Not only in view of the recent much-noticed statements of NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, we can currently identify a forced front against the People’s Republic of china, which classifies as a serious threat to the political stability of the world.
“China does not share our values,” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg recently expressed.
“So what?” one might reply, or ask why the world’s most populated country should share “our values,” by which is meant “Western values,” which are already interpreted in highly divergent ways within NATO, for example in the view of Turkey versus Norway. Inside NATO, which French President Macron called “brain-dead” some time ago, no Confucian values are shared either, as is well known.
Stoltenberg’s statement, however, is in line with the verbal and strategic front against Beijing that NATO and its allies have been practicing and advocating for quite some time – and to an extent as if they were almost grateful to finally be able to define a concrete enemy image and close their own ranks.
Propagandistic flops against Beijing.
One example. Recently, an Australian “study” was spread in Western media, mostly uncritically, which claimed that China was carrying out genocide against the Uighur minority.
In China, political pressure in the Xinjiang region has led to a collapse in the birth rate among Uighurs and other minorities, according to the Australian Policy Institute (ASPI). Our analysis builds on previous work and provides compelling evidence that China’s policies in Xinjiang may constitute genocide, said the report by the think tank Australian Strategic Policy Institute.
If low, or even plummeting, birth rates were to constitute genocide, then most governments in the West – according to this steep thesis – would be committing genocide against their own populations, including the governments of South Korea, Japan and Taiwan, those three pro-Western Asian states that have the lowest birth rates in the world.
Furthermore, the birth rate in the entire People’s Republic has fallen dramatically, as Beijing recently announced, a fact that the Australian study in question omits in its milquetoast calculation.
What is a genocide?
A genocide is usually defined as “actions that question the (physical, ethnic, racial, and cultural) existence or the identity of an ethnic group.”
Certainly, the Uyghurs are in a difficult position, with Beijing’s policies against this ethnic minority, a Muslim Turkethnia, corresponding to the process of Sinicization that other minorities are also undergoing, such as Tibetans, Mongols, etc.
Interestingly, in the West, under Washington’s leadership, even at the beginning of the millennium, the crackdown on Uighur separatism was approved as a “war on terror,” while today it is formulated as an accusation.
A genocide, however – to elaborate on just this one example – is the extermination of the indigenous population on the island of Tasmania, which belongs to Australia and forms the state of the same name. The last Tasmanian died in 1876, this ethnic group was 100% wiped out.
“In 1847, the last 47 survivors were resettled on the mainland. The last pure Tasmanian Aborigine, Truganini, died in 1876. Within 73 years, British settlers and soldiers had wiped out an entire tribe.”
The authors of the Australian study could also have explored the lives of Aborigines in their own country, through demographic characteristics such as life expectancy, for example, to look at the issue in more detail.
India great – China bad
And why is the situation of the Kashmiris, in the largest democracy in the world india, not similarly critically examined, which is increasingly being positioned against China by the West?
When looking at India, it would then be noticed that there are also ethnic minorities, such as the inhabitants of the state of Sikkim, a Tibeto-Burmese ethnic group, which has by far the lowest birth rate in India, without the West constructing a genocide accusation from this fact.
This “double standard” has long been a leitmotif of Western strategy, but in the direction of China it seems to be sinking to an obscene level that is almost neocolonial.
Anyone who believes he must counter the rise of the People’ s Republic with these methods or prevent the development of a multipolar world order is already doomed.
The example of China reveals with saddening clarity the extent to which Europeans and Americans have lost their historical consciousness. The American political scientist Fukuyama’s misdiagnosis of the “end of history” had fallen on all too fertile ground. Thus the Western world meets China’s phenomenal rise to the rank of the second world superpower with a mixture of arrogance and resentment. The forced front against the People’s Republic, as it is currently being pursued, poses a serious threat to the political stability of the world.