PART 1: Gen. Robert Spalding: Inside the Chinese Regime’s Strategy to Dominate the World, Without Firing a Single Shot
Looking for part two? Find it here.
“Warfare is daily. It never ends. There’s no beginning and end like there is here in the West.”
In this two-part episode, I sit down with retired Air Force Brigadier General Robert Spalding, author of the new book, “War Without Rules: China’s Playbook for Global Domination.”
Gen. Spalding is an expert in the Chinese regime’s strategy of unrestricted warfare—in which any and all tools are allowed, from flooding our streets with fentanyl to stealing intellectual property to exploiting a global pandemic.
The goal? To dominate the world without firing a single shot.
What explains the Chinese regime’s draconian lockdowns? Is it really about achieving “zero COVID”?
How is the Chinese regime systematically destroying the economies of free societies?
And what does the Chinese Communist Party see as the greatest threat to its rule?
Jan Jekielek: General Robert Spalding, such a pleasure to have you back on American Thought Leaders.
General Robert Spalding: Great to be back. Thank you.
Mr. Jekielek: You have written a new book. You took a very important piece of Chinese Communist Party military doctrine, and made it accessible to Western readers. Your book is, War Without Rules: China’s Playbook for Global Domination. It’s really about the book, Unrestricted Warfare, which was written 20 years ago. You call it the manual that the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) has used to achieve dominance in many areas. What is unrestricted warfare?
Gen. Spalding: The first time I read it in 1999, when it first came out, it was kind of esoteric, a little bit complicated, really sounding crazy, and I really didn’t get it in 1999. When I came back to the Pentagon, working for the chairman as his advisor on China, I started to get back into documents like Unrestricted Warfare, and I read it again. When you read it in the context of 2014, when I went back to the Pentagon, and not in 1999, when you have the benefit of almost 20 years of history that has allowed some of the ideas to actually come to fruition, it’s a completely different thing.
So in Unrestricted Warfare, what essentially they were putting forth was a doctrine of warfare that was fundamentally unlike anything that the West has. I wanted to basically take Unrestricted Warfare and make it so that people could read it, and then be able to anticipate how China might react. When you have a situation and wonder how China might react, understanding their doctrine is incredibly powerful.
Mr. Jekielek: You use the way the Chinese Communist Party weaponized the pandemic as a way to explain how one of these unrestricted warfare strategies could work. Why don’t you lay that out for me?
Gen. Spalding: I didn’t know this in January of 2020, when the pandemic essentially erupted. It came to me through somebody else that had really looked at this quite deeply, a year later. I did not know that Xi Jinping had gone to the Imperial College of London in 2015. I did not know that the Chinese Communist Party was paying tens of millions of dollars to the Imperial College of London. But what I did know was that in the spring of 2020 the numbers coming out of their epidemiology models were nowhere near what we were seeing in Italy, and Italy was bad. And if you remember, that model said, “Over two million Americans would die.”
I remember looking at the numbers and looking at the model and saying, “This doesn’t make any sense.” Essentially, when you put that fact together with the fact that we had these videos coming out of Wuhan of people collapsing, and you started seeing that picked up by the media and social media and regurgitated, what you had was the creation of this massive fear empire.
It was all designed to create enormous fear in populations around the globe. The first step of gaining control of any population is to create some kind of fear. You’re willing to give up your freedom, because you seek safety. In Unrestricted Warfare, they talk about how do you create fear. How do you take advantage of fear? Just look at the speed with which the internet has become so central to our lives, not just for good, but also in terms of undermining the social cohesion, political independence, and the sovereignty of a nation. Really, airplanes can be used for good, and they can be used for bad. In less than 20 years the internet was turned to the dark side in a way that far surpasses any other weapon system that’s ever been deployed in warfare.
Mr. Jekielek: Are you suggesting that the CCP went and told the Imperial College of London or told these media? Or is it more of a subtle kind of relationship?
Gen. Spalding: You have to understand what the Chinese Communist Party was doing. They were obfuscating. Scientists need data, and the Chinese were obfuscating the data. If you don’t have data and you don’t want to be wrong or to the low side of casualties, you plan for the worst, and hope for the best. That’s what you’re thinking as an epidemiologist. I know a lot of the people that were talking to people in China. People in the White House were calling people in China. What were their colleagues in China telling them? “This is bad. This is really, really bad.”
