Who’s being set up as NATO agrees to boost military spending to 5% of GDP?, China rejects NATO Secretary General’ s manipulation of China-related issues

 

Illustration: Xia Qing/GT

The 2025 NATO Summit was held from Tuesday to Wednesday in The Hague, the Netherlands. In the joint statement after the meeting, the most important "outcome" was an agreement to raise defense spending to 5 percent of GDP - a goal that prompted a "strong backlash" in Europe when it was proposed by the US earlier this year. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte, acting as Washington's "loyal canvasser," pulled out all the stops to "trick" European countries into loosening their purse strings: When the "Russia threat" was no longer enough, he trotted out the "China threat," making irresponsible comments about the Taiwan question and even smearing China using the Ukraine issue. This not only digs a pit for European countries but also causes trouble and chaos for the world.

Raising defense spending from 2 percent to 5 percent of GDP within a decade - more than doubling it - will amount to trillions of dollars in additional expenditure, making NATO one of the fastest-growing entities in global military spending. The last time NATO called for a military spending increase was in 2014, with most of the largest increases coming from Eastern European countries. Ten years on, have these nations become more secure because of this? The answer is obvious. Not only was Eastern Europe implicated in the war, but the whole of Europe was forced into the Ukrainian crisis, and the global economy has suffered as a result. NATO's unchecked and unrestrained military expansion is largely to blame.

Hyping claims that China's naval fleet is already the "same" size as the US and that China will "possess 1,000 nuclear warheads by 2030" is essentially an attempt to legitimize NATO's infiltration into the Asia-Pacific. By using the "China threat" to justify its military expansion, NATO even beat the US to the punch in pledging to "prepare for a possible conflict in the Taiwan Straits." If NATO insists on extending its war tentacles to Asia, it is almost certain that the more it increases its military spending, the greater the strategic suffering Europe will have to bear.

This logic of "engaging in military expansion while accusing others of being a threat" is not only foolish but also malicious. When Rutte emphasized that NATO "has no opt-out," it was nothing but intimidation for member countries that leaving the alliance midway is simply not an option. His claim of "securing our future," meanwhile, is precisely an attempt to completely tie Europe onto the US' war chariot. NATO, a war machine that should have been shut down long ago, now relies on clinging to US coattails and doing Washington's "dirty work" to survive, constantly spinning the absurd narrative that "war equals security" to scare Europeans. NATO has become Europe's net liability. A classic example is that if NATO had not expanded eastward, there would be no Russian-Ukrainian conflict. 

Among NATO's painstakingly groomed four "Indo-Pacific partners" (IP4), three leaders skipped this summit - partly due to concerns that, amid the current Middle Eastern turmoil, the summit "could become a trap." These countries neither want to get involved in Middle Eastern conflicts nor be forced to pledge to increase defense spending. US magazine The Diplomat said that Australia's post-9/11 alignment with the American missions in Iraq and Afghanistan drew the country into protracted conflicts. These conflicts, initiated by NATO led by the US, proved politically unpopular and financially draining. It is clear from this that the idea of "seeking peace through force" is actually unpopular in the international community.

The US' erratic behavior in recent years has led many European nations to believe they should do more to strengthen their own defense and reduce dependence on the US. But a dramatic increase in NATO military spending clearly runs counter to that goal. Before the summit, Rutte told US President Donald Trump that "Europe is going to pay in a big way, as they should, and it will be your win." When this comment came to light, it caused a media storm. Yet, this flattery and boasting was met with Trump's contempt and doubt about NATO's collective defense clause. Despite this, Rutte continued to reassure Europeans that they should "stop worrying" but focus on "this huge irritant, which is that we are not spending enough." NATO has long been overwhelmingly driven by US will, but this act of self-gaslighting reveals just how dire Europe's "strategic non-autonomy" has become. 

The era of NATO is long gone. Under the guiding principle of "America First," Washington repeatedly wields a "no money, no protection" stance, reducing NATO to a bargaining chip in US geopolitical trades. Allocating 5 percent of GDP to military spending is a heavy burden for European countries, but it still falls far short of satisfying Washington's geopolitical appetite and will only make the US ask for more from Europe. European nations, especially those unwilling to be dragged into wars, must remain clearheaded. - Global Times editorial: https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202506/1336995.shtml

Chinese FM and MND spokesperson reject NATO Secretary General’ s manipulation of China-related issues

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun

Some in NATO, by playing up international and regional tensions and slandering China's normal military buildup, seek nothing but excuses to allow NATO to drastically grow its military spending, arbitrarily reach beyond its geographical scope and mandate, and advance eastward into the Asia-Pacific, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Guo Jiakun said on Thursday. 

