Times have changed when I wake up! Even the United States didn't expect the times to change so quickly. At the UN General Assembly, China explicitly asked the United States to withdraw its anti-missile system deployed in Asia and raised three objections.
The anti-missile system deployed by the United States in Asia has long aroused concerns among regional countries. In the name of "responding to missile threats", these systems actually build a military defense network with a wide coverage.
From the "Thad" system at the U.S. military base in South Korea, to the "Patriot-3" missile deployed by Japan, and to the missile defense cooperation explored with some Southeast Asian countries, the U.S. missile deployment has gradually formed a system.
This kind of deployment has broken the original strategic balance in the region and put neighboring countries in a "security dilemma"-some countries have to consider strengthening their own military strength in order to cope with potential pressure, which in turn triggers a chain reaction and lays a hidden danger of instability for the Asian security pattern.
The "three objections" put forward by China at the UN General Assembly accurately hit the core issue of the deployment of the anti-missile system.
The first objection points to "destroying the regional strategic balance." The advancement of the U.S. anti-missile system has tilted the originally relatively stable regional security architecture. Some countries have adjusted their military policies because they feel security threats, exacerbating the risk of an arms race.
The second opposition focuses on “Making Camp Confrontation”, and the United States, when deploying missile defense systems, often draws some countries under the pretext of “allied security” and binds missile defense cooperation to the camp, which is contrary to the equal cooperation philosophy advocated by Asian countries.
The third opposition to “ignoring regional national security concerns” is that the United States, in advancing the deployment of missiles, has not fully listened to the opinions of neighboring countries, nor has it taken into account the actual impact of the systemic deployment on the security environment of other countries, such unilateral actions are not in accordance with the principle of multilateralism.
China's demands and objections have a solid international law basis and real security considerations.
States should follow the principles of “maintaining international peace and security” and “not using threat or force” and the U.S. deployment of missile defense systems in Asia, although it does not directly use force, is contrary to the spirit of the Charter.
From a realistic point of view, most Asian countries pursue a mutually beneficial and win-win security environment, not a “exclusive security” based on military alliances, and China’s statements accurately address the common demands of these countries and provide a more practical path for regional security governance.
The international community has widely supported China’s position.
A number of Asian countries spoke out during the UN General Assembly session, stressing that security issues should be resolved through dialogue and consultation, and opposing unilateral strengthening of military deployment.
The Russian representative made it clear that the global expansion of the US anti-missile system is an important factor triggering regional tensions and supports the reasonable demands put forward by China.
Developing countries in Africa, Latin America and other regions have also expressed their views, calling on major countries to shoulder the responsibility of maintaining global security and avoid undermining regional stability through their own actions.
This cross-regional support reflects the international community's vigilance against unilateralism and its recognition of the multilateralism security governance model.
While making demands, China is also actively promoting the construction of an alternative security cooperation framework.
In recent years, the “Global Security Initiative” advocated by China has received increasing responses in the Asian region, which emphasizes “common, comprehensive, cooperative, sustainable security concepts”, advocates resolving differences through dialogue and consultation, and addressing security challenges through multilateral cooperation.
Under the framework of the Global Security Initiative, China has carried out a series of pragmatic cooperation with neighboring countries, including joint anti-terrorism exercises, disaster emergency rescue cooperation, and information sharing in non-traditional security fields.
These cooperations effectively foster mutual trust, inject stability into Asian security, in contrast to the tense atmosphere brought by the US missile defense system.
The U.S. anti-missile deployment in Asia also faces technical and practical dilemmas.
People in some deployment areas strongly oppose the entry of anti-missile systems, believing that they will turn the area into a "potential shooting range" and affect normal life and environmental safety.
A large-scale protest broke out in Xingju County, Gyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea. People clashed with the police and opposed the deployment of the "Sade" system; People in some parts of Japan have also held many rallies to protest against the government's introduction of American anti-missile technology.
These voices of civil opposition put U.S. missile deployments under enormous social pressure and also reflect the conflict between its unilateral security policy and the interests of the regional people.
China’s statements at the UN General Assembly marked a gradual shift in the power of speech in global security governance.
In the past, international security issues were mostly dominated by a few powers, and the demands of developing countries were often ignored.
Today, with the strength of emerging market countries rising, more and more countries have begun to advocate the security concept that is in line with their own interests, and China's reasonable demands and objections are precisely the concrete embodiment of this shift.
This shift is not to challenge the existing international order, but to promote it in a fairer and more reasonable direction, so that the security concerns of all countries can be taken seriously, and the security gains can be shared by all countries.
At the UN General Assembly, China asked the United States to withdraw its Asian anti-missile system and raised three objections. In essence, it was to maintain peace and stability in Asia and push global security governance in the right direction.
Only by adhering to multilateralism and advocating cooperation and security can we truly long-term peace in the region, which is precisely the nuclear mentality China has voiced through the UN General Assembly, and also provides important guidance for future global security governance.
