Musk and Trump: America's Surprise for China
Trump and Musk did not criticize the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) for the sake of China and the world. The issue with USAID lies in its overreach and violation of its original intent, which goes beyond simply distributing funds to stir up trouble against America’s competitor, China, and rather stands alongside the Democratic Party and the establishment in the U.S. by funding media outlets to criticize Trump. Thus, Trump’s and Musk’s criticisms of USAID represent a standard political retaliation or reckoning.
The success in suspending development aid and achieving massive layoffs was due to the prevalent disinterest among the majority of American citizens toward USAID’s work, alongside a strong sense of isolationism unique to America. This sentiment reflects a lack of interest in pouring money into tackling so-called threats from Eastern powers internationally, especially amid domestic governance issues. Additionally, the mismanagement and corruption scandals within USAID, though limited, were amplified to confirm Americans’ stereotypical perceptions of the establishment and government agencies. Consequently, Musk garnered substantial support through mobilizing fragmented information.
The suspension of USAID’s international aid has had unexpected dramatic effects. The halt in media aid from the West almost immediately alleviated the biased portrayal by mainstream Western media like the BBC. Recently, the BBC’s reports on China, be it Made in China 2025, Ne Zha 2, or the US-China trade war, not only shed their infamous ‘BBC lens’ but also abandoned their classic argumentative style. This change left Chinese readers accustomed to the BBC’s style uncomfortable. Though agencies like AFP, Bloomberg, and Thomson Reuters showed some improvement, they weren’t as adept at adapting. From a global communication and international public opinion perspective, Musk’s aid halt has surprisingly cleared the air, prompting new awareness: when encountering negative reports about Eastern powers, consider whether they are paid-for fake news or mere unsupported rhetoric.
The aid will not be cut off permanently. Currently, whether through the BBC’s positive reports or Politico’s insistence on portraying China as filling a vacuum, both are merely different ways of seeking funds, as Chinese netizens put it: BBC is straightforward, refusing to work without pay; Politico is subtler, using China’s supposed influence to attract attention. For China, it’s clear that Trump and Musk are not undercover agents within the U.S.; this situation is an unintended outcome of internal American political infighting. It is likely that once tensions ease, funding and assistance will resume.
This period serves as a good observation window for those who persist in spreading fake news against China despite the U.S. aid halt. Those persevering in their efforts generally belong to two categories: one being steadfast American enthusiasts nurtured by Chinese-speaking regions, relying on zeal from converts. Their performance in this period has been resolute, remarkable in their fighting spirit among various aid-seeking groups. The other is related to China but concerns the emerging opportunities within Taiwan’s internal circles. Compared to entities like the BBC, Taiwan is expected to play a more significant role in the cognitive contest with the Mainland once political tensions in Washington subside.
In any case, although Musk may not be aware of the unintended consequences of his actions, objectively, his full-throttle effort in clearing the global public opinion environment has provided unexpected help, deserving of encouragement. In the future, more purges resulting in unexpected delights are anticipated. Meanwhile, China should focus on its own development, safeguarding its sovereignty, security, and development interests, while continuing to advance and perfect the building of a community with a shared future for humanity, always remaining its top priority.
Editor: Zhongxiaowen