We firmly oppose NATO using China as an excuse to "expand eastward into the Asia-Pacific" and urge NATO to reflect on its own behaviors, change course, and contribute more to global security and stability, Zhang Xiaogang, a spokesperson for China's Ministry of National Defense, also stated on the same day.

These remarks were made in response to NATO chief Mark Rutte's claim on Wednesday that it's really important that NATO spends more, given factors including Russia-Ukraine conflict and so-called China's massive military buildup.

Guo noted that NATO countries already account for 55 percent of the world's total military spending in 2024. Yet they're still required to raise defense investment to 5 percent of GDP to build a "more lethal NATO." What exactly is NATO's objective behind this? NATO calls itself a regional organization, but it keeps reaching beyond the geographic scope defined in its treaty and into the Asia-Pacific by claiming that what happens there and in Euro-Atlantic are "interconnected". The world is not blind to NATO's calculations, and countries in the Asia-Pacific are certainly wary of it, said Guo. 

Guo stated that on Ukraine, China has all along been promoting talks for peace and actively pushing for a political settlement of the crisis. China has never provided weapons to any party to the conflict and exercised strict export control over dual-use articles. China's objective and impartial position and constructive role have been widely recognized by the international community, while NATO's disinformation cannot deceive people around the world. If NATO truly cares about the security of Europe and the world, it should stop adding fuel to the fire and instigating confrontation.

China acts as a builder of world peace, a contributor to global development, a defender for international order and a supplier of public good. On peace and security, China has the best track record among major countries. We call on NATO to examine its own behavior, listen to the just voice of the world and let go of its outdated Cold War mentality, bloc confrontation and zero-sum approach. Time for NATO to get its perception right about China and stop manipulating issues on China, Guo said. 

China will firmly uphold sovereignty, security, and development interests, and continue to do its part to make the world a more peaceful and stable place, Guo added.

When asked to comment on the NATO Secretary General's recent claims that NATO should strengthen its partnership with Indo-Pacific countries, citing so-called military challenges posed by China, Zhang stressed that China adheres to the path of peaceful development, and is committed to a national defense policy that is defensive in nature. China's military development is purely aimed at safeguarding national sovereignty, security and development interests. 

The claim that China is "providing Russia with key support during the Russia-Ukraine conflict" is complete nonsense, said Lü Xiang, a research fellow at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. "The root cause of the Russia-Ukraine conflict lies in the US long-term meddling in regional affairs. Europe, while being a participant in the conflict, is also a victim—yet under US pressure, it has been forced to go along with the situation."

The NATO Secretary General essentially serves as Washington's spokesperson in Europe, said Lü. As a product of the Cold War and the world's largest military alliance, NATO is gradually becoming a "zombie" organization in the post-Cold War era.

"In an attempt to justify its continued existence, it keeps exaggerating and fabricating so-called security threats, thereby aligning itself with US strategic objectives and pressuring member states to increase military spending," Lü  -  By Shen Sheng  added.  https://www.globaltimes.cn/page/202506/1337040.shtml 

The ‘Chinese killed Jesus Christ’ post is a farce, but why it was allowed to spread on X is worth a closer look, "Cognitive Warfare"

Photo: VCG

Plunge into madness

Editor's Note:

"Cognitive Warfare" has become a new form of confrontation between states, and a new security threat. With new technological means, it sets agendas and spreads disinformation, to change people's perceptions and thus alter their self-identity. Launching cognitive warfare against China is an important means for Western anti-China forces to attack and discredit the country. 

Some politicians and media outlets have publicly smeared China's image by propagating false narratives in an attempt to incite and provoke dissatisfaction with China among people in certain countries. These means all serve the US strategy to contain China's rise and maintain its hegemony. The Global Times is publishing a series of articles to reveal the intrigues of the US-led West's China-targeted cognitive warfare, and expose its lies and vicious intentions. 

In the 14th installment in the series, the Global Times looks into how the US government and major social media platforms connive to spread anti-China slander online, as a non-obvious cognitive warfare trick that incites hostile sentiment toward China among ordinary US people.

