The following is an analysis by a user on the Chinese social media platform WeChat that focused on the U.S.'s offshore balancing strategy in Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia and its implications for China. According to the analysis, it is difficult for the U.S. to balance the CCP offshore in the East Asia region, while the CCP will dominate East Asia in the future, and it is quite likely that the U.S. and China will divide their respective spheres of influence.
The analysis discusses three options for the U.S. to succeed at this offshore balancing with China: allowing the ocean to create a safe distance; possessing power to create a credible threat; and making sure that there are smaller neighboring countries ready to cooperate with the U.S. in this venture. The third, it says, is not possible for the U.S. vis-à-vis China. It argues that U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger had the best solution for the U.S.: a retreat, returning home to rebuild for a decade or two, and, during its absence from the region, it can observe the resulting changes in the Eurasian continent and then resume its offshore balancing with East Asia.
Below is the analysis, titled "International Geopolitics; U.S. Uses Offshore Balancing To Manipulate The World:"
'Offshore Balance' — 'Eurasia Is The Island Of The World,' 'China Is… A Big Chess Player In The International Chess Game'
"Eurasia is the island of the world. It is undoubtedly the center of the world. The United States is isolated overseas. If countries of the Eurasian continent unite and follow the road of land rights development, the United States will be marginalized. Therefore, the United States has always been engaged in a policy of checks and balances in Eurasia.
"Britain was lonely overseas in the recent past. If there were a strong power in Europe, Britain would bound to be marginalized. Thus, Britain continues to balance Europe offshore. If France were strong, Britain would support Germany to overwhelm France. If Germany were strong, Britain would pull Russia and France over Germany and ensure that France, Germany and Russia would not have dominating power. Britain does not allow them to dominate as national powers, and the Brits have a good set of checks and balances.
"Eurasia is an enhanced version of the European continent, and the United States is an enhanced version of Britain with checks and balances. How the United Kingdom played the offshore balancing game with Europe back then is the same as how the United States exercises checks and balances against Eurasia now.
"There are several prerequisites for playing the offshore balancing game:
"First, the offshore balancing country is separated from the target continent by ocean. It does not fear direct strikes from the target continent across the ocean.
"Second, the offshore balancing country is a powerful country. If it has no power, it cannot intimidate, coerce, or threaten other countries.
"Third, there are several countries with similar strengths and divergent interests in the target continent. The third prerequisite is the most important.
"In a case where the dominant power country in the target continent has only a few small countries around it that cannot be suppressed, then the offshore balancing country must go across the ocean itself to suppress the target country.
"Originally, the ocean was used as a strategic advantage of the offshore balancing country over the target continent. It makes the offshore balancing country beyond the reach of the target continent. However, once the target continent has a single dominant country, the ocean becomes a disadvantage for the balancing country. It puts the offshore balancing country beyond the reach of the target country. It increases the cost of the offshore balancing country to get involved itself.
"Dealing with this type of situation, Britain and the United States, as offshore balancing countries, often choose to increase support and alliances with small countries around the target country. Giving the small countries a dollar to suppress the dominant country is better than spending ten dollars to suppress it by themselves.
This is the player's use of chess pieces.
"As I said in my other articles, China is by all standards a big chess player in the international chess game. What China did to India is a good example. Why bother dealing with India ourselves? The effect of giving our Pakistan buddy a dollar to deal with India is better than spending ten dollars on our own.
Britain and the United States are more proficient in playing this game than we are. After World War I, because of the rise of the Soviet Union, the United States invested heavily in the reconstruction of Germany in ruins. Behind Hitler's economic miracle was a steady stream of Wall Street capital which allowed Germany to rise quickly to block the Soviet Red Army. Later, the game went awry: Hitler, who broke free of the Wall Street chains, killed the Jews mercilessly. The United States has three main directions in its checks and balances on Eurasia: Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia.
Europe — 'The Map Of Europe Is Like A Kneeling Man, With Britain Pressing The Back Of Europe, And Russia Raping It From Behind'
"For European checks and balances, the Yankees have two directions: Britain and Russia.
