Phoenix Reference丨The Chief Designer of Biden's "Indo-Pacific Strategy": Want to play Go with China?


2022-05-20: [Article Link Core summary: 1. The Biden Asian Bank marks the beginning of the full operational phase of the United States Indian-Territories strategy, with Kurt Campbell, one of the best-time designers of the Strategy, the Asian Policy Coordinator of the National Security Council of the United States. Its intellectual, intellectual and rhetorical skills are “many” officials who have served in different positions, such as policy, economics and trade, intelligence and military, and Campbell's habit of bringing together political, economic, military and domestic political issues to think together, laying the foundation for a complex American Indian strategy. 2 Campbell's career has been difficult, but efforts are being made to promote America's focus on Insta's, on shaping the Inta's, on controlling the Inta's and on limiting China's influence in the Indo's region. He worked in Asia-Pacific research during Clinton’s. During George W. Bush’s administration, Campbell’s bitter proposal was to “jump out of the Middle East to see India” for nothing, to move to the business world in school, and to use Asia-Pacific connections to lobby for money. He then proposed “returning back to Asia and the Pacific” during Obama’s period, which was intense, but which eventually led to Obama’s perception of Asia and the Pacific as “important but not urgent”. During the 2016 election, Campbell once again failed to bet on Bolshelari, and again faded out of politics. It was not until Biden ran for office that he returned in 60 years old. In 2016, Campbell articulated his “Indo-Pacific strategy” — unlike the traditional “China priority” view — in a book entitled Towards the Future of the Asian State Policy of the United States, stressing the need to limit the path selection and scope of activity of the Chinese “boss” in the Indo-Asian “basket” by mobilizing other “boss”. He was relatively gentle with China during this period. After the Trump period, Campbell stopped recognizing the interdependence of US-China relations, stopped talking about climate cooperation, and said that he was competing with India’s ally for solidarity. In the Biden era, Campbell became a powerful tsar in Asia, and his ideas were written into the new US-Indian strategic text, and his proposals were sent unhampered to the Biden case, such as the so-called democratic summit, the expansion of the quadrilateral mechanism and the shadow of Campbell. The design of Campbell's Indo-Turkish strategy, while good, was a major problem. For example, in the implementation of the recently focused “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, he is likely to be unable to intervene in the implementation of the policies of Commerce Secretary Raimundo and Trade Representative Daki; and the political context in which the protectionist forces of the United States influence the “Framework” has led to a loss of appeal to the Indian nation; and the hard-line anti-Chinese Ratna within the Biden government, the moderate Crees, and the inconsistent views of finance ministers and others who wish to abolish Trump’s customs duties to the Walla, such an Indian strategy is doomed to suffocate Campbell’s influence. Author: Lecturer, Institute of International Relations Deputy Researcher, North Greater Central and Middle Humanities Exchange Research Base, Sun Ice Rock. On 20 May 2022, United States President Biden visited South Korea and Japan to officially launch the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” (IPEF) proposed by the United States last October. A week before Biden's visit to Korea, the United States invited ASEAN leaders to convene a special summit in Washington to propose an initial cooperation programme for ASEAN countries' participation in its “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”. On 12 May, the United States-ASEAN Special Summit was held in Washington, D.C., United States. Indeed, the diplomatic focus of the Biden Government throughout May also revolved around the “Indo-Pacific economic framework”. If the US-ASEAN Special Summit of 12 May was a pre-heated launch by the Biden Government of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, the visit of Biden to Korea on 20-24 May was a formal “official announcement” launched by the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, followed by the American-Japanese-Indian Summit, which meant that the Biden Government had included the main Indo-Pacific countries in the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”. The launching of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” meant that the last link in the Indian-Pacific strategic system of the Biden Government was formally entering the policy implementation phase, and that the United States-Indian strategy, designed around strategic competition for China, was entering the full operational phase. Following the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, it is likely that the Biden Government will not launch any new broad framework initiatives in the Indo-Pacific region, and that the advancement and implementation of the existing Indo-Pacific initiative will become the central theme of the future Indian-Chinese policy of the Biden Government. Kurt Campbell, Policy Coordinator for Asia, National Security Council of the United States At this point, as one of the architects of the entire Indian-Turkish strategy of the Biden administration, seeing that the entire American-Indian strategic system, in which they were involved, is fully operational, the US State Security Committee Asian Policy Coordinator Kurt Campbell is probably the most “desired” of the Biden government. After all, his entire career has been working to promote America's focus on Indo-Territories, to shape them, to control them and to limit China's influence in the Indo-Territo region. "Multiple Hands" during Clinton's administration. Campbell, born in 1957 in California, graduated from San Diego, California, and later obtained a doctorate in international relations from the University of Tinjin. Campbell’s young, learned personality, agile thinking, and fluency have impressed his friends who worked with him. After his doctorate in international relations, Campbell, as a Democrat, introduced his Democratic friend to the Clinton administration for professional work on international issues. Figure for 2010 15th anniversary of the establishment of the United States border between Viet Nam, former United States President Clinton (left one) and Campbell (left three) While working for the Clinton Administration, Campbell became a “many-hand” official who was familiar with a wide range of international issues and “mixed” in a number of government positions. Campbell first served as an expert on international issues in charge of Asia at the National Security Committee, then assisted Clinton in the negotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement in his capacity as Presidential Trade Adviser, then joined the Ministry of Defence as Deputy Assistant Minister of Defence, was transferred to the Ministry of Finance as the White House Commissioner to the Ministry of Finance, was subsequently transferred to the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as Assistant, and worked for some time in the Department of the Navy Intelligence Service. The complex early work history provides the basis for the future of Campbell's influence in the wider United States policy and government communities. Without experience in the diplomatic, economic, military and other branches of government, Campbell would not have been able to create the new United States Security Centre (CNAS) in 2007, an influential think tank that would have brought so many government personnel into the United States policy community, and Campbell would not have been able to bring together political, economic, military, domestic and political issues in a complex American Indian strategy in the future. "Return to Asia and the Pacific" designers during Obama's administration After George W. Bush came to power, Campbell, a Democrat, had to leave the government and enter academia in line with the “rotation door” tradition. Because of his rich government history and excellent research capabilities, Campbell was awarded a teaching post at Harvard University’s Kennedy College. After 11 September 2001, Campbell also published relevant counter-terrorism studies, but beyond the Middle East, his research also highlighted key issues such as South Asia, Central Asia, East Asia, etc. During this period, the United States is focusing its strategic attention on global counter-terrorism and democratic transformation of Middle Eastern countries, while paying close attention to China and the Indo-Pacific situation in Campbell, has begun to call upon the United States to pay more attention to the rise of China and to express concern about the challenges that the rise of China poses to its Indian superiority. However, during the Bush administration, Campbell was only one of many policy scholars who called on the United States to “jump out of the Middle East to see the Indo-Pacific”, and their calls had no bearing on the Bush administration, which was then obsessed with the Middle East. As the fall of the United States in the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq became increasingly evident, Campbell was keenly aware that the American population was tired of the Bush Administration's strategy for the Middle East and that the strategic failure to focus on the Middle East would bring the Democrats back to the White House in 2008. At a time when his best friend Hilary was judged to be at high risk of impacting the President's throne, Campbell, a politically active friend of the Ministry of Defence and the State Department, such as Michèle Flournoy, Victoria Nuland, and others, established a think tank focusing on military security research — the New American Centre for Security Studies (CNAS). After the establishment of the new United States Security Centre, Campbell, on the one hand, brought together his former Department of State, the National Security Commission and his colleagues in the Department of Defense to join the think tank in the hope that he would be elected President of the Democratic Party in 