There is renewed talk about war and nuclear weapons happening now in the same ambiguous way that such talk happened previously.
That’s when Israel first adopted the posture of having
its surrogates work to make the world believe it has nuclear weapons while
refusing itself to confirm or deny the news.
It happened the second time when, despite the denial by
Iran, Israel accused it of working to produce the bomb with which it plans to inflict
Holocaust 2 on the Jews of Israel.
And it is happening now for the third time as ambiguous
talk about the use of nuclear weapons in the Eurasian War, fills the air.
That kind of talk has always been viewed as dangerous
because ambiguity can lead to miscalculation, thus trigger an accidental war
that nobody wants.
So then, if the ambiguous way to communicate a warning to
others is unacceptable, what would be the proper way to let others know they
risk triggering a deadly conflagration they cannot win if they continue doing
what they started?
The answer to that question begins by recognizing that to
be ambiguous is to play games. This will lead to the answer that the best way
to send your message to others, is the direct approach of telling where you
draw the red line that must not be crossed.
To be clear about all of this, we begin by defining “playing
games,” and trace its origin down to our genetic code. Here is how that goes:
Playing games is the art of engaging in the gentle
simulation of real life combat. It is a training exercise that helps to
strengthen the muscles of young primates, and sharpen their reflexes.
This is what prepares the young to fend for and defend
themselves when they’ll grow up and face the world of competition without the
protection of their parents.
We see that in the young of cats and dogs we keep in the
home as pets, and we study the antics of primates that engage in all sorts of
game playing as they live in the wild.
What differentiates us, human beings, from the rest of
the primates, is that we have a versatile brain. It is restless, and likes to
spend much time altering old ideas and toying with new ones. The problem is
that not every idea turns out to be a helpful addition to the preservation of
life, the number one requirement mandated by nature for there to be something
that’s more than inanimate existence.
Thus, what we have is a situation in which we are given a
tool that prepares us to face the realities of a life that can be harsh, but
also a tool which, in the quest to enhance our capabilities, risks creating the
condition that comes close to ending life itself.
Clifford D. May is discussing one such situation in his
latest column. It came under the title: “China’s Communist ruler Xi not playing
game with U.S.” It was published on December 6, 2022 in The Washington Times.
The writer begins by attributing a state of mind to
China’s ruler Xi Jinping, speculates as to what this can lead to, and concludes
with the warning that the survival of the global democratic experiment is at
stake because Jinping does not play games when it comes to saying what’s on is
mind — all of which was thoroughly documented and explained by scholars Matt
Pottinger, Matthew Johnson and David Feith, according to Clifford May.
He goes on to say these scholars have shown that Xi
Jinping has the explicit objective of replacing the modern nation-state system
with a new order featuring Beijing at its pinnacle. To this end, Jinping is
utilizing all instruments of Chinese national power such as the initiative
known as the Community of Common Destiny for mankind.
What’s bad about this initiative according to Clifford
May, is that it is not different from “Marx’s vision of a stateless,
collectivized world in which China will mold the
interests of the Chinese people and those of the world’s people together.” When
you add to this what else Jinping has said, you’ll know why the West must
reject his vision. It is that China’s social system is incompatible with that
of the West, and this will lead to a sharp struggle even a war, according to
Jinping. But it is a war that does not horrify the Chinese leader if we are to
believe Clifford May.
The writer goes on to list a litany of mischievous
behavior by China, all of which, he asserts, have the goal of controlling and
manipulating the population of China and those abroad, including America. But
the one point that the writer did not make because it goes against his grain, is
the reality that absent a Chinese ambiguity, there has never been talk about a nuclear
war in the Indo-Pacific region.
And so, because Xi Jinping is not playing games, no
ambiguity is created, and the world is spared the agony of having to live in a
state of nuclear terror. We should be thankful for that.
Still, should we not expect something
more from Clifford May who is renown for being the diehard king of hawks? Yes,
we should expect more, and he did not disappoint, except that this time, he
made his point in a very subtle way. Here is how he put it:
“Mr. Biden has said several times that
the US will defend Taiwan if necessary. But without increased spending to
elevate American military capabilities and readiness, Mr. Xi is unlikely to be
deterred — or defeated, should push ever come to shove”.
And he closed his argument as follows:
“The first step: Clear and unequivocal
recognition that Mr. Xi isn’t playing games”.