In the United States, the formulation of China’s policy involves the cooperation of academic circles, various committees of the Congress, and various departments of government agencies, but the publication of China-related speech is more arbitrary. Some people are mild, some are tough, some people have a clear logic about rigor, and there is no basis for the population to be unfounded. The radicals are also divided into pro-China’s so-called “panda-hugger” and anti-China so-called “slayer dragon”. Dragon-slayer. In these remarks, current senior government officials and members of Congress are receiving more attention because of their special status.
As far as the current US government is concerned, the longest statement in the Congress is undoubtedly the two Republican senators of Ted Cruz and Marco Rubio; and no one in the government can appear as Secretary of State Pompeo. On the right side of (Mike Pompeo), even the high-profile Vice-President of the China-related speech, Mike Pence, could not compare with it.
US Secretary of State approves the CCP
On October 30th, Pompeo gave a speech at the Hudson Institute in New York. The whole speech was basically about China.
Pompeo said, “Today, with the leadership of President Trump, we have finally begun to realize the true hostility of the (Chinese) Communist Party to the United States and our values.” He continued to say, “We have a long and precious friendship with the Chinese people, and it is still true today.” But China and the regime that rules China are “not in the same breath.” “The Communist Party of China is a Marxist-Leninist party. “The struggle and global hegemony are the goals.” “The Chinese Communist Party is providing a completely different mode of governance for Chinese nationals and the world. Lenin-style parties rule everything. Everyone must listen to the will of the Communist elite. This is not the future I want, but also It is not the future that the Chinese people who love freedom want.” The fundamental differences in our (China-US) system can no longer be ignored. The impact of these institutional differences on US national security should not be ignored.”
For the subjective remarks of Pompeo against China, the official response of China is imaginable.
On November 1st, People’s Daily published the article “Bells”, “Away from Civilization and Exposure Hypocrisy”, and painfully approved Pompeo “to attack the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese government with its usual deception and dirty water tricks.” “Challenging the United States and the world”, “outright rumors, filth and smearing, fully exposed its deep-rooted political prejudice and darkness”, “paranoidly engaged in ideological opposition, can not tolerate China’s choice of development path in line with national conditions”, “speaking He expressed the hope that China will prosper and progress, saying that the United States does not seek to confront China, but it always makes unfounded accusations against China’s internal affairs. It has no respect for other countries and shows its hypocritical nature away from civilization.” The article also called for “at the critical stage of China-US relations, any provocations and actions are wrong or even dangerous. Mutual respect, seeking common ground while reserving differences is the proper way for China and the United States to get along.”
At the regular press conference of the Chinese Foreign Ministry on November 1, the spokesperson Yu Shuang gave a similar reply when answering the reporter’s question in this speech against Pompeo.
Pompeo’s subtle strategic shift
It should be said that from claiming that the CCP has “truly hostile” to the values of the United States and the United States, to discrediting the CCP’s series of “struggle” for the great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, and then accusing the CCP of seeking “global hegemony”, and even It is worthy of criticism that the “China-US institutional differences will have an impact on the US national security.” These statements by Secretary Pompeo are worthy of criticism. To a large extent, it also reflects the true thinking of some Americans: hostility to the CCP, misunderstanding of the “struggle” that the CCP has said, obstinacy to continue the global hegemony of the United States, and no tolerance for different systems. These prejudices and provocations are also important reasons for the increasingly slippery and uncontrollable dangers between China and the United States.
However, compared to his previous unfounded accusations against China in the South China Sea situation and the popularization of 5G communication equipment, Pompeo’s speech on October 30 was relatively “smart”—an attempt to distinguish the Chinese people and The CCP’s statement made people hear some of the voices of the Voice of America. This is consistent with the US government’s propaganda of its position in China over the past few decades. Despite the fact that the US government still says that it is a set, the current review and targeting of Chinese students, Chinese scholars, and even Chinese-American researchers are the most typical examples.
However, for the time being, whether or not it is sincere or not, this kind of “Party and State” propaganda is undoubtedly effective for the audience of most countries in the world. Further, it is effective to launch a public opinion offensive against the Chinese Communist Party for this reason, even for some Chinese nationals.
