Jin Yinan:

NATO was established after World War II, mainly with the Soviet Union as the imaginary enemy and Europe as its defense scope. This year's NATO summit was actually held amid conflicts and ended in a relatively chaotic and disorderly state. Participants in the summit, including the United States, France, Turkey, etc., all have different opinions in NATO, including New Europe and Old Europe, traditional Western Europe and Eastern Europe that were later added, including Poland, Romania, Hungary, etc., in NATO. The NATO summit that ended in chaos also revealed an important message, that is, NATO raised China as a challenge for the first time. This is the first time since the establishment of NATO that an organization with Europe as its main defense scope has challenged it from countries in other continents. Of course, he spoke more moderately, saying that the rise of China has brought opportunities and challenges to NATO, and that there are both opportunities and challenges. As you mentioned just now, NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg also specifically said that NATO does not want to use China as its enemy, but having said that, this trend is also obvious. For the first time, we have seen the so-called impact of the rise of China on NATO's security. I think this is ridiculous.

NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg said that NATO "now confirms that the rise of China has a security impact on all NATO allies" and that the new strategy towards China "is not to create a new opponent", but to "analyze, understand and respond to the challenges posed by China in a balanced way." Photo by Xinhua News Agency reporter Han Yan

host:

It was the first time that China was named at a NATO summit, and it felt like it was inexplicably lying. But in fact, before the summit began, NATO Secretary-General Stoltenberg publicly stated: China's defense budget ranks second in the world, and it has recently demonstrated new and modern military capabilities, including long-range missiles with a range that can reach all of Europe and the United States. From this, it can be concluded that China's rise poses a security risk to all NATO allies, and called on NATO member states to work together to deal with this problem. So Professor Yinan, what do you think of these "crimes" that NATO has accused China of?

Jin Yinan:

This reflects that NATO is not willing to be a "dinosaur" as defined by Trump. The U.S. military-industrial complex must create an enemy for its own survival. If there is no enemy, it must find an enemy. The U.S. military-industrial complex believes that China is another big rival of the United States in the future. Why? With this recognition, more funds and resources will be needed, and a better development and living space will be obtained. There is a military-industrial complex in the United States. Isn’t NATO a European-wide military-industrial complex? It's the same. In order to maintain the existence of this organization, if Russia is not a threat and the world does not have the rise of China, what do you want NATO to do? It's no use at all. In order to show the necessity of the existence of this organization, I will tell everyone that there is a major threat, and I can protect everyone's safety in the face of this threat. Even if there is no opponent, create an opponent. If you cannot create one, then describe such an opponent. Then with all my policies, my defense expenditures, and my resource allocation, I will be able to find reasonable space, and I will be able to cut a larger piece of the pie of economic development and peaceful development for defense expenditures.

On December 3, in London, England, NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg (left) held talks with US President Trump. Xinhua News Agency

host:

For a military organization with constant internal strife, they now want to create an imaginary enemy to enhance the internal consistency of NATO and prove the rationality and necessity of NATO's existence.

Jin Yinan:

Yes, it not only proves the rationality of its own existence, but also proves the rationality of NATO's eastward expansion. The eastward expansion to Poland and the three Baltic countries is still not enough. For example, NATO tried to extend its foot into Afghanistan, but suffered a lot in Afghanistan. Both the United States and NATO suffered a lot in Afghanistan. In fact, the military intervention in Afghanistan, including the military intervention in Iraq, Syria, and Libya, is an attempt by NATO to expand its military operations beyond the originally limited European scope. In fact, it has already left the circle. It has expanded its military operations to the Middle East, Central Asia, and these regions. So where is the rationality for the expansion? The rationale for expansion is to prevent the threat from China, so it must be close to China's doorstep. They think this reason can exist.

Xinhua News Agency data map of NATO’s first five expansions

host:

On the one hand, NATO violates the contract of the year and continues to expand eastward. On the other hand, it accuses China that its influence has touched NATO's borders. It says that it is not NATO that wants to enter the South China Sea, but that China is getting closer to NATO in the Arctic and Africa. Professor Yinan feels that NATO is playing a "word game" and secretly changes concepts from time to time. It is actually very clear who is threatening whom.

