Guan Yao: Since the support of the "one middle", why does beauty talk with Taiwan for mili

Direct news: The three -day "Xianghui" has come to an end, but the Chinese Defense Minister resolutely responded on the Taiwan -related issue at the "Xianghui" site yesterday (12th), but continued to swipe the screen in the Western media. What do you have about this? Observed?

Special commentator Guan Yao: Yes, I noticed that Wei Fenghe's speech by mainstream English media in the West, the most quoted in the title is the hard gas expression of "Fight to the End", that is, to Wei Feng and "will definitely play to the end" In English, the original speech of the Chinese Defense Minister is: If someone dares to split Taiwan, we will definitely fight to the end at the expense of fighting and at the cost of the end. This is the best choice in China. The New York Times reported the title today that China Defense Minister Wei Fenghe warned that if someone split Taiwan, China would not hesitate. The title of "Commercial Internal References" states that China announced that it would prevent "Taiwan independence" to the end. Bloomberg reported yesterday that the Chinese Defense Minister issued a strong warning of China on the risk of the Taiwan Strait War. But I don't agree with Bloomberg's judgment. In fact, this is the consistent position of the Chinese military including Wei Feng and himself. Isn't Wei Feng's talk about the Taiwan Strait, isn't there such a bloody expression: if someone dares to split Taiwan from China, the Chinese army has no choice, and it will definitely fight at all costs. What else do I have to do?

Therefore, the statement of the Chinese Defense Minister's speech yesterday's speeches actually reiterated the consistent position of the Chinese military. This consistent consistency is even reflected in discourse organizations and expressions. However, Western media once again stated that the Chinese military will definitely play the screen. It means that the core, most important and most sensitive agenda that is related to the integrity of the national sovereignty and territoriality of China, China has laid the clearest red line. Huang Yonghong's warning of the "Xianghui" host is the "deep red line" that cannot be touched. The world is obvious to this, and the Western public opinion field has once again strengthened this cognition. As for the boundary of this "deep red line", China's "Anti -split National Law" has long stipulated that the "Taiwan independence" split forces can cause the facts of Taiwan to split from China in any name and way. The possibility of a major incident from splitting from China is completely lost, or the possibility of peace and unity is completely lost. The country must adopt non -peaceful methods and other necessary measures to defend national sovereignty and territorial integrity.

Direct news: But the US defense ministers played the "Taiwan card" in this "Xianghui", and the Taiwan media also broke the news that the Taiwanese representative will hold a so -called military security dialogue with the United States near Washington next week. This means that this means What?

Special commentator Guan Yao: The US Defense Minister's statement and actions in this "Xianghui" can be said to be highly contradictory. On the one hand, the Sino -US defense ministers have achieved a face -to -face meeting. Austin himself has actively evaluated the results of the meeting. He publicly claims that the United States is committed to strengthening communication with China to strengthen the "conflict protective bar" and reduce the risk of misjudgment of both parties. Austin also claimed in the speech of the "Xianghui" last Saturday that the Bayeng government did not support "Taiwan independence" and was committed to the "one middle" principle. But on the other hand, he also accused the Chinese side of the so -called "provocative and threatening stability" military activities around the Taiwan Strait, threatening that the United States did not support Beijing's position on Taiwan's issue and so on. A detailed testimony is that when Osin said at the end of the speech at the end of the Scholar of the US think tank, Grairi said in a question about the "Risks of the Taiwan Strait War" that the world is now paying attention to the Taiwan Strait. The "One China" policy, but at the same time, is also committed to providing military means to "self -defense" to Taiwan. What US leaders have repeatedly emphasized that any unilateral change in the status quo is unpopular and unwise.

I still insist on the previous judgment. If the United States really wants to control competition and control differences, to establish a so -called "protective fence" that avoids conflict, and the quality of the column is enough, there is sufficient protective power, the first thing is to be in the Sino -US army. The most sensitive, most important and the core and the most core Taiwan Strait issues have built "protective fences". Didn't the United States oppose the status quo in unilaterally? In my opinion, the biggest risk of changing the status quo on the Taiwan Strait issue comes from the "Taiwan independence" forces of "self -respect". Austin said in response to a question about "today's Ukraine may be Tomorrow's East Asia" in response to the main purpose of Nikki Shore. There are two key issues in the Russian and Ukraine conflict: Do Rules Matter? DOES SOVEREIGNTY MATTER? Is it important? Is it important to sovereignty? However, if Austin's question is placed on the Taiwan Strait agenda, it will show the flaws and hypocrisy of the United States immediately, including the latest announcement of the so -called Taiwanese party and the US military security dialogue next week: Since the United States supports the "one middle" policy, since the United States does not do not Supporting "Taiwan independence", is it not important for China's sovereignty? Isn't it important to be a recognized principle of international relations and the general consensus of the international community?

Direct news: Wei Fenghe also criticized the US "Indo -Pacific Strategy" to abduct the country in the area in the state of the United States in his speech. What do you think of this?

Special commentator Guan Yao: During the same period of the day before the Chinese Defense Minister's speech, the United States Defense Minister Austin said that the United States does not seek other countries to choose a border station between China and the United States. The "Asian version of NATO" or the division of the region is a opposite camp. He even emphasized that big powers should become a model of transparent and communication. But Austin's grand rhetoric, obviously did not get a letter from Chinese colleagues, and naturally did not obtain trust in other regions. The so -called listening to its words, although the Austen mouth has different sounds to control and build a "protective bar", a series of actions and manipulation of the US defense ministers during the "Xianghui" period are sitting on the sharpness of the Chinese defense chief. Criticism and accusations. In particular, it is worth noting that in addition to a series of bilateral meetings during the "Xianghui" period, Austin also conducted two three -sized meetings. The Pentagon also attached great importance to the meeting. Essence These two third -sided meetings are the United States, Japan and South Korea Defense Association and the US -Japan -Australian Defense Society. I think this is the United States' arranging his small circle to suppress the actual hammer evidence of being enclosed and blocking others. The official announcement of the Pentagon quoted a blowing official, and pointed to China directly, called the three strategic coordinated countries of the United States, Japan, and Australia, and expressed serious concern for the so -called "forced" action of the Chinese South China Sea East China Sea. Safety deterrence and regional stability are determined. Both three -seasons met in Japan, and I also sat in my previous judgment in the show. Japan is to be the Malaysia in the number of "Indo -Pacific Strategy" in the United States. The "Xianghui" riot performance, especially the "Xianghui" speech of Kishidu, was even exclaimed by the Chinese media as "unusual tough", which is the most powerful witness.

Author 丨 Man Yao, special commentator of Shenzhen Satellite TV "Live Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan"

- END -