So within China, the message was, “This is really, really bad.” But there’s no data forthcoming. Okay, what are you going to do? You’re going to basically spike those numbers so that you make sure you don’t underestimate it. Models always depend on assumptions. So, essentially, did the Chinese get Neil Ferguson to spike the numbers, because they were paying him money? Logically, that’s what we want to come to in the West. We want the smoking gun, “Show me how somebody is getting paid to do something bad.” That’s not how the Chinese Communist Party works. To this day, there’s still no data coming out of China.
To the extent that we made decisions with PCR tests, how many cycles do you use to call a PCR test valid? Where does that information come from? China. Where did any of the sequenced DNA come from for any of the vaccines? It came from China. Where did any of the recommendations come for things like lockdowns, or what policies you should adopt to slow or stop the spread of the virus? China. One of the beautiful pieces of information that the press would always hold up about why we should look to China on how you deal with the coronavirus is they had only 4,600 people die. But they stopped counting in April of 2020. Up to that point, they had only counted 4600 deaths, in a population of one point four billion.
One of the things that you learn in US/China relations, and one of the things that I was taught as a military diplomat, is that the Chinese Communist Party will never come out and say anything if there is a crisis. They’re going to seclude themselves. That allows them to watch. Watch the situation, and see how it develops. What they’re very good at is figuring out a way to take advantage of how a thing is developing. That’s the way you have to think about this problem. You can’t think of it like you’re going to find a smoking gun where Xi Jinping told so and so to pay somebody to do something. That’s not the way it works.
Mr. Jekielek: To your point, there’s an incredible amount of credulity that some organizations like Imperial College and the WHO offered the Chinese Communist Party, despite overwhelming evidence suggesting that they should not be offering such credulity.
Gen. Spalding: Yes. Then, think of Tedros who said, “Holy smokes, we’ve got this pandemic, and it’s spreading globally. The Chinese Communist Party instituted these policies, and boom, they’ve shut it down.” I guarantee you his phone was ringing off the hook, “What do we do about this thing? It’s spreading everywhere. How do we stop it?” Tedros says, “The Chinese have a solution, thank God. They gave me a solution.” If you’re investing in China, just talk to the big investors. They never believe the GDP numbers that come out of China. They look to things like how many lights are turned on in the country, or other different things where you can collect information to extrapolate what the actual GDP is.
But you can’t trust the numbers, because the Chinese Communist Party lies about everything. Here is the most consequential event to happen to Western civilization since the Cold War. Yet, because of the fear and because of the worry that we had engendered in our own populations, we needed to give them an answer. And the Chinese magically had an answer that we could adopt.
Mr. Jekielek: Is this because of the influence the CCP has created in all of these organizations over the years ?
Gen. Spalding: It’s not just what the Chinese have been able to accomplish, it’s what we’ve given them. We’ve given them entree into nearly every institution. We did it with the belief that they would embrace our principles and values, human rights, civil liberties, rule of law, human dignity, those things that we hold dear. We expected that if we brought them in, they would embrace those principles and values. It’s not that they were just able to walk in, they didn’t do it of their own volition. They were basically brought in.
This is the brilliance that the two PLA colonels really brought forth in Unrestricted Warfare. The Americans are bringing us in. “We’re the bad guys. We know we’re the bad guys, because we know they’re our enemy. But wouldn’t you know it, they’re going to bring us right into the house. They’re going to give us run of the place, and what could we do with that?”
Mr. Jekielek: The answer is, according to Unrestricted Warfare, whatever we can. There are also other elements here. Xi Jinping, at the time when the pandemic was launching, cancelled domestic flights to stop the spread the virus internally in China. But the Chinese media would scream racism at any suggestion that there would be any kind of stoppage of flights to around the world. This is another part of this unrestricted warfare doctrine, where there is this fear, but there’s a lot more than just the fear.
Gen. Spalding: There again, you would get a China apologist to say, “Well, those people needed to return to their home countries.” In terms of the Chinese nationals that were leaving their borders, that’s really hard to explain. If you’re the Chinese Communist Party you’re not going to allow Chinese nationals to fly inside country, but you are going to allow them to fly internationally. Not only are you going to allow them to fly internationally, if a country says, “Don’t fly to our nation,” you’re going to say that they’re being racist.
You’ve got to really think hard about that. What’s the motivation behind that? Here again, the Chinese Communist Party has a system that is perfect for these situations, because we’ll never know. It is the most secretive organization in the history of the world, and they fight very hard for that secrecy.