"The U.S. continues to let the United Kingdom be the cockroach of Europe and to uphold NATO's suppression of Russia. Russia is a big energy producing country. France and Germany are big energy-consuming countries. The two sides have a basis for cooperation. The United States does not want to see them get together, and the small Eastern European countries in the buffer zone between Western Europe and Russia are also afraid of Russia's expansion ambitions. It is difficult for France and Germany to relax with Russia's small partners in Eastern Europe.
"The European Union, with France and Germany at its core, will face two major pressures in the West and the East. It will be successfully suppressed by the offshore balancing of the United States. As I said: The map of Europe is like a kneeling man, with Britain pressing the back of Europe, and Russia raping it from behind.
"The United States has ideological origins in the European Union. Germany is not yet a completely independent country in certain ways. The United States has strong ideological penetration into Germany, probably second only to Japan. France alone cannot support the European Union.
"Germany has taken the opportunity to pursue a dual-core drive for the EU with France. Auntie Merkel even suggested that since the EU has been established, Germany and France should be diplomatically unanimous. France should pull Germany into permanent membership of the UN. Germany and France would then share the power of permanent members in the name of the EU. But France is not a fool. Auntie Merkel's proposal was rejected by France without hesitation. The French-German dual-core drive for the EU is difficult to realize.
"The EU has the troubles of Britain and Russia in the west and east. A two-line combat strategy is taboo. France and Germany are not united. The internal differences are great. The realization of the dual-core drive is uncertain. There are issues with the five European PIIGS countries. Thus the challenge to the American hegemon is very limited. With the United States' strategic layout, the European Union is unable to threaten the hegemony of the United States.
The Middle East — 'China Worked With Russia To Create An Arc Of Shia To Oppose The United States'
"Next is the Middle East. The strategic requirement of the United States in the Middle East is to ensure that there will be no powerful countries in the Islamic world. This way, the United States can check and balance the Middle East, ensure its control over the Middle East, and consolidate the petro-dollar hegemony.
"When Iraq is strong, the United States fights Iraq. If any major Islamic country in the Middle East is strong, the United States will push it down and prevent the Islamic world from being unified. A divided Islamic world is the best Middle East in the eyes of the United States.
"Other countries, such as France, Germany, Russia, and China, also have influence on the Middle East, but they are not as influential as the United States. It is also because the United States has two important offshore balancing pieces in the Middle East. One is a small steel cannon from the Middle East, commonly known as the godfather of the United States, Israel.
"American Jews hijack American national interests. For example: Donald Trump's son-in-law Kushner is a Jew, and Trump's daughter Ivanka converted to Judaism. Kushner and Ivanka can convince and manipulate Trump to be nice to the Jews.
"Another is Saudi Arabia, a big oil buffoon. The United States is against dictatorship, but Saudi Arabia has a true dictatorship system. The relationship between Saudi Arabia and the U.S. is good because the relationship between Saudi Arabia and Iraq and Iran is not good. Saudi has a sense of crisis for defending a large amount of wealth. Saudi Arabia is a watchdog in the Middle East for the United States. In exchange, U.S. guarantees the wealth of the Saudi royal family will be passed on forever.
"The United States, through Israel and Saudi Arabia, plus its influence on other Sunni Middle Eastern countries, basically controls the Middle East. The petrodollars are stable and secure. The United States basically supports Sunnis in the Middle East. Since entering the Middle East, China supports Shiites tit-for-tat. China worked with Russia to create an arc of Shia to oppose the United States. It is not that the United States doesn't understand the world. The world is changing fast. The relationship between Israel and the United States is as strong as ever. After Pompeo went to Israel, Israel immediately screamed at China. Chinese should not expect this small steel cannon to be sincere with China.
"Saudi Arabia is a bit weird. It is not so loyal to the United States nowadays. Originally, Saudi Arabia's Aramco with trillion-dollar market value was designated to be listed in the United States, but eventually, it was listed in Saudi Arabia.
"It seems that Saudi Arabia has changed its position in the current situation of the hundred years' unprecedented Sino-U.S. war. Its mind is a little more flexible. It does not want to put all its eggs in the United States' basket. Although China supports Shiites in the Middle East, China's national interests transcend ideology. Our Belt and Road needs the UAE and Saudi Arabia, both Sunnis. We must fight for what we can get. The Middle East is not Europe, where the United States can get what they want easily. The United States cannot achieve offshore balancing in the Middle East, because the third prerequisite is unfulfilled:
"Third, there are several countries with similar strengths and divergent interests in the target continent.
