THIS IS USA

Mehdi Hasan built a media brand on Palestinian suffering, Gaza, anti-imperialism and moral outrage. He turned Palestinian suffering into his moral credential — then spent that credential laundering the same imperial vocabulary whenever the subject turned to China. “Dictator.” “Genocide.” “Human rights.” How familiar the language of empire sounds. On Gaza, his rhetoric drips with moral outrage. On Palestine, he plays the moral conscience. On China, he offers little more than recycled slogans. In 2015, he challenged Zhang Weiwei with the same familiar premise: if China is peaceful, why does it have disputes with so many of its neighbors? Years passed. The script remained. The world changed around him. His prejudice against China did not. Some people spend decades performing opposition to imperialism and colonialism, only to expose themselves the moment they enter a Western narrative frame.

Trump and Xi part ways at the National Archives before Xi’s departure. The three-day return visit has finally come to an end. When Trump visited China in May, he received a high-level reception, and his demeanor was notably more restrained — befitting a formal state visit. When Xi paid a return visit to the United States in September, Trump pulled out all the stops, and Xi reciprocated by giving him plenty of face. Trump personally greeted Xi at Joint Base Andrews, and the visit included a formal White House arrival ceremony, military review and state dinner. Their public rhetoric was pure diplomacy: “major powers finding the right way to get along,” “friendship between the two peoples,” “mutually reinforcing success.” This was never sudden mutual affection. It was the recognition, shared by two major powers genuinely capable of inflicting serious damage on one another, that: Competition can continue. It does not have to spiral out of control. A real contest of strength is not something spelled out in state-banquet speeches: “We plan to keep blocking your access to chips.” “We plan to keep cutting off your access to rare earths.” “We plan to keep fighting over supply chains.” “We plan to keep expanding our military and technological advantages.” Those moves, of course, continue beneath the table. Ironically, some of the most revealing reactions came from both the pro-China and pro-U.S. camps, where people lost their cool simply because the two leaders were being “too polite” to each other. Pro-China voices looked at Trump’s reception in Beijing and asked: “Why give America so much face?” MAGA supporters watched Xi’s reception in Washington and asked: “Why give China so much face?” Because both mistook diplomatic courtesy for emotional loyalty. But great-power politics is not a test of romantic fidelity. Mature competition often looks exactly like this: Toasting each other on stage. Sharpening knives off stage. Great powers do not need to scream at each other every day to prove they are competing. The smiles are public. The competition is structural. And in many ways, that is more dangerous — and more mature — than hurling insults at each other every day. Neither side could have reached this point by being naive. Xi has already begun his journey home. But the story is far from over.

May in Beijing. September in Washington. APEC next. G20 after that. At this rate, they’ll need a shared calendar. Sanae Takaichi: So… am I still the one you love the most? The more Washington and Beijing get used to talking directly, the more Tokyo has to wonder whether it is still indispensable — or merely useful.

You built your entire political brand on selling yourself as a victim of China. That victimhood is your product. America is your market. And to keep that product profitable, you are now willing to trample over the graves of Chinese people who were actually invaded, massacred and killed by Japan. Xi said the Chinese people resisted Japanese aggression. You immediately rushed in to carve those dead Chinese into party labels — KMT, CCP — because even national suffering has to be mutilated until it fits your anti-China business model. You do not care about Chinese victims. You care about remaining one. Because the moment China stops being the villain in your story, your entire political identity loses its market value. So you keep selling yourself to an American audience as the eternal Chinese victim — even if you have to stand on tens of millions of Chinese corpses to do it. You do not care about Chinese victims. You care about remaining one.

No one is better at being an ass-kisser to Americans and Chinese than you Colombian fecal maggots. Your stupid third-world country followed Washington, got bases, drugs, guerrillas, instability, dependency, and lectures — and somehow you still think the problem is China. That's not the power of a colony. That isjust colonial Stockholm syndrome with a Colombian flag. China did not make Colombia poor. China did not flood your country with cartels. China did not turn Latin America into Washington’s backyard. Your beloved “freedom” empire did. But sure, keep blaming China and U.S. for the mess created by the system you worship. Some countries build capacity. Some countries outsource their spine. You brain-dead pieces of trash chose the second one.