When you have a situation where you have to intuit what the other side has in terms of motivations, you’re left grasping at straws. For me, the book, Unrestricted Warfare, was the thing where I could put form on the substance. I could anticipate how the Chinese would react, because it showed how they could use everything in the world to their advantage. Within the strategy of unrestricted warfare, it would make perfect sense to shut down domestic travel and allow international travel.
Why? Because you want to take advantage. You don’t want to suffer the pandemic on your own. If it happened in America, we would say, “Let’s keep it here. Don’t let it break out internationally.” Now, you’re not thinking like the Chinese Communist Party, where warfare is daily, it never ends. There’s no beginning and end like there is here in the West, it is continuous. “Why would we suffer the pandemic by ourselves?” That doesn’t make any sense to China.
Everybody needs to suffer the pandemic, because if we all suffer the pandemic, then we’ll be able to take advantage of that fact. What do we have? We own the supply chain. What are they going to need? PPE and masks and everything else. So how do we take advantage of that? This is the way the Chinese Communist Party thinks. Unfortunately, when you’re at these cocktail parties, the elites from China intermingle with the elites from America. They talk about this shared order, this shared destiny for humanity. Xi Jinping talks about this all the time. You’re lulled into this false sense of, “Yes, we have a shared vision for how humans should treat other humans.” The Chinese Communist Party is obviously not that type of organization.
Again, this is where War Without Rules comes in, because it allows you to think differently. For us, and for any society, you tend to be biased by your context, by the culture that you were raised in, and by the environment you grew up in. We think a certain way. We need to be open to embracing how others may think. Sun Tzu sai itd brilliantly, “Know thyself, and know thy enemy.” If you don’t know yourself and your enemy, then how can you ever hope to successful?
So, it’s brilliant. When I look at the way we think about warfare, and then I compare it to the way the Chinese Communist Party thinks about warfare, we are not being very introspective. I don’t think that we are “knowing thyself and knowing thy enemy.” And that’s what unrestricted warfare is all about.
Mr. Jekielek: In 1999, the two colonels made it really clear that the U.S. is the enemy of China. Why is the U.S. already the focus of the Chinese military at that time?
Gen. Spalding: China has a Marxist/Leninist system. The Chinese Communist Party is a Marxist/Leninist organization. The Chinese Communist Party studied the fall of the Soviet Union, Putin’s worst geopolitical disaster of the 20th century. In particular, in 1989, during Tiananmen Square, they recognized that what happened in the Soviet Union, the dismantling of the Soviet Union, was going to happen in China. The reason it was happening in China is because America was trying to foment a color revolution in China with the students in Tiananmen Square. It wasn’t just about the students, it was about the United States basically convincing the students and luring them with this dream of freedom. The goddess of democracy that they had in Tiananmen Square was one visual example of that.
So you read in The Tiananmen Papers where the Chinese Communist Party basically realizes the ideology that’s baked into our constitution, it’s called the pocket constitution. It’s a very basic document. One of the core principles is that you have rights given to you by God. They’re not man-made rights or man-given rights, they’re given to you by God. The government ought to be subservient to the people, not the other way around. Now, that’s a very powerful set of ideas. After the American Revolution, it led to a change in the world, fundamentally.
This can be so invasive, this mind virus of freedom can be so invasive that in 1989 they believed it could lead to the overthrow of the Chinese Communist Party. It became something to be suppressed. In the beginning they said, “We have to keep our distance from it.” So, China kept their distance. Eventually, China needed the providence of America, the technology, the talent, the capital, the innovation, and they had to embrace America.
What they found out during the Tiananmen massacre is that America would come with all these ideas that they had to filter out. So, they basically built a very sophisticated filter for keeping that out. When these two PLA colonels were seeing this play out and they were saying, “We can do this. We can filter out those ideas, that mind virus. But we can still get the innovation, technology, talent, and capital, because the Americans believe that they can embrace us and have us change.”
Mr. Jekielek: That itself was the unrestricted warfare doctrine in play. Basically, using the false assumptions of the enemy against them. You describe the relationship of the CCP to the U.S. is a parasitic one. Please explain that.
Gen. Spalding: By the way, I don’t ascribe everything to the brilliance of the Chinese Communist Party. I also ascribe a lot of it to our own lazy thinking or simply not following the logic. When we came out of World War II, we were the most powerful industrial power in the world. We used that industrial power to rebuild Western Europe, Japan, Korea. We had the Marshall Plan. We used that economic power to help build the international order around this concept of democracy. Eventually, we used that to counter the Soviet Union during the Cold War.