08, or even to create a pool of foreign and defence talent for President Hilary's next administration. At the same time, the illustrious Campbell also intends to use the think tank's personal connections with the Department of Defense and the Department of State to “shadow lobbying” and share the lobbying dividend for the defence contracts of United States military-industrial enterprises. Former President Obama of the United States and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. However, the 2008 general election ended in the form of a temporary interruption of President Hilary’s dream by Obama’s “slash-out.” As a result of Obama’s political deal with Hilary, President Barack Obama was appointed Secretary of State. Based on his trust and appreciation of Campbell, Hilary immediately appointed him Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific in the Department of State. Campbell accepted it well, because for Campbell, a 40-year-old, the head of the Bureau of East Asia and Pacific Affairs, with significant policy influence in the Department of State, could be said to be a very powerful “technical bureaucrat” in the area of Indian policy. On November 18, 2009, Campbell and Hilary were working with Chinese officials in Beijing. President Obama visited four countries in East Asia, including China. From the very first day of his tenure, Campbell, as Secretary of State for East Asia, actively pushed the United States through his immediate superior, Hilary, to come up with the “Pivot” strategy as soon as possible. In Campbell's view, America's strategic commitment to the Middle East has cost the United States too much of its strategic resources, while at the same time giving China the opportunity to rapidly expand its influence in the Indo-Pacific region. The United States needs to raise its voice to “turn to India” in order, on the one hand, to make it clear to its own people that America's future strategic focus is no longer the Middle East, but, on the other hand, to continue to consolidate America's leadership of the Indo-Pacific region in the context of China's rapid expansion of influence. Based on this, Campbell and Hilary have jointly designed a set of American policy systems to shift to Indo-Pacific. In an effort to draw the attention of the international and domestic community to America’s “Turn to India,” Hilary published a famous article on America’s official return to India – the Pacific Century of America – on the Foreign Policy website in 2011. A screenshot of The American Pacific Century, published by former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. During the Obama administration, Campbell, who was involved in the design and implementation of the “turn to India” strategy, was either pleased or disappointed. What makes Campbell proud is that the Obama administration has, at least at the strategic level, accepted the term “turn to India.” In terms of policy advancement, the Obama administration has also partially implemented some of Campbell’s ideas. The Obama administration has stepped up its military deployment against China in the Indo-Pacific region, strengthened US-Japan, US-Korean union relations through frequent diplomatic missions, raised the level of relations with South-East Asian countries and facilitated the successful negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In terms of the policy implications of specific topics, Campbell attracted unprecedented attention in the international relations community in the context of the 2010 Al-Jazeera crisis and the 2012 mid-day Japanese-fishing island dispute. After the Korean artillery war of 2010, Campbell firmly supported the idea of his superior, Hilary, calling on the “George Washington” carrier to embark on a military exercise in the Chinese Yellow Sea in order to send a clear signal of “support” to North Korea. Following the mid-2012 Japanese fishing island dispute, Campbell participated in the development of the United States principle of “recognition of Japanese jurisdiction and non-sovereign ownership position”, clarifying the fundamental attitude of the United States towards Japan in relation to fishing islands. United States Navy carrier George Washington. The failure of Campbell is that the Obama administration, after declaring “return to Asia and the Pacific”, did not fully implement the strategic principle of “Indo-Territo” but continued to focus its diplomacy on the Middle East “battle”. The Arab Spring, the war in Afghanistan, the Palestinian-Israeli issue, and the Iranian-nuclear issue remain the focus of Obama’s administration’s diplomacy. And, whether Campbell or his leader Hilary, they are not “Obamians” like Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes or Samantha Bauer, and they are not Obama's closest or most trusted people. In such a White House decision-making environment, there is still a gap between Obama's “turn to India” and Campbell's “Turn to India” in his heart, but Campbell has been powerless to do so. Campbell's not a Obamaist. Four years after Obama’s administration, Hilary left Obama’s administration ahead of schedule to prepare for presidential elections in 2016. After Hilary’s departure, Campbell, who was “intelligent,” also submitted his resignation in February 2013, set the stage for making money after he left the government, and for his future after he was elected President. The year 2016 is a year of disappointment and disillusionment. After his departure from the Department of State, Campbell used the resources of the Government that he had accumulated during his work to create a lobbying company, the Asia Group. After becoming a “businessman”, Campbell made full use of the relationship of government accumulated by following Obama to South-East Asian countries during his tenure as Assistant Secretary of State to lobby for and draw dividends from American investments in South-East Asia in gambling, military engineering and infrastructure. For example, Campbell used his working relationship with Myanmar leaders as the United States improved its relations with Myanmar in 2012 to successfully lobby the Government of Myanmar to award the construction contract for Yangon International Airport to United States businesses. A United States media survey found that Campbell retained many risk-taking interests in the Asian Group after his recent appointment to public office. From https://www.pogo.org/investment/2021/04/the-troubling-business-conventions-of-bidens-asia-advisor-kurt-campbell After Hilary announced his candidacy for the presidency in 2015, Campbell joined the Hilary team and became fully involved in the campaign. In a generally unwelcome situation in Trump, Democratic policy experts, represented by Campbell, confidently believed that Hilary’s victory had come to an end. The United States media have been competing to predict who President Hilary's Secretary of State will be since June 2016, and Campbell is seen as an almost identified Secretary of State. Campbell in 2016 also seems to believe that he will be the next leader in charge of the US State Department. Campbell has been involved in foreign-policy activities, advocating that the foreign-policy strategy of the Hilary administration will be very clear, namely, the continuation of the “turn to India” strategy. Perhaps out of fear that President Hilary would not be able to fully and completely implement his “turn to India” idea, Campbell would simply write a book in 2016 detailing how he would implement Asia-Pacific policy later as Secretary of State – Turning to: The Future of the American Asian State Policy. The Pivot: The Future of American Statecraft in Asia For the first time in the book Turns, Campbell sets out in a systematic manner the reasons, strategic objectives, and policy recommendations for the “turn to Indo-Pacific.” In the China-related discourse, Campbell's language is relatively mild. Campbell says that US-China relations are not US-US relations, that Chinese-US relations are both competitive and cooperative. Chinese-American relations, like the full-blown film, The Wizard of Oz, are diverse and complex and cannot be consistent. According to Campbell, cooperation between China and the United States is “necessary because the Central American economy is fundamentally interconnected and substantively interdependent”. Campbell said that China and the United States should establish cooperative relations in the areas of climate, nuclear proliferation and global economic governance. Campbell said that it was important to avoid making China feel “turning to India” as a deterrent to China. Therefore, the US must increase its dialogue with China as it deploys its strategy. Figure presented by the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Asian Group, Campbell, at the High-level Forum on China Development, 2019 Campbell said that policy towards China must change the “China First” approach of previous administrations, and that policy towards China must be taken into account in the policy framework of the United States of America, in order to shape China's behaviour and development environment through the implementation of the Indian-Turkish strategy. By way of illustration, Campbell argued that the United States should not view China as a “counterplayer” opposite the board, that China is only a powerful “player” in the American chess board, and that the only “player” in the United States could limit the range of choice and activity of the Chinese “player” in the “checkboard”, which is the Campbell's “print strategy”. Trump defeated Hilary in the 2016 election with unexpected results. Campbell, who did not serve as Secretary of State, could only fade out of politics after months of selling Turn. The tsar of Asia during Biden's administration. After Biden announced his candidacy in 2019, the 60-year-old Campbell quickly pulled his expert friends from the policy community into the Biden team to assist Biden in developing his offensive points against Trump's foreign policy during the campaign. Campbell is not totally opposed to the Trump-era Indian strategy. Campbell believes that the TRP government’s strategic sense is very clear, that the strategic direction of shrinking, accelerating, and moving from the Middle East to the TRP is right, and that “strategic competition” is right for China’s policy. There is a great difference