De-coding Joe Biden and his Men’s Words about “Containing” and “Tethering” China
12.09.2023
The US Ambassador to Japan Rahm Emanuel used the expression “untethered China” in a recent declaration to the press. That was on 27 August. The word “tether”, used for China, is quite in line with existing US policy that has continued to aim to “contain” China – even after the end of the Cold War, and despite recent disclaimers. The words need some context and some de-coding.
The so-called “containment” policy began in the Cold War, when the USA’s overt aim was, crudely put, “to contain communism”. Then the US “containment” policy receded under Richard Nixon in 1979, and then more-or-less disappeared when Bill Clinton in 2000 granted China “permanent normal trade relations”, a status in US law, and in 2001 China joined the WTO. But, the word “contain” for policy towards China has not been able, itself, to be contained, and has seeped out again and again in US policy statements, especially during and since Donald Trump’s Presidency. And it is not just words uttered but a whole series of trade barriers that have gone up – “containing” and “tethering” China, to use their terms.
Why do we, in LALIT, write about this? We do so because it is bellicose language. It is the USA’s way of preparing for more wars of aggression. The USA, it must never be lost sight of, maintains 800 military bases, including one on Mauritian territory, which constitute a constant threat of war – and then this same USA talks about “containing” another country? They should “contain” themselves within their own frontiers first.
“Containment” is a word used for limiting the harm done by a toxic chemical, say, or preventing the spread of an infectious disease, or damming flood waters or a mud-slide. It is not a word used in regard to people. People are not a flowing, spreading substance, but human beings. Yet, the word used in the era of all-out Cold War has been popping up again and again since the advent of Donald Trump, and on into the Joe Biden era. It has the same racist ring as “flooded by immigrants”, and “overrun by foreigners”.
This return of the term “containment of China” has been so marked since Biden came to power that Secretary Blinken (June 2023) and President Biden, himself, (10 September in his press briefing in Vietnam) have both had to specifically stand there in public and deny any US intention to “contain China”. “We do not want to contain China,” Biden said on 10 September, before announcing bizarrely that he was “gonna go to bed”. He even repeated it. “It is not about containment of China. I don’t want to contain China. ... It’s not about containing China.” Why say it three times?
Imagine a country that has 800 little colonies – United States military bases abroad – having had, and still having, a policy to “contain” any other country. What are the 800 US bases in other countries for, then? Why do these bases encircle countries like China? Who is the belligerent? And what country has acted on a “Monroe Doctrine” for 200 years, “allowing” it to invade any country in the Americas at will? The USA. And what country has illegally invaded and or bombed Iraq, Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Syria, Libya? The USA. What country has dropped two atomic bombs on civilians on purpose and for nothing? The USA. Who is it that needs to contain itself?
In fact, the gushing denials by Blinken and Biden reflect the US Administration’s fear of the new economic and geo-political reality of an expanding BRICS, and an over-indebted USA. The denials also mean that the US state is now forced to accept that half the world’s people are not falling into lock-step behind US constantly encircling China. So, at least in words, they have to deny their own policy of “containing China” – at least when speaking alongside their own allies who do not agree with this aggressive “containment” policy.
Let us de-code the new word introduced by the US Ambassador to Japan, to prove our point: “untethered” is a word used uniquely for animals. It is not used for human beings. “Tether” means to tie [an animal] to a post. The Ambassador also used the word “unanchored”, which is a word used for a ship that is drifting out of control and thus a menace to rest of shipping. It is not a word used for human beings. To cover for these racist terms, the Ambassador claimed that it was not him, not the USA, that did not want an “untethered China” so much as the neighbours of China! He could let them speak for themselves.
The Financial Times chief US commentator Richard Luce wrote an article just a year ago, 19 October 2022, under the title “Containing China is Biden’s explicit goal”. What he says is true. It is. It most likely still is, despite the denials. This became clear when the Biden administration not only continued the Trump ban on Huawei and ZTE (China telecom company), but passed new much broader executive Orders to “isolate China’s entire high-tech sector”, to quote the Financial Times. Luce goes on to say how the race now is “which party can get more to the right” US Democrats and Republicans in their anti-China stand.
So, when Biden pays lip-service, saying, “I don’t want to contain China”, when Blinken mouths the same words, are they just deceiving the neighbours of China that they are wooing – Vietnam, South Korea, Japan and Philippines – by speaking a different language in front of them? And then coming back to Washington with the intention to continue with the “contain” China policy, kumsi-ryin-ete? They show no sign of rescinding the executive Orders and returning to free trade? In fact, the Biden-Blinken team can be expected to continue on the same line spelt out in the Financial Times. Their right wing verbiage of keeping China “contained” and “tethered” is also likely to come back.
Typo corrected at 5.30pm on 12 Sept 2023