Coming out of the Cold War, we said, “The war has been decided, we win. There’s nobody left to challenge us. We’ll take off our coat of arms and we’ll try to keep the peace and grow the peace.” There was no understanding that there could be other ideas and other systems. When you look at China and their ability to take advantage of our system, we also have to look at our own selves and say, “We didn’t see China for what it was.”
With China, the signs were there. One of the biggest challenges we had is when Nixon went to China in 1972 and Kissinger was his chief China advisor, Kissinger was not an Asian scholar, he was a European scholar. Kissinger was using his concepts of Europe and trying to place those on China, which has an alien way of thinking. If you think like a Chinese Communist Party member, part of it has to do with Marxism/Leninism, but part of it also has to do with the culture and history of that region and how they think.
It’s very much wrapped up in this idea that war is risky. If you start a war, you could lose a war. When you lose a war, you could possibly lose everything. This is an understanding that war is very risky, and should only be used as a last resort. However, be forewarned that if you do that, you could end up losing your head, your kingdom, and everything. If you read ancient Chinese literature, if you look at Sun Tzu, and if you look at Mao who was himself a scholar of ancient Chinese literature, you start to understand the tradition of pursuing goals without creating the risks of losing everything, and the allure of this way of thinking.
There is peace time, and there is war time. We have a disagreements, my state has a disagreement with your state. A good example is Kosovo. We, the United States, believe that you, Serbia, should stop killing Kosovars and committing genocide. We believe that Serbia should give up Milosevic to be tried for war crimes. The Serbians think differently, they’re not going to give up easily. So how do you get them to capitulate? It turned out if you took away assets of the elites in Serbia, pretty soon they capitulated.
So when we have this disagreement, we put pressure on the political system. This is the fundamental premise behind war. That’s why in his book On War, Carl von Clausewitz said, “War is politics by other means.” But in Mao’s perspective, there are so many other ways to put pressure on that elite system. It doesn’t even have to be negative pressure, it can be positive pressure. Like if we have a relationship where if I do something and you are enriched by it, then when I need you to do something for me, what are you likely to do? You’re likely to reciprocate. Particularly, for Americans, we want to reciprocate.
If I create a system where you are tied to me financially and economically, and your wealth is tied to our relationship, then just like I was using B-2s in Kosovo to take out the assets of the elites, I can use these economic relationships to motivate you just as easily. Having the ability to use other nonviolent tools, tools that will not involve any bloodshed, but yet still have the same outcomes, is what’s baked into unrestricted warfare.
Mr. Jekielek: What are some examples where this has manifested in this parasitic relationship that you describe?
Gen. Spalding: I’ve talked to people that had their factories here in the United States picked up brick by brick and moved to China. Over time that has had a net effect of sapping the nation of its productive capacity. So what does that look like today? One of the things that we’re very happy to talk about is the Fed (Federal Reserve Bank.) The Fed has created this enormous inflation in our country. But if we no longer have the ability to produce things and we no longer have control over the supply chain, and you have a constriction of that supply, that can also be a cause of inflation. In fact, we saw this during the 1970s with OPEC. We had a constriction in the supply of oil, and we had high gas prices. So we had stagflation, a stagnant economy and inflation, something that shouldn’t happen.
One of the things that economists talk about is monetary theory all has to do with the money supply. Actually, it also has to do with the physical ability to purchase whatever product we’re talking about. If you can constrain the supply, because the United States no longer owns a supply chain, that can be a feature of inflation. The parasitic nature of China is one part industrial. The money that would’ve gone to build infrastructure that supported our industrial base, rather than being poured in America over the last 30 years, it was poured into China.
So, cities, roads, fiber-optic cables, all of the infrastructure that powers the machinery of China’s industrial base was from money that wasn’t invested in the United States, in our industrial base and manufacturing. It was invested in China. They just had this hypersonic system go around the world and drop off a weapon near the islands in the South China Sea to the amazement of all the scientists and engineers in America that worked in hypersonics. How could the Chinese do that? How could they possibly do that?
Because they we’re using our scientists and engineers to teach them how to make hypersonics. Our capital is poured into China, our industrial based is poured into China, and our know-how poured into China. When all of this happens over the course of 30 years, and it’s not reinvested in our society, then you have this decline in prosperity. You have this decline in economic performance. You have this decline in your ability to provide for your own future.
