China in 2020 is completely different from China in 1949.For the United States, the so -called losing China is not a real problem at this stage.In China in 1949, the national government of pro -American and Chongmei was replaced by another sparse and American regime, and the United States' political, economic, and cultural influence on China was completely eliminated.
But this kind of problem does not exist in the current China.Therefore, Peng Nian, an associate researcher at the South China Sea Research Institute, said that the United States should ask who is losing China (see the United Zaobao's article on August 7), which is obviously biased.Does the United States really need to debate this issue?
Although the Chinese government is willing to expand its economy and education in the United States today, it does not truly trust the United States and maintains the defense of the United States.Under normal circumstances, the regime will not publicly incite anti -the United States and the beauty of the United States, but it will still be suspicious and anti -beauty in secret.Regardless of whether the United States wants to decompose between China and the United States, China's policy position on the United States will not fundamentally change, even if it is adjusted in specific practices.
Generally speaking, China and the United States are favorable to both sides, but China has benefited more from bilateral relations (especially economic relations) than the United States.It is not exactly that Peng Nian's so -called American commodity, investment, personnel, and cultural turbulence into China.For the Chinese Communist Party, the Chinese Communist Party is controllable for the output of Chinese goods, culture and other aspects of Chinese commodity, culture and other aspects, and there are tangible or intangible barriers.This basically does not affect the stability and continuation of its rule, and at the same time, it also limits the greater benefits of the United States from all aspects of China and the United States.
In addition, on the rise of China's economy, Sino -US trade (including huge trade surplus) play an important role; for China's rise in science and technology, China -US science and technology and educational exchanges can not be ignored.
On the other hand, the negligence of Sino -US trade will cause the interests of both parties to be negatively affected, but China's loss is likely to be greater.At present, the United States has not really found a way to promote the transformation of Sino -US trade relations so that the benefits of the United States can be close or even greater than China.
Under such circumstances, the strategy of the U.S. hardcore's thoughts, including decomposing Sino -US trade, thinking that this will cause major losses to China, and even help to prevent China ’s (economy) rise.If China and the United States are decoupled, the United States will also believe that China will lose greater losses and help prevent the latter from becoming a superpower of technology.As for the influence of financial decoupling of both parties, the United States will be more cautious.
Will China and the United States decoupling (involved in science and technology, trade, finance and other fields) and even comprehensive confrontation will it prevent China's rise?This possibility should not be completely eliminated.After all, China's politics, military, economy, society and other aspects have their deep -rooted problems, and the deterioration of the external environment will cause these internal problems to intensify or even cancer, and it is difficult to assert at present.
As for different forms of intervention and intervention in Taiwan, Hong Kong, Xinjiang and other issues (confrontation on the core interests of China), and objective judgment, some effects are not obvious, but some still have a certain impact.In particular, China has always lacked a superb strategy on the Taiwan issue (which is related to its employment and other aspects). In this case, strong intervention in the United States will cause trouble for Chinese officials, not as Peng Nian's claim, and will strengthen it.Its control ability.The voices of martial arts on the domestic Internet sometimes seem to increase, but lack a substantial influence on official policies.
It should also be pointed out that the United States' hostile policy to China does not necessarily cause a stronger and more hostile China (Peng Nian's point of view).There are various contradictions, disadvantages, and problems within China. Except for the lack of democracy and the rule of law, the phenomenon of social unfairness is almost ubiquitous, and even the educational and academic circles.Even the so -called authoritative academic journals have many relationships and emotional drafts, while most colleges and universities are affected by various relationships (even including money relationships).
As for the political, military, and business circles, unfair phenomena are also common.General unfairness is actually related to various corruption, including employment corruption.In China, unfair development (including but not limited to the disparity of the rich and the poor) is unsustainable development. At present, it has almost reached the limit and will definitely go to the opposite side.
Peng Nian mentioned the Korean War when he questioned the success of the United States' confrontation with China.The United States did not achieve the ultimate victory in the Korean War about 70 years ago.However, if the United States currently adopts a confrontation policy against China, there are actually many options, which is not limited to the hot war, but also includes the Cold War and others.It is attached to this that the United States has won in the Cold War of the United States and Soviet in the last century.
If the United States continues to adopt a comprehensive confrontation policy in China (the policy can be summarized as anti -rise in a certain sense), the external environment of China's rise will deteriorate to a considerable extent, which is obviously not conducive to its continuous promotion of the rise of great powers.After all, the rise of the great power requires a process (even a long historical period), and it is difficult to achieve overnight, especially for the rise of peace.
(The author is a doctorate in history, scholar travel to Canada)
