The decision of the CPC Central Committee on upholding and perfecting the Socialist system with Chinese characteristics and promoting the Modernization of the National Governance system and Governance capacity, adopted at the fourth Plenary session of the 19th CPC Central Committee, systematically expounds for the first time the remarkable advantages of China's state system and national governance system. It answers the major political question of "what to adhere to and consolidate, what to improve and develop" in China's state system and national governance system, and points out the direction to uphold and improve the socialist system with Chinese characteristics. In terms of system, it provides a fundamental guarantee for building a modern and powerful country in an all-round way and winning the great victory of socialism with Chinese characteristics.

        Upholding and improving the socialist system with Chinese characteristics and promoting the modernization of the national governance system and governance capacity is a major strategic task for the whole party. The overall goal is to modernize the national governance system and capacity in an all-round way, so as to provide a fundamental guarantee for building a modern socialist power in an all-round way. The key task is to continue to comprehensively deepen reform, form and improve a mature and stereotyped institutional system, and better translate institutional advantages into the effectiveness of national governance. The fundamental way to accomplish the goal and task is to adhere to the leadership of the Party and improve the ability of being in power and the level of leadership.

        The key to better transform the institutional advantages into the effectiveness of national governance lies in the implementation of the system. The implementation of the system should be guaranteed by strict management and supervision. Supervision over the implementation of the system should be led by inner-party supervision, promote the organic integration and coordination of various kinds of supervision, such as the supervision of the National people's Congress and judicial supervision, strengthen the joint force of supervision, and improve the long-term mechanism.

     In order to better transform institutional advantages into the effectiveness of national governance, we must adhere to the people-centered strategy and take meeting the growing needs of the people for a better life as our mission. The criterion for testing full implementation is that the people are the real masters of the country, stimulating creative vitality, and the people have a real sense of achievement and share the fruits of transformation.

        To better transform the institutional advantages into the effectiveness of national governance is a systematic project, which requires the implementation of the party's leadership in all fields of system implementation and national governance, and the establishment of a politically competent and highly skilled enforcement and governance team. Building a high-quality professional team should be an important task to strengthen the construction of the Party.

      COVID-19 's epidemic has been raging all over the world for nearly seven months, and its "epicenter" has been rolling around, rapidly spreading and spreading widely, causing heavy damage to human society and a severe impact on the world economy. The global industrial chain, value chain and supply chain have been broken and damaged, the investment and business activities of enterprises have been dealt a heavy blow, the international forces have been reorganized and the global order has been rebuilt.

Total Demand and Total Supply Evaporate Instantly under the Epidemic

        The first feature of this epidemic is that it produces, spreads, mutates, expands, and harms, and threatens human life and safety without distinction, regardless of nationality, national boundaries, or even ideology, and can be called the "common enemy of mankind."

        This epidemic crisis is completely different from previous economic and financial crises. It is neither a simple lack of demand or overproduction, nor a stagflation crisis of insufficient supply and vicious inflation, but because human activities suddenly come to a standstill. As a result, total demand and total supply evaporated in an instant.

The United States Soaked All the Fertile Fields in the World by Releasing Water All Over the World

        The second feature of the world economy under the epidemic is the direct impact on the international price system. "Gold, stocks, foreign exchange, grain, oil, mining" market tremors, crude oil futures prices (WTI) once fell into a negative zone. The devaluation of many currencies has exacerbated the expansion of dollar debt, capital outflows from emerging markets, and the global debt balance is teetering.

        In order to get out of the quagmire of the financial crisis and implement an unprecedented scale of non-traditional financial policy, the United States has released water all over the world, soaked all kinds of fertile land in the world, and formed an unprecedented amount of US dollar debt on a global scale.

Protectionism in the United States Separates the Globalization of Free Competition

        The third feature of the world economy under the epidemic is that governments of various countries actively adopt "wartime policies" and even force strategic industries and medical materials industries to retreat at home, so that the "global competition among enterprises" gives way to "national competition", the "global industrial chain" shrinks, and the "regional industrial chain" is reconstructed. The central banks of developed countries act as the vanguard of anti-epidemic, "raising war fees" and implementing "monetization of public bonds".

