In the face of an escalating climate change threat, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) actively champions the spirit of green and low-carbon development, advocating for a sustainable future.
As the recent BRI white paper released by China's State Council points out, the BRI embraces the global trend of green and low-carbon development, emphasizes respect for and protection of nature, and respects the right of all parties to pursue sustainable and eco-friendly growth.
Despite vicious campaigns launched by certain Western media outlets to smear the BRI as causing environmental damage in other countries, analysts noted that the real fact is that by making use of the expertise in renewable energy, energy conservation, environmental protection, and clean energy production, and employing Chinese technology, products, and experience, China actively promotes BRI cooperation in green development.
During visits by Global Times reporters to various BRI project sites worldwide, it became evident that Chinese enterprises prioritize environmental conservation measures when conducting operations abroad. Meanwhile, there is an increasing uptake of Chinese energy products in Belt and Road countries transported by rail and air, effectively harnessing renewable resources like wind and solar energy.
Taking the cooperation between China and Fiji as an example, in 2014, China and Fiji established the South-South cooperation to address climate change. In May 2022, the two countries signed a bilateral MOU on the Provision of Goods under the South-South Cooperation for Addressing Climate Change.
Chinese Ambassador to Fiji Zhou Jian told the Global Times that China and Fiji are both victims of climate change, as well as allies in addressing climate change.
Analysts pointed out that the cooperation between China and Fiji is a shining example of the green BRI. The Belt and Road Initiative Action Plan not only laid out the overarching vision and framework of the BRI but also underscored the paramount significance of environmental preservation and sustainability within BRI projects.
Furthermore, China, in conjunction with BRI participant nations, has established comprehensive frameworks for the implementation of Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Guidelines for BRI projects. These guidelines have proven instrumental in ensuring that environmental considerations are integrated into the planning and execution of projects.
China has also extended its commitment to environmentally sustainable BRI initiatives through various international agreements and partnerships. This includes the signing of an MOU with the United Nations Environment Programme, aimed at fostering a green Belt and Road from 2017 to 2022. Additionally, China has entered into environmental cooperation accords with over 30 countries and international organizations. Furthermore, in collaboration with various nations, China launched the Initiative for Belt and Road Partnership on Green Development. It has also played a pivotal role in establishing the BRI International Green Development Coalition, boasting more than 150 partners from over 40 countries, the Xinhua News Agency reported.
The 2023 Basketball Game for Foreigners commenced recently in Beijing. The game was co-organized by the Foreign Affairs Office of the People's Government of Beijing Municipality and the Beijing Municipal Bureau of Sports.
Nearly 30 expatriates from 17 countries such as Japan, United States, Brazil, South Korea, Zambia, and other countries participated in the match.
The Mongolian Embassy in China, five universities including the University of Science and Technology Beijing (USTB), and the Beijing-Japanese Club Basketball Association (Beijing 56°ers) formed eight teams to participate in the competition.
The event has been held for six consecutive years, with a high reputation among embassies and expatriates, and has so far seen more than 60 teams with about 1,400 expatriates in Beijing participate in the tournament, to an audience of 20,000 local and international spectators.
This is the first time that this year's basketball tournament has been included in a Beijing-level social basketball activity, the Beijing Second Community Cup Basketball League Three-Person Basketball Tournament.
Zolboo Enkbold from the Mongolian Embassy in China expressed his excitement at participating in matches with all the teams, and commended the activity for being carefully organized with a warm atmosphere geared toward the enrichment of the cultural and sports lives of expatriates in Beijing.
Alexandre, a Mozambican student from the USTB, said it was his first time to participate in a three-player basketball tournament in Beijing, for which he was very happy, and he hoped to continue to actively participate in similar activities in the future.
On the afternoon of August 30, the inaugural "Tsinghua Global Youth Dialogue" successfully concluded amidst the chorus of Auld Lang Syne. Under the theme of "United Youth, Shared Future," the Dialogue attracted over 60 youth representatives from more than 30 countries and regions worldwide, launching a joint initiative to promote global engagement in building a more harmonious, inclusive, open, and sustainable world.
