Slide 1
The COVID19 epidemic is a global "black swan"
event in 2020, and it is still spreading.
I believe that the epidemic has become the
most significant crisis in the field of global
governance, and it can even be called the
first "world war" in the field of non-traditional
security. It has caused distressing lives
and property losses to countries all over
the world and has a structural impact on globalization.
At present, China's epidemic prevention and
control war has achieved major strategic results
and won the recognition of most countries.
But China must not only prepare for long-term
coexistence with the epidemic, but also make
corresponding plans for what is happening
and the great changes in the world after the
epidemic.
Anti-globalization is a phenomenon that has
appeared before the outbreak of the epidemic.
Contemporary globalization since the Reagan
era advocates privatization, free trade, and
open markets, and promotes trade between countries
to improve production efficiency. While globalization
creates wealth, it also creates a huge gap
between the rich and the poor. The information
revolution in the 1990s has increased the
return gap between the financial industry,
advanced service industries, and high-tech
companies and other industries. In developed
countries such as the United States, the manufacturing
industry is shrinking. Domestic blue-collar
workers are dissatisfied with the "offshoring"
and believed that foreign manufacturing competitors
have "stolen" their jobs; populist politicians
took the opportunity to claim it was the globalists"
and "establishment elites" in the government
and large enterprises colluded with foreign
countries to harm their own national interests.
In developing countries, economic nationalists
emphasize the importance of industrial protection,
and politicians in some countries refer to
multinational companies as "neo-colonialists",
inciting people to oppose transnational economic
cooperation.
In short, the epidemic has aggravated the
anti-globalization phenomenon in several ways.
First, some countries are facing financial
difficulties due to the epidemic, and their
rejection of globalization has increased.
Second, the "China's guilty theory" and racist
remarks advocated by the United States and
others have intensified xenophobia in some
countries. Finally, the epidemic has caused
some countries to call for "self-sufficiency"
in strategic materials. Therefore, after the
crisis, some countries may take the initiative
to reduce their dependence on international
trade.
Some countries that politicize the virus and
make it a tool of political struggle, which
has impacted on world politics and even intensified
the ideological confrontation between China
and Western countries. I predict the following
changes may occur in the world political scene
after the epidemic.
Slide 2
First, the prestige of the world hegemon is
damaged. After the end of the Cold War, the
United States became a superpower with global
hegemony in the fields of military, technology,
finance, and public opinion. However, as of
today, the number of new infections and deaths
in the United States far exceeds that of other
countries. The slow and inefficient response
has weakened the prestige of the United States.
After Trump came to power, US foreign policy
embodied principles of the cold war-style
zero-sum mentality to contain China and unilateral
hegemonism with the slogan "America First".
When the epidemic first spread and spread
in China in January, US Secretary of Commerce
Wilbur Ross happily declared that the spreading
epidemic would help jobs return to the United
States. Now the Trump administration repeatedly
accused China and threw out the "China guilty
theory" in an attempt to divert attention
at home and abroad; some US politicians even
want to Sue China and threaten to refuse to
repay the US Treasury bonds held by China.
The accusation of China is certainly not helpful
to the United States in fighting the epidemic,
but it can cater to conservative voters who
support Trump, and it can cater to hawkish
strategists who intend to completely "decouple"
China and the United States. But most countries
have refused to stand in line under the intimidation
of the United States. For example, on occasions
such as the G7 and the World Health Assembly,
the United States did not succeed in propagating
"China's guilty theory", which was rejected
by most countries.
In addition, the Trump administration has
always pursued a unilateral policy and repeatedly
withdrew from the international cooperation
framework. Trump even announced that the United
States would terminate its cooperation with
the World Health Organization. When the European
epidemic broke out, it unilaterally issued
US-European air travel bans, seized anti-epidemic
supplies from multiple countries and intercepted
orders; repatriated Infected illegal immigrants
to Latin American countries; threatened to
withdraw US troops and ask European allies
to increase defense spending. The selfish
actions of the United States in the global
crisis will not only be detrimental to global
cooperation in fighting the epidemic, but
will also damage its reputation as a world
power.
Second, most countries in the Western world
performed poorly during the epidemic, which
is mainly reflected in the following aspects.
The first is racism. Some countries, represented
by Norway and Denmark, allowed domestic attacks
against overseas Chinese and even other Asian
groups. Japan·s financial minister Taro Aso
once said that some European countries have
reacted coldly to the epidemic in January,
and believed that ;that is the disease of
the yellow people, not ours:; some European
media have also repeatedly indicated that
the epidemic is a product of China's "unhygienic"
lifestyle. This arrogant sentiment made Europe
miss the best time to prevent the epidemic.
The second is the internal struggle in the
EU. In the face of the epidemic, Germany snatched
medical supplies from neighboring countries
such as Switzerland and snatched medical staff
from low-income countries. The EU did little
to deal with the epidemic in Italy and other
countries, but China has extended a helping
hand. Finally, there is the theory of herd
immunity. The United Kingdom once adopted
a passive anti-epidemic attitude at the beginning
of the outbreak of the local epidemic, which
attracted criticism from all walks of life,
and was eventually forced to change its strategy.
Sweden has clearly adopted a "herd immunity"
strategy, which has led to the second highest
death rate in Europe, and the cumulative death
toll has reached more than four times the
sum of the three neighboring countries.
