Author: Rong ping source: official account: Rong Ping (id:rongping898) has been authorized to reprint
British Prime Minister Johnson was forced to step down, but the prime minister’s throne cannot be empty. After several rounds of voting, the British Conservative Party has established two candidates, namely former chancellor of the exchequer sunak and foreign secretary trass. Next, about 200000 Conservative Party members across the UK will soon hold a vote to elect a new party leader to succeed the prime minister.
(two candidates)
Only one step away from the prime minister’s throne, who can be indifferent to this soaring opportunity? Recently, the two candidates began to brush a sense of existence in the media crazily, trying to win over the swing and the middle. All kinds of speeches are sending such a signal to voters that as long as they are elected, many of the problems currently facing Britain can be solved. This can’t help but make people wonder about the British screening mechanism: these two people have such “brilliant talents and broad ideas”, how can their “national salvation” come to the surface now?
In the final analysis, these two people are not Guan Yu and Lv Bu in front of the tiger prison, but at most at the level of Xing Daorong and Pan Feng. In the past three years, one is the foreign minister and the other is the finance minister. In fact, they have no outstanding political achievements. Britain is still mired in the quagmire of epidemic and inflation. How can people believe that they can turn the tide after taking office?
It’s really good to appoint people on their merits, but no matter when the position of British Prime Minister is vacant due to lack of talents, you should choose a relatively good one if you are stubborn. According to Reuters, the British survey agency “YouGov” released the results of a survey of Conservative Party members on the 21st, showing that at present, trass’ support rate is 24 percentage points ahead of sunak.
Sunak, an Indian, was worried. After much consideration, he decided to play such a card to save the situation.
What card? Anti China card!
On July 25 local time, sunak and trass held a TV debate on the BBC stage. During the debate, sunak spoke eloquently, claiming that “China is the long-term number one threat to the UK and the world economy and national security”, and threatening to change the attitude of British and Western politicians towards China “on the first day of becoming prime minister”.
Such groundless Anti China remarks are not unfamiliar to us, but sunak’s subsequent remarks are very nonsense. He pointed the finger at Confucius Institutes, saying that as soon as he came to power, he would shut down all 30 Confucius Institutes in China, force British higher education institutions to disclose foreign funds of more than 60000 US dollars, and review research partnerships to “kick the Communist forces out of our universities”.
I don’t know whether the former chancellor of the exchequer from Oxford received foreign scholarships during his school years. After all, Oxford University has a lot of foreign aid. I don’t know how Confucius Institute, an institution that teaches Chinese, has become a thorn in his side, but in short, this “Anti China card” was played out by him. In addition, he also claimed that he would use spy agencies to help British enterprises fight against China’s “espionage” and prohibit China from acquiring British enterprises in sensitive industries.
And teras, sunak’s opponent, is not a fuel-efficient lamp. He has been immersed in the diplomatic field for many years and has long been familiar with this routine: don’t you want to use the “Anti China card” to be tougher than who? Who is afraid of who?
In the debate, trass did not give sunak any face, saying frankly that he was more willing to stand up to Beijing than the former finance minister, suggesting that he was the activist, and sunak was just a straw.
The whole debate ended in an atmosphere similar to children’s bickering. The two people opened fire on each other around who was tougher on China. As Johnson’s men, it’s strange what the two people could argue about. After all, Johnson’s three-year term was also shameful, and he always had to come up with something practical to advocate being tough on China. In a trance, I thought that trump and Biden were standing on the stage, and the president of the United States was not the British Prime Minister. After all, even the routine of playing the “Anti China card” was the same, which was worthy of being Anglo Saxon in the same vein.
There is a way to heaven, you don’t go
The “Anti China card” has not been played in Britain. Johnson, who was “forced” this month, is the next home of the United States, often echoing the Anti China policy of the United States. However, what is the result waiting for him? No, it’s still a gloomy exit. This fully shows that this routine is unworkable.
