For the first time in history, a Chinese president has openly delivered clear red lines to an American president, delineating Beijing’s non-negotiable core interests. When Chinese President Xi Jinping met with President Joe Biden at the 31st APEC Economic Leaders’ Meeting in Lima, Peru, the world’s attention was drawn to Xi’s blunt articulation of China’s “four red lines.” Unlike previous APEC meetings, which often emphasized cooperative economic growth, this meeting was starkly different in tone, as Xi chose to lay down firm boundaries. Xi delivered these red lines with a strategic calculation: he saw Biden as weak—a perfect target for asserting China’s boundaries—preferring to establish these limits before Donald Trump, a leader with a much stronger and more combative stance on China, takes office again in January. These red lines were issued as a stark warning to Washington: do not cross boundaries concerning Taiwan, democracy and human rights, China’s path and system, and its rights to economic development. Xi’s delivery of these red lines marks a critical turning point in global power dynamics, reflective of an increasingly confident China testing the resolve of a U.S. president they perceived as pliable.
- Taiwan: Beijing sees Taiwan as an inalienable part of its territory. Xi emphasized that any U.S. support for Taiwanese independence or actions that embolden the island’s efforts to solidify its separation from China would be unacceptable. The language was a firm reminder that Washington’s increased engagements with Taiwan would be seen as a direct challenge to China’s national unity.
- Democracy and Human Rights: China demanded an end to external interference concerning human rights and democracy, both of which Beijing deems to be domestic matters. U.S. criticism over China’s treatment of Uyghurs and actions in Hong Kong has been seen by China as interference designed to undermine the ruling Communist Party.
- China’s Path and System: Xi underscored that the United States must respect China’s governance and its chosen socialist path. Any attempts to influence or undermine the authority of the Communist Party would be viewed as an existential threat.
- Rights to Development: Finally, China asserted its right to pursue economic development and technological advancement without external obstruction. Restrictions on trade, technology transfers, or economic development would be seen as direct infringements on China’s core rights.
Why to just say no:
First, the U.S. already is in a Cold War. It was started by the CCP, and it is high time that the U.S. joined the fight against it. The many tens of thousands of Americans killed by the CCP’s fentanyl alone shows that the CCP is at war with the United States and has no qualms about killing Americans.
The current Cold War with the CCP is multifaceted and fought, thus far short of kinetic war, but in all other domains—including the economic, diplomatic, and political. It is important to understand the similarities between this Cold War and the one with the Soviet Union. The most salient is that the motivation for aggression remains the same, the Communist ideology of the Soviet Union in the past and of the CCP today. The impact of the ideology of Communism and its role in driving the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) aggression is essential to comprehend. Communism is a Western ideology imported into China and is not a part of Chinese civilization, political culture, or political history.
But its effect on China has been profound and created a swath of destruction through that country. It has intentionally destroyed the traditional pillars of Chinese culture, society and civilization and killed many scores of millions of Chinese. Understanding the CCP’s ideology provides major insights into the People’s Republic of China’s behavior. It allows Americans to comprehend why the PRC is inherently aggressive. Communism seeks to force societies like China’s into an ideological Procrustean Bed defined by Marxism-Leninism. In addition, Communism requires aggression, including unrestricted warfare, against non-Communist states. The effect on U.S. national security interests could not be more significant as this explains the CCP’s aggression against the U.S. In the CCP’s worldview, the U.S. is the fundamental enemy to be destroyed.
Third, the right response to the “Four Red Lines” is total rejection. In essence, the affirmation of whatever Xi tells Americans they cannot do.
First, the U.S., not Xi, sets its policy toward Taiwan. U.S. must revisit its policy over Taiwan to reflect the strategic realities of the 21st Century.
Second, while Communist dictatorships abuse the human rights of their captive populations, which perforce all do, the rest of the world must not accept this. The Chinese diaspora, people of goodwill around the world, and the U.S. will speak for those oppressed.
Third, Xi knows that his government is illegitimate and tyrannical, and so the incoming Trump administration might revisit every aspect of its policies towards that regime. It is certainly appropriate for the world’s population to ask whether the CCP is a legitimate government and should continue to oppress the Chinese people.
Fourth, Xi is asking that the U.S. not impede the PRC’s power and accept its position while it seeks to supplant the U.S. without an adequate U.S. response. For too long, the U.S. elite have gone along with supporting the CCP because it has profited them. It was only the first Trump administration that turned the rudder and challenged the CCP. Xi’s effort to define the boundaries of PRC-U.S. relations with the new Trump administration is bound to fail.
Xi’s free ride is over. There is a new sheriff in town as of January 20th. This sheriff is unlike the previous one. He might have some demands of his own.
There is a lot of information at each of the links as well as arguments to back up the position. Trump has to be strong and protect America
Delusions of Adequacy 