In contrast, the Asia-Pacific region performed
well during the epidemic. South Korea took
resolute and rapid measures. Although epidemics
in Japan occur from time to time, the operation
of the society is basically stable, and the
people voluntarily isolate themselves and
wear masks consciously. The overall loss of
ASEAN countries in the epidemic is small.
After the epidemic, the outstanding performance
of East Asian and Southeast Asian countries
has helped to eliminate people·s blind worship
of Western countries, and regional economic
integration is also conducive to political
stability in the Asia-Pacific region.
The epidemic will bring an ideological shock
to the world. For a long time, Western developed
countries led by the United States have linked
material wealth with liberal ideology, linked
modernization with Western democratic systems,
and advocated the advantages of free markets
in terms of efficiency and innovation. For
countries with different political systems,
Western public opinion is dedicated to promoting
their backwardness, corruption and inefficiency.
In the Global Health Security Index released
by Hopkins University in the United States
in 2019, the United States ranked first with
a score of 83.5 (out of 100), while China
ranked 51st with a score of 48.2. At the beginning
of the outbreak, some Western media were extremely
excited and claimed that the prescription
for China was "freedom and democracy." Many
media believed that the epidemic would become
China's "Chernobyl moment. But the end result
is that the "national system" represented
by China and South Korea is far more efficient
than Western countries in fighting the epidemic.
When the epidemic raged in developed countries,
all kinds of stupidity under the banner of
"freedom" were exposed: people ignored the
government's ban on gatherings, young people
believed in "low youth mortality rate"; politicians
would not wear masks in "defense of freedom";
some media spread false rumors and racist
speech; some Western countries have frequent
scandals such as looting of supplies, falsified
data, and busy political fights and still
insist on shirking responsibility. The epidemic
has made more people in the world aware of
the inherent shortcomings of the Western system.
It can be expected that after the epidemic,
more people will step out of the blind worship
of "Westernism".
Slide 3
There are several contradictions that are
difficult to bridge and intensify in American
society, including the gap between the rich
and the poor, racial contradictions, ideology,
virtual versus real economy, globalization
and anti-globalization. Major social crises
will promote the emergence of extremist groups,
and these groups cannot communicate with each
other, which intensifies social opposition.
For example, after the 2008 subprime mortgage
crisis, the American people were deeply dissatisfied
with Wall Street financiers who acted recklessly
and transferred risks to the country and society.
The American leftists demand strengthening
supervision and improving the social security
mechanism, while the extreme right "Tea Party"
requires deficit reduction and restriction
of government power. The demands of the two
are fundamentally contradictory. After 2010,
the "Tea Party Movement", of alternative right-wing
movements and the left-wing anti-fascist movements
and "black lives matter" movements are at
the throat of each other. Trump has won the
support of American right-wingers with his
efficient network mobilization ability and
unique agenda setting ability. He won the
2016 presidential election by focusing on
winning "die hard loyal" voters. Therefore,
they have introduced a large number of radical
domestic and foreign policies, even at the
expense of intensifying domestic and international
conflicts. At the same time, the Democratic
Party and some groups with impaired interests
have also begun to use radical means to confront
the Trump administration.
Since the Obama era, America·s strategic
hostility towards China has increased day
by day; the American elite has been disappointed
by China·s "peaceful evolution", commercially
dissatisfied with competition from Chinese
technology companies, and militarily towards
the increasingly mature Chinese military.
Feeling worried, the United States has gone
further and further on the anti-China road.
In this general environment, the U.S. government
has made frequent moves in the fields of trade,
technology, finance, justice, military, diplomacy,
human rights, and international organizations.
It has made no secret of its intention to
curb China·s development. Anti-China has
become a bipartisan consensus, and the "moderates"
in China have lost their right to speak.
The sudden crisis reflects the true attitudes
of people and governments around the world
towards China. Most countries have provided
assistance to China within their capacity
during the crisis, and international organizations
have also expressed support for China.
The epidemic has brought a series of new challenges
to China. First, Sino-US relations continue
to deteriorate. The epidemic has brought a
series of crises to American society, with
racial conflicts and conflicts between the
rich and the poor being intensified. This
has made American strategists more manic and
even irrational. It can be expected that in
the near future, the anti-China policy of
the United States and its allies will become
more intense.. Secondly, "China guilty theory"
is constantly developing. Western countries
headed by the United Kingdom and the United
States will continue to fan the flames in
the international arena and encourage countries
around the world to seek "compensate" against
China. Third, some neighboring countries,
such as India, deliberately provoke border
conflicts with China out of the need to shift
internal conflicts and cater to the US strategy.
Finally, the wave of anti-globalization is
severe and will create huge obstacles to the
governance of transnational crisis management.
China·s top priority is still to restore
economic production and ease the pressure
of small and medium-sized enterprises and
low-income workers. China needs to be prepared
for a prolonged war, develop a fast and effective
mechanism of coexisting with the virus to
maintain the operation of economic machinery.
In short, only by recovering from the epidemic
as soon as possible can China be more confident
in coping with the challenges and seeking
more long-term development.
Creating original content is hard work, your
support is what keeps me going. Please like
and share this episode. You can also donate
to this channel by clicking the link in the
description below. Thank you.
