control of Afghanistan’s lithium reserves positions China to control and manipulate battery production for decades. Furthermore, China is implementing a Blockchain-based Services Network (BSN). A blockchain is a type of database that stores information in “blocks” that are securely “chained together.” The implementation of a global BSN capability would enable the CCP to monitor and control all economic/trade transactions of users around the world—on CCP terms.
Build the infrastructure, build the manufacturing capacity, control the natural resources and strategic commodities, and ascend to economic superpower status—this economic warfare strategy is working, as China is already the number two largest economy in the world.
The preceding are the second three of the three threes of warfare being conducted by the CCP against the United States and the rest of the world. Part three will conclude the series with a discussion of the final three CCP warfares.
Read part 1 here.
Communist China Declared War on the US Long Ago
The age of the Chinese regime’s “benevolence” is long over; war was declared years ago.
Communist China has been at war with its main adversary—the United States of America—for years. Sadly, most Americans have not been paying attention. After Mao Zedong’s death in 1976, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) became quiescent, with a general policy promoted by Deng Xiaoping.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is partial to the number three for cultural and superstitious reasons. For example, the number three represents Buddha and stands for Heaven, Earth, and human being; and great respect and reverence are given to three historical Chinese kingdoms.
No slouches on superstition and luck, the CCP routinely capitalizes on the number three to pursue its goals and objectives.
A lot of “threes” have been orchestrated by the CCP since 1949.
- Mao’s Three Phase Theory of revolutionary war, which included establishing a secure base of operations, expansion of controlled areas through terror and attacks on isolated enemy units, and destruction of the enemy in large scale battle.
- Mao’s Three Main Rules of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) discipline: 1) obey all orders; 2) take nothing so much as a needle or thread from the masses; and 3) turn in everything captured.
- Mao’s Three Anti-campaign, which “targeted communist cadres who had become too close to China’s capitalists.”
- Mao’s Three Worlds, defined as first world (United States and USSR at the time), second world (Japan, Canada, and Europe), and the third world (everybody else).
- The Three Warfares, which include public opinion warfare, psychological warfare, and legal warfare.
- The Three U.S.-China communiques, which established the flawed “one-China policy” that essentially conceded Taiwan to the PRC.
The CCP’s propensity to capitalize on “the luck of threes” starts right at the top with the appointment of the ruling Chinese leader as general secretary of the CCP, president of the PRC, and chairman of the Central Military Commission. Lucky Xi Jinping! Three jobs filled by one man, which is the essence of the Chinese communist dictatorship, in theory and practice being checked only by the Central Committee of the CCP.
Upon assuming power, Xi launched his own campaign of threes. The first threesome involved grandiose economic initiatives: the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI, also called the “One Belt, One Road”), Made in China 2025, and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road. All three were aimed at consolidating China as the world’s leading economy for all time.
Another example of Xi’s threes was announced last year at the 2020 China International Trade in Services Global Service Trade Summit: 1) jointly create an open and inclusive environment for cooperation; 2) jointly activate the cooperation momentum led by innovation; and 3) jointly create a mutually beneficial and win-win cooperation situation.
A third example is Xi’s “third historical resolution” at the Sixth Plenary session of the 19th Central Committee of the CCP earlier this month, as reported by state-run media. The “historical” reference relates to Xi’s resolution being the third of its kind, following in the footsteps of Mao and Deng. Xi also seeks to triple down by winning a rare third five-year term in office, which would elevate him as the third Chinese “paramount leader” along with Mao and Deng, completing in effect a trifecta or triple threes. This personal objective will likely be achieved during the CCP’s 20th National Party Congress in 2022.
But the most important “triple three” was Xi’s initiation and/or furtherance of three threes of warfare against the United States in a dramatic departure from the policies of Deng and his successors. Deng’s policies were not overtly belligerent and involved penetrating, coopting, and leveraging international institutions in order to gain access to resources, foreign direct investment, advanced technology, and Western methods in order to restore the Chinese economy and professional class that was destroyed during Mao’s Cultural Revolution.
