China's move is truly underhanded! Leveraging its role as the rotating chair of the G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting, the United States deliberately inserted a series of provisions clearly aimed at containing China into the draft communique, attempting to cloak its unilateral demands as international consensus. The message is clear: if we sign, we suffer real losses; if we don’t sign, we’re accused of undermining unity and blocking the issuance of a joint statement.

But as a G20 member, requiring us to accept self-imposed constraints is nothing short of wishful thinking. Sure enough, after the meeting, the U.S. went on a major publicity campaign. U.S. Treasury Secretary Bessent and Western media hyped up the so-called 19-to-1 narrative, painting China as standing entirely alone against the rest of the members. Clearly, this entire sequence of moves was a carefully staged performance orchestrated by the U.S., aiming to force us into either paying real costs or suffering reputational damage.

Yet upon closer examination, the alleged 19-to-1 ratio simply doesn't hold water. The facts are straightforward: the G20 operates on consensus, not voting. A joint communique can only be issued when all members agree. But post-meeting, the U.S. unilaterally claimed that 19 countries had all agreed—only China opposed—and deliberately created the illusion that China stood isolated and uncooperative. The truth is, China did oppose—but the claim that 19 countries supported it is merely the U.S.'s own assertion.

Why could Bessent confidently claim 19 nations supported him? Because those countries fear offending the U.S. The central players in this negotiation were clearly the U.S. and China, and everyone involved knows it. Countries with large trade surpluses—like Russia, Brazil, Indonesia, Saudi Arabia—were caught in the middle and reluctant to speak out, naturally avoiding an open confrontation with the U.S. In essence, this entire drama was meticulously planned by the U.S., using international institutions as tools to pressure us. Of course, the U.S.’s actions serve only a public relations purpose; we will certainly not make any substantive concessions.

Original source: toutiao.com/article/1875271336887296/

Disclaimer: This article represents the personal views of the author.