        Along with this, globalization has actually stalled under the epidemic. The United States engages in nationalism and statism, wantonly imposes high tariffs on some countries, including China, makes use of foreign capital to examine and exclude competitors, and even engages in "hostile economic security" tactics to block competitors. At the expense of involving the responsibilities of third parties, unilateralism in terms of capital, technology, and standards has led to ill-fated globalization and a sudden deterioration of the overseas investment environment.

There is plenty of room for development in overseas markets. Chinese products still have comparative advantages.

        From the perspective of the general trend of globalization, the globalization that we live in and benefit from in fact began after the end of the Cold War, which is the essential feature of this round of globalization and the fundamental reason why the 2008 American financial crisis failed to change the trend of globalization. Today, the COVID-19 epidemic also can not stop the trend of globalization. The fundamental trend of globalization is unstoppable. This will certainly become the condition of the times for Chinese enterprises to invest and operate overseas and integrate into the trend of world development.

        Therefore, from the perspective of the driving force of globalization, the formation and distribution of comparative advantages between developed and developing countries will not change fundamentally as a result of the epidemic. The market economy will still be a form accepted by the whole world, and it is very difficult for the confrontation at the policy level during the epidemic time to last until post-pandemic era.

        The impact on the current industrial chain will be short-term and will be repaired in the long run. With the globalization after the Cold War, the developed countries have to hand over the right of production to the developing countries, and this trend has not changed at present.

        Since Mr Putin announced possible changes to the constitution at his annual press conference at the end of 2019, Russia's domestic politics after years of silence, which has dull Russia experts, has once again entered a new round of adjustment. In January 2020, Medvedev's government resigned and Mikhail Vladimirovich Mishustin, former director of Director of the Federal Taxation Service, was nominated by Putin as the new prime minister. In March, during the second reading of the draft constitutional amendment by the Russian State Duma, Tereshkova, vice chairman of the "United Russia" party, suddenly proposed adding a "cancellation of presidential term" clause to the draft constitutional amendment. The chairman of the State Duma immediately called Russian President Putin on the spot, Putin said, if the Constitutional Court agrees. The restriction that the Russian president cannot be re-elected for two terms should be recalculated after the adoption of the new constitution. This means that if the constitutional amendment is passed in a referendum, Putin will have the right to run in two more presidential elections after the end of his current term in 2024. The date of the referendum on constitutional amendment is set for April 22nd, it can be said that everything is carried out in accordance with the planned plan of the Putin regime, and the new adjustment of internal affairs is ready to take place.

        The spread of novel coronavirus in Russia completely disrupted the deployment of the Putin regime. When the COVID-19 epidemic first broke out in China, Russia reacted rapidly. However, since the epidemic spread in Europe in March, the number of confirmed cases of COVID-19 has increased rapidly since the end of March, and the epidemic has blossomed at multiple points in Russia, among which Moscow bear the brunt of having the closest contact with other countries.

        In terms of the establishment of the leading body for epidemic prevention and control in Russia, the regime initially chose to set the center of epidemic prevention and response in the federal government, and then set up a State Council anti-epidemic working group led by Moscow Mayor Sobyanin. President Putin and the president's office, an important body of power, are relatively detached from the fight against the epidemic. The Federal Security Council, which is responsible for the coordination of decision-making on major issues, has not become the core of epidemic prevention command. The reason for setting up a leading body for epidemic prevention may be that the regime wants to remove President Putin from specific epidemic prevention decisions and commands as far as possible, so as to protect his popularity when the epidemic situation worsens and epidemic prevention measures that may cause public discontent are needed. This logic is also reflected in Russia's central-local relations during the epidemic. During the epidemic, the Russian central government, which has been committed to weakening local autonomy and various resources for more than 20 years, unexpectedly handed over the decision-making and implementation power of epidemic prevention policy to the local government. But the reality is that it is difficult for local governments that have long been under the orders of the central government and whose ruling goal is to ensure the security of the regime to provide appropriate election results. The governments of many federal subjects lack not only the ability of independent decision-making, but also the relevant resources and means to implement epidemic prevention policies independently. The abnormal transfer of power by the regime may involve the consideration of shifting responsibility down at the same time. However, such a policy contains huge contradictions. On the one hand, if the local government performs well in the struggle against the epidemic, it may gain popularity and legitimacy that have nothing to do with the central government, which the regime does not want to see. On the other hand, if local governments fail to fight the epidemic due to lack of adequate capacity and resources, the decentralized federal central government is also to blame.