People walk on a street in New York City, the US. Photo： VCG

Seeing unfriendly content toward China on today's US social media platforms is not uncommon, although some of them have reached the level of laughable absurdity. Dom Lucre, a US political commentator, recently wrote a controversial post on X (formally known as Twitter), in which he inexplicably claimed that the "Chinese killed Jesus Christ." This inexplicable post soon went viral online. Many X users seemed to have followed suit by fabricating rumors about "the Chinese," creating a wave of disinformation attacking Chinese people in recent days.

How did this campaign come about? Was it just the innocent dark humor of some individuals online, or a branch of the US' growing cognitive warfare against China to further deepen misunderstanding and hostility among Americans toward Chinese people? What roles do the US government and social media platforms play in such seemingly unofficially-initiated disinformation campaigns?

Dark humor?

"The Chinese killed Jesus Christ. This isn't a conspiracy. This isn't racist. This is history." The ridiculous post by Lucre on March 16 has since garnered over 3.5 million views and 1,500 forwards, much more than his other daily posts.

This was not the only ridiculous Chinese-themed post by Lucre that month. Earlier on March 9, he posted that "The Chinese control Hollywood. That's why every show they own can make fun of Jesus Christ and describe it as comedy…The Chinese [have] weaponized the American media against Christians." 

"China really controls the world," "China (is) allowed to legally mingle [sic] in American elections," "FBI caught five Chinese men dancing during 9/11"… Within a week, Lucre had posted several bizarre accusations against China and Chinese people, triggering widespread discussions on X.

So what was the motive behind it?

Some users commented that they guessed the posts were a form of "dark humor" satire by Lucre to "mock" the bans of US social media platforms like X on negative content about Jews as it appears Lucre had simply replaced the word "Jews" with "Chinese" in his post. Sharing personal experiences of Jew-related posts being deleted, they suggested that the platforms usually block or restrict posts attacking certain groups of people like Jews or Muslims, but seemingly allow similar content when directed at Chinese people, if not encourage them.

Superficially, Lucre's posts were a performance-art-like satire to highlight how different groups are treated on US social media platforms, and Chinese people unfortunately became a tool and the victims of such "satire."

However, as an increasing number of X users followed suit to fabricate and spread rumors defaming Chinese people, some anti-China forces thus seized on the opportunity to further muddy the waters with fake evidence to "support" the ridiculous claims. This "dark humor" farce has resulted in the inundation of disinformation that demonizes Chinese people.

There were more than 2,000 X posts containing the keywords "Chinese killed Jesus" within a week after Lucre's original post on March 16, showed online media monitoring company Meltwater. Instead of attaching so-called "background information" to Lucre's related posts, X seemed to have not blocked or clarified any of the forwarded posts, allowing them to keep going viral and mislead the public.

Obviously, the disinformation was spread under X's inaction and connivance, said Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University. "X can hardly escape the blame," he told the Global Times.

Long-term connivance

US social media platforms have long connived with and acquiesced to anti-China misinformation, "a very vicious act" that is backed or promoted by some politicians and government agencies in the US, Li said.

By indulging the false accusations against China online and deliberately elevating a few statements - no matter how absurd they are - to ignite a sort of public hostility toward China and its people, these platforms and politicians attempt to foment unfriendly consensus against Chinese people at the social level, so as to set off an anti-China sentiment among the general US public, noted Li.

The "Chinese virus" smear during the COVID-19 pandemic was a typical cognitive campaign that started on social media and was fueled by the US government and politicians. Meltwater data showed that the terms "Chinese virus" first appeared on social media platforms and in some news coverage around early January 2020, and surged in late March, soon after former US president Donald Trump used similar labels in his X posts

The US government was obviously happy to see these insulting words flooding social media, and actively joined the COVID-19 cognitive campaign that smeared China and obfuscated the facts. 

The so-called "Great Translation Movement" in early 2022, a malicious smear campaign against China on Russia-Ukraine issues on X, was also a vivid instance in which US social media platforms connived to spread rumors and hateful, discriminatory remarks against Chinese people. By translating cherry-picked, niche, and radical content from the Chinese internet into multiple languages, and spreading said translations on overseas social media platforms, participants of the "movement" attempted to portray Chinese people as an arrogant, populist, and cruel group, which maliciously misled the public. 

