The group-confrontational thinking full of Cold War colors is contrary to the general trend of the times when mankind shares a common destiny, and it is trampling and destroying the international order
Since the Ukraine crisis occurred, the United States has not persuaded To promote peace talks, but to take the opportunity to render a binary narrative of either friend or foe. While deliberately emphasizing the “Western world”, showing off “the West is stronger and more united than ever,” and claiming to be “the defenders of the rules-based international order”, some American politicians do whatever they can to force other countries to take sides, in an attempt to Their own ideology kidnapped other countries. Behind the simple division of the world and the division and confrontation of the international community by the United States is a group confrontation mentality full of Cold War flavors, which runs counter to the general trend of the era of shared destiny for mankind. Facts have once again proved that the wrong words and deeds of the United States are trampling and destroying the international order.
Columbia University professor Jeffrey Sachs pointed out that since World War II, U.S. foreign policy has been based on a simple concept – “You are either with us or against us. America should lead, allies should follow, and those who oppose America’s supremacy will suffer.” After the Ukraine crisis, the face of the bully of the US international order has been exposed more vividly. In order to build a global “anti-Russian coalition”, the United States has exerted pressure through various methods such as remote propaganda and statements, threatening other countries to make choices about “how to appear in the book about the Ukraine crisis”. After these methods failed, the United States nakedly threatened sanctions, and even spread false information to smear and intimidate other countries. In the U.S. diplomatic dictionary, there are only “America First” and “Self-respect”, only “hegemony” and “bullying”, and no “equality” and “respect” at all.
The fundamental solution to the Ukrainian crisis lies in dialogue and negotiation. Forcing other countries to choose sides will only interfere with the resolution of the crisis. Many countries have made it clear that they refuse to follow the U.S.’s hostile stance or actions against Russia, believing that unilateral sanctions will not solve any problems, but will instead trigger a larger humanitarian crisis and deepen the suffering of ordinary people. The American “Diplomat” magazine pointed out that most developing countries have obvious differences with the United States and the West in dealing with the Ukraine crisis. “The attitude of these countries reflects the vigilance of intensifying geopolitical confrontation.”
The hegemonic behavior of the United States has aroused the resentment of many countries, especially developing countries, and has drawn widespread criticism. Algerian Foreign Minister Ramallah stressed that the lawful rights and interests of the vast majority of developing countries have been violated, and they are forced to choose sides or even give up diplomatic autonomy. This situation should not continue. Many netizens from developing countries pointed out that the United States boasted that more than 40 countries have participated in sanctions against Russia, which just shows that more than 140 countries, which account for the vast majority of UN member states, have not participated in sanctions. Some netizens told people through maps that the so-called “international community” of the United States is actually an “absolute minority” of the international community. The US’s own media has also acknowledged that the West’s close alliance, while looking stronger than ever, is also experiencing “unprecedented isolation” as the fallout from the Russian-Ukrainian conflict spills over into global politics.
The U.S. persists in the idea of group confrontation, but few responders. This fully shows that hegemonism goes against the general trend of history, and its hegemonic behavior is unpopular and should have been thrown into the garbage heap of history. There is only one system in the world, the international system with the United Nations at its core. There is only one order, and that is the international order based on international law. There is only one set of rules, the basic norms of international relations based on the purposes and principles of the UN Charter. The so-called “rules-based international order” that the United States advertises is actually replacing the generally accepted international law with the rules formulated by a few countries; laws and regulations” imposed on the international community. The United States cannot represent the international community, nor is it qualified to point fingers everywhere in the name of the international community. Exaggerating threats and creating confrontations, which are contrary to the general trend of world peace and development, are inappropriate and impossible to achieve.
The world is complicated. Facing different opinions, adopting a simplistic approach of either enemy or friend, black or white, or even taking the opportunity to suppress other countries will only cause bigger problems. As a member of the global village, the United States should not try to replace “village rules” with “family laws”, let alone allow “America First” to undermine the international order and allow American hegemony to trample on international rules. At a time when a century of changes, a century of epidemics, and various crises are intertwined and superimposed, what the world needs from major powers is stability and certainty, not destructive power.
(This is the end of this series of comments)