global times editorial: the "quadrilateral mechanism" targeting china is doomed to fail
2024-09-23
한어Русский языкEnglishFrançaisIndonesianSanskrit日本語DeutschPortuguêsΕλληνικάespañolItalianoSuomalainenLatina
leaders of the united states, japan, india and australia held the "quadrilateral security dialogue" summit from the 21st to the 22nd local time in the united states. although the white house strongly denied that the "quadrilateral security dialogue" mechanism is a tool for the united states to restrict china in the "indo-pacific region", and us president's national security advisor sullivan also claimed that the "quadrilateral security dialogue" was not aimed at a certain country, reporters on the scene captured us secretary of state blinken's announcement of the first topic: china through cameras shortly after the meeting began. participants thought that reporters could no longer hear the live audio. everyone knows that the "quadrilateral security dialogue" is aimed at china, but the participants are so evasive and cover-up, which shows how unpopular it is to contain china in the international community.
the joint statement issued by the four countries also did not directly mention china. the statement expressed "serious concern" about the situation in the east china sea and the south china sea, condemned "coercion and intimidation" in the south china sea, but did not explicitly name who took the action. in addition, the leaders of the four countries also announced that they would strengthen cooperation in the field of maritime security, improve the "interoperability" of the four countries' maritime security agencies, provide marine surveillance technology to other "indo-pacific" countries, and announced that the four countries' coast guard joint patrol operations will be held next year.
although western media have previously raised the volume of the meeting on "responding to an aggressive china", we have seen that apart from continuing to hype up the "china threat theory" and "indo-pacific crisis theory" behind closed doors, the "quadrilateral summit" has not produced anything new and substantial. the so-called joint implementation of the coast guard mission has been brewing for a long time. as for the "quadrilateral mechanism"'s claim to contribute to the "freedom and openness" of the region, it is even more illusory and difficult to see.
many analysts believe that the more important agenda of this "quad summit" is for the leaders of the four countries to get together to express their support for the continuation of the "quad mechanism" in the future. three of the four countries will have elections, and this dialogue will be the last meeting of the current leaders of the four countries. washington certainly hopes to leave some political legacy at this time, and the other three countries also said some polite words. however, many foreign media, including "nikkei asia", pointed out that whether the four countries can continue to maintain close interaction under the relevant mechanism in the future is still an unresolved issue, and "hype cannot cover up the survival crisis of the quad dialogue."
the quadrilateral security dialogue between the united states, japan, india and australia, as a landmark project of the indo-pacific strategy, has been “restored” under the leadership of the united states for three years. over the past three years, apart from a few meetings and statements, the six working groups established to respond to the so-called “global challenges” have “made almost no concrete progress” and the dialogue “seems to have lost its direction”. this is something that is beyond imagination and is perfectly normal. a small group in the region that attempts to contain china in terms of security and exclude china in terms of economy, while singing the high-sounding tune of “building a free and open indo-pacific”, is actually brutally interfering in regional affairs, which is contrary to the trend of the times and the wishes of regional countries.
the situation of the "quadrilateral mechanism" is also a microcosm of the closed and exclusive "small circle" that the united states has been piecing together around china in recent years. western public opinion, especially in the united states, attributes the fact that the "quadrilateral mechanism" has not developed as well as the united states expected to india's "independence", accusing new delhi of always using its relationship with the united states to seek benefits for itself, which undermines the concept of "strategic alliance". in fact, including the united states itself, which of the four countries does not have realistic considerations of its own national interests when facing china? which country can truly "decouple" from china or "exclude china"? china is the main trading partner of most countries in the region, and china is also a major contributor to regional peace and stability. talking about security and development without china will not produce any substantive meaning except empty talk. not to mention artificially creating tension and inciting confrontation with china, which is doomed to be unpopular.
some analysts pointed out that the "quad" summit attempted to thwart the so-called "china threat" without "provoking china". in fact, washington is trying to cover up its own faults. it has to take into account not only china, but also the reactions of regional countries and even the international community. instead of being so sneaky, the united states should return to the general trend of peace and cooperation in the asia-pacific region as soon as possible. the united states has long promised not to seek a "new cold war" or to oppose china by strengthening alliances. whether its words and deeds are consistent is not only watched by china, but also by the international community.