"In the Middle East, Iraq and Iran have always had the strongest national power. Iran is one of the few countries in the Middle East with a relatively complete industrial system. Its comprehensive national power has always surpassed the countries in the Middle East. Under the leadership of Saddam, Iraq was on the rise to become a leader in the region. Once either of these two countries rises up again, it will have the ability to gain dominance in the region, unify the Middle East and shake the U.S. oil hegemony. Specifically, the U.S. wants to practice offshore balancing against Iran and Iraq.
"Israel, one of the United States' pawns and thugs in the Middle East, is a very small country. The small steel cannon in the Middle East is very capable of fighting. It always had feuds with the Islamic world, and they dare to fight desperately. But there is only so much they can do. If it weren't for the American Daddy's amulet of nuclear weapons, Israel would have long been plowed over by Iraq and Iran with missiles. One cannot expect that Israel alone can counterbalance Iran and Iraq.
"Saudi Arabia is just a pawn for the U.S. in the Middle East. It can't even be a part time fighter. Saudi Arabia is so useless at fighting. I have to say objectively that the Saudi army may not even win a fight with the Chinese city militia. I am not kidding, really.
"The U.S.' biggest move to check and balance the EU was to hit the euro after the establishment of the EU. Kosovo was bombed by NATO for several months. The U.S. did not have to get involved. Instead, the U.S.' European checks and balances strategy was very successful. The U.S. did not have to get into the game in person to achieve its strategic goals. But in the end, the U.S. was forced to get involved and a protracted war in Iraq was waged because the most important condition for offshore balancing was not established in the Middle East.
"Third, there are several countries with similar strengths and divergent interests in the target continent.
"Israel's small steel cannon alone cannot balance Iran and Iraq. Saudi Arabia is a big buffoon with a fifth-rate army. Sunni Muslim countries are naturally hostile to Israel. They are very dissatisfied with the U.S.' bias towards Israel. Their stance regarding the Middle East strategy also differs from the U.S. China, Russia, France and Germany also secretly set traps for the United States in the Middle East. It is partially due to this that the U.S. is unable to achieve strategic synergy with Iran and Iraq. The U.S. is evidently not able to achieve offshore balancing in the Middle East as easily as in Europe.
"As a result, offshore balancing in the Middle East is not going well. The United States ended up fighting in the Iraq war to take charge in the Middle East. The United States invests a lot of time, energy, and efforts in the Middle East. Now let's take a close look at the final, most relevant area to China: East Asia.
East Asia — 'The U.S. Has Always Targeted China For Offshore Balancing'
"The United States and China are separated by the Pacific Ocean. The U.S. has always targeted China for offshore balancing. The most important U.S. military power station is Hawaii, located in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Since it faces China just as much as the U.S., this greatly reduces the United States' deterrence against China.
"The United States suffered devastating losses when it fought against Japan in World War II. The aftermath is that the U.S. learned a valuable lesson, leading it to appeal in the Yalta system to control the West Pacific. The Western Pacific Framework has three sections: North, Middle, and South. To the north, the United States' garrison in South Korea and Japan maintain deterrence in Northeast Asia.
In the middle section, the U.S. protects and arms Taiwan. In General MacArthur's words, 'Taiwan is the United States' unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Western Pacific.'
"To the south, the U.S. troops stationed in the Philippines and the Five Eyes Alliance members, Australia and New Zealand, maintain deterrence. The North, Central, and South linking together is referred to as the 'first island chain' that strangles China's national movement by the United States.
"When the People's Republic of China was first established, this combination of powerful framework was difficult for China to fight against without a naval capacity. China barely had passive defense power. There was no way China could break the chain.
"At that time, China was resisting U.S. aggression and aided North Korea (Korean War). The U.S. was in Japan and South Korea acting as frontline camp for arms factories and logistic stations. On opposing sides, the U.S. and South Korea had to fight against China and North Korea. It encouraged Taiwan to counterattack mainland China in the middle. The conflict also meddled in affairs in Southeast Asia. The U.S. was causing trouble for China in the north, middle, and south Western Pacific.