in policy orientation between Tebridan and Trump. However, Campbell believes that Trump's eventual return of policy is “China-led”, that the United States is focusing only on China's “matchings” in the Indo-Pacific region, rather than regulating China by shaping the Indian-Pacific pattern. Moreover, Trump has not only failed to bring on India's allies in the United States, but has also worsened union relations in the course of “the match” with China, which is the most painful thing Campbell has ever done. During the Trump period, there was also a subtle change in views about China’s policy under the Campbell-India strategic framework. Unlike the Chinese policy of 2016’s “Turn-A” book, Campbell no longer refers to China’s competition and cooperation, does not recognize the interdependency of the US and China’s economy, and does not refer to China’s cooperation in the climate field, but to total competition with China by India’s united allies. Figure shows high-level strategic dialogue scene in Middle America, Ancreche, March 2021, and Campbell on the right. After Biden won the election, on the first day of his term, Campbell was announced as the “policy focal point” of the NSC for Indo-Pacific affairs (Coordinator). For the first time in the history of the United States NSAC, Campbell's position, which is lower than that of the National Security Assistant, is the “director” of the NSC who is responsible for all of China's affairs, Taiwan's affairs and other Indo-Pacific affairs, playing a real technical leadership role in policy-making throughout the Indian and Chinese issues. It can be said that Campbell did not succeed in obtaining the highest-ranking diplomatic post in the Biden Government, but, against the background of the Biden Government’s firm determination to make Indo-Ter the strategic focus of the United States, Campbell actually managed to find the posts he was best at, most interested in and most influential. Figured out the press conference that Campbell, then Assistant Secretary of State of the United States Department of State, held at the United States Embassy in Japan in 2009 At last, Campbell, during the Biden regime, was able to do a great job of fully and thoroughly implementing his systematic Indo-Pacific strategy over the years. At this time, his friends and colleagues in the Biden administration, Sullivan, Ely Ratner, Newland and Laura Rosenberg, were in charge of Indian policy in the Department of State, the Ministry of Defence or the National Security Council. At a seminar in 2019, Campbell had a great time with United States national security adviser Sullivan (right-one). Biden is also willing to listen to the advice of his group of “academic” experts in decision-making. Campbell’s Indo-Pacific strategic program can be sent unhampered to Biden and endorsed by the President. In such a comfortable decision-making environment, Campbell, who is in charge of decision-making, presented Biden with unprecedented efficiency his set of Indo-Pacific strategic ideas. Given the circumstances in which the Biden government launched the Indo-Pacific strategy, Campbell’s design of the Indo-Pacific strategic package is being systematically launched. In May 2021, Campbell gave a speech at Stanford University, making it clear for the first time that America's “contact” strategy to China was over. Campbell’s idea of a D10 high-tech alliance based on American-style democratic values to isolate China is being put into practice by the Biden government. In December 2021, the US brought together global “democratic” countries to convene a “global democratic summit” to form an industrial technology camp to isolate China. The United States-sponsored Global Democracy Summit invited some 110 national and regional leaders, civil society organizations, etc., but China and Russia were excluded At the suggestion of Campbell et al., the Biden Government continued to expand the cooperation of the US-Japan-India Quadrilateral Mechanism to include supply chains, military security and the placement of emerging industries in the cooperation of the Quadripartite Mechanism. At the suggestion of Campbell et al., the United States is taking advantage of technology proliferation to speed up the development of armaments in countries bordering China and is trying to maximize the security constraints surrounding China through low-cost inputs. The new Indian-Turkish strategic text published by the Biden government in March 2022 clearly reflects Campbell’s own influence. In describing the Biden government’s policy toward China under the Indo-Thai Strategic Framework, the text stresses that “Our goal is not to change China, but to shape the strategic environment in India (“shape”) that will create a world where the common interests and values of the US and allied partners are best served by a balance of influence. From the language of the text, it can be inferred that Campbell has had a great deal of influence in the drafting of the text. Because the core meaning of the text is highly similar to that of Campbell’s 2016 book, China is still the only chess player in the inkboard, and the United States has to limit the range of its path selection activities by playing with other chess pieces. Campbell. Now Campbell is “springing” in terms of decision-making status and policy influence. The American media now call him Asia Tsar. Future: Will Campbell continue to be “satisfied”? Following the high-profile launch of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” in the United States, Campbell's participation in the design of the entire Indo-Pacific Strategic Framework is largely in place: the Alliance System, military deployment, the quadrilateral mechanism, the Democratic Summit, vaccine diplomacy and the Indian-Pacific Economic Framework, which intersects with it. What Biden’s government is going to do next is not to design or launch new Indo-Pacific initiatives or mechanisms, but rather to implement the policies that have been launched. For Campbell, policy implementation is the key to determining whether he will continue to be “satisfied.” In the case of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, which the United States has just launched, Campbell's desire to move the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” perfectly forward requires overcoming many of the resistance that he himself has been unable to change. Since 2022, Campbell has worked hard to promote the Indo-Pacific economic framework in the Indo-Pacific region First, despite Campbell's involvement in the design of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, its policy implementation is under the responsibility of the Minister of Commerce, Raimundo, and Trade Representative Dage. In the negotiation of labour standards and e-trade rules, Campbell would probably have to be a bystander, after all, the subject of the international trade dimension would have to be dominated by Dage; and in the area of chip unions, cross-border infrastructure cooperation and supply chain security, the powerful Raimundo would certainly not allow this policy “coordinator” from the NSC to intervene in the business sector. In this context, does Campbell feel the anxiety and frustration that he cannot directly intervene in the implementation of both policies when he sees deviations from the principles of the Indo-Pacific Strategy in the implementation of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework by Dage and Raimundo? United States Secretary of Commerce Raimundo (right I) and Trade Representative Dage (right II) Second, Campbell’s involvement in the design of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” is bound to produce results that do not meet the expectations of the Indo-Pacific strategy. In the Campbell vision’s Indian strategy, strengthening US economic relations with South-East Asian countries and the South Asian region is essential. However, in the political context of the enormous impact of the protectionist forces of the United States, Biden’s “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” is no longer a luxury to talk about tariff reductions and market openings as Obama’s TPP in 2016. This means that the US cannot include tariff reductions and market openings in the implementation agenda of the Indian-Pacific Economic Framework. For South-East and South-East Asian countries that are relatively backward in terms of industrial levels and wish to find export markets, an “economic framework” that does not include tariffs and market openings is not attractive to them. As a result, the “Indian-Pacific Economic Framework” is of little significance in bringing US economic and trade relations closer to South-East Asia and South Asia. For US economic relations with South-East Asia and South Asia, the implementation of the “India-Pacific Economic Framework” is likely to disappoint Campbell. The influence of the “Tsar of Asia” Campbell may be limited to the policy design link of the Indo-Pacific strategy, while the Department of State, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Finance and other White House officials do not necessarily share Campbell's true “commitment” with regard to the implementation of the Indo-Pacific strategy. (a) Ratna, a 19-year-old man, was more aggressive than Campbell when the Chinese team led by the Ministry of Defence was developing an anti-China strategy, far from being a gentlemanly and elegant competition of the sort that he had; From the left: Melanie Hart, Elie Ratna, Elizabeth Rosenberg. Kry, also leading the climate issue in the Biden Government, advocated a more moderate attitude by the United States in other areas of policy towards China in exchange for China's more active cooperation in climate governance; Minister of Finance Yalun questioned the Biden Government's policy of not withdrawing the Trump tariff from China. All of this reflects the subtle differences and subtle dichotomy within the Biden Government over the specific trade-off between the Indo-Pacific strategy and Chinese policy in the context of the overall advancement of the Indian-Pacific strategy and the identification of strategic competition for China. In this sense, Campbell’s “satisfaction” may be temporary. His frustration may have only just begun as Biden’s government fully moved forward with the implementation of the new Indo-Pacific strategy.