So this is the drain, the parasitic drain that I’m talking about, literally draining the vitality of America. Look at us now and compare us to the end of World war II. Look at us 30 years after the end of the Cold War, and we are the opposite of what we were. We are a shell of who we were from an economic prosperity perspective. And guess what? The Soviet Union was a shell, now we are a shell, and China is this great gleaming city on a hill, where everybody goes to worship to their economic model.
Mr. Jekielek: But it’s not really that gleaming and shiny. You talk about this in the book as well. There was certainly massive growth, but you argue it was based on this unsustainable parasitic model.
Gen. Spalding: Dr. Seuss talks about it in Yertle the Turtle. Yertle was powerful because of all the turtles below him. With the Chinese Communist Party, the socialist communist model is not a more efficient model. You take any state-owned enterprise and you compare it to a private enterprise in a free country, and the efficiency is probably 25 per cent less in the state-owned enterprise. There’s corruption, there’s graft, and it’s just not the way that you organize an economy. Any economist would tell you that. But 75 per cent of the Chinese economy is state-owned enterprises, so how is it that they continue to grow?
First of all, if you don’t have to invest in R&D, because you’re stealing it from your competitor, that’s one factor. If you can take the capital that would typically go into your competitor’s industrial base and infrastructure, if you take that and use it to build your own through this parasitic effect, you make up for the fact that you’re less efficient. You can basically show the rest of the world that you’ve got a better system. It’s not a better system because it’s actually more efficient, or it makes better sense in terms of how people should organize themselves.
It’s better because everything that’s coming out of these free countries—the U.S. and the EU—is going into your country. In a lot of ways, it’s a false perception. It’s a perception just like a Ponzi scheme, “Hey, I’m doing well. Why don’t you invest?” Everyone says, “Okay, great.” What happens at the very end? Who ends up losing? Not the people in the beginning, they did great. It’s a people at the end who are left holding the bag.
Ultimately, this is the problem with a parasite. The parasite ends up killing the host. In the case of the Chinese Communist Party, that is their goal anyway. They want to kill the host. At the end, you end up with a less efficient society that’s not as well-organized or self-actualizing. But you’re better off than everybody else is, so you’ve won.
You don’t care. You don’t care if you have a less effective model, you’ve won. You’re on top. Because you’ve won and because you’re on top, to the victor go the spoils. That’s essentially what you’re talking about. Their system has been very alluring to the entire world, in such a way that it has invited the elites of free societies to basically invest everything—their innovation, technology, talent, and capital. As a result, they’ve been slowly draining their own societies of vitality.
The other thing that happens is you have the unraveling of social cohesion within those nations. You have the undermining of faith and confidence in the institutions of those nations and of the international order. Because everyone acts like the Chinese can do whatever they want, and somebody else should deal with it. It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. By the end of it, they’re on top, and we’re on the bottom. It’s a worse-off world, and we didn’t see it coming. Because, to the two colonels’ point, it was part of the day-to-day routine.
Mr. Jekielek: There is another element of, of course. The West, especially the U.S., continues to invest a lot of money in communist China, despite genocide, and despite crimes against humanity. Once that money is invested, it’s a very different situation than in the World Trade Organization where you can get that money back. Please explain that.
Gen. Spalding: When I was in the White House, I went to the U. S. Treasury and said, “Why don’t we change the accounting rules so that anybody who has funds invested in China that can’t actually extract those funds, we basically classify those as level three assets, which means they’re worthless. You can have money in a bank. That’s a level one asset. You can turn around and you can use it. In China, there’s even a company that one day had six billion in cash on hand, and then the next day they had none.
Mr. Jekielek: Six billion?
Gen. Spalding: Six billion in cash on hand, and the next day they had none. That couldn’t happen here the United States, but that does and can happen in China. That’s the accounting system. So, I said, “Why don’t we change that so that if you own stock in a Chinese company, you can’t actually count it as part of your wealth.” If we did that it would be horrible for the people that had stocks in China, because now their net worth would drop precipitously. But it would be great because the Chinese Communist Party couldn’t hold that over their head anymore. They couldn’t say, “If you do X, I will make sure that you never get any of your money out.” It has become a Damocles sword, to use a quote from Unrestricted Warfare, over the head of anybody that’s invested in China.