        This paper preliminarily discusses the "unexpected" and "reasonable" from the two aspects of the establishment of Russian epidemic prevention leading organization and the adjustment of central-local relations during the epidemic. So far, the epidemic has exposed many problems in Russian national governance. As observed by the academic community before, the level of national governance is relatively low. The epidemic is not over yet, and such an inspection is of course very preliminary. However, there is no doubt that the exploration of the national leadership system and the central-local relationship in the epidemic can show us a more in-depth and comprehensive picture of Russian national governance.

        China-US relations are one of the most important bilateral relations in the world. Relations with the United States have always been the focus of China's diplomatic work, and the proper handling of Sino-US relations is of great significance to the peace and development of both sides, the Asia-Pacific region and the world as a whole. At the same time, there is also a considerable degree of complexity and variability in China-US relations. How to accurately locate China-US relations is particularly important, because accurate strategic positioning can bring structural stability to the two countries, so that China-US political structure can maintain dynamic order and continuity, so that China and the United States can interact and play games within a controllable range, so as to avoid major fluctuations and setbacks in China-US relations.

        As the largest developed country and the largest developing country, the relationship between the United States and China still follows the principle of the supremacy of national interests. The orientation of the game relationship between China and the United States, whether it is "enemy" or "friend", or non-"enemy" or "friend", the foothold of the relationship is where their respective national interests lie. In the standpoint of national interests, China and the United States have different interest demands. In essence, international relations are a kind of relationship in which countries play a game of interests. Based on the standpoint of their respective national interests, the game between China and the United States will still be fierce. Today's China-US relations can be generally described as the relationship between the eldest and the second. According to the traditional view of western scholars, there may be a "Thucydides trap" between China and the United States. In other words, in the process of realizing the transfer of power, there will be fierce friction in China-US relations and a negative sum game between China and the United States, but on the whole, the bottom line of the game between China and the United States will follow "survival and permissible survival". The game relationship between China and the United States is a Locke game relationship.

        In fact, the Locke game between China and the United States has a scope, its upper limit is that cooperation is greater than competition, realize cooperation and peace between China and the United States, and then achieve mutual benefit and win-win situation. The lower limit is fierce competition, which is close to the edge of violent conflict between the two countries, and even enters the situation of marginal war or even proxy war, which is the bottom line of the Sino-American Locke game. Its future evolution direction is to form a Sino-American Locke-style political structure. Under the Sino-American Locke-style political structure, the political relations between the two nuclear powers are placed in a state of "maintaining self-survival and allowing each other to survive", and the coexistence of cooperation and competition is the main content. however, violent conflicts will be strictly controlled within the effective scope, restricted by nuclear weapons, and the complete destruction of each other makes the possibility of an all-out war between the two sides very little. Although the Locke-style political structure can not put an end to the fierce competition and conflicts between the two nuclear powers of China and the United States, these contradictions and conflicts will be limited by subjective and objective conditions and will be controlled within a limited scope without getting out of control. Therefore, the theoretical framework of the strategic game between China and the United States can be led by the concept of "Locke game".

