The systems are not the problem

The escalation of political tensions between the US and China has been felt around the world despite the Corona crisis. The simplified analysis that the US has surpassed the peak of its economic and political power, and that China is slowly but surely taking its place – becoming the first serious competitor or challenger in a century – is, in principle, correct, but an unhelpful simplification.

Because, given that most countries in the world depend more or less heavily on both nuclear superstates – politically and economically – we, or our politicians, need far more knowledge and an understanding of history and background to at least avoid mistakes or even make a constructive contribution to easing the situation. In principle, all information and many clever analyses are available – but there is a lack of will to use or implement it.

In advance in example for introduction and reflection

Tensions between the US and China reached a new peak only this week, when US Secretary of State Michael Pompeo, who is currently a Hardliner, declared that everything “Chinese” should be reduced in the US from the areas of IT Software (Apps), Hardware (Huawei, etc.), Cloud and Community Services (TikToc, etc.) and then abolished. A similar approach will certainly be “recommended"to the euro partners and others in the coming days.

The current “case of Hong Kong"can be understood – if one only wants-also in Europe rather than the overall problem of China-USA tensions.

Western / European politicians and almost all media condemn the increased control of Hong Kong by Beijing simply as “an attack on the democratic structures of this country, on the freedom rights there” etc.

But who asks if Hong Kong has ever been a democracy – just like Singapore, which is popular with business people and holidaymakers – which simply has a dictatorial (but successful) government or more recent history.

We condemn the slave trade, racism and supposedly colonialism – but Hong Kong has been a British “crown colony” so far. The British had “acquired” this Region under the worst circumstances, the targeted use of Heroin and huge casualties among the Chinese. It later – after the Second World War – built modern Hong Kong, while the Chinese first had to free themselves from Maoism.

It is true that in Hong Kong there were/are extensive freedoms, especially economic ones. But the Mafia organization of the Triads still has five-digit membership numbers (and participates in the demonstrations) and no place in the world was/is probably as successful in money laundering as the Duo Macao-Hong Kong.

The “pre-and main wash” takes place in Macao (still organized by professional mafia organizations), the “rinse and dry” in Hong Kong – which means that the money received in Hong Kong is almost clean, can be converted into any currency in the world with the help of international banks and the reputation of the city – state remains just as clean-or is even called “democratic”.

The former. British chief of the secret police in the city-state (this was also typical of Hong Kong democracy!), who for many years has also worked with a US intelligence officer (now a private security company) estimated the annual money laundering at well over 100 billion US dollars. But while people get excited about Panama Papers and tax havens in Europe and elsewhere, is all this part of the “democracy” that needs to be preserved in Hong Kong?

Worse still, who was doing well in Hong Kong, where no serious Democratic Opposition was seen for many decades? To rich foreigners, banks, shipping companies, businessmen, money launderers, etc.

On the other hand, millions of “guest workers” who arrived from mainland China or other countries never had any hope of democratic rights or even complete universal “human rights.”

Because a large number of them live/vegetate next to the many rich and ultra-rich in pitiful accommodations. Often there are 2 (two!) Square meters, which pass any comparison with the Tönnies workers. Basic health and other social services are available to them – but at most on a scale equivalent to “communist” China. These groups have never demonstrated for democracy, but at most for their minimal rights – if at all.

Democracy and the rule of law! Yes, on the lower level, from road traffic to construction law, but also with regard to academic freedoms and the media, things have worked comparatively well in Hong Kong so far. But nobody knew or wanted under British “democracy” a comparable right of work or residence with us.

Conversely, whoever has the means in Hong Kong is in charge. And the” stupid " Chinese leadership has never managed (see Analyses below) to make it clear to the world that their partly successful fight against corruption was holey as long as a large number of mainland Chinese with their millions, who had been duped or extorted, were relegated to “free” Hong Kong-and from there to the USA, among others, protected by the British “protectorate” – as the word itself explains.

No wonder that the leadership in Beijing is boiling when Boris Johnson publicly offers up to three million Hong Kong Chinese a move to the kingdom-not least of all, these will again be the majority of the groups that have previously been afraid of not being able to hide their accounts in Hong Kong from the Chinese tax investigation at some point.

The former richest man in China, Li Ka – ching, whose son Victor Li is the president of the Hong Kong Chamber of Commerce, supports the democracy movement-his business interests are against Beijing. What no German Journalist or member of Parliament wants to know: the large service provider “ISTA” belongs to Li Ka-Ching and its measuring devices spark from millions of German households around the clock – but this is a democratic Hong Kong Chinese and not a “bad Huawei Communist”. To reassure: for a long time, Huawei programmers struggled with their own security programs and were long exposed to the attacks of the NSA. Fortunately, however, they represent the democratic West.

Our media focus on Hong Kong, on the other hand, is mainly on the small group of convinced Democrats who had previously stood up against the semi-democratic government. It is not an issue that a majority of Pseudo-democrats have joined them, who have every reason to fear some Cleanmen from Beijing.

And what is also not in the press: the British would probably have wanted to keep Hong Kong much longer than their crown colony had the Chinese not had an “unbeatable” means of pressure at hand: without the water supply from the neighboring Chinese mainland, Hong Kong could not survive. Because the own production is too small and a seawater desalination for millions of inhabitants is not feasible.

What are we saying? Even the comparatively transparent “case of Hong Kong” needs to be judged in a much more differentiated way, instead of practising its alleged moral “grandeur” and indignation at China’s Hong Kong policy through harsh criticism and sanctions against Beijing like the USA or Europe (on the Meuse).

Which brings us back to the fundamental questions of systems. Much more than what is lacking in detail, background and historical knowledge about Hong Kong is being falsified and ignored in the case of the world’s most populous state.

From the example of Hong Kong to the background of China-USA

Without to say anything about it: although China introduced many new degrees of freedom into the previously Soviet-planned economic System since the Deng Xiaoping government, the basic political structures still remained largely Leninist, guided by a central party structure that currently makes use of a thoroughly technically/technocratically qualified government under Xi Jinping.

Xi, on the other hand, like most of his colleagues, is largely convinced of the meaningfulness of this basic structure or ideology, and the majority of the party apparatus is just as much behind him as he is behind the party apparatus. The reports about internal conflicts apply just as much as one can save the details. In our model democracies, however, just such” conditions “characterize their liveliness – and this is no different in China, only that one preserves one’s face there and does not take the citizens' night’s sleep around the clock – everyone knows it, even in dictatorships.

Even more than US politicians, who are convinced or even persuade themselves to serve a liberal democracy, Chinese politicians assume that their system of tight leadership with modern elements and a thriving economy is optimal for the most populous country on Earth. After all, China is the most successful development dictatorship in the world and has generated about a third of the world’s economic growth in the last decade – as well as lifting more than half a billion people out of poverty.

For Chinese politicians, but also for a large number of Chinese, economic human rights simply take precedence over general human rights, which we consider to be of higher value.

And while fewer and fewer people in the” richest country on Earth “believe in their” unlimited possibilities, " many Chinese have actually fared better and better over the past two decades – not all of them, but not only the rich elites (as in the US), but also a huge under - and recently wealthy middle class that has outgrown poverty.

This was also the case in the US – but this cycle is now either over or has been interrupted for a long time, while China actually still has “air to the top”. Above all, it has recognised its own (structural) problems and is tackling them vigorously – sometimes successfully. This includes environmental protection, the digitalization of the economy, great efforts in education and of course the difficult transition from" old " industries such as coal and steel to high-tech, etc.

Western media Propaganda that China is, despite everything, a control state and therefore fundamentally negative to see – or even to fight against – is not even covered by American scientific research.

Just recently, a long-term study was published by the Ash Center of the prestigious Harvard School (perhaps also as a small sideshow to the current Washington), which clearly shows that between 2003 and 2016, the Chinese were more and more satisfied with their government than ever before. More than 30,000 Chinese people in urban and rural regions were surveyed.

Among other things, barely a third of Chinese people twenty years ago believed that the fight against corruption could be successful. Under Xi Jinping, the approval rate rose to over 70%. Since then, most survey results have weakened somewhat, but they remain at a relatively high level.

And in contrast to Western democracies, where more often local politicians receive more praise than the leadership in the capital, it is the other way around in China: there they rather praise the tight central guidelines and more often criticize the local representatives.

The expression “hierarchical satisfaction” – to translate with higher satisfaction with the higher level-is rather incomprehensible to Western ways of thinking, but very Chinese, as a well-known Professor at Lee Kwan Yew University in Singapore points out.

No one questions the fact that some of the approval is also supported by effective Propaganda, as well as the fact that citizens of higher education are far less dependent on propaganda than uneducated people-but this is true worldwide, especially in the USA.

Where Are we now in the China-US conflict?

It could look as if the Chinese, with their “Expansion” in the South China Sea (SCS) and the militarization of this Region, have got rid of the Problem-and stepped on the Americans ' geostrategic tie. China’s economic successes – which they actually achieved using similar unfair means as the Japanese once did (which was probably forgotten by US) - only became a Problem for the US when its own economy showed itself less and less able to cope with global competition.

In addition, the global financial crisis in 2008 hit western countries much harder than Asia or China. Because the Asians had at least learned from the Asian currency crisis – which was brutally unleashed by the “democracy propagandist” George Soros in 1998-that financial markets are dangerous and high – speed gambling can end badly.

From around 2010, the Obama administration tried to boost business and trade with Asian countries beyond China – but this remained relatively powerless, as the Initiative was as unsystematic as it was unsustainable.

Understanding the course of events-right up to the recent “declaration of war” by US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo – requires neither an academic background nor an overly profound knowledge of the US mentality. Donald Trump’s original idea of regulating world politics in a business and simple way – his real strength-failed not only because of the Chinese, but because of the deeply entrenched us mentality and policy.

This has long been in ideological and religious pseudo-moral categories. Simplified: the world should recover not from the German, but from the American being. In the worldwide (damaging)joy over the dispute between the former adviser and Hardliner Bolton and Donald Trump, it is completely overlooked that Trump is perhaps the “crazy”, at least the Chaot – but the real enemies of China (and of world peace) are people like Bolton, Pence, Cruz, Pompeo and many others – who are currently supported by US military.

Trump has probably long since lost track of how many maneuvers, “FONOPS,” exercises, and actions his generals have performed in the South China Sea, the Taiwan Strait, and near the Chinese mainland over the past three months. According to internal US sources, this “high operational speed” serves to show the Chinese that despite the Corona problems, the US military is able to maintain its combat readiness also in the Pacific.

The trigger was not the embarrassing paralysis of the USS Theodore Roosevelt with 1156 infected soldiers, but this had already been designed as a political-military strategy: on April 16, Republican Mac Thornberry presented the so-called “Indo – Pacific Deterrence Initiative” before the “House Armed Services Committee”, which is supposed to serve-according to the US view – to form a counterweight to Chinese Aggression.

Not only did German media forget to analyse this, but they probably also overlooked the fact that the text of the “European Deterrence Initiative” of 2014 had been reworked to prevent such Aggression in Europe – this time on the part of Russia.

But these new programs are not war games on patient paper, but real military Hardware, missile defense systems, observation and espionage activities, the provision of equipment, troop shifts, and the expansion of military installations and exercises with regional partners from Thailand to Tokyo - for a combined $ 6 billion.

Above all, there is clear information that the US wants to be even more prominent alongside Taiwan, “of course, in order to prevent China from taking over by force.”

Not the Russian, the Chinese “bear” was awakened

China’s “militarism” is comparatively more recent – and therefore hardly comparable to the US so far, although growing rapidly. For thousands of years, the Chinese “empire” was primarily concerned with its own cohesion, instead of conquering other countries.

Nothing underlines this better than the construction of the Great Wall of China – which was at least somewhat more successful in defence than Donald Trump’s modern attempt in the south of the USA.

Worse still, China’s historical internal weaknesses have been brutally exploited time and again, for example by the colonial conquests by the British Empire – whose presence can still be “admired” in Hong Kong today. Even more humiliated were China’s self – beloved rulers by the – far worse-long period of bondage under Japanese rule.

This very simplified historical digression simply serves to answer the question, " How Will China react to the growing pressure from the United States?“The answer cannot lie in a detailed prediction of the future, but in a clear analysis: China will do a devil to let itself be patronized, oppressed or even incapacitated once again, no matter what it wants.

To classify China as economically aggressive for some time is not out of the question, but in the past five decades this has simply been seen as a sign of clever action, hard-working citizens and creative thinkers for the USA, Germany and many other “market economies”.

French Commercial Agencies proudly call themselves” poste d’expansion économique " – for example,“outpost of economic expansion”. What was allowed to the Western democratic “gods” for centuries, is now resented by the rising Chinese.

Two weeks ago, US Secretary of State Pompeo gave a speech that had long been expected of a former CIA chief: “communists always lie… most of all when they think they speak for 1.4 billion people they monitor, suppress or silence through pressure..”

“I call on the leaders of all countries to do what America has done – simply to insist on reciprocity, transparency and accountability of the Chinese Communist Party.”

If one observes – without any ulterior motives-that the demand for transparency with the Communists took place just at the time when his own boss, President Trump, once again refused to explain his income, tax and wealth relations, one does not need to hold a talk show about the concept of double standards-or should do so all the more.

Pompeo deliberately gave his speech in the garden of the “Richard Nixon Library” or in front of his birthplace in Yorba Linda, California, because – whatever else Nixon did – it was he who, together with Henry Kissinger, thawed the frozen political relations with China for the first time after the Second World War.

Briefly and painlessly, the US Secretary of State declared this attempt over with the words, “we must not continue this. We must not go back there.“Official Washington has thus – perhaps even past Trump – declared an end to global détente-with the Russia sanctions already in place.

In the twenty-minute speech, he also criticized Germany, which is not clearly on the side of the USA, and called on the” free world “to unite against China, because” the Chinese are more dependent on us than we are dependent on them…”

If he is not mistaken, although this is actually true economically. Because China needs its foreign trade and its investors not only because of the Corona crisis, but above all in the medium term to carry through its massive structural reforms and programmes such as the “go West” and the “Silk Road”.

The – extremely important-further strengthening of China’s middle class also costs a lot of money, as does the restructuring of the banking system. But the USA – which a stock exchange operator in Frankfurt recently described as “a WireCard with 350 million inhabitants”-is sitting in the debt glass house – and the people are also waiting for improvement there.

On the other hand, the Chinese are more united today than in the past two thousand years of their history, also and especially because of the permanent pressure by the USA. And – like the Americans for a long time-they finally have a lot to lose, especially decades of incomparable economic recovery.

Pompeo’s speech-attempt to drive a wedge between the “good, hardworking “Chinese” and their” people-driven, irresponsible " government (short version) - shows that he, too, does not read the analyses of his intelligence services any more than Trump himself does.

Two kinds, three kinds, many kinds (Meuse)

The fact that the USA is only making itself heard by “Atlanticists”, Mainstream journalists and politicians-and thus unfortunately also by the “democratically feeling masses” – in Germany is simply due to selective information processing.

“China is buying up Europe” is almost a classic. Nobody reckons that US financial groups have a multiple of German and European companies in their pockets (technical language Portfolio investments). European politicians tremble in front of Huawei, who can hardly distinguish hardware and Software – and in their buildings, the entire Internet runs through Cisco Servers.

This US company has “guaranteed “us not to install” Backdoors " in their devices. Nor do they, because every semi-sober Amateur spy knows that the devices leave the Cisco plants “clean”, but then are retrofitted by well-known service providers with three letters in a separate high-tech Operation before Export (to Germany, etc.).

The (real) joke among intelligence officers is the Code to refer to such devices simply as an” Export Version", while the (correctly encrypting or backdoor-free) devices are reserved for personal use.

This is what (almost) all countries do. And when Kzl’in Merkel told the press, “listening to friends, that’s certainly not possible”, she referred to “naive” or respectable Germany. Because “Export"devices with back doors were actually (sold at least for a long time) only to “less friendly” States.

