How should Washington respond to US Defense Secretary’s ‘regret’?: Global Times editorial

Relations between China and the USA. Illustration: Liu Rui/GT

In the latest response to the lack of a meeting between Chinese and US defense ministers on the sidelines of the 11th ASEAN Defense Ministers Meeting Plus (ADMM-Plus), Chinese Ministry of National Defense spokesman Wu Qian said the responsibility lies entirely with the US. Wu said the US cannot undermine China’s core interests by selling arms to the island of Taiwan on the one hand, pretending nothing happened and seeking to engage in military exchanges with China on the other. He called on the US to immediately correct its mistakes, sincerely respect China’s core interests and create favorable conditions for high-level military exchanges between the two sides. Earlier, US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin complained about China’s refusal to meet with its Defense Department representative, expressing “regret” and saying that “it was unfortunate” and “is a setback for the entire region.”

The US may know better than anyone why the Chinese side “refused to meet with their official.” Just last month, the US Department of Defense approved $2 billion in arms sales to the island of Taiwan. It is the largest arms sale to the island under the Joe Biden administration, including weapons such as advanced surface-to-air missile defense and radar systems. Many American media outlets note that the missile defense system “has been combat tested in Ukraine” – what this means requires no explanation. China has repeatedly made it clear to the US that the Taiwan issue is the first red line that should not be crossed in Sino-US relations. Despite this, the Pentagon has insisted on standing on the periphery of China’s red line and continuing to provoke China rather than creating the conditions for dialogue. Some people in the US even behave innocently: they talk about “dialogue”, but in reality they create “communication” in the sense that “I can hit you, but you can’t hit me back.” China will never tolerate such behavior.

Since the beginning of this year, the defense ministers of China and the United States have communicated face to face, while the Sino-US defense policy coordination talks, the Naval Consultative Agreement working group meeting and the theater commander talks have resumed one after another. If the US side is really trying to blame “China’s reluctance to communicate”, then how can such interaction be explained?

On the one hand, the US continues to undermine China’s interests by creating problems regarding the Taiwan issue and the South China Sea issue. On the other hand, he emphasizes so-called “crisis management,” presenting himself as “responsible.” He claims to be committed to dialogue with the Chinese side, but at the same time publicly shifts the blame to China and labels it as “unwilling” to communicate.” This performance turned out to be a failure, and the fact that almost no country in the region reacted to such an “embarrassing speech” by Austin really speaks for itself. This is not the first time such manipulations have occurred, and their purpose has long been clear to the international community.

During this meeting, China’s proposals, such as “building a stronger security community,” were widely welcomed by the participating countries, many of whom were eager to engage in dialogue with China. In recent days, China has held talks with defense officials from Malaysia, Thailand, India, Japan and other countries. Notably, after the much-anticipated meeting between the Chinese and Indian defense ministers, Indian Defense Minister Rajnath Singh called the talks on social media “extremely productive,” saying both sides “agreed to work together to create a roadmap to restore mutual trust and understanding.” ” During the 14th China-ASEAN Defense Ministers’ Informal Meeting, ASEAN countries also expressed their desire to further expand pragmatic security cooperation with China. A Global Times editorial last year noted that Chinese diplomacy is very busy and does not have time accept insincere people. The current situation is no different.

The critical importance of military dialogue in Sino-US relations is undeniable, and it is often referred to as the last “safety valve” between the two countries. The purpose of such dialogue is to promote cooperation, establish trust and eliminate misunderstandings. China has consistently advocated and adhered to this approach to resolve problems through dialogue based on mutual respect. Why, then, are so many countries able to successfully negotiate with China’s defense minister while the United States is not? Shouldn’t this cause serious reflection on the part of the United States? We hope that the US can tone down its “awkward actions” and focus more energy and effort on truly promoting regional peace and stability.

What actually constitutes a region’s prosperity, and what constitutes its failures? At the 11th ADMM-Plus, the Chinese side called for firmly entrenching ASEAN’s central role and supporting the improvement and modernization of existing cooperation frameworks, opposing “starting over” or creating “small circles”; we must firmly support the unity of the countries of the region and resist the introduction of bloc politics and camp confrontation in the region; We are firmly committed to solving problems through dialogue and are opposed to provoking disputes, using force, unifying or even bringing in external forces.

This reflects the common aspirations of the countries in the region. Countries in the region can clearly see who is sincerely promoting peace and who is promoting division and confrontation in the name of peace.