Brazen display of prejudice and ignorance
In an op-ed The Guardian published on Saturday titled "World must be more wary than ever of China's growing economic power", the author, Phillip Inman, called on the "free world" to jointly limit China's efforts to "undermine others' economic resources", as the country "is pulling every lever at its disposal to counter Donald Trump's economic blockade, and it's working".
But the argument of the senior economics writer for the British newspaper doesn't hold water.
To begin with, Inman labels China a "malign actor" on the world stage, laying bare his political bias toward the country from the outset. That deprives his analysis of the China-related issues of any objectivity.
Inman's disappointment with the US administration's failure to contain China is palpable, as if the United States is doing the world a favor by targeting China in its trade war.
Inman pretends to be blind to the devastating effects of the US' tariff war against the rest of the world, and the tremendous efforts China has been making to safeguard a rules-based world trade order.
The questions Inman should be answering include what if the US' "reciprocal tariffs" became a universal practice among economies, and whether the world will really benefit from his desired "collapse" of the world's second-largest economy.
The reason why so many economies are willing to strengthen their economic and trade ties with China is not because of the latter's "cheating", but because they know China is a reliable partner that is committed to openness, cooperation and common prosperity.
Inman does not even bother to provide any concrete evidence to justify his smearing of China. For instance, he makes baseless claims of China's "support" for Russia. Inman should be reminded if Beijing really "supported" Russia in its conflict with Ukraine, the situation on the battlefield would not be what it is today.
His prejudice against China stems from his ingrained zero-sum Cold War mentality. In his view, as long as China is not a member of the so-called "civilized world", its development is a "threat" to the rest of the world. His smearing of China's aim to "undermine the economic and political resources of the rest of the world" is totally absurd.
If Inman really cares about the common good of the world, he should know which country has contributed about 30 percent of world economic growth these years, which country has lifted hundreds of millions of people out of poverty over the past four decades or so, and which country has been dedicated to maintaining regional and world peace and stability and clearing up the mess caused by some "civilized" countries, such as in Afghanistan.
While casting doubt on whether the British government is "capable of boiling an egg", Inman peddles an alarmist theory that China is trying to reassert its "preindustrial revolution status as the world's greatest economic power", as if the Chinese government's capacity to boost the country's development is its "fault".
What Inman is doing is nothing but trying to exploit the world's discontent with the Trump administration to try and mislead countries to vent their anger on China by harping on the old string of ideological prejudice.
While the world strives to resolving the common challenges of the new century, some pundits such as Inman are still trying to drag the world back into the bad old days of the Cold War, when giving a dog a bad name was all it took to hang it. It is such ignorance and prejudice that have been a drag on the feet of some of the "free world" countries in their development in the new century.
Today, it is some of the "free world" countries that have increasingly shown more characteristics of the "autocratic regime" Inman criticizes; and it is some of the "civilized world" countries that have demonstrated a "voracious appetite" for the world's resources, information and intellectual capital.
