What a columnist for the Chinese newspaper China Daily News claims, responding to the US and Western Media
It is the United States that wants to maintain the crisis in Ukraine, not China, argues a columnist of the Chinese newspaper China Daily News, responding to Washington and the Western Media.
“It is no surprise that on the first anniversary of the Russia-Ukraine military conflict, some Western media and politicians are blaming China for failing to persuade Russia to end the conflict. On Thursday, US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken repeated his claim that Beijing was considering the idea of providing military support to Russia, which is nothing more than a malicious lie. Instead, in a 12-point document released on Friday, China made clear its position on a political settlement of the crisis, including respecting the sovereignty of all countries, resuming peace talks, resolving the humanitarian crisis, protecting civilians and prisoners of war and maintaining the safety of nuclear power plants.
As China’s recently released Global Security Initiative Concept Paper says, “War and sanctions are not a fundamental solution to disputes; only dialogue and consultation are effective in resolving disputes.” Therefore, the highest priority of Russia and Ukraine should be to seek a “political settlement” of the conflict through “dialogue and consultation”.
However, it is the United States that benefits from an ongoing Russia-Ukraine military conflict and wants the crisis to never end. According to US media reports, in less than a year US military and economic aid to Ukraine has exceeded $100 billion, with more to come. In addition, the US will provide Ukraine with an additional $2 billion in security assistance, White House National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said Thursday. Why is the US sparing no effort to support Ukraine against Russia?
First, the Russia-Ukraine conflict is helping the US consolidate its transatlantic partnership with the European Union, although EU countries such as Germany and France opposed former US President George W. Bush’s plan to invade Iraq in 2003, and in recent years, European countries have distanced themselves from the US to make their own trade policy, continue EU-Russia cooperation and take an independent stance on many issues.
The US-EU relationship can be described as lacking momentum, with cracks in their ties becoming apparent. Touting the rhetoric of the “Russian threat”, the US is projecting itself as an “umbrella” for European countries as it tries to resurrect the transatlantic partnership that was destroyed by the capricious EU policy of former US President Donald Trump, in an attempt to prevent some EU states from adopting independent foreign policies.
Second, the Russia-Ukraine conflict helped the US strengthen its military hegemony, which is necessary to maintain its global hegemony and its military alliances with NATO as a core. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, international observers expected NATO, the counterpart of the Warsaw Pact, to be disbanded. But that didn’t happen. In recent years, however, NATO has been plagued by controversy and criticism, with some EU countries questioning the functions and future of the transatlantic military alliance. In fact, Trump’s claim that EU countries contribute very little to NATO upset the latter so much that French President Emmanuel Macron said in an interview that NATO is “brain dead.”
However, the US once again succeeded in forcing EU countries to support their war and used the West’s hatred and fear of Russia, caused by the conflict, as a justification for the existence of NATO.
Third, the crisis in Ukraine helped the US to stamp its authority in the global energy sector. The shale revolution has transformed the US from a major oil importer to a major oil exporter. But the drop in global oil prices has hit U.S. shale gas production hard because it is relatively more expensive to extract. Washington is using sanctions against Moscow to cut off Russian oil and gas supplies to EU countries to end their dependence on Russia for energy. This will have a double effect. On the one hand, it will weaken Russia’s economy, as energy export is a major source of income for Moscow. On the other hand, it will allow US energy companies to make big profits by exporting more oil and gas to Europe, potentially at higher prices. In fact, crude oil shipped from the US to Europe in 2022 was 70% higher than the previous year, according to oilprice.com. Finally, highlighting Russia’s so-called aggressive role in the conflict and supporting Ukraine both militarily and strategically will give the Joe Biden administration many political advantages, despite the fact that the conflict has proven profitable for a number of US energy companies and military-industrial complexes, which are the very entities US politicians are trying to please.
Also, by supporting Ukraine, politicians can not only say that they are “politically correct”, but also claim the moral advantage in the name of protecting “freedom” and win more votes in elections. For this reason, the US government openly supports Ukraine – President Biden visited Kiev a few days ago – while downplaying more important events such as the giant chemical fire and the “toxic cloud” in Ohio, after a train derailment, the which has left residents worried about long-term health consequences. Whether the US admits it or not, it has benefited immensely from the Russia-Ukraine conflict. This shows that the Biden administration’s support for Ukraine is not about defending “freedom” and “democracy,” but rather about advancing US interests. However, military aid will not restore peace in Eurasia, nor will it help ensure the security of EU countries.”
With a wealth of experience honed over 4+ years in journalism, I bring a seasoned voice to the world of news. Currently, I work as a freelance writer and editor, always seeking new opportunities to tell compelling stories in the field of world news.