That Chancellor Kohl and the Federal Foreign Office received bugged telephone systems from France, the USA with their antennas near Bonn and in Bavaria listened to Airbus - and other companies as well as the Swiss listened to Karlsruhe or Stuttgart – all no Problem compared to today’s alleged “Chinese danger” for Germany?

Without the South China Sea (SCS), an analysis of the “China-Bashing” by the US and its allies (literally) and The Associated tensions and risks would be more than sketchy. In this regard, too, the assessment is clear at first glance, especially since China has clearly lost even the lawsuits before the international tribunal for the law of the sea (the ISGH in Hamburg). The verdict: China has by no means comprehensive territorial claims on most of the artificial or “reclaimed” islands.

The position of the USA: China is (actually and potentially) obstructing the “FONOP”, the free shipping or “Freedom of Navigation Operations” – whereby the USA at FONOP refers in practice to its 7th US fleet, which carries out comprehensive maneuvers there and in the Indian Ocean together with the 6th US fleet.

If you want to learn more about this largest military fleet in the world, almost every aircraft carrier or frigate will find their own (!) Website – after all, one has nothing to hide, but defends (as at about 1,000 other global military outposts) the free world.

On the other hand, China, with its few dozen cultural-political “Confucius Institutes”, which serve to spread its ideology and way of thinking as well as comparable Western institutions, does not look very militant worldwide until now without major military ports (which are now slowly emerging)-but is portrayed as the Aggressor.

But China is not only a (so far) weak Aggressor, but a “lousy” PR practitioner: because in the SCS China could have played with open cards for years, instead of making a bad reputation in old-communist secrecy and denial.

Because the” occupation " of the SCS did not take place – as is also claimed – mainly because of the deep-sea raw materials or fishing rights there (which certainly exist and in which the Chinese are actually interested), but in response to (not to say: for fear of) the 6th and 7th US fleets. Because China has a huge Problem: an essential part of its energy (and also goods) supply runs through the Strait of Singapore or the Strait of Magellan.

Not the notorious pirates there, but already a single submarine of the Americans could seal them off – and economically bring China to its knees in a few weeks. Militarily, the US is still far superior to the Chinese. Not only has China only begun to build or equip aircraft carriers that are usable at all, but its nuclear submarines are comparatively too slow and the diesel-electric ones too loud.

Above all, the Chinese lack navigation logistics from the air for effective use. So if – as recently-the USA demonstratively shows its superior P-8 (Poseidon) and other “sniffer dogs” like the EP-3E up to 76.5 kilometers before Shanghai (!) patrolling, the Chinese can only crunch with their teeth-or finally retrofit, what the stuff holds.

Unfortunately, most European politicians apparently lack the time and / or imagination to imagine a reversed scenario with Chinese submarines on the Panama or Suez Canal-but what would happen then, we know from the Cuban Missile Crisis.

In the end, the South China Sea is not about the free navigation of the USA, but about that of China. And in a certain desperation, the Chinese have “upgraded” the many islands in the SCS for the next 10-20 years to replacement aircraft carriers, in order to ensure from there their vital “FONOP”, i.e. their energy and goods traffic with the Middle East and Europe with the existing flight and missile material.

As shirtless as American China policy is, the Chinese are unable or unwilling to tell the world what is the matter and where the focus of their interests lies. A tragic " stair joke “in world history, because even if China were to tell the truth more or less brutally, this would be credible or understandable and would be” swallowed " (as today by the ASEAN states)-while the US has long since lost its credibility in many places.

The majority of all educated citizens in Africa know that Chinese people do not come to give alms, but that it is a matter of business, recognition and presence – no more, no less, and above all they (almost) no longer “sell” ideology – except that one accepts the “Chinese way”.

If western / German media repeatedly warn African or other countries receiving China Aid or investment against them, this has long since become an insult. In a restaurant in Bonn, I asked a waitress from Sri Lanka what she thought of the Chinese (media: scandal) project of the Hambantota port, which was created as part of the Silk Road.

