Chapter 25: Pompeo: Changing the “Flawed Framework” 2020 (Part II)

Pompeo’s China policy drew heavily on his adviser on China affairs, Yu Maochun. In an interview with Voice of America on November 16, 2020, Yu outlined three new directions in China policy launched by the Trump State Department. First, the United States must stop treating “the Chinese Communist Party” and “China” as synonyms. Only by clearly distinguishing the two can one begin to understand the CCP’s damage to China. Second, the long-advocated “engagement” strategy promoted by America’s so-called “China hands” must be changed. The theory of engagement sought to draw the CCP into exchanges in business, education, tourism, and other fields in order to induce it to follow international norms, but in practice the results were often the opposite. Third, agreements with the CCP must be “results-oriented.” For many years, the CCP has adopted a strategy of endless negotiation, deliberately delaying urgent issues until the United States loses patience and ultimately accepts inconclusive outcomes.

The world needs to awaken to the CCP’s domineering behavior and formulate its own rules to restrain CCP aggression. The CCP’s strategy for threatening the United States is to demand that America not interfere in the regime’s so-called “internal affairs,” including Hong Kong, Tibet, and Xinjiang, and to label these issues as “red lines.” When the CCP tells other countries that Xinjiang is a “red line,” what it really means is this: we want to detain one million Uyghurs in concentration camps; we want to torture them and suppress their freedom. Killing people in the name of sovereignty is genocide. On this issue, the international community is not permitted to protest, or else it is accused of disrespecting China. These matters are said to concern China’s core interests and national dignity and to stir the national sentiments of 1.4 billion Chinese people. Touching on these issues, the CCP claims, will only cause serious damage to Sino-U.S. relations and to America’s own interests.

“These are merely the Chinese Communist Party’s ‘red lines,’ not red lines grounded in international law,” Yu Maochun said. Beijing’s so-called red lines are neither based on international law nor on international conventions; in fact, China has signed many of these conventions but has never implemented them. Therefore, this is not interference in China’s internal affairs or national sovereignty, because one cannot slaughter others or commit genocide under the banner of sovereignty. Since the 1940s, the international community has established such rules. This is how Yu understands the CCP’s red lines. The international community should have its own red lines and must require the CCP to abide by them. Red lines should be set in response to CCP aggression, forcing the regime to comply with international rules. The entire world must awaken to this kind of bullying behavior and refuse to accept such rhetoric.

China should abandon Leninist ideology and instead compete with the European Union, the United States, and other countries in a peaceful, calm, and rule-based manner. This includes ensuring fair trade and stopping the theft of Western industrial secrets and military intelligence. Competing while recognizing international rules is the correct path forward; if the CCP refuses to follow these rules, it will become even more isolated internationally.

In an interview with Jan Jekielek, host of American Thought Leaders, Yu Maochun said that previous U.S. administrations had a kind of “missionary zeal,” believing that economic engagement with Beijing would make China more democratic and turn it into a responsible stakeholder in the world. “Look at their domestic policies. Look at their international policies. Every major policy initiative is driven by ideology.” Past thinking about China failed to understand the nature of the regime that rules the Chinese people. The CCP’s nature is “the most central threat of our time.” Continually underestimating the fact that China remains a communist country is “completely disconnected” from reality. As a result, U.S. China policy long operated within a “flawed framework.” Maintaining a “stable relationship” with the CCP within this framework has, in reality, continuously “eroded” U.S. national interests. “What we are trying to do is to change this framework.” “We should not focus on how to do things right, but on how to do the right things.”

Today’s Chinese Communist Party is more evil than the Soviet Union was in its day. Back then, the Soviet Union was largely isolated from the United States; now, the CCP has already penetrated into American society. This terrifying red force has thoroughly infiltrated Chinese-American communities and the media. Many pro-CCP organizations have emerged, and there are numerous CCP members and supporters within Chinese communities. Of course, there are also many pro-American democrats, but shockingly, in the United States it is not the pro-CCP elements who fear pro-democracy activists; rather, it is the democrats who dare not publicly disclose their addresses, fearing harassment or even assassination by pro-CCP forces. This is in free America, yet they cannot freely enjoy American freedom. That CCP influence has reached such a level in the United States is chilling indeed. Republican Congressman Scott Perry introduced legislation to designate the CCP as an organized transnational criminal organization, providing strategic guidance for U.S. law enforcement agencies to counter CCP malicious activities.

On October 2, 2020, U.S. immigration authorities implemented regulations barring CCP members from applying for immigration or permanent residency in the United States. “Unless otherwise exempted, any immigrant who is or has been a member of the Communist Party or any other totalitarian party is inadmissible.” Membership in the Communist Party or other totalitarian parties is incompatible with the naturalization oath to “support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States,” and cannot guarantee such support and defense. Unless an exemption applies, any attempt by a Communist Party member to immigrate to the United States is impermissible. The additions to the immigration policy manual help officers determine grounds of inadmissibility under federal law.

The United States has concluded that the CCP has long sought to “influence Americans through propaganda, economic coercion, and other covert activities.” To protect the United States from “malign influence,” the State Department began restricting travel to the United States by CCP members and their immediate family members. For CCP members and their immediate relatives applying for B1/B2 business, tourism, or family-visit visas, the validity period was shortened from ten years to one month, and limited to single entry.

U.S. immigration guidance barring CCP members and affiliated organization members from immigrating to the United States has caused a major shock among Chinese communities in America. Some Chinese permanent residents planning to apply for U.S. citizenship have already felt the force of this policy. Yang Jianli told Radio Free Asia, “I think this guidance aligns with the core concept of U.S. China policy, which is to separate the Chinese people from the Chinese Communist Party. This regulation is not rigid; there is flexibility, because exemptions can be applied for.”

America is awakening. Pompeo said the United States is prepared to build a new alliance of like-minded countries—a new democratic alliance—dedicated to changing the Communist Party. If you do not change it, it will change you. Pompeo’s vision is sound, but unfortunately his immediate superior was a president with a background in real estate—someone who understands how to build houses but not macroeconomics, and even less the global economy. Trump valued Xi Jinping’s purchases of soybeans and wheat to secure his own reelection. Upon taking office, Trump withdrew from alliances first, offending many anti-communist allies. Although the United States had a secretary of state like Pompeo, who possessed a clear understanding of the CCP, one man alone could not shoulder the burden. The future depends on whether the American people can fully awaken from naïve illusions about communism, and whether democratic nations worldwide can unite—only then can communism be buried.

Zhong Wen concludes: The twentieth century was a century in which communism ran rampant and brought disaster; the twenty-first century will be the century of communism’s “end of history.” Changing the Communist Party is the mission of the Chinese people, and free nations must work together with the Chinese people to take action. Now is the time to act. America has awakened at last; the CCP has been allowed to run amok for far too long. Communist rulers are in fact internally weak—the CCP is far from a monolithic iron block. In Xu Zhangrun’s words, many officials are already waiting to abandon the sinking ship to save their own lives. The tide of history surges forward irresistibly. Those who cling desperately to a bankrupt totalitarian communism are destined to be swept away by that tide.