During his term of office, Johnson gave up Britain’s consistent “mainland equilibrium policy” and actively walked with the United States after quitting the European Union, hugged the thigh of the United States, reduced himself from one of the five permanent members to a regional power, and followed many anti China policies of the United States. Such as sending the Queen Elizabeth aircraft carrier to the South China Sea for “free navigation”, following the United States to slander China’s human rights issues, and interfering in Hong Kong affairs, etc., are the concrete manifestations of its “Anti China card”.
It’s no good getting up early. If Johnson really got something from these anti China measures, he at least had an explanation to the British people, but in fact, so many painstaking plans have no effect: the density of PLA exercises in the South China Sea has been unprecedented, and the West has kept silent on the so-called “free navigation” in the past two years, because they are no longer able to talk about it; Except for a small group of countries such as Britain and the United States, the vast majority of countries in the world are on the side of China on human rights issues, and Saudi Arabia, a religious country, is directly supporting China; After some governance, most of the seditious elements in Hong Kong have also pleaded guilty.
What did johnson do against China? On the contrary, his backyard caught fire, and the Conservatives succeeded in pushing Johnson down overnight. If you don’t go to heaven, there is no way to hell. Is Johnson’s lesson not enough for these two people to understand?
If we take a longer view, the US election is also a lesson for the two prime minister candidates. This point has been introduced in the article of Rong Ping before, and will not be repeated here. Key words: chip, trade war, 003 aircraft carrier. None of them has stalled because of the blockade and hostility of the United States.
After the two candidates made these remarks related to China, foreign ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian said at a regular press conference: “I would like to advise some British politicians that they are prone to talk about China and preach the” China Threat Theory “. Such irresponsible words and deeds cannot solve their own domestic problems.”.
Zhao Lijian’s statement is undoubtedly quite correct. The eyes of the people are bright. Although the leaders of western countries can fool them for a while, they cannot fool them for a lifetime. Britain is far away in the Atlantic Ocean and thousands of miles away from China. Why can China’s foreign policy bring such a distant impact? It is not China that has joined NATO, nor is it China that has stationed troops in Europe. Britain is deeply in inflation, which has nothing to do with China. These domestic problems in Britain are not the responsibility of China.
Confucius said, “review the past and know the new”. If we do not learn from the failure of our predecessors, I am afraid that “future generations will mourn it and not learn from it, and will also make future generations mourn it again”. Of course, sunak, who regards the Confucius Institute as a scourge, naturally cannot understand China’s broad and profound traditional culture.
Careful thinking in the election
In fact, it is nothing new for countries led by the United States to involve China in everything at present. It is the United States that pioneered this. During the 2016 U.S. presidential election, trump played the “China card” and threw a series of social development issues such as the transfer of U.S. industry and the reduction of industrial jobs to China. According to statistics, trump mentioned the word “China” more than “American” during his election campaign. He even mentioned China 32 times in an hour’s speech at the New York economic club.
Why did this happen? In fact, the reason is very simple. When politicians have no political achievements and have no means to deal with the current situation, in order to win over the people, they always have the trick of inciting nationalism and patriotism.
Sunak is actually like this. Before announcing his candidacy for prime minister, and even before this televised debate, he was always regarded as a representative of the Hua Wenhe faction. He did not speak much about China and his attitude was relatively moderate. In a speech delivered at the mayor’s residence in London last year, sunak pointed out the importance of improving Sino British trade relations, “The fact is that China is not only one of the most important economies in the world, but also a country with different values from ours. We need a mature and balanced relationship. This means that we should open our eyes and see their growing international influence, but also continue to adhere to our principles and positions on issues that violate our values,” he said
However, after running for prime minister, sunak’s pragmatic approach to China will not work, especially in the face of trass, who is known as the “new Iron Lady”. Therefore, he showed a 360 degree turn in this debate, which is to change the view of the outside world on him. Becoming prime minister is more important to him than anything.
