Young Neocons Want WAR With China While Enjoying Military Industrial Complex Perks
By Joel Wong
The post author, Neutrality Studies, is the moderator discussing the provided text: “No Substitute for Victory: America’s Competition With China Must Be Won, Not Managed.”
The term “Neocons” refers to neoconservatives, a political movement in the United States that emerged in the 1960s and became influential in the 1980s and 1990s. Neoconservatism is associated with a hawkish foreign policy, advocating for a strong U.S. military presence and intervention abroad to promote democracy and American interests. Neoconservatives are often characterized by their support for spreading democratic values globally, skepticism towards international organizations and multilateralism, and a focus on maintaining American military strength. Matt Pottinger and Mike Gallagher are sometimes labeled as neoconservatives due to their foreign policy views and positions on national security.
Matthew Pottinger is a distinguished visiting fellow at the Hoover Institution and chair of the China program at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies. Mike Gallagher is a member of the House of Representatives who previously served as the chair of the House committee on the Chinese Communist Party.
These individuals are portrayed in the video as proponents of a hawkish approach towards China and aggressive foreign policies.
In their article quoted in the video, Matt Pottinger and Mike Gallagher emphasize several key points regarding the United States’ approach to competition with China:
1. The authors contend that the Biden administration’s China policy, while promising in certain aspects, risks repeating past mistakes by prioritizing short-term cooperation with China’s leaders over achieving a long-term victory against China’s adversarial strategy. They advocate for shifting focus from managing competition to actively pursuing victory.
2. China is engaging in various global initiatives aimed at undermining Western influence and establishing an anti-democratic order. These actions include supporting expansionist dictatorships, rapidly expanding its nuclear arsenal, and strengthening conventional military capabilities. The authors argue that China seeks more than a stalemate and assert that the U.S. should not settle for one either.
3. Victory would entail China’s communist leaders abandoning efforts to prevail in conflicts, whether hot or cold, against the U.S. and its allies. It would also involve Chinese elites and citizens finding inspiration to explore alternative models of development and governance not based on domestic repression and international hostility.
4. Achieving victory requires increasing friction in U.S.-China relations. The U.S. must employ rhetoric and policies that may seem confrontational but are essential for establishing boundaries that Beijing is currently crossing. This includes imposing costs on Chinese leader Xi Jinping and openly addressing China’s impact on U.S. interests, while bolstering U.S. defense capabilities.
5. The authors advocate for engaging in intensive diplomacy with Beijing only from a position of American strength, as perceived by both Washington and Beijing.
In essence, Pottinger and Gallagher argue that the U.S. must actively seek victory in its competition with China rather than passively managing the current status quo.
Their perspective challenges complacency and stresses the necessity for a robust, strategic approach to protect U.S. interests against China’s global ambitions.