Frosty China-US Talks in Alaska

Region: ,

All Global Research articles can be read in 27 languages by activating the “Translate Website” drop down menu on the top banner of our home page (Desktop version).


US foreign policy isn’t pretty. Rhetoric suggesting otherwise is subterfuge.

Hegemons like the US don’t negotiate. They demand.

Longstanding US geopolitical aims are all about seeking dominion over planet earth, its resources and populations — wanting other nations worldwide subservient to its will.

Nations free from its control are targeted for regime change, forever wars by hot and/or other means its favored tactics.

Diplomatic outreach by independent countries to the US for improved relations are exercises in futility.

Promises made by its policymakers are hollow, betrayal following time and again.

In response to Biden calling Vladimir Putin soulless, a killer, Russia’s leader proposed a “discussion” with his counterpart on live television.

“Without any delays and directly in an open, direct discussion,” he added.

“I don’t want to put this off for long.”

“(W)e could do it tomorrow or Monday. We are ready at any time convenient for the American side.”

Asked on Thursday if he’ll agree to discuss bilateral issues live on television with Putin, Biden ducked the question.

With bilateral relations more dismal than at any time in modern memory and sinking to new depths, the likelihood of dominant US Russophobes turning a page for improved relations with Moscow is virtually nil.

Washington considers Russia a mortal enemy — for its sovereign independence, not for any threats to US security.

None exist from Russia, China, Iran or other countries.

When claimed otherwise, they’re invented, a pretext for unbridled militarism and belligerence.

The US considers China its top national security threat — for its growing prominence on the world stage, its economic strength, heading toward surpassing America’s, perhaps in a decade or less.

Beijing prioritizes cooperative relations with other countries, polar opposite how the US operates.

Last December, Trump’s DNI John Ratcliffe falsely called China “the greatest threat to America today (sic), and the greatest threat to democracy and freedom worldwide since World War II (sic),” adding:

“Beijing intends to dominate the US and the rest of the planet economically, militarily and technologically (sic).”

The above sentiment is bipartisan in the US, both right wings of its war party militantly hostile toward China and other nations free from their control.

Sino/US talks in Anchorage, Alaska continue for a second day on Friday.

Discussing them on Thursday, China’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said the following:

“The US side proposed to have this dialogue with China, and China accepted this proposal, a constructive gesture showing our sincerity towards resuming China-US dialogue and exchange and improving and developing China-US relations.”

“The Chinese side will make clear its positions and concerns on relevant issues during this dialogue.”

“All topics that can be discussed are on the table.”

“On issues that bear on China’s sovereignty, security and core interests, no one shall expect China to make any compromise or trade-offs.”

“China is determined and resolute in safeguarding its core interests.”

“It is a fool’s errand that serves no purpose at all to try to set the tempo for the dialogue through ‘megaphone diplomacy,’ or to gang up on China.”

While engaging in good faith diplomatic outreach with the US, an effort to improve bilateral relations, Beijing knows how time and again its best intentions for cooperative relations with Washington aren’t good enough.

Ahead of talks, Tony Blinken repeated false claims about detention of millions of Uyghurs in Xinjiang by China, along with expressing “deep concerns with actions by China (on) Hong Kong (and) Taiwan (sic).”

He slammed nonexistent Chinese cyberattacks on the US (sic) and “economic coercion toward our allies (sic)” — invented issues he raised in bilateral talks.

It made for frosty discussions in Anchorage on Thursday, perhaps more of the same Friday.

In response on Thursday, China’s Central Committee official/Foreign Affairs Director Yang Jiechi reportedly accused the US of brandishing a big stick and exerting financial supremacy to pressure other nations into compliance with its will, adding:

“The US has no competence whatsoever to take a patronizing tone with China. It won’t work on us.”

By raising phony national security concerns, Washington threatens cooperative international relations.

Supported by international law, China strongly objects to US interference in its internal affairs.

Yang also slammed US human rights abuses and its “cold war mentality.”

Calling for “no confrontation, no conflict, mutual respect and win-win cooperation with the United States,” Yang and other Chinese officials know that dominant US hardliners have other aims in mind in dealings with the world community of nations.

Separately on Thursday, an unnamed member of China’s delegation in Anchorage said the following:

“The Chinese mission has arrived at the (US) invitation in Anchorage with sincere intentions to hold strategic dialogue with the United States and was preparing (for talks) in line with the protocol earlier agreed on by both parties,” adding:

“However, the US party has significantly gone beyond the time limit during the opening speech resorting to baseless attacks and accusations concerning the Chinese foreign and internal policy, thus provoking a conflict.”

“This is not in line with the ethics of the treatment of the guests and violates the diplomatic protocol.”

“The Chinese party has made a harsh response.”

Before talks began, Beijing’s envoy to Washington Cui Tiankai said the Chinese side does not have high expectations “or fantasies” about improving bilateral relations from two days of talks, adding:

On all things related to China’s core interests, including its sovereign rights and territorial integrity, they’ll be no compromises with the US.

A Final Comment

On Friday, China’s official People’s Daily broadsheet the People’s Daily slammed Biden’s State Department for “slander(ing) the decision of the National People’s Congress (NPC) of China to improve the electoral system of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), and threatened to implement financial sanctions against Chinese officials,” adding:

“Such practice of hegemony and interventionism seriously violated international law and the norms governing international relations, and interfered in China’s domestic affairs.”

“It fully revealed the vicious intention of the US to disrupt Hong Kong and hinder China’s stability and development.”

“No interference or slander can shake China’s resolution to safeguard its national sovereignty, security, (and) development interests…”

“The US had better quit political threatening as soon as possible.”

Bilateral relations are frosty. They’re more likely to worsen ahead than improve.


Note to readers: please click the share buttons above or below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Stephen Lendman is a Research Associate of the Centre for Research on Globalization (CRG).

VISIT MY WEBSITE: (Home – Stephen Lendman). Contact at [email protected].

My two Wall Street books are timely reading:

“How Wall Street Fleeces America: Privatized Banking, Government Collusion, and Class War”

“Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity”

Comment on Global Research Articles on our Facebook page

Become a Member of Global Research

Articles by: Stephen Lendman

About the author:

Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at [email protected] His new book as editor and contributor is titled "Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III." Visit his blog site at Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network. It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.

Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). The Centre for Research on Globalization will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. The Centre of Research on Globalization grants permission to cross-post Global Research articles on community internet sites as long the source and copyright are acknowledged together with a hyperlink to the original Global Research article. For publication of Global Research articles in print or other forms including commercial internet sites, contact: [email protected] contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of "fair use" in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than "fair use" you must request permission from the copyright owner.

For media inquiries: [email protected]