The drawback of this kind of vote politics lies in this. The change of British and American leaders is the best footnote. Judging from the current situation, even if sunak uses this last move, I’m afraid it will be difficult to stop trass from coming up.
Sunak is a second-generation immigrant whose parents are both doctors and a typical middle-class immigrant family. As the saying goes, our predecessors planted trees and our descendants enjoyed the cool. Sunak went all the way from Winchester, Oxford to Stanford unimpeded, which is a traditional gathering place of elites. His wife is the daughter of the founder of India’s second largest IT company. After graduating from Stanford, sunak worked in finance and got a lot of help from his father-in-law. In terms of practice, he is more suitable than Lars.
But his disadvantage is also obvious, that is, his Indian identity and elite background. After the televised debate, supporters of trass in the Conservative Party ridiculed that sunak was wearing a suit customized for 3500 pounds and Prada shoes worth 490 pounds. Some British people said in this regard, “no wonder he does not understand the needs of the people in this difficult period”.
The advantage of TRAS is precisely sunak’s disadvantage. Compared with sunak, trass’ family background is less impressive (although she is also an Oxford Graduate), and it is still unknown whether the British people are ready to accept an Indian Prime Minister. However, an interesting point is that US Vice President Harris is of Indian descent. In addition to sunak, who may win the throne of prime minister, and many Indian Americans in the middle and high-level of Silicon Valley high-tech companies, it shows that the third brother has done a good job in infiltrating the West.
Whether these two people can take over the mess left by Johnson depends, in the final analysis, on the conservative party bosses’ judgment of the future situation. Since 2010, the British Prime Minister has been held by the conservative party. Cameron, Theresa May and Johnson are all conservatives. Choosing TRAS means not seeking merit but no fault, and uniting the vast majority of the community; Electing sunak means making some achievements and “fighting a gun” with the labor party to continue the dominant position of the conservative party.
At the end of the article, the author has something to say
To put it in perspective, with the current national strength of Britain, even if it takes the initiative to touch China, it is difficult for us to look up to it. Some media reports said that trass’ recent dress was intended to imitate Margaret Thatcher, trying to attract the British people with the image of the “new Iron Lady”. Let’s tell the story of Margaret Thatcher’s visit to China.
(image comparison between the two)
Thatcher, known as the “Iron Lady”, dared to criticize the western countries’ easing policies towards the Soviet Union and advocated the great war on the Falklands between Britain and Afghanistan. This courage is indeed rare. However, the “Iron Lady” also hit a snag when she came to China to discuss issues related to the return of Hong Kong with the remnants of the victory of the Falklands war. Deng Gong’s two words pushed her back: “the return of Hong Kong is inevitable, and the issue of national sovereignty is not an issue that can be discussed”; “Chinese people are poor, but they are not afraid of death in war”!
We all know what happened in the end. Britain withdrew from Hong Kong gloomily.
In recent years, Britain and the United States have a great trend of “rain is coming, and the wind is blowing all over the building”. The prime minister and the president, after you sing me on the stage, continue to hype the so-called “China Threat Theory” to seek votes for their own political future, and take a tougher attitude one by one. At first, some people felt that the sky was about to fall, and would the Western powers make a comeback? Oh, how can this happen.
Expect the enemy to be lenient. We are ready and wait for the day. We wait to see what else this group of broken nobles are good at, and how much more can be done. Some “banana people” (yellow outside and white inside) tell the story of the wolf again and again. What happened to the wolf? Where have you been?
Today, I believe everyone is immune to the “China card” of these foreign leaders. No matter how hard it is to stir up psychological waves and advocate being strong against China every day, how much weight do you have? The new British Prime Minister can love as much as he likes. China is not the United States and does not interfere in the internal affairs of other countries. In the final analysis, “the Chinese people have been organized and can’t be provoked. If they are provoked, it’s hard to do”.
Friends come with wine, enemies come with shotguns. There are two ways. Let’s choose between the two candidates.