"As Chairman Mao said, 'The enemy may perform a three-way breakthrough!' His warning proved to be correct. Interestingly, the U.S. breakthrough in the South relied on the defeated Kuomintang troops that fled into Southeast Asia from mainland China. The Yankees gave them money and weapons to attack the Chinese border as long as they cooperated with the U.S. during the Korean War to fight us from behind.
"This group of defeated Kuomintang troops is so pathetic. They took money and weapons. They came to the border to fight a battle, but Chairman Mao had already ordered the border troops to be ready for the fight. The KMT troop were shocked: 'Darn it. When did the Communist bandits become so powerful? We could not beat them when they were weak with only millet and rifles. There is no way we can win now!'
"The defeated KMT troops refused to die for the United States. They turned around and went to the deep mountains and old forests in Southeast Asia. They forcibly occupied some mountain areas. They planted poppies and started a drug business. The drugs they produced had good purity and high quality. Some drugs were even sold overseas to the U.S. What a mess. This is a major part of the background of the Golden Triangle. The United States has a north, middle, and south three-way suppression offshore balancing system regarding China. This strategy used to be very effective but not anymore. Because China has developed so fast, its military power, especially its navy, has developed rapidly. China has a vast land area and has been an unshakable leading power in East Asia for thousands of years.
"In the early 21st century, Japan and South Korea were able to offshore balance the Chinese dragon in military and economic terms. Brzezinski famously said: 'The Japan-U.S. alliance may be the most important alliance for the United States.' Once the Chinese dragon takes off, Japan and South Korea are not enough to offshore balance China.
"In addition, Japan and South Korea are alienated from the United States. Israel has been feuding with Iran and Iraq for centuries. National interests dictate fundamental requirements from the U.S. They are willing to work hard for the United States. South Korea and Japan, held by the U.S. on a dog leash, have not even achieved national normalization. Japan and South Korea's fundamental interest demands are the pursuit of maximizing national interests. When the U.S. succeeds in suppressing China, Japan and South Korea will not be able to unbind themselves. On the contrary, only after China breaks through the Western Pacific framework will Japan and South Korea be able to normalize. In terms of attitude towards the U.S., Japan and South Korea and China have more areas of consensus than differences in interests. Japan and South Korea will not be another Israel and fight for the U.S.
"In my opinion, even when North Korea launches a firecracker, Japan and South Korea will be scared, trembling and watching from the sidelines. I do not know if they will really tremble, however Japan and South Korea will act like they are trembling.
"In Northeast Asia, Japan and South Korea, which the United States believes it can count on for support, are not capable or really reliable. In South Asia, the U.S. can count on Philippines and Australia. Except that Australia is all talk and no action. It's so far from China's waters. The Philippines is prone to be provoked by China in the South China Sea. If even Japan and South Korea are not enough to challenge China, what can the Philippines do?
"In 2016, the U.S. encouraged and supported the Philippines against China. The U.S. promised to support the Philippines with military force, when in reality, American aircraft carriers ran far away from the Philippines. This made the Philippines recognize the true nature of American paper tiger. Now it is even more impossible for the Philippines to fight for the United States.
"In the Southern Pacific, the US wanted to get support from Vietnam. Vietnam, a large Southeast Asian country, does carry a bit of weight. However, Vietnam was beaten by China in past wars and has a psychological weakness regarding China. It dares not to cooperate with the United States to target China. Back then, we beat the Vietnamese to starvation. So many men died in the war. There was a surplus of women.
"They put forward the crazy slogan 'Sacrifice a generation of women, develop Vietnam's economy.' Vietnam's tourism and erotic industry developed. Well, you know what that means. Now Vietnam is dedicated to economic development. Taking advantage of the Sino-U.S. trade war, it has taken on many Chinese companies. The United States let Vietnam pull China back as a world factory. Vietnam has developed its economy, and this inspired the United States to make Vietnam a bridgehead against China. Vietnam would rather die than do that.