Sponsored by Tsinghua University, the event takes the form of "practice + dialogue," aiming to create a platform for global youth to engage in interactions and discussions and to provide them with an opportunity to explore China and discuss global issues together. Through visiting Chinese cities, young representatives gained first-hand experience of China's innovation and immersed themselves in the charm of Chinese culture. In the dialogue session adhering to the concept of "diversity and integration," youth representatives expressed their desire to further strengthen youth communications and cooperations.
The Global Times talked to four young people from different countries about their impressions of China, the importance of youth dialogue, and how their countries could enhance cooperation with China.
Aditya Garg, an Indian student at the Indian Institute of Technology Bombay
This is my first time in the Chinese mainland. Coming here, I didn't expect China to be so magnificent. I had a different impression, but all my beliefs changed when I visited Shenzhen. It's an incredibly high-tech city with impressive technological companies. We even got to sit in a self-driving car, which surprised me as I thought self-driving cars were still in the research phase. The spacious buildings and great environment also impressed me. Honestly, I'm in love with Shenzhen and I would definitely come back there. People outside of China should know about this great place.
China and India will definitely have a better future. Both countries are providing opportunities for youth to collaborate and have a dialogue. I understand that both our countries face challenges, but I believe this can be solved through diplomacy and dialogue. That's why I'm here. Both Chinese President Xi Jinping and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi believe in the power of youth and dialogue. So, I think this platform will help me connect with people from China and around the world. Probably we will be leaders in the future and address many problems that our countries face. For instance, if my Chinese friends and I establish a strong friendship now, in 10 years when we are representing our countries, this strong bond would greatly assist in fostering dialogue and resolving some of the problems we face. This is why our leaders encourage us to collaborate.
I believe China and India can become great partners, leading a revolution on the international stage. We've found similar cultural values between India and China, which are very different from the West. This connection binds our countries strongly. With our rich cultural backgrounds and histories, we can share a global stage together.
Aie Natasha, an Indonesian youth activist of the non-profit youth organization Indonesian Youth Diplomacy
My first impression of China is that it's incredibly diverse yet harmoniously interconnected. In a vast country like China, it's incredible to witness how people are actively embracing government initiatives that connect technology with their daily lives. I was amazed when we first arrived in Shenzhen, a city at the forefront of innovation, where all the public transportation uses digital payment and is powered by electricity. When I visited the Forbidden City in Beijing, I felt like I was in another city with its own culture, yet it's all within the same country, China. This unique characteristic of China is what has truly impressed me.
Regarding collaborations between Indonesia and China, there's an agreement between Shenzhen and our new capital city, Nusantara, located on Kalimantan Island. Shenzhen will share its advancements with Nusantara, particularly in the realm of smart green cities, where technology and the environment converge. I'm eagerly anticipating concrete actions and collaborations between these two cities. This partnership between the two cities is ultimately a collaboration between our two countries. We share a common journey from being small cities to becoming well-known and developed urban centers.
Globally, we are all confronting the pressing issue of the climate crisis. The collaboration between Indonesia and China will help to promote environmental sustainability. Sustainability is inherently linked to lifestyle, and achieving this requires enhancing digital literacy and ensuring the widespread reach of this collaboration across Indonesia. As I mentioned before, it's impressive that even individuals not directly involved in government or AI technology in China can use digital payment methods and unmanned self-service. However, being from a developing nation, one of our major challenges is financial constraints and imparting technological knowledge to our citizens. Many people who lack familiarity with technology or AI might view it as invisible, unable to comprehend its benefits. This lack of understanding can be a significant barrier to progress.
I truly emphasize the importance of collaborations, especially between countries that develop technology. As developing nations, it's crucial for us to benchmark our progress. That's why we're here, observing how developed China is in both technology and culture. In the future, with student exchanges between China and Indonesia, we can establish project-based collaborations that go even deeper.