Coincidentally, when Chinese Ambassador to the United States Cui Tiankai attended the Symposium on the 40th Anniversary of US-China Relations organized by George Bush’s US-China Relations Foundation on October 28, he also talked about the issue of “party-state relations.”
Ambassador Cui said, “The Chinese Communist Party, the ruling party of China, has always represented and firmly safeguarded the interests of the Chinese people in the struggle of the past 100 years. It has made tremendous sacrifices for the independence and liberation of the Chinese nation, and has created world-renowned achievements. The Chinese people’s deep trust and heartfelt support. Denying all this is denying the centuries of Chinese history. The attempt to split the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese people is a provocation against the entire Chinese people. On the one hand, it claims to hope to see China’s success, on the other hand, it tries to discredit. It is hypocritical and unreasonable to overthrow the core force that leads the Chinese people to success.”
Perhaps it is Cui Tiankai’s statement that inspired Pompeo, who gave a speech two days later.
Tell the story in a way that the audience can accept
For many Chinese nationals, as well as Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan and even the majority of the international community, the issue of “a distinction between the party and the state” requires the Chinese authorities to give their arguments. After all, regardless of the party and the country, this is a symbol of ignorance and backwardness in the eyes of many modern countries.
In fact, the article on November 1 of the People’s Daily has given a certain degree of acceptance. The article mentioned, “China is developing well, how is China governed, nearly 1.4 billion Chinese people have the most say, and the world’s righteous people have their own opinions. In the 70 years since the founding of New China, the Chinese people have led the Communist Party of China. Next, we have embarked on a development path suited to China’s national conditions and achieved great achievements that have attracted worldwide attention. China has become the world’s second largest economy, with more than 800 million Chinese people achieving poverty alleviation, the world’s largest middle-income group, and economic growth. It is at the forefront of the world’s major economies, and its contribution to world economic growth has ranked first in the world for many years… The irrefutable facts fully prove that this is a correct path in line with China’s national conditions and a development for the world. A road with profound inspiration and reference.”
This is all right. The 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic, about a month ago, made even the most liberal and consistently criticized CCP intellectuals proudly proud of China’s achievements in the past 70 years, and this is related to the governance and road choice of the Chinese Communist Party. Have a close relationship. From this point of view, this century-old party, which has been in power for 70 years and has outstanding academic performance, absolutely has the support of the people. From the perspective of realism, today’s CCP and China are indeed inseparable.
The problem is that this set of words can be understood for the mainland people who have experienced the development of the country. But when it comes to Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan and overseas Chinese who do not recognize the Chinese Communist Party, there will be resistance; public opinion is for foreigners to listen to? This is a place where China’s foreign propaganda is not enough.
Just as the mainland of China and Hong Kong have the same understanding of the “Hong Kong social movement” since this summer, the different audiences have different values, different understanding habits and different aesthetics. In the face of these differences, they need one. For example, Confucius teaches different stories according to his teaching.
Over the past few decades, the CCP has been committed to transforming the ignorant national culture, committed to the four modernizations of national industrial agriculture, national defense, science and technology, committed to economic construction, and is committed to seeking an independent diplomatic path… these are great struggles. However, the “struggle” of “how to tell the Chinese story” is not a priority, but now it is time to put it on the agenda.
Propaganda work is necessary. In the past few years, we have indeed seen China’s significant progress in this regard. Whether it is the tone of the official media in the face of the nationals, the creation of the main theme, or China’s achievements in the fields of film, animation, variety shows, etc., this is conducive to “speaking the Chinese story.” However, for Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan overseas Chinese (and domestic dissidents) and international audiences, it may be necessary to hear that the official media is not so tit-for-tat, but to tell the story in a Western way. Or maybe it is necessary to hear some unofficial, more neutral voices to avoid the “mouthpiece” questioning?
In short, how to find supporting theories for China’s political reality and the CCP’s experience in governing the country, supplemented by supporting propaganda, and ultimately become an important part of China’s soft cultural strength, the “struggle” in these areas is still far from repairing. Far away.
Therefore, we should criticize Pompeo’s remarks, but it is also necessary to urge myself to tell the Chinese story.