"For example, the U.S. wants to rent the strategic Cam Ranh Bay from Vietnam. It's a location in the South China Sea which is of military importance. The U.S. asked repeatedly to rent it, making it known that money is no object, as long as Vietnam is willing to rent. The Vietnamese Defense Minister said bluntly: 'the U.S. is very far from Vietnam. China is very close to Vietnam.' And that was the end of the discussion.
"Japan and South Korea in the north, and the Philippines and Australia in the south cannot be depended upon. What about Taiwan in the middle, the unsinkable aircraft carrier in the Western Pacific Ocean? Sorry America, Taiwan is not a country. It is a sacred and inseparable part of China.
"China treats Taiwan differently than Japan, South Korea, or the Philippines. China has a natural legal rationale that China's internal affairs must not be interfered in by outsiders. The United States was able to pinch our testicles by squeezing Taiwan. That is because our military strength is not strong enough to impact the West Pacific framework. Therefore the United States dared to do that. Now we have all the strength and weapons. United States, we dare you to pinch our testicles again.
'The U.S. Allowed India To Be A Thug And Suppress China!' — 'The U.S. Is Too Afraid To Fight China Directly In The West Pacific'
"The United States can't play well in the North, Central, or South Pacific. It cannot offshore balance China. What shall the United States do? The United States thought of a good way! Unite India!
"The West Pacific Framework expanded into an Indo-Pacific strategy, and the United States allowed India to be a thug and suppress China! Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines are different from India. First, India is indeed a regional power on the South Asian continent. Moreover, India is a nuclear-powered country with a population of one billion. This is not comparable to the small populations of Japan, South Korea, and the Philippines.
"China is very worried about India for two reasons:
"1. India is quite strong
India has one billion people with nuclear powers. India does not have enough nuclear counterattack capabilities, though, so it is still necessary to be cautious in fighting a full-scale war.
"2. India is too weak
China attacks India using a three-dimensional strategy--the land and sea advancing side by side, flanked by Pakistan. If India is beaten badly by China, the South Asian subcontinent may not be able to control the influence and infiltration of a certain religion. Pakistan's ambition, and a possible change for the worse, are also worrisome.
"This is the most difficult point for China when dealing with India. It's not that China doesn't want to fight India, nor that China can't beat India. It's that China doesn't want to fight India now. When it does want to fight in the future, if China hits India lightly, India may not learn the lesson. If China hits India heavily, India may lose miserably and disintegrate.
"This is a test of China's timing and scale. It's too difficult for China... The U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy is murderous. In 2016, the U.S. aircraft carrier ran away from the South China Sea. It dared not go head-to-head with China in the West Pacific. The following year, in 2017, the U.S. formulated the Indo-Pacific strategy. America convinced India to engage with China to achieve offshore balance.
"Korea, the Philippines, and Taiwan were unable to check and balance China. When the U.S.' West Pacific framework was faltering, the U.S. pulled a heavy hitter, India, into the ring to check and balance China, thus delaying our impact on the West Pacific framework.
"The bad news is that the U.S.' Indo-Pacific strategy is an open book. China will be held back no matter what. There is indeed no solution.
"The good news is that the more the United States pulls India into the water to engage us, the more it shows the United States' strategic mentality: The U.S. is too afraid to fight China directly in the West Pacific.
"If the United States is as powerful as the superpowers of the past, if the offshore balance of the Middle East cannot be played well, it would have rolled up its sleeves and entered the fight in person. If the United States still had the strength, it would have fought China in 2016 in the South China Sea.
"The more the U.S. wishes for others to share the burden of offshore balancing China, the more it shows that the U.S. is now powerless. After all, the United States has three major checks and balances in Eurasia: Europe, the Middle East, and East Asia. The United States was directly involved in the Middle East. Later, it withdrew troops from the Middle East. But it was not because U.S. solved all the problems. There are too many problems remaining. The real reason is that if U.S. does not withdraw, the Chinese dragon will take off completely in the Western Pacific. If the U.S. gets involved in East Asia, it would violate the tactical taboo of fighting two fronts at the same time.