“Do you want your money out? Okay, well, you better do what we say. And if you don’t do what we say, then we’re going to make sure that you don’t get your money out. But if you do what we say, we’re going to make sure that you can still get your money out, at some point.” When you report this to the IRS, or on your 10-Ks or 10-Qs it becomes, “I can report this, because it hasn’t been taken away from me in China. But can I actually get it out? No, I can’t.”
It becomes this thing where if you’re a corporate executive, or if you’re running a fund, if that decoupling means you can’t get that money out, you want that to happen to somebody else. You don’t want it happening on your watch. Because we think in such a short term—if I can cash out before that happens, great—who’s going to be left holding the bag? Well, whoever’s the last principle in that fund. It’s going to be the retirees, the American retirees that have to deal with it. Ultimately, if you invest in China and there’s banks that have all kinds of real estate investments in China, you can’t get it out. There’s big corporations that have money there, they can’t get it out. It’s a non-convertible currency with strict capital controls.
By the way, if you read Unrestricted Warfare, one of their biggest evil villains is George Soros.
Mr. Jekielek: Yes.
Gen. Spalding: Why do they think George Soros is an evil villain? Is it because he’s a financial-
Mr. Jekielek: Warmonger, correct?
Gen. Spalding: Warmonger. He uses finance to destroy nations. That’s his goal, to destroy nations. What the Chinese Communist Party learned from that is, “Okay, how do I protect myself from these kinds of warmongers?” The way I do that is I don’t allow you to convert my currency. The People’s Bank of China is the only one that can convert. Now, here’s what happens. Technically, you should not be a part of the international financial system. You shouldn’t be a part of the IMF. You shouldn’t be a part of the World Bank. You don’t have a convertible currency. Why are you a part of it? Because it’s China. Time and again, you see these exclusions. China gets a special pass. Everybody else has to play by the rules, but China gets a special pass.
“You’re not going to continue to have your stocks listed on our stock exchange, unless you allow for the same type of audits that our corporations have. You’re going to be delisted.” Until that, you didn’t hear a peep out of the Chinese, in terms of being willing to allow audits. Now, what are they saying? “We’re going to allow you to audit our books.” They’re finally starting to say that, but will they ever get to the point where they will actually allow you to audit their books? No, they’re not. They say they will, but then it will never be forthcoming.
You can never extract that from them. The brilliance of China is to give concessions by saying they’re going to give concessions, but not actually giving the concessions. There’s a difference here. They do this time and time and time again. A good example of this is, “Stop hacking into our systems.” They reply, “Oh, okay. We’ll stop that.” But do they stop? No, they don’t stop.
Mr. Jekielek: The example that always comes to my mind is, “Yes, we’ll stop taking body organs from prisoners of conscience. We’ll do it.” But they don’t stop.
Gen. Spalding: They don’t stop. “We’ll stop sending fentanyl.” But they don’t stop.
Mr. Jekielek: You would think that we would have figured this out by now.
Gen. Spalding: Yes. If you’re doing business with somebody and they rip you off the first time, do you go in for more? No, you don’t. But with China it’s, “I want more of that. Can I get some more of that, please?”
Mr. Jekielek: Why?
Gen. Spalding: What I’ve seen in my almost 10 years of working on this is, it’s greed, mostly greed. I’ve had people come up to either myself or people that work with me, and say, “I don’t really care long as I get my money.” And that’s China’s system. If they can get you to have no values or morality, except what it means to you in terms of money, they’ve got you. They’ve got you exactly where they want you. You may have the best impression of yourself as a human being. But, ultimately, if you have that type of relationship with China, then you have to look yourself in the mirror, and say, “I’ve embraced what are the most heinous things that humans can do to other humans.” Because you’re in service to the party.
Part 2 preview
Mr. Jekielek: Coming up in part two.
Gen. Spalding: The Chinese Communist Party doesn’t do things willy nilly, it’s very deliberate.
Mr. Jekielek: Behind China’s draconian lockdowns, what’s really going on? Is it potentially related to Xi Jinping’s plans for Taiwan?
Gen. Spalding: They’re going to go element by element through their economy and see which of those is still open to attack from the West. To seal those up prior to invading Taiwan.
Mr. Jekielek: In part two, General Robert Spalding breaks down how the US can effectively counter the Chinese communist threat to the free world.
Gen. Spalding: When we brought China into this international order, we began to suppress the principles and values that made us free here in America.
Subscribe to the American Thought Leaders newsletter so you never miss an episode.
“Download EpochTV Ebook for free.
Follow EpochTV on social media: