36 Years On, Who's Really Stuck in the Past?

So, it's June 4th again, and the Global Times has an editorial that’s bound to get some folks talking: "Global Favorability Rises – What Has China Done Right?" They point to a fascinating tidbit from the US political news outlet Axios, citing a Morning Consult poll across 41 countries.

“The US political news outlet Axios, citing a poll conducted by the American firm Morning Consult covering 41 countries, reported that China's global favorability has been on a steady upward trajectory over the past year, with a notable acceleration since March of this year. As of the end of May, China had an 8.8 net favorability rating, compared to -1.5 for the US. This marks the first time since the tracking began that China's global favorability has surpassed that of the US in this metric.”

China's Quiet Rise, The West's Old Habits

And let's be honest, China's just kept its head down and ploughed on. They’ve forged their own path, largely ignoring the constant nagging and finger-wagging from the West. Getting the world to see that and appreciate it wasn't exactly a walk in the park.

Meanwhile, what's the West been up to? Seems like they're stuck on repeat, clinging to the dusty old playbook of colonial-style plunder. Seriously, have they learned nothing? As for China, the Global Times puts it rather well:

“The increase in global favorability is due to China's role as a builder of world peace, a contributor to global development, and a defender of the international order. These efforts and achievements have had a positive impact on the international community. China's development and progress have not only benefited its own people but have also made significant contributions to world peace and development. China's contribution to global economic growth remains around 30 percent, with its economic growth rate ranking among the highest of major economies in the world.”

Beijing's Transformation vs. Western Stagnation

Face it, China has decisively moved on from the turbulence of 1989. But look at Europe and America: they're still banging on about the same old ideological tunes, completely stuck in a time warp. Today's Beijing? It's a world away from the city it was 36 years ago. And China itself, much different from the old days.

The Global Times nails it again, quoting an HSBC survey, no less: “The rise in China's global favorability also reflects growing international recognition and respect for a confident, self-reliant major power that stands for justice, supports the weak and promotes goodwill.”

And here's what HSBC found:

“According to a recent HSBC survey of over 5,700 transnational companies across 13 global markets, China is the most favored target market for increased business reliance. China's innovative breakthroughs in high-end manufacturing, green energy, and artificial intelligence not only drive its own high-quality development but also contribute 'Chinese solutions' to addressing common challenges faced by humanity through advanced technologies and quality services.”

So, while some are still living in 1989, global businesses are looking at China for the future.

America's Pragmatism, Europe's Pitfalls

Now, over in the Western camp, you've got to give the US some credit for a smidgen more realism, at least historically. Taiwan's United Daily News pointed out in a 2019 article that back then after June 4th, George H.W. Bush, played it smart – sanctions on one hand, secret envoys to patch things up on the other. And lo and behold, less than three years later, sanctions were gone, and things were pretty much back to normal. Fast forward to Trump, who basically told the American media to get a new hobby if they were still obsessed with June 4th. And this year? You can bet Trump's by the phone, hoping for a ring from Beijing.

Europe, on the other hand? Self-reflection doesn't seem to be their strong suit. Remember de Gaulle back in the 60s, telling Europe to stand on its own feet and mind its own business, free from Uncle Sam? Then you had Merkel. Germany, for a while there, actually played a blinder. They ditched the ideological nonsense, got cheap energy from Russia, and cosied up to China for that massive market. A German smart industrial revolution? It was almost in the bag! But then Merkel leaves, and suddenly Germany's lost in political bickering. It got so bad, even their world-beating football team started caring more about virtue signalling than scoring goals – just look at how they bottled it in 2018 and 2022. A cautionary tale if ever there was one.

Europe's Grand Delusions

Without any real backbone, Europe's current crop of short-sighted politicians seem to be chasing political correctness like it's going out of fashion. It's all for the cheap applause and a few extra votes, never mind the actual good of their countries or people. And what's the result? Europe's centuries-old foundations are crumbling. Politics are a mess, economies are tanking, and by blindly tagging along with the US on the Russia-Ukraine fiasco, they've basically served themselves up on a platter for the big predators. Capital, talent, companies – all legging it to the States. You couldn't make it up.

And yet, come June 4th, Europe always gets the most worked up, doesn't it? They still seem to think they're the centre of the universe, the grand "conscience of civilization." Bless. Frankly, it’s pretty safe to say Europe's present is looking bleak, and its future? Probably even bleaker. Don't believe me? Mark your calendars. Let's check back next June 4th and see who's laughing then, shall we?