"If the U.S. gets involved in the Western Pacific, it will ensure that the Middle East will become more problematic. God bless China. India and China are separated by a plateau screen. Only about half the year is suitable for fighting. The rest of the year, heavy snow covers the mountains. Even if India wants to fight a full-scale war with China, it cannot brave the wind and snow to expand the war. In addition, our bosom buddy Pakistan fights for us. We do not even have to fight for ourselves.
"India looks very big, but it only annoys us and cannot really check and balance us, so the U.S. Indo-Pacific strategy still cannot effectively offshore balance China. U.S. attempts to offshore balance the Middle East or China will be unsuccessful without direct, on the ground involvement
"American national advisor Kissinger has a very cryptic statement about China.
He said that China has the potential to become a global power. But it is difficult to do so because China has too many neighboring countries.
"Kissinger said it very vaguely and euphemistically. China has the second longest land border in the world. It borders 15 countries with a land border of more than 20,000 kilometers. The coastline of 18,000 kilometers is adjacent to 11 countries. China has the second largest number of neighboring countries in the world behind Russia.
"Kissinger hinted that U.S. should take advantage of China's many neighbors and unaligned ideologies. The U.S. could effectively offshore balance China and prevent China from becoming a global power. China and the U.S. could divide the Pacific into two respective spheres of influence.
"The Chinese dragon has shocked the West too much. It is not for no reason that China has been an unshakable leading power in East Asia for thousands of years. It has withstood the repeated tests of history. In the future, China will also unshakably dominate East Asia.
"The East Asia offshore balancing that the U.S. engages in with China is destined to be an offshore misbalancing. If the U.S. does not get involved directly, the West Pacific will be a disaster. Our big boss Xi Jinping said: "The Pacific Ocean is very big. It is big enough to accommodate China and the United States."
"What does he mean? He meant that the Pacific Ocean can be divided in two. The West Pacific will belong to China. The East Pacific will belong to the U.S. By then, China will tell the U.S.: 'Your military is not allowed in our West Pacific. Not a single sail can enter the area!'
"That's all for now about the offshore balancing of the U.S. against the Eurasian continent, and the power of the three major regions. It is clear that the United States cannot maintain offshore balancing in the Middle East and East Asia unless it gets involved directly.
Kissinger's First Proposal: Unite With Russia To Offshore Balance China
"When the U.S. first fought in the Middle East, it was still a world hegemon. Now times have changed. The country's fortunes are different from the past. The United States now has endless internal turmoil. If it tries to fight in East Asia, the results could be disastrous.
"Therefore, Kissinger proposed two plans for the United States.
"First, Unite Russia to Control China.
"Kissinger said that India is not worth considering. It cannot do anything to offshore balance China. Russia is different. It can destroy China completely by destroying its reputation, ideology, and beliefs first. If the U.S. improves the relationship with Russia, that alone would be enough for China to deal with. If they can join forces, then China will follow the U.S.S.R.'s footsteps and fate.
"Putin is not a fool. He knows the interdependence of Russia and China. If the U.S. proposes to join hands with Russia, Putin will not agree to it. At most, he will ease the relationship between the United States and Russia a little bit.
"Russia was sanctioned by Europe and the United States after its annexation of Crimea in 2014. The economy is very bad. People's livelihood is difficult. Ignore how much Putin hates Europe and the United States. Just look at the difficulty of Russians' lives currently, you will conclude that easing U.S.-Russian relations will make life better in Russia. It is pragmatism for any politician.
Kissinger's Second Proposal: Retreat, Allow Eurasian Internal Conflicts To Reemerge, Then Return To Assert Dominance
"Second, Retreat Home.
"This is Kissinger's final retreat. Kissinger said that if there is too much domestic resistance and Russia cannot ease tensions in the relationship, then the U.S. should not compete with China for anything in the West Pacific. The U.S. should let China have the West Pacific and make deals with China.
"Kissinger, the spokesperson for Wall Street, believes that the U.S. Middle East hegemony can be maintained for a while if the U.S. makes a deal with China regarding the West Pacific. The U.S. may insist on getting involved directly, gambling with China on the country's future. If the U.S. loses, it may lose control of the Middle East and Europe as well. U.S. hegemony and offshore balancing will all be 'game over.'