Jin Yinan:

Everyone, please note that NATO has said that China is getting closer to Africa, the Antarctic, and the North Pole. Why are we so close? We are doing construction there! Are you a construction group at NATO? Are you an investment group? We are engaged in the “One Belt and One Road” initiative, but are you engaged in the “Two Belts and Two Roads” initiative? Do you have an economic development plan? It doesn't. You say we Chinese are close to Africa, entering Africa, entering South America, entering Europe, or entering Central Asia. What are we going to do? We are going to build. Is this the same as NATO's eastward expansion? Completely different! We want to bring peace, development, prosperity and stability to the places where we go, which is the exchange and integration of civilizations. What are they thinking about? NATO has a military presence in the three Baltic countries, Poland, Hungary, Czechoslovakia, and is preparing to go to Ukraine and Georgia. They all export equipment, troops, and force. Have you ever built a highway in NATO? Have you ever built an airport? Have you ever built a convention and exhibition center? Have you ever built an overpass? None, it is all military defense personnel, all military personnel, all weapons and equipment, all ready to fight, prepare to occupy, and prepare to rule. It is not engaged in construction. Therefore, NATO's eastward expansion is completely different from our "One Belt, One Road" initiative. This is a fundamental difference.

The CNN website reported that the summit commemorating the 70th anniversary of the founding of NATO not only failed to promote unity among old friends, but also allowed Trump to turn the gathering into a "diplomatic soap opera."

host:

The "Belt and Road" initiative is to develop economic partnerships and jointly build a community of shared future and responsibility for mankind. This is completely different from the nature of NATO's eastward expansion, and it should not be a reason for NATO's eastward expansion.

Jin Yinan:

Yes, it is very interesting. We understand our path of peaceful development and construction in the same way as its path of military expansion. Are they the same? Totally different.

The Western media were collectively silent on the Xinjiang anti-terrorism documentary. Foreign Ministry spokesperson Hua Chunying said that lies cannot cover up the truth after all.

host:

NATO turns a blind eye to China's contribution to maintaining world peace and promoting regional economic development, just as the Western media collectively silenced China's anti-terrorism documentary in Xinjiang and were selectively "blind", "deaf" and "aphasic". Professor Yinan, what do you think of this phenomenon?

Jin Yinan:

In fact, this phenomenon allows people to see their true face. What about universal values, freedom, democracy, and human rights? Now you don’t even want to use a fig leaf. It’s already reached this level. It’s completely selective. There was a terrorist attack on London Bridge not long ago, killing several passers-by. In fact, several local residents had subdued the terrorists and pinned them to the ground. Armed police officers came up, pulled away all the people who had subdued the terrorists, and shot them to death on the spot. Very clear video, this shot took place in London and became an effective counter-terrorism measure. You were able to arrest him, put him in handcuffs, and find out through trial what he was going to do and who his backend organization was. But the London police did not bother to fulfill these legal procedures and shot him twice, killing him on the spot. This was a video taken by the British. There was widespread applause in the West and they felt that they had done a good job. Can we imagine what this video would look like if it were in China? If the Chinese police shot a terrorist to death on the street, what kind of hype would it cause in the West? Hong Kong thugs grabbed the Hong Kong police's guns on the street, and the Hong Kong police were forced to shoot, not to kill but to injure the thugs who were trying to grab the guns. The Western media has hyped it up, saying that the Hong Kong police used excessive violence and then suppressed it under the command of the mainland. They have been criticized a lot. They wear colored glasses. Everything I do is right, because I am the maker of the rules. I will judge whether everything you do is right or not. If I say it is right, it is right. If I say it is wrong, it will be wrong. This is today's world. It is not equality everywhere and rule of law. No, it is not free from this kind of power. The expansion of NATO we are talking about is actually the expansion of force and power.

host:

Today, China's influence is indeed increasing. For the first time, the NATO summit included the opportunities and challenges brought by China's development into a joint statement. Does it also remind us that we should pay more attention to NATO's trends in the future?

Jin Yinan:

right. We must pay enough attention and vigilance to its trends, but we do not need to take it too seriously. NATO does not have that much power. It is not a thriving organization, but a declining organization. I think this basic judgment can still be established.

Column Editor: Zhang Wu