        Combing the history of the game between China and the United States, the game between China and the United States has experienced an evolution process from the Hobbes game (such as the War to resist US aggression and Aid Korea and the War to resist US aggression and Aid Vietnam) to the Locke game (Sino-US relations after the establishment of diplomatic relations between China and the United States). The contents of the Sino-American Locke game are relatively rich. It includes not only the bottom line of Sino-US game (survival and permissible survival), but also the content of Sino-US negative sum game (such as local or proxy war), as well as the content of zero-sum game (such as "warm war" or "cold war"), Sino-US non-zero-sum game (non-conflict, non-confrontation), The content of the positive sum game between China and the United States (such as mutual respect and win-win cooperation put forward in the new type of great power relationship between China and the United States). If a process description from low to high is used to describe the Sino-American Locke game, its reasonable expression is: there is a struggle and cooperation between China and the United States, but the struggle is not broken, the fight does not die, and the final evolution trend is win-win cooperation. on the one hand, the analysis of the theoretical orientation of the Sino-American Locke game can more widely cover the complex connotations of different levels of Sino-US relations. On the other hand, it also has a certain degree of commonality, which can better explain the complexity, variability and diversity of Sino-US relations. Bringing Sino-US relations into the framework of Locke game analysis will help us to determine and grasp this "anchor" of Sino-US political positioning.

        According to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Assessment Commission authorized by the U.S. Congress, as of February 2019, there were 156 Chinese companies listed in the United States with a market capitalization of 1.2 trillion US dollars. China holds 1.1 trillion US dollars in US Treasuries. Some experts in China estimate that, coupled with investment in the US housing market, China's financial assets in the United States alone may exceed 3 trillion US dollars. In addition, there are 600 tons of gold in the United States in China, accounting for about 1/3 of the existing gold reserves in China. We should draw lessons from the huge losses caused by many countries caused by the "financial war" provoked by the United States, and take effective measures to deal with the impact of the "financial war" provoked by the United States.

        Over the past 70 years, the hegemony of the US dollar has continued, and the United States has repeatedly provoked a "financial war", which has been strongly supported by the following factors.

        I. The United States controls two major international financial institutions.

        The president of the World Bank has always been an American, and the managing director of the International Monetary Fund has long been an European. In essence, the two major international financial institutions are controlled by the United States.

        II. The United States levies "seigniorage" from various countries.

        The United States uses the "excessive privilege" of the US dollar to collect "seigniorage" from various countries. It costs only a few cents to print a hundred-dollar bill in the United States, but other countries must provide the equivalent of $100 in real goods and services.

        III. The United States dominates global trade, especially the control of the oil market.

        Up to now, more than 60% of world trade is still settled in US dollars, especially since the US dollar was decoupled from gold in 1791, the world has entered an era of full credit currency. As the US dollar is still the world's leading currency, the US foreign trade deficit can be made up by US dollars.

        IV. The United States controls the international payment system.

        The Global Interbank Financial Telecommunications Association ((SWIFT)) is an international settlement network based on US dollars, with the participation of financial institutions from more than 200 countries and regions around the world. Banks from countries such as North Korea and Iran have been excluded from the international settlement network as part of US economic sanctions.

        V. The United States makes exorbitant profits from the hype of "money makes money".

        By the end of 2018, the US dollar still accounted for 61.69 per cent of the world's official foreign exchange reserves, and more than 80 per cent of the world's financial transactions were still conducted in US dollars, as did 87 per cent of transactions in the foreign exchange market. Of the $5 trillion a day in foreign exchange transactions, nine out of every ten transactions involve the US dollar. Where did the dollar come from? The Fed keeps printing.

        VI. The United States is the largest currency manipulator.

        Back in 1971, John Connery, then Treasury Secretary of the Nixon administration, said: "the dollar is our currency, but it is your (world) problem." This sentence has not changed so far. For more than 30 years, the United States has been the largest currency manipulator. Both the appreciation and depreciation of the dollar will do more good than harm to the United States. Economy is the body, finance is the blood.

        VII. To enhance the international status of RMB

        To enhance the international status of RMB, one is to speed up the internationalization of RMB. The second is to increase the proportion of RMB in global foreign exchange reserves. The third is to study and pilot the use of digital currency. The fourth is to increase the share and voting rights of the two major international financial institutions.

        VIII. Actively participate in and expand local currency settlement of bilateral and multilateral trade.

        With the hegemony of the US dollar and the unreasonable sanctions imposed by the United States on other countries, more and more countries are forced to reduce their dependence on the US dollar or even "de-dollarize". Experts point out that many unjustified US sanctions are forcing countries to accelerate away from the dollar settlement system.

        IX. Gradually reduce your holdings of US Treasuries

        China still holds US $1.1 trillion of US Treasuries, and we should gradually reduce our holdings of US Treasuries. When we make all kinds of investments in the United States, we should have risk awareness and effectively guard against risks so as to maintain the safety of financial assets.

        X. Gradually diversifying foreign exchange reserves

        We should gradually diversify our foreign exchange reserves, especially increase our resources reserves. European countries have shipped home most of the gold stored in the United States, and Germany shipped back 1690 tons of gold stored in the United States as early as 2016. The 600 tons stored in the United States account for about 1/3 of China's gold reserves.

        XI. Asian countries strengthen regional financial cooperation

        Since the Asian financial crisis in 1997, Asian countries have been strengthening and expanding regional financial cooperation, reducing their dependence on the US dollar and coping with the impact of exchange rate fluctuations of the US dollar.

        If we take effective measures and strengthen cooperation with more and more countries, we will be able to respond effectively to the financial war provoked by the United States.

        Since the spread of Covid-19 around the world, the increasingly tense China-US relations have increasingly become the focus of attention as a result of the Trump administration's stigmatization, demonization of China, rumors and misbehavior. In the chaotic comments of the media, we can also see some sober and objective expositions made by some famous American scholars, which can give rise to a lot of associations and revelations related to how to understand China-US relations.

        Example 1: on June 28, Japan's Yomiuri Shimbun published an article by Joseph Nye, a professor at Harvard University in the United States, entitled "Cooperation with China is inevitable."

        Example 2: on June 30, Francis Fukuyama, a famous Japanese-American scholar, gave an exclusive interview to the Beijing News. He did not agree that the Trump administration had been trying to demonize China.

        Example 3: on June 30, the website of Hong Kong's South China Morning Post published an article entitled "Why the decoupling of the US-China supply chain will be more sobbing than loud". The author is Yukon Huang, a senior researcher at the Carnegie Institute for International Peace (he has advised government departments and companies in the World Bank, the Asian Development Bank and several countries) and Jeremy Smith, a junior researcher at the institute. The main point of the article is to disapprove of exaggerating the decoupling between the United States and China.

        On July 8, the bimonthly website of the US National interest published an article by Professor Eric Gatzk, director of the Center for Peace and Security Studies at the University of California, San Diego, that "China did not make novel coronavirus to attack the United States and any other country."

        The above four pieces of information show that although American scholars have inevitable class limitations, and some have even safeguarded and promoted the Cold War mentality, once they get rid of the Cold War mentality, transcend ideological disputes, and observe the world situation without prejudice, we can also get more fair answers to international issues, including China-US relations.

        When Communists observe, study, and judge the international situation and China-US relations, there is no doubt that we should adhere to Marxist positions, viewpoints, and methods. Four aspects of thinking are put forward here.

        First, to observe and study international relations, we should stand at the height of the times, which is not only a starting point, but also a foothold.

        Second, to study international issues, we should use materialist dialectics and should not look at problems in isolation.

        Third, competition and cooperation between China and the United States, like the two sides of the same coin, will not be completely separated.

        Fourth, we must keep overall vision of national interests and a clear head, jump out of the narrow pattern of nationalism and populism, and clarify the relationship between challenges and opportunities.

        A spokesman for the US Treasury Department said a few days ago that US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin had sent a letter to the finance ministers of four European countries proposing to suspend negotiations on a unified digital tax plan for multinational enterprises under the framework of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), on the grounds that "governments around the world are currently focusing on responding to the COVID-19 epidemic and safely restarting their economies."

