China News Service: China has become a “shadow protagonist”, it’s time to “goodbye, G7!”
China News Service, May 7 (Wen Tianxia) “Goodbye, G7! …you can only blame yourself for your failure!”
Martin Martin, a well-known British scholar and senior researcher at the University of Cambridge Jacques’s words on social media hit the nail on the head, representing an international voice. Experts from many countries believe that as a product of the old era, G7 has long been outdated.
On May 5, London, England, the G7 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting completed the first offline meeting in two years. Although there were no Chinese representatives at the meeting, the plans for how to deal with Chinese voices came and went one after another, as if China was the “shadow protagonist” of this meeting.
The message released by this meeting is very clear: The G7 led by the United States has formed a gang to instigate confrontation with China. Excluding Russia, the G7 is essentially just a product of the old era. It can’t contain China’s development at all. It can only bluff people through political shows.
【Forming gangs, just to deal with China? 】
Seven countries, including the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan, are the constituents of this “small circle”. This meeting is the first offline meeting held by the G7 in two years. The rotating presidency of the United Kingdom has also attracted “newcomers” such as Australia, India, South Africa and South Korea.
With such a strong momentum, it should have focused on the most urgent issues of the new crown epidemic and economic recovery recognized by the people on the earth. Unexpectedly, China became the “shadow protagonist” of the conference.
Before the formal meeting began, US Secretary of State Blincoln made frequent essays on the topic of “China”. After arriving in London on May 3, Brinken held bilateral talks with British Foreign Minister Raab. Raab bluntly said that this meeting is to deal with the “challenges” of China and Russia.
On the same day, Brinken also held separate talks with the foreign ministers of Japan and South Korea, and emphasized the need to “strengthen cooperation” in dealing with issues related to China.
“G7 seeks a common front against China.” Foreign media reported. The first meeting of the G7 formal talks was to discuss China.
A senior official of the US State Department said that the meeting took about 90 minutes to discuss China’s “Belt and Road” initiative and advocate China’s “economic threat.”
From China’s practices in trade, investment and development financing, to Hong Kong’s electoral system, the surrounding situation in the East China Sea and the South China Sea, and the Xinjiang issue, the G7’s discussions and attacks on China-related issues are full of firepower. Open, none of them will fall.
p > [International rule order, G7 has the final say? 】
Since we are so concerned about China, why not invite Chinese representatives to the conference?
Faced with questions raised by a reporter from the US media “New York Times”, Raab responded that he believed that it was necessary to have an organization that would link “countries with the same ideas” together for discussion.” How to deal with the challenge”.
Blinken added that this is not “want to contain China” but only to “maintain an international rule-based order.”
It’s okay if I don’t say this, it means “covering one’s ears and stealing the bell”. A diplomat said that the United States hopes to establish a consultation mechanism involving the G7 and other stakeholders, so that all parties can make a coordinated response to China and Russia’s actions.
The simple translation is, we are going to engage in a “small group” to discuss how to deal with you (Chinese and Russian), how can we let you participate? As for the “same thinking”, I am afraid it is “containing China and Russia.”
The so-called “rule-based order” is also very ridiculous. If the “rules” are based on global consensus, then past history has proven many times that the United States is not only the guardian of a series of international rules, but the destroyer of rules. Whether it is ignoring the will of the United Nations, launching a war alone, or ignoring World Trade Organization rulings; whether it is withdrawing from international treaties and agreements concluded at will, or “long-arm jurisdiction” interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, it all shows that the United States has a rule of thumb. The term “double standard” and narrow definition.
At the China-US Alaska talks in March 2021, Chinese representative Yang Jiechi had already refuted the argument of “rules-based order.” Yang Jiechi stated that “China follows an international system with the United Nations at its core, an international order based on international law, not an international order based on rules advocated by a small number of countries.”
Is the international order, the G7 has the final say?
[“G7, you can only blame yourself for your failure”]
Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin said at a regular press conference held on May 6, “The Seven Nations The group’s foreign minister’s accusation against China has no factual basis. This is a flagrant intervention in China’s internal affairs, a group politics that reverses history, a gross interference in China’s sovereignty and wanton destruction of the norms of international relations, and a violation of peaceful development and cooperation. The trend of the times for a win-win situation.
In fact, experts in many countries believe that as a product of the old era, G7 has long been out of date.
Martin Jacques social account Screenshot
Martin Jacques, a well-known British scholar and senior researcher at the University of Cambridge, posted on his personal social media: “Goodbye, G7. You used to dominate the world, but now you are only a smaller and smaller part of the world. . You can’t stand the decline of your status, so you blame China. But you can only blame yourself for your failure.”
Vice Chairman of the Russian Federation Security Council Medvedev once said that in the G20 and other international cooperation Under the background of the model, the existence value of G7 is “doubtful.”
Even the egoist of the United States has admitted the limitations of G7. Former US President Tron once criticized the G7 as “a group of outdated countries” and “cannot objectively reflect the current world pattern.” However, the reason why Trump did not implement his usual “retirement” move is undoubtedly that he still wants to use this group to expand the interests of the United States.
Nowadays, no matter how the G7 holds high the banner of “responding to China” and clings to “crisis” against China, this unpopular “political show” is destined to be a one-man show with no applause. (End)