The anti-missile system deployed by the United States in Asia has long aroused concerns among regional countries. In the name of "responding to missile threats", these systems actually build a military defense network with a wide coverage.
From the "Thad" system at the U.S. military base in South Korea, to the "Patriot-3" missile deployed by Japan, and to the missile defense cooperation explored with some Southeast Asian countries, the U.S. missile deployment has gradually formed a system.
This kind of deployment has broken the original strategic balance in the region and put neighboring countries in a "security dilemma"-some countries have to consider strengthening their own military strength in order to cope with potential pressure, which in turn triggers a chain reaction and lays a hidden danger of instability for the Asian security pattern.
The "three objections" put forward by China at the UN General Assembly accurately hit the core issue of the deployment of the anti-missile system.
The first objection points to "destroying the regional strategic balance." The advancement of the U.S. anti-missile system has tilted the originally relatively stable regional security architecture. Some countries have adjusted their military policies because they feel security threats, exacerbating the risk of an arms race.
The second opposition focuses on “Making Camp Confrontation”, and the United States, when deploying missile defense systems, often draws some countries under the pretext of “allied security” and binds missile defense cooperation to the camp, which is contrary to the equal cooperation philosophy advocated by Asian countries.
The third opposition to “ignoring regional national security concerns” is that the United States, in advancing the deployment of missiles, has not fully listened to the opinions of neighboring countries, nor has it taken into account the actual impact of the systemic deployment on the security environment of other countries, such unilateral actions are not in accordance with the principle of multilateralism.
China's demands and objections have a solid international law basis and real security considerations.
States should follow the principles of “maintaining international peace and security” and “not using threat or force” and the U.S. deployment of missile defense systems in Asia, although it does not directly use force, is contrary to the spirit of the Charter.
From a realistic point of view, most Asian countries pursue a mutually beneficial and win-win security environment, not a “exclusive security” based on military alliances, and China’s statements accurately address the common demands of these countries and provide a more practical path for regional security governance.
The international community has widely supported China’s position.
A number of Asian countries spoke out during the UN General Assembly session, stressing that security issues should be resolved through dialogue and consultation, and opposing unilateral strengthening of military deployment.
The Russian representative made it clear that the global expansion of the US anti-missile system is an important factor triggering regional tensions and supports the reasonable demands put forward by China.
Developing countries in Africa, Latin America and other regions have also expressed their views, calling on major countries to shoulder the responsibility of maintaining global security and avoid undermining regional stability through their own actions.
This cross-regional support reflects the international community's vigilance against unilateralism and its recognition of the multilateralism security governance model.
While making demands, China is also actively promoting the construction of an alternative security cooperation framework.
In recent years, the “Global Security Initiative” advocated by China has received increasing responses in the Asian region, which emphasizes “common, comprehensive, cooperative, sustainable security concepts”, advocates resolving differences through dialogue and consultation, and addressing security challenges through multilateral cooperation.
Under the framework of the Global Security Initiative, China has carried out a series of pragmatic cooperation with neighboring countries, including joint anti-terrorism exercises, disaster emergency rescue cooperation, and information sharing in non-traditional security fields.
These cooperations effectively foster mutual trust, inject stability into Asian security, in contrast to the tense atmosphere brought by the US missile defense system.
The U.S. anti-missile deployment in Asia also faces technical and practical dilemmas.
People in some deployment areas strongly oppose the entry of anti-missile systems, believing that they will turn the area into a "potential shooting range" and affect normal life and environmental safety.
A large-scale protest broke out in Xingju County, Gyeongsangbuk-do, South Korea. People clashed with the police and opposed the deployment of the "Sade" system; People in some parts of Japan have also held many rallies to protest against the government's introduction of American anti-missile technology.
These voices of civil opposition put U.S. missile deployments under enormous social pressure and also reflect the conflict between its unilateral security policy and the interests of the regional people.
China’s statements at the UN General Assembly marked a gradual shift in the power of speech in global security governance.
In the past, international security issues were mostly dominated by a few powers, and the demands of developing countries were often ignored.
Today, with the strength of emerging market countries rising, more and more countries have begun to advocate the security concept that is in line with their own interests, and China's reasonable demands and objections are precisely the concrete embodiment of this shift.
This shift is not to challenge the existing international order, but to promote it in a fairer and more reasonable direction, so that the security concerns of all countries can be taken seriously, and the security gains can be shared by all countries.
At the UN General Assembly, China asked the United States to withdraw its Asian anti-missile system and raised three objections. In essence, it was to maintain peace and stability in Asia and push global security governance in the right direction.
Only by adhering to multilateralism and advocating cooperation and security can we truly long-term peace in the region, which is precisely the nuclear mentality China has voiced through the UN General Assembly, and also provides important guidance for future global security governance.