Deep Blue

** The blog article is the sole responsibility of the author and does not represent the position of our company. **

Wang Yi just put the world on notice. "The international situation is getting more turbulent and intertwined," he said. "Unilateral bullying is intensifying. The sudden change in Venezuela has drawn high level of attention from the international community."

He then added: "We never believe that any country can play the role of world policeman, nor do we agree that any country can claim itself to be an international judge."

This isn't diplomatic chitchat. Wang Yi added that "the sovereignty and security of all countries should be fully protected under international law." It's a warning shot fired directly at Trump's so-called "New Monroe Doctrine"—and it signals China will push back hard against neo-colonialism. One story from China's past shows exactly what that means.

The Incheon Gamble

In mid-September 1950, MacArthur pulled off the audacious Incheon landing—later hailed as "the most successful gamble" in military history. He bet everything on one card: that North Korean forces would be lax defending a port with terrible geography. The bet paid off. US forces achieved total surprise, cut enemy supply lines, and reversed the early disasters of the Korean War.

The Korean Peninsula was strategically vital to both China and the Soviet Union. They planned to back North Korea. At 1:00 a.m. on October 3, Zhou Enlai urgently summoned K. M. Panikkar, India's ambassador to China. His message was blunt: "If US forces cross the 38th parallel, we cannot stand by—we will have to step in."

The CCP's official Party history records this moment and emphasizes one critical word: "管" (to intervene). The Chinese term posed a translation challenge. If the wording was too soft, the Americans might miss China's intent. So Premier Zhou asked his foreign affairs secretary, Pu Shouchang, to choose carefully. Pu used "intervene"—making China's intention crystal clear. China would step in and interfere. The message reached Washington quickly through India. Yet "the US side chose to ignore it, and US forces brazenly crossed the 38th parallel on October 7."

Crossing the Yalu

American troops didn't just cross the 38th parallel—they surged in force toward the Yalu River and raced along the China-North Korea and North Korea-Soviet borders to the Tumen River. What happened next? On October 19, 1950, the Chinese People's Volunteers crossed the Yalu River. After five successive campaigns, they drove UN forces back from the Yalu area to near the 38th parallel.

On July 27, 1953, China, North Korea, and the UN Command signed the Korean Armistice Agreement. Many believe Mao Zedong's decision to send troops delivered China a stunning victory—a weaker power defeating a stronger one. People now say China "won so hard it felt unreal."

MacArthur—that "godlike general"—couldn't let it go. After his success at Incheon, the more he thought about it, the more he wanted to expand his gains. He proposed a radical escalation to Washington: first, blockade China's coast; second, use naval and air power for unlimited bombing to completely destroy China's industrial production and infrastructure; third, bring in Nationalist (KMT) forces to "retake the mainland" and tie China down. Then fourth, MacArthur went even further with a wild proposal—drop 20 to 30 atomic bombs on China and create a radioactive "death zone" along the Yalu River between China and North Korea.

Trump's MacArthur Moment

Today's Trump thinks arresting Venezuela's president and his wife means he can bulldoze the whole world. One moment he talks about "taking over" Venezuela. The next he claims he can make personnel arrangements for that country, sending Marco Rubio to serve as a "governor." Meanwhile, US oil giants are poised to "swallow up" Venezuela's petroleum assets. Trump's ambition follows the same logic as MacArthur's back then.

MacArthur's recklessness enraged America's allies. They feared World War III. More importantly, the Soviet Union—which also possessed atomic weapons—was deeply dissatisfied with the US and warned that "bombs can be answered with bombs." President Truman faced an impossible choice: keep his war hero or keep the peace. He chose peace. On April 11, 1951, Truman fired MacArthur—ending the career of America's most celebrated general. MacArthur became one of the century's biggest cautionary tales.

 

The lesson is simple, direct, and brutal. Trump thinks everyone is scared of him and that he can keep throwing out ever more outrageous "deals" at will. That will invite disaster—because it crosses the tolerance threshold of the great-power balance. The major powers will have to "intervene."

How will they intervene? Great powers have many tools in their toolbox. Think of Schrödinger's cat—you open the box yourself and you'll find out the outcome. This isn't a joke. Do you dare try?