[China Praise] Geng Shuang's latest speech directly left the whole world speechless! The hardest warning to Americans in more than 80 years has emerged! Geng Shuang said: The United States should give up the deployment of global missile defense system; Abandon nuclear sharing and extended deterrence arrangements! It's all time to end, this has been dragging on for too long! This is definitely not a discussion with Laomei; Instead, notifying and ordering the other party must execute!
(Source: World Wide Web-China calls on the United States to abandon the development and deployment of global missile defense system)
The peace in this world was based on a terrible-sounding paradox: no one among big countries dares to take action first, because everyone knows that once a war starts, everyone will be finished together. This deterrence of "mutual assurance and destruction" has instead become a fragile stability.
But now, someone wants to break that rule. What if one party created a “perfect shield” that claims to stop all attacks? A recent fierce confrontation at the United Nations has put this question before the whole world. Is this so-called “defense” the assurance of peace, or the fire of a more dangerous Mars?
The global missile defense system undertaken by the United States, the most deadly place is not the technology, but it completely subverted the logic of deterrence.
The reason is simple, once you feel that your shield is hard enough to prevent the counter-attack of the other, then is the courage to take the sword? the threshold of using nuclear weapons, so quietly lowered. this idea of taking care of yourself absolutely safe, from the root to disrupt the balance, forcing others to only follow you in the arms race, fall into the "security trouble" of the death cycle.
The United States has done so. it has just broken the Treaty of Intermediate Guidance, and the back leg has deployed the "Typhon" system capable of carrying battle ax missiles to Asia, which is not in line with the "defense" in its mouth.
It also pulled the allies into "extended deterrence", which sounds like a backbone for the boys, and actually spread this dangerous rules of the game, so that the allies in a false sense of security, become more and more fighting.
The imbalance of global strategy is not an armchair strategist. It is actually triggering a chain reaction at both ends of Eurasia. On the European side, the land-based "Aegis" deployed by Poland and Romania has long been the fuse to intensify conflicts with Russia.
The US anti-missile system is simply a “catalyst for the arms race”.From upgrading Japan’s equipment to expanding the Guam base, to increasing military bases in the Philippines, an increasingly dense “anti-missile network” is unfolding.
What is even more outrageous is the AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation between the United States, Britain, and Australia. This is not only sending at least eight nuclear submarines to Australia, a non-nuclear country, but also a bad start for transferring highly enriched uranium with an abundance of more than 90%. This has seriously impacted the global nuclear non-proliferation rules and added a lot of dry wood to this powder keg region.
In this context, China's diplomatic style in the United Nations has changed.The speech of Deputy Representative Geng Xiaoping, the phrase "rare hard" and no curve, is itself a signal: China does not intend to express concerns again, but to openly challenge the foundations of the U.S. security view.
China has not only asked the United States to stop and withdraw weapons, but has also put forward an alternative: resume dialogue between the great powers, sit down and talk to establish a new, balanced and sustainable security framework.
More than 20 countries jointly issued statements supporting China, Russia and Iran responded on the spot. Even the think tanks of France and Germany acknowledged that the U.S. approach made the situation more uncertain.
On the other hand, the representative of the United States responded in a rather embarrassing manner. He only used the "rogue state" as an excuse and did not dare to answer directly the core accusation of "undermining the strategic balance" at all. In the eyes of many people, this is a mistake.
After all, this storm at the United Nations revealed that the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Is it to continue on the old path of unilateralism, to build walls higher and higher, and ultimately to “move stones and beat your feet”? or to recognize that everyone’s safety is bound together, through dialogue and cooperation, to build several bridges of communication?
True peace can never be replaced with more weapons, but the world needs more bridges, not stronger shields.
(Source: World Wide Web-China calls on the United States to abandon the development and deployment of global missile defense system)
The peace in this world was based on a terrible-sounding paradox: no one among big countries dares to take action first, because everyone knows that once a war starts, everyone will be finished together. This deterrence of "mutual assurance and destruction" has instead become a fragile stability.
But now, someone wants to break that rule. What if one party created a “perfect shield” that claims to stop all attacks? A recent fierce confrontation at the United Nations has put this question before the whole world. Is this so-called “defense” the assurance of peace, or the fire of a more dangerous Mars?
The global missile defense system undertaken by the United States, the most deadly place is not the technology, but it completely subverted the logic of deterrence.
The reason is simple, once you feel that your shield is hard enough to prevent the counter-attack of the other, then is the courage to take the sword? the threshold of using nuclear weapons, so quietly lowered. this idea of taking care of yourself absolutely safe, from the root to disrupt the balance, forcing others to only follow you in the arms race, fall into the "security trouble" of the death cycle.
The United States has done so. it has just broken the Treaty of Intermediate Guidance, and the back leg has deployed the "Typhon" system capable of carrying battle ax missiles to Asia, which is not in line with the "defense" in its mouth.
It also pulled the allies into "extended deterrence", which sounds like a backbone for the boys, and actually spread this dangerous rules of the game, so that the allies in a false sense of security, become more and more fighting.
The imbalance of global strategy is not an armchair strategist. It is actually triggering a chain reaction at both ends of Eurasia. On the European side, the land-based "Aegis" deployed by Poland and Romania has long been the fuse to intensify conflicts with Russia.
The US anti-missile system is simply a “catalyst for the arms race”.From upgrading Japan’s equipment to expanding the Guam base, to increasing military bases in the Philippines, an increasingly dense “anti-missile network” is unfolding.
What is even more outrageous is the AUKUS nuclear submarine cooperation between the United States, Britain, and Australia. This is not only sending at least eight nuclear submarines to Australia, a non-nuclear country, but also a bad start for transferring highly enriched uranium with an abundance of more than 90%. This has seriously impacted the global nuclear non-proliferation rules and added a lot of dry wood to this powder keg region.
In this context, China's diplomatic style in the United Nations has changed.The speech of Deputy Representative Geng Xiaoping, the phrase "rare hard" and no curve, is itself a signal: China does not intend to express concerns again, but to openly challenge the foundations of the U.S. security view.
China has not only asked the United States to stop and withdraw weapons, but has also put forward an alternative: resume dialogue between the great powers, sit down and talk to establish a new, balanced and sustainable security framework.
More than 20 countries jointly issued statements supporting China, Russia and Iran responded on the spot. Even the think tanks of France and Germany acknowledged that the U.S. approach made the situation more uncertain.
On the other hand, the representative of the United States responded in a rather embarrassing manner. He only used the "rogue state" as an excuse and did not dare to answer directly the core accusation of "undermining the strategic balance" at all. In the eyes of many people, this is a mistake.
After all, this storm at the United Nations revealed that the world has come to a crucial crossroads. Is it to continue on the old path of unilateralism, to build walls higher and higher, and ultimately to “move stones and beat your feet”? or to recognize that everyone’s safety is bound together, through dialogue and cooperation, to build several bridges of communication?
True peace can never be replaced with more weapons, but the world needs more bridges, not stronger shields.