        Since France promulgated a new law on levying digital tax on foreign Internet companies in July last year, France and the United States have been tit-for-tat and acted frequently. The dispute over digital tax between France and the United States is not only related to the new business model of the digital economy, the tax challenges faced by Internet enterprises, the relationship between trade disputes and tax disputes, but also involves many issues such as regional governance and global governance programs. The origin and prospect of the dispute over digital tax between France and the United States mainly have the following points.

        First, the new business model has given birth to new types of digital taxes in France.

        Second, where does France have the strength to levy a digital tax? First of all, France's move is to safeguard its own national interests. Second, France is not alone. France's move is supported by Britain, Austria, Spain, Italy and many other European countries. Finally, France occupies the moral high ground.

        Third, the digital tax may cut off Ireland's way to make money.

        Fourth, the digital tax moved American cheese and triggered a strong reaction from the United States.

        Fifth, the role played by OECD in solving the problem of BEPS.

        Sixth is whether OECD can come up with an "acceptable" global solution.

        From the point of view of being familiar with the situation and mastering the policy tools, it is the right choice for OECD to take the lead in undertaking this work. However, in addition to OECD members, there are also non-OECD G20 members and other developing countries, totaling about 130 countries and jurisdictions. All participants have their own interests, economic characteristics and tax systems, and the contradiction between the United States and Europe is particularly prominent. Does OECD adhere to the fair and just rules of international taxation and put forward a global plan for simultaneous and coordinated tax and economic growth, or does it form a compromise plan that takes into account the interests of all parties in order to achieve the "maximum common divisor" agreed by all member states by lowering the goal of reform? It remains to be seen whether the final plan can be accepted by all parties and quell the dispute over digital tax in Europe and the United States.

        China is the second largest economy in the world and the largest trader of goods in the world. The establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank ((AIIB),) is promoting the internationalization of RMB, and the (IMF) of the International Monetary Fund has recognized the status of RMB as an "international currency". The economic and trade organizations, forums and multilateral mechanisms established by China's participation and leadership are advancing in an orderly manner. When President Xi Jinping announced the "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative in 2013, it revived memories of that prosperous history. The great changes and achievements of China today can always be found in the history of the past, and the axis of the world's rotation is shifting to the Silk Road, the original place that made it rotate for thousands of years. The ancient Silk Road linked China with the European continent a long time ago, which is at both ends of the Silk Road. It should be a natural and inevitable choice for China and the European Union to carry out "Belt and Road Initiative" cooperation.

        I. The current situation of cooperation between China and the EU to promote the "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative.

        1. The EU generally believes that the importance of the "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative has become increasingly prominent.

        (1). The "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative has promoted the interconnection between the Asian economic circle and the European economic circle.

        (2). The "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative is making up for the imbalance of economic development in the middle of Asia and Europe.

        (3). Chinese companies have become a link between China and Europe by virtue of their unique entrepreneurial spirit.

        2. steady progress in China-EU "Belt and Road Initiative" cooperation.

        The "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative has been paid more and more attention by the European Union, and the rise of China has brought more opportunities than risks to Europe.

        3. Cooperation with Central and Eastern European countries is becoming more and more intensive.

        4. the cooperation between China and the EU in the field of security has been broadened and stabilized day by day.

        II. The cognition of the "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative by the major core countries in Europe.

        The EU is not a federal country, and EU member states can implement their own policies according to their own wishes. There are various challenges within Europe, and it is very difficult to implement a unified foreign policy. Due to the consideration of their own interests and the confusion caused by Brexit, it is very difficult for the EU itself to make substantial progress in the pace of integration if it cannot carry out fundamental reform. However, the major core countries in Europe generally attach great importance to China's "Belt and Road Initiative" initiative.

        1. stable and far-reaching type.

        (1). Italy strengthens port economic cooperation with China within the framework of "Belt and Road Initiative"

        (2). Gold cooperation: the all-round cooperation between China and the West, China and Portugal has entered the Golden Dynasty.

        (3). Deep ploughing and careful cultivation: mature and sound cooperation between China and Greece.

        2. Enhanced willingness to cooperate

        (1). The cooperation between China and Germany and France is advancing steadily.

        (2). Remarkable results: the effect of "Belt and Road Initiative" financial cooperation between China and Britain is obvious.

        III. Prospects for future cooperation between China and the EU.

        1. the idea of Eurasian connectivity will be docked with China's "Belt and Road Initiative", which will play a ballast role for the healthy development of China and Europe in the future.

        2. China and the EU will play a leading role in the implementation of green "Belt and Road Initiative" in the future through green energy cooperation.

        3. Scientific and technological cooperation with EU member states will add new impetus and vitality to China-EU relations in the future.

        4. China-EU cooperation in the third market will be a booster for the sound development of China-EU relations in the future.

        5. China and the EU will have potential and space for cooperation in jointly building the "Digital Silk Road" and the "Health Silk Road".

        IV. Difficulties and challenges faced by China and Europe in jointly building "Belt and Road Initiative"

        1. the EU regards it as both a partner and a systematic competitor.

        2. the United States has become the biggest uncertain factor in the "Belt and Road Initiative" cooperation between China and Europe.

        3. Europe, the United States and Japan strengthen communication and coordination in reformulating world economic and trade rules to restrict China.

        4. Brexit has an impact on EU relations with China.

        5. the bondage of the EU's own decision-making system.

        In short, China and the EU share extensive common interests in economic globalization, trade liberalization and the multilateral trading system. There is no geopolitical competition in the relationship between China and Europe. China is the second largest trading partner of the European Union after the United States, and the European Union is China's largest trading partner and the largest export market, which is usually regarded as a legitimate reason for attaching importance to bilateral relations between Europe and China and explain the central role of trade in EU-China relations. Since the outbreak of the European debt crisis in 2008, driven by the devaluation of the euro, Europe is deindustrializing. For example, Italy, Portugal, France and the UK provide opportunities for Chinese companies in the fields of automobiles, food, energy, transportation, luxury goods, entertainment and tourism. China attaches importance to cooperation with European countries, and the two sides have begun to set foot in new areas of cooperation, promising cooperation in security and combating terrorism. In particular, after the COVID-19 epidemic, China and the EU have a lot of room for cooperation in global public health governance and common economic assistance mechanisms.

        Britain divided in each colony, using one part to oppose the other part. This is the "divide and rule" strategy commonly used in British foreign policy. Among them, the Middle East is an important testing ground and also the victim of Britain's "divide and rule" strategy. In this regard, domestic scholars have discussed some related topics, but works devoted to this topic are still rare. The author tries to make an in-depth discussion on this issue from the perspective of the combination of history and reality.

        The main manifestation of Britain's "divide and rule" policy in the Middle East.

        (1) Encroach on, split and eventually disintegrate the Ottoman Empire.

        (2) To create disputes and contradictions among countries in the Middle East.

        (3) To foster Israel's statehood in the Middle East.

        The negative influence of the British colonial heritage of "divide and rule" on the Middle East.

        (1) The lack of "core countries" has plunged the Middle East into long-term instability.

        (2) Arab countries are constantly in dispute with each other, and regional contradictions emerge one after another.

        (3) The Arab-Israeli conflict has become a "century dispute" in the Middle East.

        The causes and consequences of Britain's implementation of the "divide and rule" policy in the Middle East show that the frequent division of western powers in the Islamic world is, in the final analysis, the inevitable outcome of hegemonic logic. A weak and divided Arab world is obviously conducive to the hegemonic rule of Western powers over the Middle East. As long as hegemonism exists, the division of the geographical territory of the Middle East is likely to continue. The same is true. After World War II, the United States replaced Britain as the hegemon of the world, and basically inherited the geo-tradition of Britain. As a sea power country isolated from Eurasia, the main goal of the United States in Eurasia is to prevent the emergence of potential challengers and prevent the internal integration of Eurasia. To this end, the United States has always tried every means to create disputes, turbulence, and conflicts in Eurasia, so as to enable the United States to play the role of "offshore balancing hand" calmly.