Xi’s three threes of warfare are directly aimed at elevating China to world leadership while destroying its primary adversary, the United States.
Those nine elements of CCP warfare against the United States and the West include the following:
Ideological (or Political) Warfare
The CCP is aggressively attempting to “discredit the tenets of liberal capitalism so that notions like individual freedom and constitutional democracy come to be seen as the relics of an obsolete system,” according to Tablet Magazine. The goal in undermining democratic values and individual liberties of Western democracies is to both safeguard China’s own authoritarian regime and also to assert world leadership.
Euphemisms such as “whole process democracy,” “socialism with Chinese characteristics,” and “socialist democracy with Chinese characteristics”—that are endlessly repeated by Chinese diplomats and Xi himself—mask the CCP’s true intention to fundamentally change the world order and replace Western liberal democracies with the ideological precepts that lead to CCP authoritarian rule over all nations in the future.
One important aspect of the CCP ideological warfare against the United States has been to foment discord and division among Americans, which has been ongoing for decades. Beijing’s greatest success in that regard to date has been the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, which was founded by three self-proclaimed Marxist women and has been supported by the Chinese Progressive Association, Freedom Road Socialist Organization, and other pro-Chinese communist organizations (as noted here, here, here, here, and here). BLM-supported Critical Race Theory being taught in public schools continues to divide Americans and sow ideological turmoil in the United States.
This is an excellent definition of legal warfare as employed by the CCP: “Legal warfare, at its most basic, involves ‘arguing that one’s own side is obeying the law, criticizing the other side for violating the law [weifa], and making arguments for one’s own side in cases where there are also violations of the law,’” according to The Heritage Foundation.
The CCP’s goal in employing legal warfare is to undermine the international system and especially the Western tradition of the “rule of law” by propagating a Chinese legal framework that supersedes international law.
For example, one CCP objective is to extend the new National Security Law to all Chinese regardless of where they live around the world. With that assumed control comes the ability to influence events and policies in countries that have a significant minority population of Chinese, with the eventual goal being to extend the law in order prosecute anyone who violates its provisions, whether Chinese or not.
According to Article 38 of the law, it can apply even to offenses committed “outside the region by a person who is not a permanent resident of the region.” That means an American penning an editorial for a U.S. newspaper that argues for, say, sanctions against China, could technically fall afoul of the law for “inciting hatred” against Beijing. If its jurisdiction is ever accepted, this will mean the end of national sovereignty of other nations while turning the United Nations into nothing more than a CCP enforcement agency.
While the PLA “Political Work Regulations”—published in 2003 and 2010 that address the employment of psychological warfare—are focused on pre-war activities to “soften up the enemy” for kinetic warfare, the CCP continuously employs the basic concepts to achieve other objectives. For example, to undermine any international coalitions oriented toward stopping PRC aggression and intimidation of its neighbors and others, including forced PLA intrusions into disputed areas, predatory Chinese mercantilist trade practices, rampant continuing economic espionage, and CCP efforts to unilaterally exert Chinese leadership in all spheres of human endeavors.
CCP psychological warfare involves the coordinated use of Chinese leadership, diplomats, and state-run media, as well as CCP-friendly foreign leaders, diplomats, academics, and media to sap the will of Americans and others who publicly impede CCP goals, objectives, and aggressive actions. CCP psychological warfare “includes diplomatic pressure, rumors, false narratives, and harassment to express displeasure, assert hegemony, and convey threats,” according to Marine Corps University.
These actions are all aimed at conveying a perception of lack of public support for anti-China public policies in the United States and other countries while marginalizing voices that speak out about Chinese authoritarian practices.
The ongoing coordinated effort directed against international support for the defense of Taiwan against a PLA attack is a good example of CCP psychological warfare aimed at a particular target.
The above are the first three of the three threes warfare being conducted by the CCP against the United States and the rest of the world. Part II of this series will continue the discussion.