Trump and Xi: Two Views on international relations
President Donald Trump, left, and Chinese President Xi Jinping offer differing views of international relations. | Mark Schiefelbein / AP

It should come as no surprise to the knowledgeable observer that the current state of international affairs is, to put it mildly, a mess.

In recent weeks, we have seen how the leadership of the United States government, bogged down in a war that it cannot win, is spewing threats and insults against countries, both “friend” and “foe.”

In what many say is a shift from a military focus to an economic one, the president of the United States announced that he was going to undertake “the most crushing economic operation ever taken against any country.”

He didn’t stop there; he threatened to invoke drastic measures against any nation, some of whom have been long-time U.S. allies who have or continue to provide any type of assistance to Iran.  He labeled these countries “enablers.”

Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent expanded on the president’s announcement in an interview on CNBC. The economic pressure that the United States is going to apply, the secretary stated, includes “all of our allies,” in what he called “the greatest coordinated economic isolation in the history of the world, and we are going to them and saying, you are either with us or against us.

“We want this murderous regime to end. And if you insist on the doing business with them, either transferring money, buying their oil, doing seaborne ship transport first, then the U.S. Treasury and the U.S. government…will put its full might and force toward enforcing against you.” Bessent went on to say, “So it is time for our allies and the rest of the world to make a decision. And we are going to squash the economy of this murderous regime….”

A few days later on X, Bessent further explained U.S. policy, calling it the equivalent to D-Day in World War II. “Today, in that same spirit, we are launching an economic onslaught against Iran’s financial connections around the globe. Our objective is to sever every economic lifeline that sustains this tyrannical regime.”

At the same time, the president announced on his social media site that he will continue to use the military option, with attacks on targets in southern Iran. “If the failed Nation of Iran retaliates for this very justified attack, they will be hit again at a much harder and higher level, but it will not be the biggest attack of them all, that is waiting in the wings and, when it is over, there will be very little left of the Islamic Republic of Iran!”

The president’s language, to say the least, is stark and speaks in a tone rarely heard in international affairs. One can make all types of analyses as to what motivates Trump, but one thing is clear: He is an extreme example of U.S. imperialistic policies followed since the Spanish-American War. His rhetoric may be “over the top” or an embarrassment to the political establishment, but it still expresses a hegemonist mindset in the modern age.

When Mr. Trump talks about “enablers” it has led some to wonder if he included China in his calculations. After all, President Xi Jinping of China will be visiting the White House in several weeks, and the American side may not want to torpedo the talks before they take place. And therein lies the rub.

Whatever the president’s intent, China immediately turned down Trump’s offer to join him and isolate Iran. And that was not just because of some minor technicality, but because the basis of Chinese foreign economic policy is, in most respects, the complete opposite of that of the United States.

In an editorial in the authoritative Global Times, the Chinese raised a salient point:

“If the U.S. cannot even rally its own allies, it certainly cannot expect to boss China around. China has consistently opposed unilateral bullying and long-arm jurisdiction—not because China is Iran’s largest trading partner and maintains long-standing friendly relations with Iran, but because once this U.S. logic is accepted, international trade would no longer be normal exchanges between nations. Instead, it would devolve into an absurd situation where the U.S. unilaterally sets the rules and the flow of all goods must be approved by the U.S.”

It reiterated its long-standing position that “only a comprehensive ceasefire and the cessation of hostilities can fundamentally create the conditions for easing tensions….”

Yet, beyond the specifics of the U.S.-Iran-China relationship, China believes that countries should seek a “consistent approach” to international trade and economic cooperation. Toward that end, the People’s Republic is “always taking equality and mutual benefit as the fundamental principles of all cooperation.”

As a result, the newspaper said that a growing number of countries are finding cooperation paths that align with their own long-term interests in trade collaboration with China. These include countries in Southeast Asia, Canada, Australia, and the European Union, among others.

“It is precisely this non-exclusive, non-confrontational principle that is entirely based on mutual benefit that has made China the preferred partner for more and more countries to proactively deepen cooperation.”

Xi Jinping often places China’s economic policies in a broader context. Most recently he spoke in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, where he said all countries need to build “an equal and orderly multipolar world,” one that “should ensure equal rights, equal opportunities and equal rules for all countries, regardless of their size, strength and wealth.”

That is the stark choice facing the people of our planet.  On the one hand, we have the neo-barbarism of the Trump administration. On the other, a new set of international relations based on equality, fairness, and peace. The choice is clear.

As with all op-eds published by People’s World, the views expressed above are those of the author.

We hope you appreciated this article. At People’s World, we believe news and information should be free and accessible to all, but we need your help. Our journalism is free of corporate influence and paywalls because we are totally reader-supported. Only you, our readers and supporters, make this possible. If you enjoy reading People’s World and the stories we bring you, please support our work by donating or becoming a monthly sustainer today. Thank you!


CONTRIBUTOR

David Cavendish
David Cavendish

David Cavendish is a retired teacher, active in the union movement, the peace movement (many years in an anti-Iraq/Afghanistan War vigil), and other progressive political activities. He is a longtime contributor to People’s World. David Cavendish es un maestro jubilado, activo en el movimiento sindical, el movimiento por la paz y otras actividades políticas progresistas. Colabora desde hace mucho tiempo en People’s World.