        During the Cold War, the United States mainly adopted a containment policy against the "giant" Soviet Union in Eurasia, and finally led to the disintegration of the Soviet Union by encouraging national separation. After the end of the Cold War, Brzezinski and other strategists hoped that the "balkanization of Eurasia" would turn from the Eurasian continent of North Africa, the Middle East, the Caucasus, Central Asia and India into a black hole fighting against each other. Under such circumstances, the Islamic world has become a new containment and separatist object of the United States. Especially after the "September 11 incident" in 2001, the United States locked the region as the object of "transformation". "Divide and rule" is one of the usual tricks. After the upheaval in the Middle East in 2011, sectarian and tribal conflicts have become prominent, Western military intervention has thrown Libya and Syria into chaos, and the Middle East is once again facing the trend of geographical fragmentation. It should be pointed out that the fragmentation of the geographical territory of the Middle East has reduced the threshold and resistance for Western powers to enter the Middle East, but at the same time, because of the complex contradictions and various political forces in the Middle East, it is difficult for external powers to find strategic support that can be relied on for a long time. To some extent, politics in the Middle East, like quicksand, has become a tomb for seducing great powers to seek hegemony, and then burying great power hegemony.

        The smooth re-election of Tsai ing-wen heralded the beginning of the struggle for power and resources within the DPP in the "post-Tsai Ing-wen era". Various factions and forces began to make an active layout, and the struggle for power and mastering resources became the main contradiction within the party at present.

        The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is a typical grass-roots party with strong factional struggle. At present, various factions and forces in the party are engaged in an increasingly fierce struggle around the election of local chairmen and central party posts in various counties and cities, the mayoral election of Kaohsiung after the possible strike, the local election in 2022 and even the inner-party primary election of leaders in 2024. Among them, factional interests and personnel layout have become the main contradiction within the party, but there is no contradiction between political line and cross-strait policy. Such fierce inner-party contradictions and struggles will not affect the DPP's high degree of unity with the outside world, especially against the KMT and the mainland. At present, inner-party contradictions and struggles are only a storm in a teapot and will not cause too much political storm. Tsai Ing-wen's strong style and authority can fully control inner-party disputes and will not affect political power and political stability.

        On May 20, 2020, Tsai Ing-wen delivered a re-election inaugural speech, which began with an emphasis on "Taiwan as a community", which is quite confrontational with the "community with a shared future for both sides of the strait" repeatedly emphasized by the mainland in recent years. The deeper purpose is to stimulate the "Taiwanese consciousness" of the people on the island as an imaginary community, and to "create Taiwan independence" in terms of identity. To create a "de facto Taiwan independence" that does not need to "declare Taiwan independence" but has "completed Taiwan independence". In his last term, Lee Teng-hui dished out that the two sides of the strait belonged to "special state-to-state relations," claiming that "since the constitutional amendment in 1991, cross-strait relations have been defined as state-to-state, or at least special state-to-state relations." At present, Tsai Ing-wen has entered her final term in power, and there is no pressure for re-election at all. Moreover, she is in power, lacks strong checks and balances by the opposition parties, and is fully qualified and able to follow Lee Teng-hui's old path of "radical Taiwan independence." In addition, under the influence of populist politics, weak economic growth, tearing public opinion and other factors on the island, Tsai may fall into the "curse of the second term" in the future, that is, she will be crippled ahead of time because public support is too low. At that time, in order to protect herself and boost the morale of the Democratic Progressive Party, Tsai may be on the wrong side of the sword and "step on the accelerator" instead of "stepping on the brakes" on the issue of "Taiwan independence". Embrace the basic market of the Green Camp by provoking the mainland, destroying the two sides of the strait and colliding with the international community. History is not far away, whether Tsai ing-wen will gather party and government resources on the island in the future, promote the transformation of the "Taiwan community" discussion into the "Taiwan independence discussion" in the mode of the whole government, implement "Taiwan independence" in a more naked and radical way, and touch the "Anti-Secession Law", resulting in the "extreme detonation" of cross-strait relations, which deserves a high degree of vigilance from all walks of life on both sides of the strait.