Answer: “without the Chinese, we would still not have a port, and if our own government had done it alone, the money would have disappeared in our pockets and the port would have been a ghost town.” In short, anyone who lectures these countries about" evil Chinese " is a racist, completely independent of the truth of the Information.

The fact that Chinese people are classified as “racist” as a group of boot-wearing Texans in a Buddhist pagoda by their often rude appearance only shows that Chinese people – like the USA at the time-have made enormous economic progress, but still need a lot of “inter – cultural” understanding and experience in order not only to be accepted, but also to be liked-currently there is no evidence.

The US, on the other hand, has led bloody and expensive crusades all over the world – since Vietnam – and (according to quite reasonable sources) interfered in elections in about 80 countries. But the fact that this would have led to more freedom and (real) democracy in the affected states is, politely, hardly demonstrable – something that has since spread, albeit very slowly.

China’s mistake – even stupidity-lies in selling perfectly logical, even geo-strategic actions provoked by US pressure such as the “new Silk Road” (BRI) as a kind of service to humanity, rather than as a trade, economic and foreign policy with quite expansive intentions.

In the end, the leadership in Beijing has maneuvered into a potential “Thucydides Trap” faster than necessary-especially without seeking early assistance from the rest of the world diplomatically and professionally. (Short version of the Thucydides trap: the danger of war grows when one power outstrips another.)

For at present, China – in the majority of Western countries (unlike Asia or Africa) – benefits less from its “good deeds” or at least cooperative pacifist behavior (no sanctions, no military interventions, but “usual” political or economic pressure) than from the unspeakable policies of Trump and his “comrades” like Pompeo.

Why do the Chinese still have a worse reputation than the Americans – compared to the rest of the world? Simplified answer: anyone who does not know a people behaves in a covertly racist way – and the Chinese are known far less than the Americans.

After all, at least with the person Trump “the fun stops.“Even simpler, but still true:” what the farmer does not know, he does not eat” - and who knows China?

If foreign minister Genscher was right in 1978/79, when he (after the SS-20 threat by the USSR) forced the USA with a risky diplomatic Trick not only to leave the US nuclear weapons in Germany, but even to modernize them, then the world could hope again this time that the Thucydides Trap does not close for the time being, thus there is no war between the USA and China.

However, a warning is appropriate: anyone who believes that the world will be safer if Trump leaves is mistaken. On the one hand, the" political USA " has long been committed to the implementation of its – God – given-World Police role. And with the exception of a few pacifists, a majority still believes in the good in capitalism and the evil in (thought) Communist China.

Trump’s “Business instead of war” was worth a try. The fact that you can “buy” the world with money, that you can forget politics with Russians and Chinese and instead conquer “hearts and minds” through business was almost brilliant – albeit as naive as megalomaniac. But even more than Obama before, Trump failed not because of his own plans, but because of the US political Establishment. And this does not practice “conspiracy theories”, but a long-established practice of world hegemony.

Whether the (secret?) Scenario it is still open that his representative Pence will take over the candidacy of Trump in the short term (for which he will receive a lot of honor and a comprehensive amnesty). The majority of Republicans could be behind such an Operation, because the" moral level " or reputation of the Democratic opponent Biden is also not much higher.

However, a constitutional hurdle lies in the fact that amnesties generally only apply to US national jurisdiction-but not to charges such as those currently brought by the state of New York, among others. If necessary, Trump could then follow the example of the old Spanish King.

Beijing is also currently playing us simulation games, but Xi Jinping (who understands the US far better than Trump understands the Chinese, especially since Xi’s daughter even studied there) knows as well as himself and the Great Chinese Communist Party that the apparatuses or systems are ultimately like the desert the caravan passes by.

After all, even in China things are by no means streamlined: in February, the Corona crisis flared up in Wuhan, shortly after which the photogenic North Korean ruler in the neighborhood disappeared from view for two weeks, which was intensively observed and speculatively commented on by the media worldwide.

That President Xi was also “offline” for several days and not only wild rumours circulated in China, but so far unimaginable public criticism spread – and was not suppressed – has hardly any media person or even a politician noted – or even evaluated in the West.