"Kissinger thinks that both Canada and the United States are energy countries. The United States has great agricultural strength and technology. South America is a low-cost labor base and an emerging market. It is good for U.S. power to shrink and retreat back to its homeland. U.S. is naturally the dominant country in the Americas.
"There is no shortage of technology, market, energy, or labor in North and South America. If the U.S. spends 10 or 20 years working hard in North and South America, it will rise again in due time.
This is the final retreat that Kissinger is suggesting for the United States. This means the U.S. admits that it has messed up and ruined things by itself. It must shrink its strategy and return home to rebuild. In twenty years, it will be a hero again. Once the external U.S. threat disappears from the Eurasian continent, various internal struggles will appear. China and Russia will even fight against each other. The U.S. can stay in the Americas and watch the changes.
"Once these world changes do take place, the U.S. can go east to the Atlantic Ocean, continuing the offshore balance of Europe and the Middle East. It can go west to the Pacific Ocean continuing the offshore balance of East Asia. It can recreate its dominance and hegemony.
"Kissinger said that the United States must be fully aware of its godsend, the most superior geographical advantage in the world. It must maintain strategic patience. It should not compete with China and Russia for short term benefits. It must seek long term benefits. Blah, blah, blah.
"Of course, retreating home is Kissinger's opinion. Even Wall Street capital would not be willing to do it. Wall Street capital is petrodollars. It is the global collection of seigniorage. It is a financial game. If the U.S. retreats home, petrodollars are bounced, and seigniorage is gone. Who will repair the busted financial bubble? A bunch of poor South Americans cannot afford to do that. If the U.S. returns home, it will not only sacrifice the interests of the U.S. military-industrial complex, it will also hurt Wall Street itself.
"Today's U.S. internal affairs are messed up disastrously. In order to kiss black voters' ass, Biden said that the light bulb was invented by black people. Trump lied blatantly that more people died from the Covid-19 pandemic in China than in the United States. Current American politics is in an unbelievably horrible situation. There is no way the White House will sacrifice U.S. military industry complex and Wall Street interests and return home. It will not regroup and wait 20 years to come out again.
"Impossible, absolutely impossible. Kissinger's return home proposal is only his personal opinion and does not represent the will of Wall Street. In the U.S., Kissinger probably feels like the old saying that 'the world is turbid and I am clean. Everyone is drunk and I am sober.'
"I am certain that the U.S. will not take Kissinger's second path. I do believe that is the best path for U.S. It is also the path that Eurasian countries fear the most that the U.S. will take. In reality, the U.S. will either choose to negotiate or get involved directly to end the impact of China in the Western Pacific framework. It is difficult for the United States to willingly retreat and return home.
'The History Is Very Long, We Have To Be Patient'
"Today's discussion is very loosely structured. The core theme is easy to summarize. Regarding the three major areas of the United States offshore balance, the Middle East and East Asia, the United States cannot offshore balance them. In East Asia, the U.S. must either negotiate or get involved directly. China is unwilling to do either due to the pandemic.
"Let me end with the words of Kissinger, the last sober man in U.S. It is also an exhortation to the United States and an insistence on our patient strategy.
"Kissinger said: 'I have had conversations with Chinese students. They think that any action by the United States is well-designed, premeditated and aimed at achieving specific goals.' Actually, it is not. The U.S. has repeatedly intervened, withdrawn, interfered and withdrawn again in history. The United States has never had a global foreign policy. This repetition is one of its manifestations.
"The United States is struggling between trying to manage global affairs and trying to withdraw from global affairs. This is a painful experience for the United States. I often tell my audience in the United States to have clear ideas. On the one hand, we cannot dominate everything in the world. On the other hand, we should participate in global affairs.
"The history is very long, we have to be patient. 'America, oh America, it cannot go back; it cannot hold on to the West Pacific. China, oh China, bright future, tortuous road. The history is very long. Both China and the United States should have patience...'
%B2%B8%E5%B9%B3%E8%A1%A1%EF%BC%8C%E6%93%8D%E7%BA%B5%E6%95%B4%E4%B8%AA%E4%B8%96%E7%95%8C, March 14, 2021.