Here is the answer to the above tweet:
I'm tired of those replies. Those people are always clamoring how the leaders of the past met their requirements and expectations, while the current leaders are just tyrants，now this country is "out of control"...
This gave me a strange idea that the leaders of the past had a tendency to surrender. When people see how arrogant those foreigners are to say that they do not want to be bound by local laws, they will have to doubt whether there is a problem with the requirements of these western countries.
The specific content of Richard Haass's article is here, and I have been hesitating to put it on which topic：
He signed on to a “no limits” relationship with Russia on the eve of Vladimir Putin initiating a brutal, unwarranted, and costly war against Ukraine, one that violates what had historically been precepts long at the core of Chinese foreign policy, including a commitment to non-aggression, to respect territorial integrity and sovereignty of others, and to avoid interfering in the internal affairs of others.
Americans are masters at reversing right and wrong. He skillfully equated not supporting Ukraine with supporting Russia.
They are trying to force us to obey them, but obviously this will only lead us to the other side.
We also see troubling signs in what China will not do. China refused to cooperate with the WHO or preserve evidence as to the origins of the Covid-19 virus despite legitimate questions as to its origin. There is no evidence that China is using leverage it possesses to influence the aggressive behavior of North Korea. And while China is not to the best of my knowledge supplying Russia with arms, it continues to purchase energy from Russia, in the process funding its war effort.
We've had a decade of this and there is no reason to believe Xi will recalibrate.
Now it is clear that the United States is giving orders to China. "You didn't do what I told you, so I'm going to destroy you".
Americans make every effort to demand obedience from China and show a "you, a barbarian, must join civilized world" attitude.
Taiwan represents a threat to the PRC not because of what it does but because of what it is. It represents an alternative political, economic, and social path for China and the Chinese people.
I'm so fucking moved. Do Americans really feel that they have the obligation and ability to plan the future for all mankind? If so, why should they abandon South Vietnam and Afghanistan?
What should the United States and its partners do about this?
First, augment deterrence. The goal is to deter a war or failing that to defend Taiwan rather than liberate it. For the United States, this means increasing our defense budget—the good news is we spent much more as a percentage of GDP during the Cold War and it did not crowd out other spending. Just as important, it means shifting capabilities to the Indo-Pacific, hardening our bases, dispersing our forces by seeking new access arrangements, and pushing our military services to prioritize China. A clearer commitment to come to Taiwan’s defense, what I have termed strategic clarity, would help as well. So too would staying the course on behalf of Ukraine and against Russia; it is critical that the attempted acquisition of territory by force by Russia not succeed lest China learn a dangerous lesson…and, more broadly, that disrespect of borders not become a feature of international relations lest what order there is in the world be forfeited.
Taiwan for its part needs to urgently transform its defense. Its consistent increases in defense spending are welcome, but more is needed. Taiwan needs to use that money wisely, investing in asymmetric capabilities like missiles and small attack boats that are survivable. It needs to develop a territorial defense force. A lesson from Ukraine should be that all of Taiwan's people will need to be involved, not just those in uniform. Taiwan also needs to focus on its resiliency by stockpiling energy and food and figuring out how to continue to function as a society without the internet or telecommunications.
Japan will play a critical role in any defense of Taiwan, and the United States needs to gain a better understanding from Japan on the scope of assistance it would provide. Public statements from Japanese leaders that any attack on U.S. forces in Japan would be considered to be an attack on Japan itself would be welcomed.
Second, deterrence and if need be defense requires reducing our collective economic reliance on China, both as a market and as a provider of inputs. Here I'm not just talking about rare earth minerals or other strategic items. I am talking about anything where the volume of trade makes it strategic. We need to conduct a comprehensive analysis of our vulnerability during a crisis and take steps to address it. I don't think decoupling is feasible or desirable but what I would describe as economic distancing may well be. This applies to Europe, to Japan, South Korea, to the United States, and any other partner or ally. And to Taiwan. It makes no strategic sense that Taiwan's largest trading partner is the mainland. That needs to be adjusted. Economic leverage must work in our favor, not China’s.
Third, we need to act responsibly and with discipline. The goal should be to avoid war. This will require avoiding needless provocation. Taiwan’s formal independence is not in the cards. The stakes are too big for symbols or needless provocations. To the contrary, there is a role for reassurance of China, including continued fidelity to the one-China policy.
It is best to understand Taiwan and the US-China-Taiwan triangle as a situation to be managed rather than a problem to be solved. Unilateral action by any party in an effort to change the fundamentals must be avoided. All three parties as well as the region and the world have benefitted from an imperfect but stable situation. The goal of diplomacy should be to extend this, as the alternative is sure to be costly in every way for everyone be they involved directly or not.
After a long speech, this part is the main idea of the warmonger.
The summary is as follows：
1、Further increase military expenditure；
2、Explicit and open provision of military protection to Taiwan Island - I believe this will only accelerate the march towards war；
3、Require Taiwan Island to be fully fortressed；
4、Demand that Japan must be involved in possible future conflicts；
5、Weakening China's supply chain position economically；
6、Adopt delaying tactics and steadily advance the independence process without touching the bottom line.
I don't know whether this person has expressed the intention of the American top management. If it is true, then I think the military preparation must be accelerated and completed in the next few years