But isolated cases, such as the tragically deceased doctor who failed the (old-communist) local authorities in Wuhan, suddenly filled our pages. That the culprits were then severely punished was again missing in the media perception = selective journalism / politics. The term “intellectual racism” would have to be invented.

It is important to understand that we can still learn a lot from the Chinese, because which politicians, officials or authorities are held accountable for corruption, misconduct, stupidity, impudence, etc.? Stupid, evil young people and right-wingers whistle on the duty to make masks. The media do not lie, but in March/April, when I – coming from Asia – had been wearing masks for a long time, Merkel, Spahn and the Rest of the “leadership” whistled on masks as well – and so instructed the people.

One (educated, well-traveled) Asian visitor stated after a visit to China: “unbelievable, everything clean, everything well organized, everything safe, even in front of supermarkets a uniformed, there are not even pickpockets… that’s better than in Sweden, I think … there you give your tax money to the government and they do a lot for it … but in China I felt somehow better.“Just a single opinion-but worth thinking about.

In the end, Beijing is the same as Foreign Minister Maas, who gets the BND reports from China, via Hong Kong, the South China Sea or the Silk Road (in which there are certainly a hundred times more than here), but ultimately follows the flow of things and opinions – and it is still flowing from West to East at the moment.

A recent observation at the end-the Puzzle must be composed by each reader himself: from Indian sources comes the Information (consciously launched or not) that two Chinese generals of their own leadership, namely President Xi Jinping, would have advised, in future foreign policy somewhat more carefully or diplomatically with the USA(!).

Generals Dai Xu and Qiao Liang (the latter retired, teaches at the PLA People’s Liberation Army University), known as” hardliners " (hawks), have demanded that China reassess its understanding of the US. This must be done from an ideological point of view and take into account one’s own strategy and tactics in order not to make dangerous mistakes.

The General refers to the – relatively new-instruction to Chinese diplomats to understand themselves as “wolf warriors” - that is, to operate with a little less restraint in the future. China’s Foreign Minister Wang Yi had instructed his embassies accordingly in May of that year, justifying this more or less unequivocally by saying that one was surrounded by “hegemonic wolves” – which clearly meant the United States and Great Britain.

The generals demand, among other things, that Xi should abandon any idea of taking Taiwan militarily, as well as any kind of warfare on several fronts – or even use the Corona Situation for such actions. The Indian source claims with this (TV)broadcast that there is massive criticism of Xi in China-which is not entirely wrong, but also deliberate Propaganda.

The fact that the Indians cannot refrain from calling the Chinese generals depicted in the broadcast as internal “Angels of peace” at the same time as Hawks is again typical of Indian thinking or military. A (fundamentally hostile) Chinese or even Pakistani military can only be cited with a negative attribute-no matter in what context, otherwise you are a traitor yourself – Asia is just a little different.

Those of our thoughtful readers who do not believe this should “google"Indian or Pakistani military websites (many in English).

If one reads the texts of local military or press spokesmen, not only do European hairs stand out, but one also wonders why violent nuclear wars have not long ago broken out between Pakistan, India, but also China.

The good news: if – as we fortunately know – this is not the case, then we can also assess the risk of an escalating (military) conflict between the US and China as critical for the time being, but not very likely.

Conclusion: in a” battle of the giants”, like between China and the USA, one is tempted to interpret too much of Details and opinions or even" up-to-date information " into it and thus to overlook the forest for the trees. But both countries have clear interests and fundamental strategies that will hardly change, even if the media and politicians present it differently on a daily basis.

The nuclear annihilation of the world – except for the Cuban Missile Crisis and the Soviet invasion-would have so far only happened through technical errors or misunderstandings. Even in the event of a China-US conflict, the latter could happen sooner.

There is little evidence for a deliberate military strike at the moment, because both sides are today controlled by ideologies, but even more by material interests – those who have something to lose and do not get the kingdom of heaven for it, think twice. At least for the Chinese this is true – the US is now much deeper into ideological and pseudo-religious thought schemes.