Pelosi’s visit, a planned move to maintain the strategic status quo of Taiwan and tactically delay its reunification with the Chinese mainland for some 5-8 years, says report published by Gwadar Pro on Sunday.
According to Mehmood Ul Hassan Khan, Executive Director of The Center for South Asia & International Studies (CSAIS), despite China’s strong messages and integrated diplomatic efforts to convince the US to stay away from its internal affairs, the US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi did not alter her plans and paid a visit to China’s Taiwan region and consequently infuriated China and its leadership.
Ironically, the US government and its establishment still believe in the one-China principle and honour the three communiqués signed between the two sides in the past. But why Pelosi launched the so-called “Taiwan Independence Project”? The answer is not simple but seemingly it is a planned move to maintain the strategic status quo of Taiwan and tactically delay its reunification with the Chinese mainland.
It is a diplomatic coup which has created unbearable heat and uneasiness between the two sides.
Nancy Pelosi left behind a great crisis, born out of mistrust, hypocrisy, and conspiratorial attitude of the hawks sitting in the Joe Bidden administration. They have been persuaded to reactivate the “US Military Complex Theory (UMCT)” to earn more money out of military misadventures and deadly conflicts in the Indo-Pacific region.
The UMCT has great validity and relevancy in the case of Taiwan, not the least because right now the US macro-economy is at its lowest ebbs and has entered into recession.
According to the Stockholm Internal Peace Research Foundation (SIPRI), the US spends around US$ 1.5 trillion on military purposes annually, not just in its ‘Defense’ department, but all of its departments taken together. In April, the institute reported that, “US military spending amounted to US$ 801 billion in 2021, which is the highest in the world.”
Under the UMCT framework, owners of the military industries promoted a dictatorship serving the owners of the military corporations and of their extraction-corporate dependencies such as Chevron.
Since 1945 starting from Truman to incumbent Joe Bidden, war euphoria, military misadventures and deadly conflicts remained a profitable doctrine of successive US governments to support its military establishment, defense departments and last but not least military industries.
Frankly speaking, the US government was forced to remain on a virtually permanent war footing, even though World War II against imperialistic fascism had ended.
The US had to pass through the Global Neoliberal Militarism (GNM) which surfaced as the defining institutional-ideological configuration of USmilitarism, with the rise to power of a neoconservative coalition centred on the privatisation of all possible military functions while expressing an inordinate affection and affliction for military intervention embodying the worst illusions of the pre-First World War Prussian militarist.
The next crucial stage was the birth of the Corporate Militarism Regime (CMR) which was meant for the acquisition of windfall and structural profits, technological spinoffs, patent-rights transfers, and subsidised plant and equipment.
This model may be now replicated on the so-called project of “Taiwan Independence” by the US and its strategic allies in the region.
