The video opens by saying that the Chinese military has been doing exercises in Guangdong province, but says their "exact movement and reason for being there is unknown." It also says that the US recently completed exercises in the South China Sea, accompanied or followed by Australian, Japanese and British forces. On July 27, it says, a US fighter plane approached within 100 km of Shanghai, causing unprecedented tensions. Towards the end of the video, it mentions that if the Chinese military had designs on invading Taiwan, it would make much more sense for them to be conducting exercises in Huadu district (directly adjacent to Taiwan across the South China Sea) rather than in Guangdong which is far to the south of the Taiwan theater.This next video suggests that China is preparing a small scale distractionary war against either Taiwan or India.
At 1:13 in the video, an opening statement from the narrator says "it seems that the people's liberation army has taken the strategy of: 'If the enemy is retreating, I will advance. If the enemy is advancing, i will retreat." But from the actual facts as given by the video itself, it is impossible to say that the US and its allies have ever retreated from their aggressive positions in the South China Sea, nor has China ever advanced towards Taiwan.
At 2:38 the narrator acknowledges that "in fact, Beijing's greatest fear is that the US military will intervene directly... it is expected that the PLA would not dare to attack Taiwan directly. BUT many analysts also believe that Xi Jinping might attack Taiwan."
Who are these "many analysts" and why do they contradict the obvious analysis that the PLA would not dare to do this? The narrator continues: "For Beijing and especially for Xi Jinping waging a small-scale war is much needed... a war victory is desperately needed..." What kind of bizarre idea is this, that attacking Taiwan would lead to a quick victory against the US and indeed the entire Western world, that would unite against this?
The video briefly mentions the situation at the Indian border. The terrain there is said to be mountainous rather than densely populated, so that the scale of a war could be easily controlled. This seems more plausible, but how much domestic credit would Xi Jinping really get for conquering an uninhabited moonscape at the Indian border? I don't see the point.
The video is produced by "Vision Times", a shadowy entity whose You-tube channel "about" claims that it is "an independent media headquartered in the United States." Their website says "Vision Times is a borderless, largely volunteer community of writers, analysts, online media experts, and translators from around the world... we are a not-for-profit organization with a mission of creating a better world." Wikipedia says they are owned by "Vision Times Media (Australia) Corporation Pty LTD." which boasts proudly of their ability to sell advertisements. The Chinese logos of these enterprises appear identical. So is this a non-profit, or a massive advertising engine? Headquartered in the United States, or Australia, or around the world?
One author, Ben Hurley, claims that Vision Times is just another part of the Falun Gong media enterprise, which as we have already discussed is a CIA funding conduit. Looks that way to me. And, Hurley has much more interesting information about life inside Falun Gong.
This article is in no way an attempt to justify the Chinese government’s ridiculous and violent campaign against Falun Gong. The many outright lies the Chinese government has told about the group have in some ways helped Falun Gong by giving the organisation a human rights narrative that allows it to not focus too closely on its own practices and beliefs. If only the Chinese government had just stuck to the facts. Falun Gong in many foreigners’ minds is associated with other freedom movements abroad, when in reality Falun Gong doesn’t give a stuff about other groups or about reform in China. In the world view of most Falun Gong practitioners, any movement that is trying to achieve an outcome in the human world — apart from Falun Gong’s various projects, that is — is engaging in dirty human politics.
Unfortunately the sympathy that many uninformed Westerners have towards Falun Gong has led to a kind of exasperated stand-off with a lot of Chinese people who justifiably feel that Falun Gong is just plain silly and that Westerners can never really understand China. This kind of thing drives a wedge between China and the rest of the world which is the last thing we need in an increasingly tense geopolitical climate.
The way Falun Gong defines itself to the public and to its own followers — as a health-focussed spiritual group concerned about human rights — is just not true. It made me less healthy, less happy, less kind, less compassionate. And it made me less truthful — to myself and others.