China would not fear confrontation with the United States but would welcome cooperation if it is mutually beneficial, Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi said on Monday.

Problems in the U.S.-China relationship were down to “strategic misjudgments” by the American side, he said in a speech, posted on foreign ministry website.

“If there is confrontation, then (China) will not fear it, and will fight to the finish,” he said.

Wang said “there is no harm” in competition but it should be “positive”.

“If there is confrontation, then (China) will not fear it, and will fight to the finish,” he said.

Wang said “there is no harm” in competition but it should be “positive”.

Relations between the United States and China are at a low over a range of disagreements including the origins of the COVID-19 pandemic, trade, human rights, and Beijing’s increasing pressure on Taiwan.

In a call last month that lasted for more than three hours, U.S. President Joe Biden pressed his counterpart, Xi Jinping, on human rights while Xi warned that China would respond to what it called provocation on Taiwan.

The U.S. Senate passed legislation on Thursday to ban imports from China’s Xinjiang region over concern about forced labour, the latest U.S. response to Beijing’s treatment of the Uyghur Muslim minority there.

China rejects accusations of rights abuses in Xinjiang.

قال وزير الخارجية الصيني، وانغ يي، اليوم الاثنين، إن الصين لن تخشى مواجهة مع الولايات المتحدة.

وأضاف وانغ يي خلال كلمة ألقاها في بكين، أن بلاده سترحب بالتعاون إذا كان يصب في مصلحة الطرفين، وأنه يجب أن تكون المنافسة إيجابية.

ولفت إلى أن المشكلات في العلاقة بين الولايات المتحدة والصين تعود إلى “سوء تقديرات استراتيجية” من الجانب الأمريكي.

ونُشر نص الكلمة على الموقع الإلكتروني لوزارة الخارجية الصينية.

هذا وتوترت العلاقات بين الولايات المتحدة والصين في الآونة الأخيرة لأسباب، عدة أبرزها تناقضات تجارية، والوضع في هونغ كونغ، والوضع المتعلق بحقوق الأقليات القومية في جمهورية الصين الشعبية، وتفشي وباء فيروس “كوفيد-19″، ورفض الصين المشاركة في مفاوضات الحد من التسلح. في كل هذه القضايا لدى واشنطن مطالبات جادة لبكين.

Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri has warned that failing to take swift action to address Lebanon’s accumulating crises would mean that the country will head to a “worse” situation.

“The next week will be decisive in clarifying the course of things,” Berri said

He noted that the coming week carries important junctures that are likely to stir the stagnant water, expecting the Constitutional Council’s ruling on the Free Patriotic Movement’s appeal against the electoral law’s amendments to be issued on Monday or, at the latest, Tuesday.

“This would create new dynamics, regardless of the ruling’s nature,” the daily said.

Noting that “there are serious efforts to find exits,” Berri pointed out that the governmental crisis is still deadlocked.

He instead called for “working seriously to address the situations that the Lebanese are going through, or else we will definitely head to the worse.”

حذر رئيس البرلمان اللبناني، نبيه بري، من مخاطر عدم معالجة الأزمات المتراكمة في لبنان، مشيرا إلى أن “عدم التحرك سريعا، يعني أننا ذاهبون إلى الأسوأ”.

ولفت بري إلى “الاهتمام الدولي الكبير بإجراء الانتخابات النيابية”، معتبرا أنه “أمر طبيعي، وأنه من الطبيعي والضروري إصرارنا على إجراء هذه الانتخابات”.

وأشار رئيس البرلمان اللبناني إلى أن “الأسبوع المقبل يحمل مواعيد مهمة من شأنها أن تحرك المياه الراكدة”، متوقعا أن يصدر قرار المجلس الدستوري بخصوص  الطعن المقدم من قبل “التيار الوطني الحر” حول قانون الانتخابات، اليوم الاثنين، أو بعده على أبعد تقدير.

وأوضح بري أن “ثمة حراكا جديا لإيجاد مخارج”، في حين أنه قال إن ملف الأزمة الحكومية “يراوح مكانه”، داعيا إلى العمل بجدية من أجل معالجة الأوضاع التي يمر بها اللبنانيون “وإلا فإننا ذاهبون نحو الأسوأ حكما”.

The United Arab Emirates, a Gulf state as ambitious as it is small, was once known as Little Sparta, such were its attempts to project military prowess across the Middle East and north Africa.

Its prime goals were to stiffen resistance to political Islam, whether the version practised by the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt and elsewhere, or Iran’s Islamic Republic, with its regional network of revolutionary militias.

To get itself taken seriously, particularly in Washington, it intervened in wars in Yemen and Libya, and established military bases in the Horn of Africa.

The UAE has intervened in wars in Yemen and Libya, and established military bases in the Horn of Africa, in a desire to establish its presence, especially in Washington, noting that only months ago, it was dealing with regional opponents such as Turkey and Qatar as hostile countries, but now it is building bridges. with her.

The UAE become the leading voice of the new peace in the Gulf region, and has even been urging the United States and Israel, enemy of the past and friend of today, to retreat from the threat of a strike on Tehran and its nuclear facilities.

A statement issued after Bennett concluded the first visit of an Israeli prime minister to the UAE this week did not mention any talk of Iran, despite holding four hours of talks with Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, the de facto leader of the UAE and crown prince of Abu Dhabi.

Despite this, the UAE made it clear that the response to the strikes was “no,” and the official Emirates News Agency said that Sheikh Mohammed had defended “regional stability,” referring to the objection to more military actions in the Middle East.

Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed, the UAE’s National Security Adviser, also visited Tehran and held talks with Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi and local officials two weeks ago, and Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said: “We are about to open a new page in our relations with the UAE.”

Before WikiLeaks leaked the diplomatic cables in 2010, little was known about the political influence of the UAE, and the cables showed Sheikh Mohammed’s clear voice with Washington, at a time when Saudi Arabia, ruled by aging kings, was losing influence.

Sheikh Mohammed told then-US President Barack Obama and his officials in no uncertain terms that he expected swift and firm action against Iran, telling Timothy Geithner, the US Treasury Secretary, that a nuclear-armed Iran was “absolutely untenable,” according to a 2009 cable.

After former US President Donald Trump assumed power, it was considered a great glimmer of hope for a toughening of the American position in the Middle East, especially after Trump withdrew from the nuclear agreement with Iran, and preferred kings in the region, such as Sheikh Mohammed, and military leaders such as the Egyptian president, Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi, and also sent aircraft carriers to the Gulf in a sign of permanent support.

But when Iran began attacking Western shipping in the Gulf in response to the reimposition of sanctions, Trump failed to take action, and at one point appeared to have aborted a menacing strike that was about to take place.

At that point Sheikh Mohammed decided to take responsibility for the Iran file himself, rather than Washington, and in light of the unwillingness to see the Iranian missile arsenal turn against Abu Dhabi and Dubai, a short trip across the Gulf might mean reaching some kind of understanding, at least an agreement Ruling not to assault.

The first sign of this was the UAE’s decision to withdraw its forces from Yemen, which had joined with Saudi Arabia to defend the

Sheikh Tahnoun bin Zayed, the UAE’s National Security Adviser, also visited Tehran and held talks with Iranian President Ibrahim Raisi and local officials two weeks ago, and Iranian Foreign Minister Hossein Amir Abdollahian said: “We are about to open a new page in our relations with the UAE.”

Before WikiLeaks leaked the diplomatic cables in 2010, little was known about the political influence of the UAE, and the cables showed Sheikh Mohammed’s clear voice with Washington, at a time when Saudi Arabia, ruled by aging kings, was losing influence.

Sheikh Mohammed told then-US President Barack Obama and his officials in no uncertain terms that he expected swift and firm action against Iran, telling Timothy Geithner, the US Treasury Secretary, that a nuclear-armed Iran was “absolutely untenable,” according to a 2009 cable.

After former US President Donald Trump assumed power, it was considered a great glimmer of hope for a toughening of the American position in the Middle East, especially after Trump withdrew from the nuclear agreement with Iran, and preferred kings in the region, such as Sheikh Mohammed, and military leaders such as the Egyptian president, Abdel-Fattah el-Sisi, and also sent aircraft carriers to the Gulf in a sign of permanent support.

But when Iran began attacking Western shipping in the Gulf in response to the reimposition of sanctions, Trump failed to take action, and at one point appeared to have aborted a menacing strike that was about to take place.

At that point Sheikh Mohammed decided to take responsibility for the Iran file himself, rather than Washington, and in light of the unwillingness to see the Iranian missile arsenal turn against Abu Dhabi and Dubai, a short trip across the Gulf might mean reaching some kind of understanding, at least an agreement Ruling not to assault.

The first sign of this was the UAE’s decision to withdraw its forces from Yemen, which had joined with Saudi Arabia to defend the internationally recognized government against the Iranian-backed Houthi rebels, a war the Emirati side seemed to be losing.

The UAE has also found itself, during the past twelve months, supportive of peace talks and rapprochement with Turkey as well. “What is happening with the UAE is a reassessment of the results of the conflict with many influential powers,” says Abdul Khaleq Abdullah, a prominent Emirati analyst.

The latest fruit of this transformation was the visit of Turkey’s Foreign Minister, Mevlut Cavusoglu, to the UAE, which Turkey had previously accused of sponsoring the 2016 coup attempt against President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

Now, with its economy collapsing, Turkey is hoping to invest via Gulf sovereign wealth funds, a form of relationship in which the UAE may now feel some kind of alignment with its traditional strengths.

Abdullah says: “It is time to start again and heal the rift with some of yesterday’s opponents. And Iran in the first place.

Amiraculous and perhaps mystifying development is happening in the Middle East currently: Diplomacy is flowering across the region. Leaders who ordinarily undercut one another are instead exploring whether more constructive arrangements can be made for the benefit of their respective nations. And states that were once mortal adversaries for regional influence are beginning to mend fences, if for any other reason than to cool the temperature in a part of the world often synonymous with conflict.

This week’s meeting between Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennett and United Arab Emirates (UAE) Crown Prince Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed, a landmark trip if there ever was one, is only the latest example of previously hostile countries seeking to bury the hatchet. A week prior, Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, the man who helped orchestrate a multi-country boycott of neighboring Qatar in 2017 over terrorism allegations, traveled to the tiny but influential nation on Dec. 8 for a personal chit-chat with Qatari Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani. Mohammed’s voyage to Qatar came nearly a year after Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Bahrain and Egypt restored air, land and sea links to the Persian Gulf nation after the boycott failed to result in the Qatari foreign policy change that Riyadh and its partners wanted.

On Nov. 24, nearly a month before greeting the Israeli prime minister, UAE Crown Prince Mohammed set foot in Turkey to sign a series of economic and financial agreements with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan. The signing ceremony was notable because both nations have been at loggerheads on a myriad of issues since the dawn of the Arab Spring protests, when Turkey and the UAE found themselves on the opposite side of the region’s fault-lines. Before their recent encounter, the UAE crown prince hadn’t been to Turkey in nearly a decade, viewing Erdogan’s support for groups like the Muslim Brotherhood as an existential threat to the type of family-ruled dynastic regimes prevalent in the Gulf.

Turkey and Egypt are also working to rescue their bilateral ties, with their respective deputy foreign ministers meeting in September in an attempt to chip away at problems from conflicting claims over natural gas fields in the Mediterranean to interference in one another’s internal affairs. As a goodwill gesture, the Turks and Egyptians are both reducing their propaganda wars in the media.

The Saudis and Emiratis are also reaching out to Iran for talks, which if successful, have the potential to ameliorate many of the proxy wars that have roiled the Middle East for decades. While diplomacy between Riyadh and Tehran remains tedious and frustrating (at least according to Saudi Arabia’s U.N. envoy), the negotiations are nonetheless continuing despite the bad blood and suspicion that has accumulated since the advent of Iran’s Islamic Republic in 1979. That talks haven’t fallen apart yet is an accomplishment in its own right.

Even Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, once the region’s favorite pariah, is beginning to be drawn back into the regional fold. The UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Oman and Iraq have all been increasing engagement with Damascus this year, some more than others. In October, Assad received his first phone call from Jordan’s King Abdullah II since Syria erupted into civil war in 2011—a long way from the days when Abdullah was the first Arab leader to advocate for Assad’s resignation. A few days before the call, a central crossing point on the Jordanian-Syrian border was reopened for normal commerce.

What is exactly driving all of these events?

While each stream of diplomacy is unique, there is a common theme threading them together: the sense that the United States is deprioritizing the Middle East in its grand strategy after two decades of intense involvement in the region’s internal politics. It’s no coincidence Saudi Arabia and the UAE, which have grown accustomed to unconditional U.S. support, are the driving forces behind much of the diplomatic activity now underway. With the Biden administration pledging additional resources and attention to the Indo-Pacific, U.S. partners in the Middle East are now being incentivized to make their own arrangements. Uncle Sam has other priorities to attend to, and leaders are concluding they need to adapt to changing circumstances instead of depend on the U.S. to do its bidding.

Without overstating the case, U.S. military disengagement is serving the Middle East quite well. It’s also slowly extricating the U.S. from a region which, frankly put, is not as strategically important to U.S. security and prosperity interests as it was during the Cold War.

Of course, we shouldn’t overstate the case. There are still roughly 45,000-65,000 U.S. troops stationed in the Middle East, down from a peak of 90,000 in early 2020. The U.S. possesses a sizable constellation of bases throughout the region, with one, the al-Udeid Air Base in Qatar, hosting approximately 10,000 U.S. servicemembers, air platforms and the regional headquarters of U.S. Central Command. A U.S. carrier strike group frequently traverses the waters of the Persian Gulf, and the U.S. has a habit of flying B-52 and B-1 bombers to demonstrate a presence.

Even so, numbers don’t lie. There has been a reduction in the U.S. force posture in the Middle East, even if it isn’t yet accompanied by a change in underlying strategy as some would like. U.S. policymakers are starting to see the aftereffects of this reduction, and it just so happens that one of the byproducts is a growing interest among Middle Eastern governments in the peaceful resolution of disputes.

قالت مجلة “نيوزويك” (Newsweek) الأميركية إن منطقة الشرق الأوسط تشهد حاليا تطورا غريبا ومثيرا للدهشة من خلال حركية دبلوماسية في كل الاتجاهات بات من خلالها القادة -الذين عادة ما يقوض بعضهم مصالح بعض- يستكشفون ترتيبات بناءة أكثر لدولهم، فيما بدأت الأقطار التي كانت ذات يوم تتصارع حتى الموت من أجل النفوذ الإقليمي في إرساء نوع من السلم وخفض حرارة التوتر في جزء من العالم غالبا ما يقترن بالحروب والصراع.

وذكرت المجلة -في مقال لكاتب العمود المختص في شؤون الدفاع والسياسة الخارجية دانييل دي بيتريس- أن “الرحلة التاريخية” التي قام بها رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي نفتالي بينيت خلال هذا الأسبوع إلى الإمارات ولقائه ولي عهد أبوظبي محمد بن زايد ليسا سوى أحدث مثال على كيف أن دولا طبّع العداءُ علاقاتها في السابق تسعى الآن لدفن الأحقاد.

وفي 24 نوفمبر/تشرين الثاني الماضي -أي قبل نحو شهر من استقبال رئيس الوزراء الإسرائيلي- حط ولي العهد أبوظبي الرحال في تركيا لتوقيع سلسلة من الاتفاقيات الاقتصادية والمالية مع الرئيس التركي رجب طيب أردوغان.

وكان حفل التوقيع على هذه الاتفاقيات -تضيف المجلة- لحظة مشهودة بالفعل لأن كلا البلدين كانا على خلاف حول عدد لا يحصى من القضايا منذ اندلاع احتجاجات الربيع العربي، ووجدت أنقرة وأبوظبي نفسيهما في الجانبين المتقابلين لخطوط الصدع في المنطقة.

كما تعمل تركيا ومصر أيضا على إنقاذ علاقاتهما الثنائية؛ حيث اجتمع نائبا وزيري خارجيتهما في سبتمبر/أيلول الماضي في محاولة لتضييق دائرة المشاكل القائمة بينهما، خاصة مطالباتهما المتضاربة بشأن حقول الغاز الطبيعي في البحر الأبيض المتوسط وتدخل كل طرف في الشؤون الداخلية للطرف الآخر، وقاما كبادرة حسن نية بتخفيض نطاق حربهما الدعائية بوسائل الإعلام.

من ناحية أخرى، يتواصل السعوديون والإماراتيون أيضا مع إيران لإجراء محادثات من المحتمل -إن هي نجحت- أن تخفف نيران العديد من الحروب بالوكالة التي عصفت بالشرق الأوسط لعقود.

وحتى الدكتاتور السوري بشار الأسد الذي كان “المنبوذ المفضل” في المنطقة -تضيف نيوزويك- بدأ في العودة مرة أخرى تدريجيا إلى الحظيرة الإقليمية، حيث زادت كل من الإمارات والسعودية والأردن وعمان والعراق خلال هذا العام تواصلها وانخراطها مع دمشق.

وتؤكد المجلة أنه بالرغم من كون كل هذه الخطوات الدبلوماسية فريدة من نوعها فإن هناك سمة مشتركة تجمعها، وهي شعور الجميع بأن الولايات المتحدة بدأت تزيح منطقة الشرق الأوسط من صدارة أولوياتها ضمن إستراتيجيتها الكبرى بعد مشاركة مكثفة في شؤونها الداخلية لأزيد من عقدين.

لذلك فليس من قبيل المصادفة -تضيف المجلة- أن تكون كل من السعودية والإمارات- اللتين اعتادتا على دعم أميركي غير مشروط- القوتين الدافعتين للكثير من النشاط الدبلوماسي الجاري الآن.

ومع تعهد إدارة الرئيس الأميركي جو بايدن بتخصيص موارد إضافية والاهتمام بمنطقة المحيطين الهندي والهادي بشكل أكبر بهدف احتواء النفوذ الصيني، يتم الآن تحفيز شركاء الولايات المتحدة في الشرق الأوسط لاتخاذ ترتيباتهم الخاصة ويخلص قادة المنطقة إلى أنهم بحاجة إلى التكيف مع الظروف المتغيرة بدلا من الاستمرار في الاعتماد على الطرف الأميركي.

ولعل فك الارتباط العسكري الأميركي بالشرق الأوسط -تختم المجلة- هو في الواقع قرار يخدم بشكل جيد المنطقة، كما أنه يخرج الولايات المتحدة تدريجيا من منطقة لم تعد -بصراحة- مهمة من الناحية الإستراتيجية لأمن الولايات المتحدة ومصالحها كما كانت خلال فترة الحرب الباردة.

US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin said that China is rapidly enhancing its nuclear capabilities, but Washington is ready to compete and will also work to bolster Taiwan’s ability to defend itself.

Speaking at the Reagan National Defense Forum, Austin said the United States remains committed to the “one China” policy, but is willing to resist any attempts to use force against the island.

1000 Nuclear Warheads

The US Secretary of Defense stressed that Washington is ready to confront the Chinese military escalation with confidence and determination, and is working to “support Taiwan’s ability to defend itself.”

Austin also said that China is rapidly building its nuclear arsenal, with a goal of reaching at least 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030.
Asian NATO.

Austin emphasized that the United States was not trying to build a North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) or an anti-Chinese alliance.

And he added, “We do not seek a new Cold War or a world divided into rigid blocks,” but added, “We want the Indo-Pacific region where all countries are free from coercion.”

According to the US Secretary of Defense, Washington is taking measures to reduce risks in relations with China, and is interested in opening channels of communication between the military and diplomats of the two countries.

The United States has strengthened cooperation with Taiwan in recent years, while China has enhanced the deployment of combat aircraft in the Taiwan Air Defense Identification Zone.

Taiwan has been governed independently from China since 1949. China regards the island as its own province, while the island’s authorities assert that it is a self-governing country.

Senior US and European diplomats said in a joint statement on Friday that Washington and the European Union are interested in deepening cooperation with Taiwan on the basis of the “one-China” policy and maintaining the status quo in the Taiwan Strait.

قال وزير الدفاع الأمريكي، لويد أوستن إن الصين تعزز قدراتها النووية بسرعة، لكن واشنطن مستعدة للمنافسة وستعمل أيضا على دعم قدرة تايوان على الدفاع عن نفسها.

وفي حديثه في منتدى ريغان للدفاع الوطني، قال أوستن إن الولايات المتحدة لا تزال ملتزمة بسياسة “صين واحدة”، لكنها مستعدة لمقاومة أي محاولات لاستخدام القوة ضد الجزيرة.

1000 رأس نووي

وأكد وزير الدفاع الأمريكي، أن واشنطن مستعدة لمواجهة التصعيد العسكري الصيني بثقة وتصميم وتعمل على “دعم قدرة تايوان على الدفاع عن نفسها”.

كما قال أوستن إن الصين تبني بسرعة ترسانتها النووية، بهدف الوصول بها إلى ما لا يقل عن 1000 رأس نووي بحلول عام 2030.
ناتو آسيوي.

شدد أوستن على أن الولايات المتحدة لا تحاول بناء حلف شمال أطلسي آسيوي (ناتو) أو تحالف مناهض للصين.

وأردف، “لا نسعى إلى حرب باردة جديدة أو عالم مقسم إلى كتل جامدة”، لكنه استدرك قائلا، “نريد منطقة المحيطين الهندي والهادئ حيث توجد جميع البلدان خالية من الإكراه”.

وبحسب وزير الدفاع الأمريكي، تتخذ واشنطن إجراءات لتقليل المخاطر في العلاقات مع الصين، وهي مهتمة بفتح قنوات اتصال بين الجيش والدبلوماسيين في البلدين.

عززت الولايات المتحدة التعاون مع تايوان في السنوات الأخيرة، في حين عززت الصين نشر الطائرات المقاتلة في منطقة تحديد الدفاع الجوي في تايوان.

تخضع تايوان للحكم بشكل مستقل عن الصين منذ عام 1949. وتعتبر الصين الجزيرة مقاطعة تابعة لها، بينما تؤكد سلطات الجزيرة أنها دولة تتمتع بالحكم الذاتي.

قال دبلوماسيون أمريكيون وأوروبيون بارزون في بيان مشترك يوم الجمعة، إن واشنطن والاتحاد الأوروبي مهتمان بتعميق التعاون مع تايوان على أساس سياسة “صين واحدة”، والحفاظ على الوضع الراهن في مضيق تايوان.

President Vladimir Putin of Russia and President Xi Jinping of China met in a video summit and sought mutual support in their conflicts with the West.

They did not declare a formal alliance, but they called each other “old friend,” “dear friend” and “esteemed friend,” showing solidarity in the face of increased Western pressure over human rights and an ever-tighter geopolitical partnership.

Putin said that he would attend the opening ceremony of the Beijing Olympics in February, making him the first leader to confirm that he would go to an event that officials from the U.S., Australia, Canada, New Zealand and other countries have boycotted.

Points of agreement: Xi voiced support for Putin’s demands for “security guarantees” from the West. Putin concurred with Xi’s critical view of Western military activity in the Asia-Pacific region. The leaders discussed forming an “independent financial infrastructure,” a Kremlin aide said, to reduce their reliance on Western banks.

Context: Western officials have been in talks about Russia’s pressure on Ukraine. But Moscow is signaling that it has plenty of other friends, as with Putin’s trip last week to meet with Prime Minister Narendra Modi of India. Putin and Xi floated a possible three-way summit with India.

Quotable: “Both China and Russia face the same pressure from the United States,” Cheng Xiaohe, a professor in Beijing, said. “Therefore, the two countries need to support each other in diplomacy.”

التقى الرئيس الروسي فلاديمير بوتين والرئيس الصيني شي جين بينغ في قمة عبر الفيديو وطلبا الدعم المتبادل في صراعاتهما مع الغرب.

لم يعلنوا عن تحالف رسمي ، لكنهم أطلقوا على بعضهم البعض “الصديق القديم” ، و”الصديق العزيز” و “الصديق المحترم” ، مظهرين التضامن في مواجهة الضغط الغربي المتزايد على حقوق الإنسان والشراكة الجيوسياسية المتزايدة باستمرار.

قال بوتين إنه سيحضر حفل افتتاح أولمبياد بكين في فبراير ، مما يجعله أول زعيم يؤكد أنه سيذهب إلى حدث قاطعه مسؤولون من الولايات المتحدة وأستراليا وكندا ونيوزيلندا ودول أخرى.

نقاط اتفاق: أعرب شي عن دعمه لمطالب بوتين بـ “ضمانات أمنية” من الغرب. وافق بوتين على وجهة نظر شي النقدية للنشاط العسكري الغربي في منطقة آسيا والمحيط الهادئ. وقال أحد مساعدي الكرملين إن القادة ناقشوا تشكيل “بنية تحتية مالية مستقلة” لتقليل اعتمادهم على البنوك الغربية.

السياق: أجرى مسؤولون غربيون محادثات حول ضغوط روسيا على أوكرانيا. لكن موسكو تشير إلى أن لديها الكثير من الأصدقاء الآخرين ، كما حدث مع زيارة بوتين الأسبوع الماضي للقاء رئيس الوزراء الهندي ناريندرا مودي. طرح بوتين وشي قمة ثلاثية محتملة مع الهند.

اقتباس: “تواجه كل من الصين وروسيا نفس الضغط من الولايات المتحدة ،” قال تشنغ شياوهي ، أستاذ جامعي في بكين. “لذلك ، يحتاج البلدان إلى دعم بعضهما البعض في العلاقات الدبلوماسية.”