Note: This is a translated version of the Chinese news media article. A mature and nuanced reading is suggested.



Trending News

What China Reads


Phoenix Reference丨The Chief Designer of Biden's "Indo-Pacific Strategy": Want to play Go with China?


2022-05-20: [Article Link Core summary: 1. The Biden Asian Bank marks the beginning of the full operational phase of the United States Indian-Territories strategy, with Kurt Campbell, one of the best-time designers of the Strategy, the Asian Policy Coordinator of the National Security Council of the United States. Its intellectual, intellectual and rhetorical skills are “many” officials who have served in different positions, such as policy, economics and trade, intelligence and military, and Campbell's habit of bringing together political, economic, military and domestic political issues to think together, laying the foundation for a complex American Indian strategy. 2 Campbell's career has been difficult, but efforts are being made to promote America's focus on Insta's, on shaping the Inta's, on controlling the Inta's and on limiting China's influence in the Indo's region. He worked in Asia-Pacific research during Clinton’s. During George W. Bush’s administration, Campbell’s bitter proposal was to “jump out of the Middle East to see India” for nothing, to move to the business world in school, and to use Asia-Pacific connections to lobby for money. He then proposed “returning back to Asia and the Pacific” during Obama’s period, which was intense, but which eventually led to Obama’s perception of Asia and the Pacific as “important but not urgent”. During the 2016 election, Campbell once again failed to bet on Bolshelari, and again faded out of politics. It was not until Biden ran for office that he returned in 60 years old. In 2016, Campbell articulated his “Indo-Pacific strategy” — unlike the traditional “China priority” view — in a book entitled Towards the Future of the Asian State Policy of the United States, stressing the need to limit the path selection and scope of activity of the Chinese “boss” in the Indo-Asian “basket” by mobilizing other “boss”. He was relatively gentle with China during this period. After the Trump period, Campbell stopped recognizing the interdependence of US-China relations, stopped talking about climate cooperation, and said that he was competing with India’s ally for solidarity. In the Biden era, Campbell became a powerful tsar in Asia, and his ideas were written into the new US-Indian strategic text, and his proposals were sent unhampered to the Biden case, such as the so-called democratic summit, the expansion of the quadrilateral mechanism and the shadow of Campbell. The design of Campbell's Indo-Turkish strategy, while good, was a major problem. For example, in the implementation of the recently focused “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, he is likely to be unable to intervene in the implementation of the policies of Commerce Secretary Raimundo and Trade Representative Daki; and the political context in which the protectionist forces of the United States influence the “Framework” has led to a loss of appeal to the Indian nation; and the hard-line anti-Chinese Ratna within the Biden government, the moderate Crees, and the inconsistent views of finance ministers and others who wish to abolish Trump’s customs duties to the Walla, such an Indian strategy is doomed to suffocate Campbell’s influence. Author: Lecturer, Institute of International Relations Deputy Researcher, North Greater Central and Middle Humanities Exchange Research Base, Sun Ice Rock. On 20 May 2022, United States President Biden visited South Korea and Japan to officially launch the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” (IPEF) proposed by the United States last October. A week before Biden's visit to Korea, the United States invited ASEAN leaders to convene a special summit in Washington to propose an initial cooperation programme for ASEAN countries' participation in its “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”. On 12 May, the United States-ASEAN Special Summit was held in Washington, D.C., United States. Indeed, the diplomatic focus of the Biden Government throughout May also revolved around the “Indo-Pacific economic framework”. If the US-ASEAN Special Summit of 12 May was a pre-heated launch by the Biden Government of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, the visit of Biden to Korea on 20-24 May was a formal “official announcement” launched by the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, followed by the American-Japanese-Indian Summit, which meant that the Biden Government had included the main Indo-Pacific countries in the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”. The launching of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” meant that the last link in the Indian-Pacific strategic system of the Biden Government was formally entering the policy implementation phase, and that the United States-Indian strategy, designed around strategic competition for China, was entering the full operational phase. Following the launch of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, it is likely that the Biden Government will not launch any new broad framework initiatives in the Indo-Pacific region, and that the advancement and implementation of the existing Indo-Pacific initiative will become the central theme of the future Indian-Chinese policy of the Biden Government. Kurt Campbell, Policy Coordinator for Asia, National Security Council of the United States At this point, as one of the architects of the entire Indian-Turkish strategy of the Biden administration, seeing that the entire American-Indian strategic system, in which they were involved, is fully operational, the US State Security Committee Asian Policy Coordinator Kurt Campbell is probably the most “desired” of the Biden government. After all, his entire career has been working to promote America's focus on Indo-Territories, to shape them, to control them and to limit China's influence in the Indo-Territo region. "Multiple Hands" during Clinton's administration. Campbell, born in 1957 in California, graduated from San Diego, California, and later obtained a doctorate in international relations from the University of Tinjin. Campbell’s young, learned personality, agile thinking, and fluency have impressed his friends who worked with him. After his doctorate in international relations, Campbell, as a Democrat, introduced his Democratic friend to the Clinton administration for professional work on international issues. Figure for 2010 15th anniversary of the establishment of the United States border between Viet Nam, former United States President Clinton (left one) and Campbell (left three) While working for the Clinton Administration, Campbell became a “many-hand” official who was familiar with a wide range of international issues and “mixed” in a number of government positions. Campbell first served as an expert on international issues in charge of Asia at the National Security Committee, then assisted Clinton in the negotiation of the North American Free Trade Agreement in his capacity as Presidential Trade Adviser, then joined the Ministry of Defence as Deputy Assistant Minister of Defence, was transferred to the Ministry of Finance as the White House Commissioner to the Ministry of Finance, was subsequently transferred to the Office of the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff as Assistant, and worked for some time in the Department of the Navy Intelligence Service. The complex early work history provides the basis for the future of Campbell's influence in the wider United States policy and government communities. Without experience in the diplomatic, economic, military and other branches of government, Campbell would not have been able to create the new United States Security Centre (CNAS) in 2007, an influential think tank that would have brought so many government personnel into the United States policy community, and Campbell would not have been able to bring together political, economic, military, domestic and political issues in a complex American Indian strategy in the future. "Return to Asia and the Pacific" designers during Obama's administration After George W. Bush came to power, Campbell, a Democrat, had to leave the government and enter academia in line with the “rotation door” tradition. Because of his rich government history and excellent research capabilities, Campbell was awarded a teaching post at Harvard University’s Kennedy College. After 11 September 2001, Campbell also published relevant counter-terrorism studies, but beyond the Middle East, his research also highlighted key issues such as South Asia, Central Asia, East Asia, etc. During this period, the United States is focusing its strategic attention on global counter-terrorism and democratic transformation of Middle Eastern countries, while paying close attention to China and the Indo-Pacific situation in Campbell, has begun to call upon the United States to pay more attention to the rise of China and to express concern about the challenges that the rise of China poses to its Indian superiority. However, during the Bush administration, Campbell was only one of many policy scholars who called on the United States to “jump out of the Middle East to see the Indo-Pacific”, and their calls had no bearing on the Bush administration, which was then obsessed with the Middle East. As the fall of the United States in the battlefields of Afghanistan and Iraq became increasingly evident, Campbell was keenly aware that the American population was tired of the Bush Administration's strategy for the Middle East and that the strategic failure to focus on the Middle East would bring the Democrats back to the White House in 2008. At a time when his best friend Hilary was judged to be at high risk of impacting the President's throne, Campbell, a politically active friend of the Ministry of Defence and the State Department, such as Michèle Flournoy, Victoria Nuland, and others, established a think tank focusing on military security research — the New American Centre for Security Studies (CNAS). After the establishment of the new United States Security Centre, Campbell, on the one hand, brought together his former Department of State, the National Security Commission and his colleagues in the Department of Defense to join the think tank in the hope that he would be elected President of the Democratic Party in 08, or even to create a pool of foreign and defence talent for President Hilary's next administration. At the same time, the illustrious Campbell also intends to use the think tank's personal connections with the Department of Defense and the Department of State to “shadow lobbying” and share the lobbying dividend for the defence contracts of United States military-industrial enterprises. Former President Obama of the United States and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. However, the 2008 general election ended in the form of a temporary interruption of President Hilary’s dream by Obama’s “slash-out.” As a result of Obama’s political deal with Hilary, President Barack Obama was appointed Secretary of State. Based on his trust and appreciation of Campbell, Hilary immediately appointed him Assistant Secretary of State for East Asia and the Pacific in the Department of State. Campbell accepted it well, because for Campbell, a 40-year-old, the head of the Bureau of East Asia and Pacific Affairs, with significant policy influence in the Department of State, could be said to be a very powerful “technical bureaucrat” in the area of Indian policy. On November 18, 2009, Campbell and Hilary were working with Chinese officials in Beijing. President Obama visited four countries in East Asia, including China. From the very first day of his tenure, Campbell, as Secretary of State for East Asia, actively pushed the United States through his immediate superior, Hilary, to come up with the “Pivot” strategy as soon as possible. In Campbell's view, America's strategic commitment to the Middle East has cost the United States too much of its strategic resources, while at the same time giving China the opportunity to rapidly expand its influence in the Indo-Pacific region. The United States needs to raise its voice to “turn to India” in order, on the one hand, to make it clear to its own people that America's future strategic focus is no longer the Middle East, but, on the other hand, to continue to consolidate America's leadership of the Indo-Pacific region in the context of China's rapid expansion of influence. Based on this, Campbell and Hilary have jointly designed a set of American policy systems to shift to Indo-Pacific. In an effort to draw the attention of the international and domestic community to America’s “Turn to India,” Hilary published a famous article on America’s official return to India – the Pacific Century of America – on the Foreign Policy website in 2011. A screenshot of The American Pacific Century, published by former US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. During the Obama administration, Campbell, who was involved in the design and implementation of the “turn to India” strategy, was either pleased or disappointed. What makes Campbell proud is that the Obama administration has, at least at the strategic level, accepted the term “turn to India.” In terms of policy advancement, the Obama administration has also partially implemented some of Campbell’s ideas. The Obama administration has stepped up its military deployment against China in the Indo-Pacific region, strengthened US-Japan, US-Korean union relations through frequent diplomatic missions, raised the level of relations with South-East Asian countries and facilitated the successful negotiation of the Trans-Pacific Partnership. In terms of the policy implications of specific topics, Campbell attracted unprecedented attention in the international relations community in the context of the 2010 Al-Jazeera crisis and the 2012 mid-day Japanese-fishing island dispute. After the Korean artillery war of 2010, Campbell firmly supported the idea of his superior, Hilary, calling on the “George Washington” carrier to embark on a military exercise in the Chinese Yellow Sea in order to send a clear signal of “support” to North Korea. Following the mid-2012 Japanese fishing island dispute, Campbell participated in the development of the United States principle of “recognition of Japanese jurisdiction and non-sovereign ownership position”, clarifying the fundamental attitude of the United States towards Japan in relation to fishing islands. United States Navy carrier George Washington. The failure of Campbell is that the Obama administration, after declaring “return to Asia and the Pacific”, did not fully implement the strategic principle of “Indo-Territo” but continued to focus its diplomacy on the Middle East “battle”. The Arab Spring, the war in Afghanistan, the Palestinian-Israeli issue, and the Iranian-nuclear issue remain the focus of Obama’s administration’s diplomacy. And, whether Campbell or his leader Hilary, they are not “Obamians” like Susan Rice, Ben Rhodes or Samantha Bauer, and they are not Obama's closest or most trusted people. In such a White House decision-making environment, there is still a gap between Obama's “turn to India” and Campbell's “Turn to India” in his heart, but Campbell has been powerless to do so. Campbell's not a Obamaist. Four years after Obama’s administration, Hilary left Obama’s administration ahead of schedule to prepare for presidential elections in 2016. After Hilary’s departure, Campbell, who was “intelligent,” also submitted his resignation in February 2013, set the stage for making money after he left the government, and for his future after he was elected President. The year 2016 is a year of disappointment and disillusionment. After his departure from the Department of State, Campbell used the resources of the Government that he had accumulated during his work to create a lobbying company, the Asia Group. After becoming a “businessman”, Campbell made full use of the relationship of government accumulated by following Obama to South-East Asian countries during his tenure as Assistant Secretary of State to lobby for and draw dividends from American investments in South-East Asia in gambling, military engineering and infrastructure. For example, Campbell used his working relationship with Myanmar leaders as the United States improved its relations with Myanmar in 2012 to successfully lobby the Government of Myanmar to award the construction contract for Yangon International Airport to United States businesses. A United States media survey found that Campbell retained many risk-taking interests in the Asian Group after his recent appointment to public office. From https://www.pogo.org/investment/2021/04/the-troubling-business-conventions-of-bidens-asia-advisor-kurt-campbell After Hilary announced his candidacy for the presidency in 2015, Campbell joined the Hilary team and became fully involved in the campaign. In a generally unwelcome situation in Trump, Democratic policy experts, represented by Campbell, confidently believed that Hilary’s victory had come to an end. The United States media have been competing to predict who President Hilary's Secretary of State will be since June 2016, and Campbell is seen as an almost identified Secretary of State. Campbell in 2016 also seems to believe that he will be the next leader in charge of the US State Department. Campbell has been involved in foreign-policy activities, advocating that the foreign-policy strategy of the Hilary administration will be very clear, namely, the continuation of the “turn to India” strategy. Perhaps out of fear that President Hilary would not be able to fully and completely implement his “turn to India” idea, Campbell would simply write a book in 2016 detailing how he would implement Asia-Pacific policy later as Secretary of State – Turning to: The Future of the American Asian State Policy. The Pivot: The Future of American Statecraft in Asia For the first time in the book Turns, Campbell sets out in a systematic manner the reasons, strategic objectives, and policy recommendations for the “turn to Indo-Pacific.” In the China-related discourse, Campbell's language is relatively mild. Campbell says that US-China relations are not US-US relations, that Chinese-US relations are both competitive and cooperative. Chinese-American relations, like the full-blown film, The Wizard of Oz, are diverse and complex and cannot be consistent. According to Campbell, cooperation between China and the United States is “necessary because the Central American economy is fundamentally interconnected and substantively interdependent”. Campbell said that China and the United States should establish cooperative relations in the areas of climate, nuclear proliferation and global economic governance. Campbell said that it was important to avoid making China feel “turning to India” as a deterrent to China. Therefore, the US must increase its dialogue with China as it deploys its strategy. Figure presented by the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Asian Group, Campbell, at the High-level Forum on China Development, 2019 Campbell said that policy towards China must change the “China First” approach of previous administrations, and that policy towards China must be taken into account in the policy framework of the United States of America, in order to shape China's behaviour and development environment through the implementation of the Indian-Turkish strategy. By way of illustration, Campbell argued that the United States should not view China as a “counterplayer” opposite the board, that China is only a powerful “player” in the American chess board, and that the only “player” in the United States could limit the range of choice and activity of the Chinese “player” in the “checkboard”, which is the Campbell's “print strategy”. Trump defeated Hilary in the 2016 election with unexpected results. Campbell, who did not serve as Secretary of State, could only fade out of politics after months of selling Turn. The tsar of Asia during Biden's administration. After Biden announced his candidacy in 2019, the 60-year-old Campbell quickly pulled his expert friends from the policy community into the Biden team to assist Biden in developing his offensive points against Trump's foreign policy during the campaign. Campbell is not totally opposed to the Trump-era Indian strategy. Campbell believes that the TRP government’s strategic sense is very clear, that the strategic direction of shrinking, accelerating, and moving from the Middle East to the TRP is right, and that “strategic competition” is right for China’s policy. There is a great difference in policy orientation between Tebridan and Trump. However, Campbell believes that Trump's eventual return of policy is “China-led”, that the United States is focusing only on China's “matchings” in the Indo-Pacific region, rather than regulating China by shaping the Indian-Pacific pattern. Moreover, Trump has not only failed to bring on India's allies in the United States, but has also worsened union relations in the course of “the match” with China, which is the most painful thing Campbell has ever done. During the Trump period, there was also a subtle change in views about China’s policy under the Campbell-India strategic framework. Unlike the Chinese policy of 2016’s “Turn-A” book, Campbell no longer refers to China’s competition and cooperation, does not recognize the interdependency of the US and China’s economy, and does not refer to China’s cooperation in the climate field, but to total competition with China by India’s united allies. Figure shows high-level strategic dialogue scene in Middle America, Ancreche, March 2021, and Campbell on the right. After Biden won the election, on the first day of his term, Campbell was announced as the “policy focal point” of the NSC for Indo-Pacific affairs (Coordinator). For the first time in the history of the United States NSAC, Campbell's position, which is lower than that of the National Security Assistant, is the “director” of the NSC who is responsible for all of China's affairs, Taiwan's affairs and other Indo-Pacific affairs, playing a real technical leadership role in policy-making throughout the Indian and Chinese issues. It can be said that Campbell did not succeed in obtaining the highest-ranking diplomatic post in the Biden Government, but, against the background of the Biden Government’s firm determination to make Indo-Ter the strategic focus of the United States, Campbell actually managed to find the posts he was best at, most interested in and most influential. Figured out the press conference that Campbell, then Assistant Secretary of State of the United States Department of State, held at the United States Embassy in Japan in 2009 At last, Campbell, during the Biden regime, was able to do a great job of fully and thoroughly implementing his systematic Indo-Pacific strategy over the years. At this time, his friends and colleagues in the Biden administration, Sullivan, Ely Ratner, Newland and Laura Rosenberg, were in charge of Indian policy in the Department of State, the Ministry of Defence or the National Security Council. At a seminar in 2019, Campbell had a great time with United States national security adviser Sullivan (right-one). Biden is also willing to listen to the advice of his group of “academic” experts in decision-making. Campbell’s Indo-Pacific strategic program can be sent unhampered to Biden and endorsed by the President. In such a comfortable decision-making environment, Campbell, who is in charge of decision-making, presented Biden with unprecedented efficiency his set of Indo-Pacific strategic ideas. Given the circumstances in which the Biden government launched the Indo-Pacific strategy, Campbell’s design of the Indo-Pacific strategic package is being systematically launched. In May 2021, Campbell gave a speech at Stanford University, making it clear for the first time that America's “contact” strategy to China was over. Campbell’s idea of a D10 high-tech alliance based on American-style democratic values to isolate China is being put into practice by the Biden government. In December 2021, the US brought together global “democratic” countries to convene a “global democratic summit” to form an industrial technology camp to isolate China. The United States-sponsored Global Democracy Summit invited some 110 national and regional leaders, civil society organizations, etc., but China and Russia were excluded At the suggestion of Campbell et al., the Biden Government continued to expand the cooperation of the US-Japan-India Quadrilateral Mechanism to include supply chains, military security and the placement of emerging industries in the cooperation of the Quadripartite Mechanism. At the suggestion of Campbell et al., the United States is taking advantage of technology proliferation to speed up the development of armaments in countries bordering China and is trying to maximize the security constraints surrounding China through low-cost inputs. The new Indian-Turkish strategic text published by the Biden government in March 2022 clearly reflects Campbell’s own influence. In describing the Biden government’s policy toward China under the Indo-Thai Strategic Framework, the text stresses that “Our goal is not to change China, but to shape the strategic environment in India (“shape”) that will create a world where the common interests and values of the US and allied partners are best served by a balance of influence. From the language of the text, it can be inferred that Campbell has had a great deal of influence in the drafting of the text. Because the core meaning of the text is highly similar to that of Campbell’s 2016 book, China is still the only chess player in the inkboard, and the United States has to limit the range of its path selection activities by playing with other chess pieces. Campbell. Now Campbell is “springing” in terms of decision-making status and policy influence. The American media now call him Asia Tsar. Future: Will Campbell continue to be “satisfied”? Following the high-profile launch of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” in the United States, Campbell's participation in the design of the entire Indo-Pacific Strategic Framework is largely in place: the Alliance System, military deployment, the quadrilateral mechanism, the Democratic Summit, vaccine diplomacy and the Indian-Pacific Economic Framework, which intersects with it. What Biden’s government is going to do next is not to design or launch new Indo-Pacific initiatives or mechanisms, but rather to implement the policies that have been launched. For Campbell, policy implementation is the key to determining whether he will continue to be “satisfied.” In the case of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework”, which the United States has just launched, Campbell's desire to move the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” perfectly forward requires overcoming many of the resistance that he himself has been unable to change. Since 2022, Campbell has worked hard to promote the Indo-Pacific economic framework in the Indo-Pacific region First, despite Campbell's involvement in the design of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework, its policy implementation is under the responsibility of the Minister of Commerce, Raimundo, and Trade Representative Dage. In the negotiation of labour standards and e-trade rules, Campbell would probably have to be a bystander, after all, the subject of the international trade dimension would have to be dominated by Dage; and in the area of chip unions, cross-border infrastructure cooperation and supply chain security, the powerful Raimundo would certainly not allow this policy “coordinator” from the NSC to intervene in the business sector. In this context, does Campbell feel the anxiety and frustration that he cannot directly intervene in the implementation of both policies when he sees deviations from the principles of the Indo-Pacific Strategy in the implementation of the Indo-Pacific Economic Framework by Dage and Raimundo? United States Secretary of Commerce Raimundo (right I) and Trade Representative Dage (right II) Second, Campbell’s involvement in the design of the “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” is bound to produce results that do not meet the expectations of the Indo-Pacific strategy. In the Campbell vision’s Indian strategy, strengthening US economic relations with South-East Asian countries and the South Asian region is essential. However, in the political context of the enormous impact of the protectionist forces of the United States, Biden’s “Indo-Pacific Economic Framework” is no longer a luxury to talk about tariff reductions and market openings as Obama’s TPP in 2016. This means that the US cannot include tariff reductions and market openings in the implementation agenda of the Indian-Pacific Economic Framework. For South-East and South-East Asian countries that are relatively backward in terms of industrial levels and wish to find export markets, an “economic framework” that does not include tariffs and market openings is not attractive to them. As a result, the “Indian-Pacific Economic Framework” is of little significance in bringing US economic and trade relations closer to South-East Asia and South Asia. For US economic relations with South-East Asia and South Asia, the implementation of the “India-Pacific Economic Framework” is likely to disappoint Campbell. The influence of the “Tsar of Asia” Campbell may be limited to the policy design link of the Indo-Pacific strategy, while the Department of State, the Ministry of Defence, the Ministry of Commerce, the Ministry of Finance and other White House officials do not necessarily share Campbell's true “commitment” with regard to the implementation of the Indo-Pacific strategy. (a) Ratna, a 19-year-old man, was more aggressive than Campbell when the Chinese team led by the Ministry of Defence was developing an anti-China strategy, far from being a gentlemanly and elegant competition of the sort that he had; From the left: Melanie Hart, Elie Ratna, Elizabeth Rosenberg. Kry, also leading the climate issue in the Biden Government, advocated a more moderate attitude by the United States in other areas of policy towards China in exchange for China's more active cooperation in climate governance; Minister of Finance Yalun questioned the Biden Government's policy of not withdrawing the Trump tariff from China. All of this reflects the subtle differences and subtle dichotomy within the Biden Government over the specific trade-off between the Indo-Pacific strategy and Chinese policy in the context of the overall advancement of the Indian-Pacific strategy and the identification of strategic competition for China. In this sense, Campbell’s “satisfaction” may be temporary. His frustration may have only just begun as Biden’s government fully moved forward with the implementation of the new Indo-Pacific strategy.

Note: This is a translated version of the Chinese news media article. A mature and nuanced reading is suggested.

Recent related articles

Finance and Economics Knows Early : Xi Jinping Video Hosts the BRICS Leaders' Meeting: Upholding Justice, Opposing Hegemony, Upholding Fairness, and Opposing Bullying

2022-06-24: [Domestic finance] Xi Jinping video hosted a meeting of leaders of the BRICS countries to defend justice, oppose hegemony, defend fairness and oppose bullying The BRICS countries should support each other on issues related to each other’s core interests, practise genuine multilateralism,…

A week of anti-corruption files : Two tigers were "double-opened" on the same day, and both were criticized for moral corruption

2022-06-24: I. Exposure table (6.18-6.24) Review of investigations Han Lin, former party secretary of Shandong Smoking Industries, is under scrutiny. Zhao Wensheng, Chief of Fire and Rescue, Yunnan Province, is under review. The former Deputy General Manager of the China Food Reserve and Transport…

Wei Zongyou: The Biden Administration's "Indo-Pacific Strategy" and Its Influence on China

2022-06-24: Biden Government China-United States Relations Security in Asia and the Pacific Indian Strategy The Biden Government's “Indo-Pacific Strategy” is not fundamentally different from the Trump Government in terms of order and strategy. China is regarded as the primary strategic challenge…

Zhu Haiyan: Japan's Economic Security Strategy and Its Influence on China

2022-06-24: Economy of Japan Foreign Affairs of Japan China-Japan relations (a) To build a coherent economic security strategy, based on the integration of existing policy practices, the Government of Japan is promoting a “strategic indispensability” of the relevant political legal system,…

Zhang Chi: South Korea's perception of the strategic game between China and the United States, its response and the trend of China-South Korea relations

2022-06-24: Chinese-American game. China-Korean relations [Type] South Korea is both an ally of the United States and an important partner of China, and it is under increasing pressure to “selection” against the backdrop of the growing strategic game between China and the United States. There is a…

Continued Tracking|Russia-Ukraine conflict for 4 months, what are the gains and losses of all parties?

2022-06-24: Since the full-scale outbreak of the Russian-Ukraine conflict on 24 February, the Western countries, led by the United States, have imposed unprecedented and widespread sanctions on Russia in a number of economic, financial and energy fields, while Ukraine has received enormous military, economic…

News Express on important policies affecting the market on the evening of June 24 (with news broadcast highlights)

2022-06-24: The CVM seeks advice on the Provisional Rules for the Administration of the Individual Pension Investment Fund. The provisional provisions, which are contained in six chapters 30, provide for three main elements: first, clarification of the general principles and basic requirements for the…

Zeng Xiangyu: European Powers' Involvement in the Indian Ocean: Characteristics, Motivations and Influences

2022-06-24: The situation in the Indian Ocean Indian Strategy In recent years, European Powers have significantly increased their involvement in the situation in the Indian Ocean, launching their own “Indian and Pacific” strategy, enhancing military deployment and security interventions in the Indian…

Chen Xiaochen and Chen Hong: The US-UK-Australia Trilateral Security Partnership: Features, Impact and Prospects

2022-06-24: Trilateral Security Partnership between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Indian Strategy Alliances The Trilateral Security Partnership between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is both…

● Revitalize traditional Chinese medicine for the benefit of mankind ● "Only when Chinese medicine, civilian and medical personnel join forces can human beings recover and recover"

2022-06-24: • Revival of Chinese medicine for the benefit of humanity "The nation's medicine is on its way and the human race is on its way to recovery." In 2022, the confluence of the past and the future of Chinese healers, the frenzy of the dreams and wisdom of Chinese healers, the convergence of the…
Recent related articles

Finance and Economics Knows Early : Xi Jinping Video Hosts the BRICS Leaders' Meeting: Upholding Justice, Opposing Hegemony, Upholding Fairness, and Opposing Bullying

2022-06-24: [Domestic finance] Xi Jinping video hosted a meeting of leaders of the BRICS countries to defend justice, oppose hegemony, defend fairness and oppose bullying The BRICS countries should support each other on issues related to each other’s core interests, practise genuine multilateralism,…

A week of anti-corruption files : Two tigers were "double-opened" on the same day, and both were criticized for moral corruption

2022-06-24: I. Exposure table (6.18-6.24) Review of investigations Han Lin, former party secretary of Shandong Smoking Industries, is under scrutiny. Zhao Wensheng, Chief of Fire and Rescue, Yunnan Province, is under review. The former Deputy General Manager of the China Food Reserve and Transport…

Wei Zongyou: The Biden Administration's "Indo-Pacific Strategy" and Its Influence on China

2022-06-24: Biden Government China-United States Relations Security in Asia and the Pacific Indian Strategy The Biden Government's “Indo-Pacific Strategy” is not fundamentally different from the Trump Government in terms of order and strategy. China is regarded as the primary strategic challenge…

Zhu Haiyan: Japan's Economic Security Strategy and Its Influence on China

2022-06-24: Economy of Japan Foreign Affairs of Japan China-Japan relations (a) To build a coherent economic security strategy, based on the integration of existing policy practices, the Government of Japan is promoting a “strategic indispensability” of the relevant political legal system,…

Zhang Chi: South Korea's perception of the strategic game between China and the United States, its response and the trend of China-South Korea relations

2022-06-24: Chinese-American game. China-Korean relations [Type] South Korea is both an ally of the United States and an important partner of China, and it is under increasing pressure to “selection” against the backdrop of the growing strategic game between China and the United States. There is a…

Continued Tracking|Russia-Ukraine conflict for 4 months, what are the gains and losses of all parties?

2022-06-24: Since the full-scale outbreak of the Russian-Ukraine conflict on 24 February, the Western countries, led by the United States, have imposed unprecedented and widespread sanctions on Russia in a number of economic, financial and energy fields, while Ukraine has received enormous military, economic…

News Express on important policies affecting the market on the evening of June 24 (with news broadcast highlights)

2022-06-24: The CVM seeks advice on the Provisional Rules for the Administration of the Individual Pension Investment Fund. The provisional provisions, which are contained in six chapters 30, provide for three main elements: first, clarification of the general principles and basic requirements for the…

Zeng Xiangyu: European Powers' Involvement in the Indian Ocean: Characteristics, Motivations and Influences

2022-06-24: The situation in the Indian Ocean Indian Strategy In recent years, European Powers have significantly increased their involvement in the situation in the Indian Ocean, launching their own “Indian and Pacific” strategy, enhancing military deployment and security interventions in the Indian…

Chen Xiaochen and Chen Hong: The US-UK-Australia Trilateral Security Partnership: Features, Impact and Prospects

2022-06-24: Trilateral Security Partnership between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland Indian Strategy Alliances The Trilateral Security Partnership between the United States and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is both…

● Revitalize traditional Chinese medicine for the benefit of mankind ● "Only when Chinese medicine, civilian and medical personnel join forces can human beings recover and recover"

2022-06-24: • Revival of Chinese medicine for the benefit of humanity "The nation's medicine is on its way and the human race is on its way to recovery." In 2022, the confluence of the past and the future of Chinese healers, the frenzy of the dreams and wisdom of Chinese healers, the convergence of the…