Disappointingly, during this "movement," X kept turning a blind eye to the rumors and attacks against Chinese people.

Some politicians are currently trying to take it a step further. On April 11, some members of the US House and Senate introduced the Open Translation Center Act, a bill to establish a federally funded research center that translates documents from countries like China and Russia, so as to "better understand threats" from these countries, they claimed.

One of the main initiators, Mike Gallagher, is infamous for his extreme anti-China attitude. 

Li analyzed that this bill is not to promote mutual understanding between China and the US, but to aggravate the US people's unfriendly attitude toward China. "The 'Open Translation Center' and the 'Great Translation Movement' are issues in two different fields, but they are similar in nature," he told the Global Times.

Sadly, negative content forms the majority of Chinese-related posts found on US social media platforms, with the continued connivance of the platforms and the US government. Meltwater showed that so far this year, among the posts containing "Chinese" on some major platforms including X and Facebook that were released in the US, negative, neutral, and positive sentiment stood at 26.8, 59.3, and 13.8 percent respectively.

A main battlefield

The US' cognitive warfare against China is evolving from simply distorting information about China to falsifying knowledge about China - in other words, turning misinformation to "common sense" that attempts to change people's basic knowledge and understanding of China, said Dong Guanpeng, dean of the National Institute of Public Relations and Strategic Communication, Communication University of China.

Falsifying knowledge about China is much nastier than fabricating misinformation, Dong noted. "It may mislead global audiences, particularly the young ones, during their formation of perceptions and judgments about China," he told the Global Times.

Lucre's "dark humor" posts have, to some extent, misled a few X users, who forwarded their complaints about the "misdeeds" of Chinese people that Lucre mentioned. Some Chinese observers worry that, for the less knowledgeable young netizens who are unaware of such "ironic narration," these ridiculous posts may eventually become a part of their initial cognition of China and its people.

Worse still, apart from indulging in the spread of rumors, US politicians and social media platforms have also created fake accounts to proactively make up and spread content discrediting China, and even banned pro-China posts and blocked pro-China accounts.

Earlier in 2019, during the riots in Hong Kong, many users criticized Facebook and X for suppressing their posts that support the central Chinese government.  According to CNN's report, X blocked more than 900 accounts in that same period, and was followed by Facebook. These accounts were closed for posting content "undermining" the rioters in Hong Kong. 

It is no wonder that social media has become a main battlefield for the US' cognitive warfare against China, said Li.

And the cognitive warfare has shaped or influenced US people's view of China to a certain extent. A Gallup poll released in March showed that 41 percent of Americans name China as the US' greatest enemy today, making it the top perceived US adversary for the fourth straight year. 

Yet the "greatest enemy" was created by the US itself with its meaningless hostility and panic.

 "The US has since (Huawei) spiraled into a full-blown outbreak of Sinophobia - a strong word that I don't use lightly," Stephen S. Roach, a faculty member at Yale University and former chairman of Morgan Stanley Asia, wrote in his article "American Sinophobia" published in March.

 "...Excessive fear of China conveniently masks many of America's own self-inflicted problems," Roach wrote. "The only thing we have to fear is fear itself," he quoted a line from US president Franklin Roosevelt's 1933 inaugural address, concluding that "amid today's Sinophobic frenzy, that message is well worth remembering."

Photo: Global Times

Source link 

RELATED ARTICLES

GT investigates: US reports accusing China of 'manipulating information' spark criticism with de facto faults

The proverbial thief crying out "stop thief" seems to be a norm in the US' cognitive warfare against ...

GT investigates: How some Western news agencies deceive Chinese people, distort truth while claiming not to have freedom

Some foreign journalists who do not want to be associated with this organization have revealed that it is ...

How the Philippines colludes with US government, think tank and media in 'sadfishing' itself, demonizing China on South China Sea issue

 

The China Coast Guard expels Philippine vessels which had illegally intruded into waters adjacent to Ren'ai Jiao in China's Nansha Islands, on March 23, 2024. Photo: VCG

The Philippines has been making a show of the South China Sea issue for a long time. It has repeatedly provoked China and created tension in the South China Sea region while turning a blind eye to historical facts. Seemingly suffering from a sort of histrionic personality disorder, the Philippines has not only staged many farces on the issue, but also colluded with anti-China forces in the US-led West to play the thief crying "stop thief."

Last week, during his visit in the Philippines, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken reportedly "criticized China's provocative actions" in the South China Sea. Portraying the Philippines as a victim and China as a "perpetrator" has become a common intrigue to win attention and sympathy in the international community.

Supplying to its vessels illegally grounded on China's sovereign islands in the South China Sea is a trick of showmanship that the Philippines has employed in recent months. On Saturday, it sent a supply vessel and two coast guard vessels to intrude into the adjacent waters of China's Ren'ai Jiao (also known as Ren'ai Reef) in disregard of China's strong opposition. 

"China's Coast Guard took necessary measures at sea in accordance with the law to safeguard China's rights, firmly obstructed the Philippine vessels, and foiled the Philippines' attempt," Chinese Foreign Ministry stated that same day.

Days earlier, Philippine civil group the Atin Ito coalition said it was planning another mission to the South China Sea with the aim of "delivering aid to fishermen" around China's Huangyan Dao (also known as Huangyan Island). According to Philippine media, the group openly claimed to mobilize "a delegation of international observers" to join their mission. It didn't seem to mind making the involvement of Western forces public.

"What it's like on board an outnumbered Philippine ship facing down China's push to dominate the South China Sea (CNN, March 26)," "China coast guard flexes its might against the Philippines in disputed waters as journalists look on (The Economic Times, March 27)"… It's not exaggeration to say that most media stories that smear China on the South China Sea issue, whether by Philippine or Western media, are products of the collusion between the anti-China forces of the Philippines and the US-led West. 

The Global Times has looked into some of the various collusion forms, trying to reveal what's behind the current numerous untrue and misleading "media reports" that one-sidedly support the Philippines and attack China.

People protest with signs and placards on Mendiola Street against the visit of US Secretary of State Antony Blinken to the Philippines in Manila, on March 19, 2024. Photo: VCG

Closely linked Philippine coast guard, 'civil groups,' and US scholars

The Atin Ito coalition disclosed its new "supply mission" plan at an event it held in Manila on March 14. The event gathered senior officers from the Philippine military and government, and representatives from the British, Australian, Dutch, Swedish, and European Union embassies, local media Palawan News reported the following day.

The guest list implied that Atin Ito has never been an ordinary "civil group." Close sources told the Global Times that the group was led by Risa Hontiveros, an anti-China senator who once asserted raising the notorious 2016 South China Sea "arbitration" to the United Nations General Assembly. Last winter, Hontiveros planned a "Christmas supply" mission for Atin Ito, asking the group members to send food and goods to a military vessel "stationed" at Ren'ai Jiao with the help of the Philippine Coast Guard (PCG).

Atin Ito had tried to land on Huangyan Dao and plant the Philippines flag on the island in June 2016. According to the Philippine Daily Inquirer, a US scholar Anders Corr was among the group's activists aboard the fishing boat that intruded into the adjacent waters of the island.

All the information has reflected that the so-called "civil groups" resupplying Huangyan Dao and Ren'ai Jiao are "nothing but a farce jointly planned by a few Philippine politicians and military, as well as the anti-China forces in the US-led West," Yang Xiao, deputy director of the Institute of Maritime Strategy Studies, China Institute of Contemporary International Relations, told the Global Times.

In an article published on March 6, The Associated Press (AP) introduced a PCG strategy of publicizing "aggressive actions" by China in the South China Sea, which aims to "spark international condemnation that has put Beijing under the spotlight." This strategy is known as "offensive transparency." 

"We will continue [with the strategy]," PCG spokesperson Commodore Jay Tarriela said in February.

Joining the PCG in 2005, Tarriela allegedly has numerous links with the US. In 2021, he was largely involved in bilateral US-Philippine collaboration, including in the Pacific Forum's US-Philippines' Next Generation Leaders Initiative, a project sponsored by the US Department of State, through the US Embassy in Manila. 

According to an article by The Philippine Star in December 2023, Tarriela was considered a representative of the "pro-American faction," and even faced "CIA agent" accusations on social media.

Raymond Powell is another name frequently mentioned in the Philippines' "offensive transparency" strategy. 

A retired US colonel, Powell is the founder of the security think tank Project Sealight, and leads the "Project Myoushu" at Stanford University in cooperation with the PCG and some Philippine Foreign Ministry officials. 

The main purpose of the project is to support the "offensive transparency" strategy and help create a "victim" image for the Philippines on the South China Sea issue.

A US Air Force C-130 cargo plane comes in for a landing past US marines F/A-18 Hornet fighter jets during the semi-annual Philippine-US military exercise at the airport of the former US naval base in Manila, the Philippines, on July 13, 2023. Photo: VCG

US journalists invited on board

On March 5, two supply vessels and two coast guard vessels from the Philippines, illegally intruded into the adjacent waters of Ren'ai Jiao of China's Nansha Qundao, in an attempt to send materials, including construction materials, to the vessel illegally grounded at Ren'ai Jiao. The China Coast Guard took strict regulatory action to curtail the Philippine vessels' intrusion.

It is worth noting that the Philippines' mission included journalists from CNN, who said they witnessed a "high-stakes confrontation" that day, and wrote features that described their experiences on board in detail. 

The CNN reporters wrote it was "the first time foreign journalists have been allowed to embed with the fleet in decades." But in fact, more than 10 years ago, US media reporters had boarded Philippine official vessels, including supply vessels, and wrote distorted media reports based on their first-hand experiences.

Early in 2013, The New York Times reporter Jeff Himmelman had been to the "Sierra Madre" vessel illegally grounded at Ren'ai Jiao for an interview, and later described the confrontation between China and the Philippines at South China Sea as "a game of shark and minnow" in a feature story. 

Himmelman revealed that before they arrived they had "already hooked things up" with the local officials and the Filipino Navy.

In recent years, US journalists have been frequently invited on Philippine ships to participate in the PCG's "missions." In 2023 alone, two AP reporters and several other media staffers were invited aboard three PCG vessels that protect supply ships in November. In April 2023 the PCG reportedly invited many journalists, including those from the AP, to join a 1,670-kilometer "patrol."

According to a Chinese correspondent who worked in the Philippines for many years, there is a large number of US journalists in the Philippines. The Philippine authorities maintain close contact with foreign journalists in the country, and therefore, "it is easy for the authorities to seek cooperation from US journalists," said the correspondent who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The PCG's purpose of inviting journalists on board is to deliberately amplify the possible "incidents" through media, and to launch defamation warfare against China, the correspondent told the Global Times. "But I think [directly taking CNN reporters on board the PCG vessels] is excessive, and is even a sort of 'dishonor to the country,'" the correspondent added. "There is resentment within the Philippines, too."

US-funded Philippine media

Searching online media coverage on the South China Sea, one may find that Philippine and US media outlets are particularly close. They quote and forward each other's South China Sea stories, working closely together in attacking China on this topic.

Some of the major Philippine media outlets that are active in reporting on South China Sea include Rappler, VeraFiles, and the Philippine Center for Investigative Journalism. 

Having called themselves "independent", these media outlets turn out to be are reportedly funded by the CIA and the US' infamous National Endowment for Democracy (NED).

In 2019, journalists from the aforementioned three media outlets were accused of receiving payments from the CIA, "a potential criminal offense under local law." The accusations claimed that the CIA uses the NED to channel funds, and the three media outlets "receive substantial grants from the NED," said the organization Committee to Protect Journalists in May that year.

VeraFiles, for instance, started receiving funds from the NED since 2016. 

The NED website shows that, so far VeraFiles has got five batches of money from this US government-backed foundation, totally $350,600. It's far from a small amount for a media outlet without full-time reporters (only three editors and two web technicians). But VeraFiles has never disclosed how it spent the money.

Obviously, the Philippines has deeply colluded with the US government, think tanks, and media from top to bottom in "sadfishing" itself and demonizing China on the South China Sea issue. Worse still, such a nasty trick by the Philippines may become normal and diversified in the future, said Chen Xiangmiao, director of the World Navy Research Center at the National Institute for South China Sea Studies.

In response to the slander, Chen suggested China fight back with strong facts including on-site images, videos, and objective data. "We should make it clear to the international community what China's claims are in the South China Sea," Chen told the Global Times. "Do not let the US and the Philippines skew international public opinion."

Source link\

Global Times

@globaltimesnews

·

11h

The #Philippines has no quarrel with #China, and it’s the US that is trying to push for a war, former Philippine President Duterte warned, adding that Americans won’t die for Filipinos.

https://twitter.com/i/status/1780100575222435991