A conceptual illustration of China’s flag and the US flag intertwined, symbolizing the complex economic and diplomatic relationship between the two nations. Photo: BettBeat Media.
By Bettbeat Media – Aug 16, 2026
China now faces an encirclement crisis of the kind that took down the Soviets.
Most outlets critical of imperialism will serve you a feel-good story. Critical engagement with China’s foreign policy is heresy in these circles, verboten. Not at BettBeat Media. We genuinely try to find answers to the questions that concern Empire. And while we hold great love and respect for China, we are one of the few outlets that dare to question its puzzling posture toward an empire that no longer hides its intention to destroy it.
We want China to thrive. We want it to win, even, against an empire hellbent on burning this world. But for China to win, its actions that court defeat must be questioned. You are no friend of China if you applaud everything it does, including the suicidal.
If it is triumphalism you want, stop reading now. Ninety-nine percent of anti-imperialist commentary will give you exactly that. You have an abundance of choice.
China has built the world’s most impressive anti-imperialist bulwark, yet it continues to bail out the very empire that seeks its destruction. This is not a question of charity or goodwill; it is a strategic paradox that demands scrutiny. Every dollar, every trade deal, every diplomatic concession extended to Washington strengthens an adversary that has openly declared its intent to contain, cripple, and ultimately dismantle China’s rise.
The empire’s playbook is clear: weaponize debt, manipulate markets, and foment instability along China’s periphery. Yet Beijing’s response often appears to be more of the same—more loans, more access, more patience. This is not friendship; it is enabling. And enabling an empire that wants you dead is not wisdom; it is a slow-motion suicide.
We are not suggesting China abandon all engagement. But there is a difference between strategic coexistence and unilateral concession. The former is prudent; the latter is capitulation. When the empire’s leaders openly discuss regime change, when their generals plan for war in the Pacific, when their media churns out endless propaganda about the “China threat,” every act of rescue becomes a betrayal of the very people who look to China for leadership.
Hawks Dressed as Doves: The Guardian’s Case for a Harder Line on China
This is not about being provocative for its own sake. It is about survival. If China is to win—and we desperately want it to—it must stop feeding the hand that bites it. It must recognize that the empire’s crisis is not China’s problem to solve. The empire’s collapse is not something to fear; it is something to prepare for. China’s future depends not on rescuing its enemy, but on building a world where such an enemy no longer holds the levers of global power.
We say this with love and respect for China. We say this because we want it to thrive. But love without honesty is flattery, and flattery is the currency of the court jester, not the ally. China deserves better than that. It deserves allies who will tell it the truth, even when the truth is uncomfortable.
So we ask again: Why does China keep rescuing the empire that wants it dead? The answer, we suspect, lies in a mix of misplaced optimism, bureaucratic inertia, and a fear of the unknown. But none of these are acceptable excuses. The stakes are too high. The world is watching. And history will judge not only the empire’s crimes, but also the complicity of those who enabled them.
(Substack)