The Chinese dilemma for the United States is unparalleled and unprecedented in terms of the challenges facing Washington since the nineteenth century.

The exceptionality of the Chinese dilemma lies in its intrinsic components, both natural and acquired. Beijing does not rely on other countries to support it. Not within international blocs in search of immunity and immunity. It is guided by a strict, ideologically centralized system of government; Harmonious with the social and economic values ​​of society. Political ideology is identical until it integrates with all sectors of life. A human mass is about three times the size of the American human mass.

It draws inspiration from all economic theories throughout history that helps it reach the highest levels of the global economic throne so far. It follows a cautious, flexible and deliberate policy on the international scene without compromising its prestige and prestige or the pillars of its strategic relations with major countries or major international blocs. It has its red lines in more than one area, which it considers to be within its areas of vital influence, and it has interests in it. Its development rates are constantly rising. Its historical, cultural, imperial, political and social heritage gives it many ways of exclusivity and exclusivity. It chose the economy as a way to build the growing internally and externally; She singled out her commercial fan to shade the whole world with her products.

It infiltrated most of the world markets through a decisive principle of providing each market with the commodities it desires according to its needs, capabilities, capabilities and income levels. With its merchandise production, it addressed the different tastes of consumers in the four corners of the earth. It managed to eradicate extreme poverty among its population of more than one billion people.

The US side realizes that China no longer poses a containable economic and trade challenge only, but also represents a major security challenge to its interests, based on two realities; The first: the enormous self-capabilities in all aspects. As for the second fact, it stems from the association of most of the world’s production wheel economically with the international trade movement in China, and this specifically represents a challenge no less complex and difficult for Americans than the rest of the other challenge factors, because it created a state of overlap and intertwining between Beijing’s interests And the interests of countries allied to Washington, and these countries are no longer in the process of relying on economic and commercial alternatives that meet their needs in order to waste their gains with China on the one hand, and they also seem to adhere to their options related to the low financial costs that they provide to their budgets on the other hand.

There is no doubt that the Biden administration’s options are limited in its quest to confront China, including excluding direct military confrontation with it. Wars may occur through proxies, and this does not end a problem nor resolve a fate. China does not appear to be in a state of anxiety, and its behavior and stances do not reflect an escalating tone, even though it is full of challenge and rejection of the American proposals. It does not show interest in most of the provocation attempts it is exposed to in the South China Sea, Hong Kong and some areas of its influence. Rather, it maintains a disciplined rhythm in expressing its positions. The most likely options tend towards developing joint strategies for understanding on the basis of achieving greater economic cooperation and studying some troubling security issues on each side, and focusing on creating opportunities for developing and revitalizing relations between them, especially since the two sides enjoy the two largest economies in the world with a bilateral trade volume of more than $560 billion. annually.

A comprehensive and final settlement between them is elusive due to multiple factors; The most prominent of which is the strength, ability, and ambitions of each party. Neither the Americans will accept China’s dominance at their expense, nor will the Chinese be ready to accept the second place in the world after the spread of their economic clouds and commercial ships in the world’s spaces and land.

Sino-US relations, in their various frameworks, have entered a new turning point. What is new about it is that each side puts its cards on the table without equivocations or agents, in the sense of moving from the backstage struggle to the stage and unveiling. The Americans are keeping track of files of “deep concern” due to China’s commercial, human rights and political behavior, with their readiness to discuss several issues, including North Korea, Afghanistan, Iran and human rights, and sometimes declare that they do not want conflict, but rather welcome competition.

The Chinese side takes advantage of every opportunity to vow to take resolute measures against American interference and declare that the United States is using its military power and financial power to impose long-term tutelage and suppress other countries, and that it misuses the so-called national security concepts to obstruct normal trade transactions and incite some countries to attack China.

There is no room to talk here about a cold war between the two most powerful poles on earth, and the proposition is not logically consistent with any such description. Rather, competition seems more complex than the means of any cold war. Alliances with regional and international blocs on the world stage, and Beijing as the largest human, economic and commercial force on the face of the globe, and it has alliances with well-established and influential international powers; Both of them constitute a balance for the balance of the world, and therefore it is very difficult to disrupt it or allow it to be disrupted because of the risks that this entails for everyone, including the American and Chinese parties.