On the verge of a century of his long life, the patriarch of American politics, or its fox, Henry Kissinger, still manages to raise dust and create a loud clang. He warns that the new cold war between Washington and Beijing will be stronger than what occurred during the 1960s to the late 1980s.
Kissinger was a key player in driving a wedge between Beijing and Moscow, attempting to isolate the former from the latter through the famous ping-pong diplomacy. However, today he finds his country in a different position based on two factors:
First: Beijing's financial conditions are different from Moscow's four decades ago, especially since the Chinese initially focused on the economic base that allows for a polar breakout, without unnecessary entanglement in an arms race—a trap in which the Russians previously fell, leading to high and costly repercussions.
Second: There is an advancing Russo-Chinese alliance, a direct result of American sovereignty and leadership dreams, which refuse to share the global pie and are determined to dominate the world alone, as if the era of neoconservatives and the vision of the American century have not gone to waste.
Is Kissinger correct in his predictions of what he sees as a new cold war that is more impactful and possibly more dangerous? It is certain that on the American side, fears are rising to the point of becoming an obsession day and night. Reliable strategists consider that any rising China could methodically undermine American supremacy, ultimately posing a threat to America's security.
This is evident in the latitude and longitude of the latest American national security strategy, the first under the Biden administration, where there is an increasing number of Americans, both military and civilian, asserting that China, like the Soviet Union during the previous cold war, is determined to achieve military and economic control over all surrounding regions, leading ultimately to hegemony.
China has learned from the past lessons of the Soviet Union, particularly its fatal collapse, where its nuclear arsenal did not save it from economic breakdown. China is reinforcing its commercial and financial pursuits, extending its economic bridges with every region of the world, from its Asian neighbors, where Russia is eager for any alliances, through the Gulf region, to the African continent, and extending to Latin America. The old Silk Road is being revived, and its strength will increase as Washington loses spheres of influence globally due to its stripped-down pragmatic views.
Chinese officials believe that without nuclear deterrence, Washington can impose extensive pressures on Beijing. Therefore, the elite military powers in China have started a new nuclear era that differs in length and breadth, form and content, from China’s previous convictions on maintaining modest nuclear capabilities.
In the past three years, Beijing has doubled its nuclear arsenal, as revealed by American satellites, especially those tasked with spying on China. Notably, there are sites for ballistic missiles with nuclear warheads that may reach one thousand five hundred, currently being developed underground, resembling a "great nuclear wall of China."
We have the right to object to Mr. Kissinger's perspective; the forthcoming American-Chinese confrontation, especially against the backdrop of deteriorating economic and social situations in the West on both sides of the Atlantic, opens wide doors for theories of moving forward through wars, based on the premise that violence is the mother of history, as Karl Marx put it, and the best way to restart the machines of military factories, which are a crucial component of the American military-industrial complex.
A quick glance at the book "Science of Military Strategy" published by the Chinese Ministry of Defense earlier this year gives the reader a strong sense of the likelihood of hot nuclear war on the horizon, rather than the current cold war between the two countries, despite the entangled economic and commercial relationships, along with steadfast convictions that any armed conflict will result in apparent economic ruin from Washington to Beijing.
The lines of China's nuclear strategy serve as an immediate and simultaneous deterrent, as stated in the latest American national security strategy, where it is asserted that while Russia is the present danger, China represents a more prominent fear in the foreseeable future, carrying plans to slow down the Chinese dragon, ultimately aiming to incapacitate it, if possible, all at once.
The Chinese assert: "Nuclear forces play an important role in ensuring China's status as an independent great power, safeguarding vital national interests from any violations, and creating a secure environment for peaceful development."
Nuclear confrontations are no longer limited to Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin, who announced last Saturday the conclusion of an agreement between his country and Belarus to deploy tactical nuclear weapons on its territory. This is seen by many observers as a last-minute measure in the potential nuclear confrontation with NATO, especially if Britain proceeds to supply Ukrainians with a million depleted uranium rounds for Challenger tanks.
Days ago, in an interview with the "New York Times," 91-year-old Daniel Ellsberg warned of the risks of a nuclear war outbreak due to the Ukraine crisis... So, who is Ellsberg?
In brief, he is the man behind the disclosure of American nuclear papers in 1971, known as the Pentagon Papers.
This is not a cold war, Mr. Kissinger… It is a hot nuclear one.
