Pompeo Sees Through ‘CCP Logic’ From Biden’s Climate Summit

May 5, 2021 Updated: May 6, 2021

Commentary

U.S. President Joe Biden invited 40 world leaders to attend a two-day virtual climate summit last month.

On April 22, the first day the climate summit kicked-off, Bill Hemmer, the co-anchor of the Fox News Channel’s “American’s Newsroom,” interviewed former U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. He asked Pompeo about the meaning behind Chinese leader Xi Jinping’s speech at the summit, quoting Xi’s words: “To protect the environment is to protect productivity, to boost the environment is to boost productivity, it’s as simple as that.”

Hemmer asked Pompeo, “Do you know what this means?”

Pompeo responded, “Bill, I don’t know what it means.”

There are two kinds of logic in this world—one is called “logic” and the other is called “Chinese Communist Party (CCP) logic.” Most people, including the Chinese, find it difficult to understand the CCP’s rhetoric.

In truth, Chinese citizens do not understand what Xi Jinping said about the environment, but they don’t need to understand either. The CCP wants the people to know one thing: Xi attaches great importance to ecological and environmental issues. And authorities at all levels are expected to carry out so-called environmental policies.

Epoch Times Photo
Journalists watch a screen showing  Xi Jinping delivering a speech during the opening of the Boao Forum for Asia (BFA) Annual Conference 2021 in Boao, Hainan Province, China, on April 20, 2021. (STR/AFP via Getty Images)

How can Pompeo, Hemmer, and ordinary Chinese people really understand these kinds of speeches? Inside the Communist Party system, speaking in vague terms is the norm.

Although he didn’t understand, Pompeo still had an explanation for Xi’s long-winded speech. Pompeo said, “This isn’t about a win-win solution between China and the United States of America, whatever is in his head with respect to this is an attempt to create power and authority for the Chinese Communist Party and to harm the United States of America.”

Pompeo also pointed out that Xi did not attend the climate summit for the sake of appeasing the Chinese people and the United States. He added, “This is an authoritative regime, Marxist-Leninist on its economic approach and they have big desires on displacing the United States of America as the world’s leading superpower.”

Hemmer mentioned Biden’s latest tweet. Biden wrote: “America is back. We rejoined the Paris Agreement, and are ready to rally the world to tackle the climate crisis. Let’s do this.” Hemmer asked Pompeo, “How do you rate the urgency of the climate [issue] today?”

Pompeo replied: “Everybody is for clean air and safe drinking water, but to place climate change on the list of threats that face the United States of America as number one is an enormous mistake. The threat from the Chinese Communist Party, they’re here, they’re inside the gates.”

He said that the CCP poses a huge threat to the United States. They show off their military might and destroy U.S. infrastructure. These problems are much more serious than climate change.

Pompeo is one of the few American officials who understand the CCP’s communist culture.

In an interview on the program “Fox Business Tonight” with Jackie DeAngelis, on April 21, Pompeo said that based on his own past experiences with the CCP, Beijing will not fulfill any promises it made at the climate summit and that the United States must continue to observe the CCP’s actions.

“My expectation is we’ll hear what we’ve heard from the Chinese Communist Party before, a series of commitments that they have absolutely no intention of honoring. … They have broken more promises over these last years, including a promise to President Obama that they wouldn’t militarize the South China Sea.”

The CCP’s past actions have showed that it cannot be trusted—it says one thing and does the exact opposite. In the past few decades, they have repeatedly fooled the United States. During the Civil War between the Nationalists and the Communist Party in China, when the Americans went to Yan’an (the Dixie Mission) in 1944, they witnessed how the Communists operated.

After the end of the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1946, at the National Founding Congress, the Kuomintang and the Communist Party had many disputes. One of the disputes was how the president came into being. The Nationalists suggested that the National Congress should elect the president. The Communist Party used the United States electoral process as a model to oppose the Nationalist’s initiative and insisted on universal elections to select the president. All the democratic parties, intellectuals, and young people supported the CCP’s statement, as did the Americans. But those declarations have never come to light.

The CCP’s approach had practical benefits. During the subsequent civil war mediation between the Nationalists and the Communist Party, the Marshall of the United States was biased towards the CCP. Many officials of the U.S. State Department supported the CCP and denied the government of the Republic of China at that time. In the end, the U.S. Congress stopped providing assistance such as weapons and equipment to the Nationalist government, on the grounds of not intervening in the civil war.

It was not until 1949 that the Americans woke up and began to resume military assistance to the Nationalists, including weaponry accessories and ammunition. But when the first batch of military aid arrived, it was already too late—the Nationalists had already fled to Taiwan.

In the following decades, the CCP continued to play this game. On the diplomatic front, the CCP speaks with grand rhetoric, including its words on friendship and cooperation between the United States and China.

However, behind the scenes, the CCP has never lowered its guard and has the ultimate aim of overthrowing the United States. This goal runs through the CCP’s education system and all political courses—it is clearly seen among the government agencies of the CCP, especially the theoretical and policy-making agencies.

But many Americans do not believe it. It was only after Beijing staked its claims over the South China Sea in 2009 that the United States began to be truly wary of China.

In 1999, before China’s emergence in the South China Sea, two Chinese military officers published the book “Unrestricted Warfare”–the CCP uses this strategy in dealing with neighboring countries.

Chinese vessels at South China Sea
Chinese vessels, believed to be manned by Chinese maritime militia personnel, are seen at Whitsun Reef, South China Sea, on March 27, 2021. (Philippine Coast Guard/National Task Force-West Philippine Sea/Handout via Reuters)

The core idea of “​​unrestricted warfare” is to use various means to subvert the enemy—this includes targeting the economy, technology, culture, and diplomacy, as well as infiltration and funding of internal rebellions. I believe that the concept of “unrestricted warfare” is not something that the CCP invented in the 1990s. The book “Unrestricted Warfare” is a summary of the various methods used by the CCP in the past 100 years to take down its enemies and gain control.

The Communist Party understands human nature. They have studied capitalism for hundreds of years—they know the weaknesses of this system and also understand the weaknesses of human nature under this system. These weaknesses are targeted through “unrestricted warfare.”

To avoid being tricked by the CCP, it is important to reflect on past mistakes in dealing with China. If Americans want to know how the CCP will subvert the United States, they only need to seriously study how the Communists seized power in mainland China and to understand the regime’s “unrestricted warfare” strategy.

Alexander Liao is a columnist and journalist in research on international affairs in the United States, China, and Southeast Asia. He has published a large number of reports, commentaries, and video programs in newspapers and Chinese financial magazines in the United States and Hong Kong.

Views expressed in this article are the opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.