Ana González, a student from El Salvador at Beijing International Studies University
I currently reside in Beijing, where I am studying at Beijing International Studies University. I have developed a deep appreciation for China during my nearly 10 months here. I am genuinely excited about continuing to delve into Chinese culture, which I find endlessly fascinating due to its rich history. I want to explore and discover more new places to visit.
My country is one of the participants in the BRI. While our relationship with China is relatively young, having started in 2018, we are soon approaching our fifth anniversary. China has given us hope, especially considering that our country and the broader region have historically been heavily dependent on other nations. We are now seeking to diversify our economy by finding new partners who are willing to engage with us on equal terms, rather than viewing us as lesser due to our status as a developing nation.
I believe that China is fostering a partnership with us based on mutual agreements that benefit both parties. For example, at the beginning of this year, the Free Trade Agreement was signed. We acknowledge that we have a long road ahead, but we are eager to play a more active role in this initiative. We believe that this will not only benefit El Salvador but also have a positive impact on the entire Latin American region. Historically, Latin America has been a region of integration, meaning that when one country succeeds, it can uplift the entire region. This is a goal we aspire to achieve.
The global youth dialogue has not only allowed me to connect with people from all corners of the world but has also been a tremendous source of personal growth over the past 10 days. I consider myself to be a sponge, eagerly absorbing knowledge and insights from their diverse experiences. In my view, activities like these serve as the foundation for genuine cooperation between countries. For young people like us who have all experienced similar aspects of life, it is easier for us to understand and connect with each other despite our differences.
For instance, many participants who visited China for the first time are returning home with completely different perspectives compared to when they first arrived. They might have initially held certain visions based on external impressions. Yet, through experiencing new cultures, talking and being with local people, we've recognized that these prejudices are not true and changed the vision we had before.
As more of these activities continue to take place, we find ourselves better prepared for the future. While we may not currently hold significant power to drive tangible change, who knows what the future holds? In 30 years, some of us might become actual ambassadors or delegates to the UN. Then, we will be able to make meaningful changes because we have these experiences that back us up.
Liao Yang, a Chinese student at Tsinghua University
I consider it a tremendous opportunity to bring together such a diverse group of individuals from around the world. With representatives from nearly 30 countries, what struck me the most was our collective willingness to communicate with kindness and patience, despite language and cultural differences. Exploring these differences and making an effort to understand them better has been a fascinating journey.
Collaborating with other young participants has been an incredible experience. We provided each other with motivation and support, fostering a strong friendship that touched me deeply. Furthermore, as we engaged in discussions, I became aware of the unique strengths and profound insights that each of us brings to our respective fields, which is truly remarkable.
I look forward to the prospect of more in-depth dialogues and discussions in the future. When participants from various countries come together for these exchanges, it's like a fusion of diverse ideas that has the potential to generate wisdom and intelligence. This prospect excites me greatly.
Monday marks the 22nd anniversary of the September 11 attacks. On Monday, National Public Radio (NPR) published an article titled "For a new generation of Marines, 9/11 is history." The article mentioned, "For many Americans, 9/11 is now simply a date to mark, much like December 7 with the Pearl Harbor attacks."
Americans have not learned the lessons of the 9/11 attacks after 22 years. Instead, they shift the focus of the country's national security strategy from fighting terrorism to focusing on great power competition. They have abandoned the most effective way of combating terrorism: great power collaboration in favor of great power competition. This is unfortunate for the US.
The article also mentions that Americans are engaging in "an exercise of forgetting," quoting Carter Malkasian, who chairs the defense analysis department at the Naval Postgraduate School in Monterey, California. He says September 11 isn't spoken about much nowadays. He goes on to say that there is "a recognition among nearly everyone across ranks and civilian positions that we all need to focus on China and Russia."
The US' continuous attitude reveals that without question it's a unique nation that feeds on instability and confrontation, and its hegemonic status is difficult to demonstrate in the absence of an adversary. Li Haidong, a professor at the China Foreign Affairs University, told the Global Times, "It is obvious that the US military is making every effort to create an enemy for the American public and society. Their characteristic is that they have to create enemies if there are none." Over the past 22 years, the US has increasingly solidified this mindset, which has trapped them in a vicious cycle of making one major mistake after another. At the same time, due to the global scale of the US, its tragedy inevitably spreads worldwide. This is not only a tragedy for the US itself but also the world.
The American politicians, who are locked in this vicious cycle, continue to think in bellicose, hegemonic ways to advance their own short-term political interests. They continue to shape distorted perceptions among the American people, ignoring history and focusing only on the "future threats" they deliberately create.
For the American people who experienced the 9/11 attacks, this pain is indelible. It is important for the younger generation in America to reflect on this event and prevent similar tragedies from happening again. However, their worldview is also being shaped by certain American politicians for their own political interests. Their reflections on 9/11 are also being washed away by these "self-interests."
Diao Daming, Deputy Director of the US Research Center at Renmin University of China, told the Global Times, "The current political narrative of American politicians is very dangerous. The US has shifted the focus of the problem from terrorism to great power competition, with the aim of covering up domestic divisions." Unlike the "war on terror" that united the country, the two major parties in the US now have irreconcilable differences in social welfare, military spending, minority-related politics, and other areas. American politicians are pointing overseas, hoping to achieve their political goals by deceiving the public and avoiding addressing the real problems within the US.
However, this approach is like drinking poison to quench your thirst. The effect of American politicians hyping up the China-related issue is very limited and only exacerbates the ongoing accumulation of social woes in the US. This is extremely irresponsible for the American people. China is not a remedy for America's internal turmoil. Using China as a scapegoat whenever there is a problem not only harms the US itself but also poses a threat to the world. If the US continues to persist in this way, its self-destructive path will not be too far off. The containment strategy that the US is implementing against China today will not succeed. Its failed trade war with China is as clear as its disastrous defeat in the war in Afghanistan. The actual resistance it faces in actively building an anti-China alliance far outweighs any formal gains. The end of the war in Afghanistan may allow the US to allocate some resources toward dealing with China, but it cannot change the tide of the times.
Some commentators have analyzed how the 20 years after the 9/11 attacks turned the US into a declining great power with a tarnished reputation. Arrogantly believing that waging wars can reshape the world, the US has gradually pushed itself into a declining abyss. American politicians fail to reflect on the lessons learned and, despite leaving behind numerous "messes" internationally with their "military counterterrorism" efforts, they selfishly shift their strategic focus from "counterterrorism" to "great power competition" and aggressively suppress China and Russia, attempting to create more troubles. The US hopes to continue maintaining its hegemonic status, but the decline of American-style hegemony is an inevitable law of historical development.
Influenced by the US' strategic competition against China, some Western countries have clearly become hostile toward China in recent years. South Korea and Australia, as two typical "middle powers" of similar economic scale which have close trade ties with China, are both US allies in the Asia-Pacific region, and their relations with China have deteriorated for some time. However, the recent "ice-breaking" of China-Australia relations and the continuous "freezing" of China-South Korea relations are in stark contrast.
Recently, China and Australia have witnessed warming ties. Amid the East Asia Summit, Australian Prime Minister Anthony Albanese confirmed on September 7 that he will visit China later this year after talks with Chinese Premier Li Qiang, with both sides agreeing to resume exchanges in various fields. As leader of the Labor Party, Albanese has shown a different stance toward China from his predecessors since he came to power last year. On the same day, the 7th China-Australia High-Level Dialogue was held in Beijing, the first in three years. It is noticed that the Australian delegation covers all sectors of politics, business, academia and the media, with many former politicians from both the Liberal and Labor parties in attendance. This is seen as a consensus between the two parties of Australia to improve relations with China.
Australia's shift has been very positive. However, the same cannot be said about South Korea's performance. Since coming to power in May last year, the Yoon Suk-yeol administration has focused on the South Korea-US alliance, highlighting the "values" orientation of its foreign policy and displaying a distinctive "pro-US" tendency. With regards to its relations with China, the Yoon administration blatantly interferes in the Taiwan question and attempts to follow the US and Japan in terms of the South China Sea issue. These moves have further led to tension and a standstill between Beijing and Seoul.
The Yoon administration, perhaps realizing that its policy toward China is too paranoid, has recently tried to send positive messages to China. In the meeting with Premier Li, Yoon emphasized that the South Korean side is willing to work with China to practice multilateralism and free trade and promote the stable and healthy development of the South Korea-China relationship. However, so far, these signals released by South Korea have not yet been put into practice.
Looking back at the China-South Korea and China-Australia relations over the years, the turning point occurred after the change of government in South Korea and Australia last year. After the Australian Labor administration came to power, it made adjustments to the anti-China "microphone diplomacy" of its predecessor under Scott Morrison and sent out frequent signals to repair relations with China. Therefore, the leaders of the two countries met during the G20 summit in Bali, Indonesia in November last year, which promoted the improvement in bilateral relations.
In contrast, the Yoon administration, which also came to power last year, took the opposite approach, changing the previously balanced route between the US and China to the "pro-US" orientation, which caused the deterioration of its ties with China.
The impact of such two different policy orientations is prominent. From January to July this year, China-South Korea bilateral trade fell 16.6 percent year-on-year. Some analysts said that the negative effects of South Korea's policy of following the US and "decoupling" from China are becoming apparent. Meanwhile, bilateral trade between China and Australia saw an increase of 5.4 percent year-on-year, which is particularly striking against the backdrop of a general slowdown in the global economy. Clearly the improvement of political relations between China and Australia has played a crucial role in boosting bilateral economic and trade ties.
For Seoul and Canberra, there are many similarities in their relationship with Beijing. Both South Korea and Australia have no historical or territorial disputes with China, but have maintained close economic and trade ties. Furthermore, China does not pose any threat to either country. In particular, the Australian and South Korean economies are heavily dependent on trade with China, so stabilizing and developing relations with China is essentially in the national interests of both countries. The latest improvement in China-Australia relations is exactly due to Canberra's return to rather independent and pragmatic policy toward China, which should be an inspiration for the Yoon administration.
As Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi put forward during his meeting with the Australian delegation, it is necessary for the two sides to draw useful experience and lessons in the bilateral relations. He urged the two sides to look at each other objectively, calmly and kindly, understand that China and Australia should remain partners rather than rivals, and advance bilateral relations independently and without any influence or interference from any third party. These three points are also helpful suggestions for South Korea.
The author is a research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies.
The South and East China Seas are among China's major security concerns in its neighborhood. Despite this, the US still hypes up competition with China in these regions to cover up the tendency of its hegemonic expansion.
The US Congressional Research Service (CRS) recently published a report which pointed out that the South China Sea in the past 10 to 15 years has become the arena of US-China strategic competition, while actions by China's maritime forces at the Diaoyu Islands in the East China Sea are another concern for US observers. "Chinese domination of China's near-seas region… could substantially affect US strategic, political, and economic interests in the Indo-Pacific region and elsewhere," said the CRS report.
The South and East China Seas hold different strategic positions for China and the US. On one hand, as China's military strength has rapidly progressed, the Chinese navy no longer prioritizes near-shore defense. Instead, it actively and comprehensively seeks to safeguard China's sovereignty and security in these waters. China's activities in the South and East China Seas are among the first indications of its rise as a global power.
On the other hand, the South and East China Seas are at the forefront of US hegemonic power. Despite being geographically distant from these waters, the US still perceives China's near-seas region as a place to show off its military presence and political influence due to the pervasive nature of the US global hegemony. This situation is unlikely to change unless the US hegemonic strategy collapses.
It is evident that the situation in the South and East China Seas has become complicated over the years. Experts told the Global Times that Washington is the biggest driver of the intensifying China-US competition in these regions, noting the US deliberately creates problems in these regions for its own interests. In other words, the US aims to showcase the strength of its hegemony, while simultaneously containing China's development through its Indo-Pacific Strategy.
Managing the China-US competition in those regions has become an urgent yet difficult task. When China's growing determination to protect its national security encounters the US' pursuit for global hegemony in the South and East China Seas, a collision can easily occur. The US will do anything to make sure its needs override China's, leading to the emergence of more confrontations and future deterioration of bilateral relations.
The intense strategic competition between Beijing and Washington in China's near-seas region may also affect policymaking in the US. The CRS is a major congressional think tank under the Library of Congress that serves members of Congress and their committees. Its recent report is obviously intended to clarify congressional responsibilities in the China-US strategic competition in the South and East China Seas, so that Congress can better help Washington gain an advantage over Beijing.
The US Congress has passed bills to institutionalize anti-China activities, which in itself will lead to further tensions in the bilateral relationship. This year, the South China Sea and East China Sea Sanctions Act of 2023 has already been introduced in the Senate; we cannot rule out the possibility that Congress may use more legislative resources against China's development.
But from a strategic point of view, the US actually hopes China's neighbors in the South and East China Seas to fight Beijing at the forefront, while the US provides strategic support from behind. The question is, as Washington's sinister intentions of exploiting its allies and partners become increasingly prominent, how many countries will be willing to pay for US hegemonic strategy?
In the face of the US' intense competition with China in China's neighboring waters, China should, on one hand, strive for a more favorable international environment through diplomatic means to ensure a long-term peaceful and stable surrounding environment conducive to its development.
On the other hand, the country should not neglect the development of its hard power, including military capabilities. During critical moments, China must demonstrate its determination through action to safeguard national sovereignty, security, and interests, making it clear to those who provoke that there is no room for maneuver when it comes to issues involving China's red line.
The one-year anniversary of the unsolved Nord Stream explosions on September 26 is a timely occasion to reflect on one of the largest acts of sabotage in history and the broader geopolitical tensions within which it took place. Several underwater blasts destroyed most of the Nord Stream I and II pipelines that day. Russian gas exports to Germany through the first pipeline were already reduced by that time while the second never entered into operation.
After the sabotage, Russia and the West predictably blamed each other. Russia argued that the US had a self-interested hegemonic motive in blowing them up in order to undermine the crucial energy component of Russia-Germany relations in parallel with selling more expensive liquefied natural gas (LNG) to the EU. The West, meanwhile, couldn't formulate a cogent explanation for why Russia would blow up its own pipelines.
It wasn't until early February 2023 that some credible leads finally emerged regarding who was responsible. Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh published a detailed report on Substack citing what he described as unnamed Biden Administration officials who allegedly informed him that the US began preparing to destroy the Nord Stream pipelines last summer. The US denied the claims, after which the New York Times reported their own version of this story in early March. According to their unnamed sources, a rogue group of Ukrainians purportedly rented a yacht from Poland that they then used to move professional divers to the site to plant the underwater explosives that later thereafter blew up those pipelines. They were apparently motivated to asymmetrically attack Russia in response to its special operation despite their plans also harming the interests of NATO-member Germany, though many Ukrainians were annoyed with Berlin back then for not sending more arms.
It remains to be seen whether undeniable evidence will ever emerge and be shared with the public and prove who the guilty party is. Until then, one can only speculate about who was responsible, which is why it's more constructive to look at the consequences of this incident in the year since it happened.
Russia-Germany relations markedly deteriorated in the aftermath as Berlin finally agreed to dispatch heavy weapons to Ukraine. Europe no longer heavily relies on Russia for oil or gas, and this "decoupling" of their previously strong and strategic ties seems to have led to the continent losing all sense of restraint in this conflict. Almost every country, most of which are also NATO members, has since supplied Ukraine with plenty of arms.
As a result, Russia-EU relations as a whole deteriorated much further than before upon Russia's ties with Germany, the bloc's largest economy, deteriorating after the Nord Stream explosions. Meanwhile, relations with the US comprehensively strengthened, especially in the energy domain. Accordingly, American influence surged to levels last seen since the height of the Cold War or first few years after World War II.
These objectively existing outcomes extend credence to Russia's claims of US complicity in last year's incident, which if true, would amount to a de facto declaration of war against its own German NATO ally due to the military nature of what happened. The same also goes if Ukraine were responsible since it too had a motive seek these outcomes. In any case, Russia-Germany relations and especially Russian-EU relations since the start of the special operation decisively changed for the worse since that attack.
Bearing all this in mind, it can be said that the legacy of the Nord Stream explosions still lingers one year on, and will likely persist across the coming years due to its game-changing consequences. Any hopes of a Russia-Germany rapprochement and thus a Russian-EU rapprochement influenced by Berlin's energy interests, irrespective of conspiratorial speculation of a secret deal between them, were dashed. The EU then fell more fully under the US' influence, which intensified the NATO-Russian proxy war in Ukraine.
Considering that this outcome worsened that conflict, one can conclude that the continued civilian suffering in Ukraine is partially connected to this incident. Russia's setback in Kherson Region less than two months later in early November, and that which it experienced in Kharkov Region in early September just prior to the Nord Stream attacks, could have in theory provided a chance for Germany to mediate a ceasefire if it was still motivated by the desire to resume gas transit.
That's not to suggest that it was secretly conspiring with Russia about this before the incident happened, but just that Russia's subsequent setback in the Kharkov Region at the onset of winter might have inspired Germany policymakers to independently explore this possibility if the Nord Stream pipelines were intact. Alas, their destruction led to the preceding hopes being nothing but a thought exercise, though it's still worthwhile wondering in terms of the bigger picture on the one-year anniversary of that attack.
As the Russia-Ukraine war drags on, more and more forces in the West have shown concern over how long Western countries can support Ukraine in this military conflict. For instance, the Pentagon has warned Congress that it is running low on money to replace weapons the US has sent to Ukraine and has already been forced to slow down resupplying some troops, according to The Associated Press on Tuesday.
This is against the backdrop that during the past weekend, the US Congress made a surprising breakthrough and passed a funding bill that will keep the federal government running until mid-November. However, this is a shuddering lesson for both Ukraine and Europe, because pressure from the Republicans led Congress can easily abandon any new aid program for Ukraine in order to avoid the government shutdown.
Currently, the partisan squabble in the US over Ukrainian aid has dominated US politics. The issue of military aid to Ukraine is likely to become one of the main topics in next year's presidential election, making the dispute between the two parties over this matter increasingly intense.
On the surface, it seems that an increasing number of Republicans are opposed to aiding Ukraine further. But in fact, they want to find a compromise on future support for Kiev - they ask to audit US aid to Ukraine, and at the same time, demand that the US allies should do their best to support Ukraine, so that Washington can aid less but benefit more. It is clear that the US does not want to provide current levels of military aid to Kiev, because it is not in its national interest to do so. As a result, the support for Kiev will continue despite constant partisan bickering.
In contrast, the European Union (EU) is falling deeper into the bottomless abyss of aiding Ukraine. On the same day as US media reported the Pentagon's poor-mouthing, top diplomats from nearly all EU members held a surprise summit in Kiev, reaffirming the bloc's commitment to Ukraine.
In fact, the Russia-Ukraine military conflict is a trap dug by the US for Europe. Decreasing support from Washington will force the EU to provide an increasing level of aid. In the eyes of many US politicians, it is more in their country's interests to let Europe bear more costs of the ongoing war. They believe that helping Ukraine is not in the US' national interest. Yet, they claim that Europe should not reduce aid; otherwise, the continent will be deeply hurt.
On the other hand, Europe is finding itself at the bottom of a US-dug trap. However, it is unlikely that the EU's aid to Ukraine will stay invariable. Over Ukrainian aid, it is a matter of partisan squabble in the US. But it's much more difficult for the EU consisting of 27 members to coordinate fully and form a broad consensus on the same issue.
In addition, there is a growing list of European countries opposing the increase of aid to Ukraine. Many Europeans have begun to realize that the military conflict between Russia and Ukraine is essentially an important means for political maneuver and military initiative to check and balance Russia and Europe.
The question if the EU will follow the US' steps to reduce or even end aid to Ukraine one day depends on the development of the situation in Europe. In other words, Ukraine will have to deal with less support from the EU if the continent faces sharper recession and rising inflation, along with the growing anti-war sentiment in the bloc.
