Beijing’s Logic and the “Whistle” of the Wise

Beijing’s Logic and the “Whistle” of the Wise

[People News] Chiang Kai-shek—President of the Republic of China, the first person in the world to expose the conspiratorial ambitions of the Communist bandits, and also the first to take concrete action against communism worldwide—was an expert on the Chinese Communist Party.

In 1960, Chiang Kai-shek was invited to write a Good Friday Sermon. At the beginning of this document, he first explained the circumstances that led to its writing: Dr. Daniel A. Poling had recently written to him, requesting that he compose a sermon for the Christian Herald. Dr. Poling suggested the following topic: “If you were to preach to Americans, what would you say?” Accordingly, this sermon may also be regarded as Chiang Kai-shek’s counsel and advice to the American people.

Miles Yu (Yu Maochun), director of the China Center at the American think tank Hudson Institute, who served as the State Department’s chief China policy planner during Donald Trump’s first term, is also an expert on the Chinese Communist Party.

Sixty-five years after Chiang Kai-shek’s “sermon” was published, at the end of 2025, Dr. Yu Maochun wrote a letter to American elites, once again offering counsel and advice to the United States.

So why did these two wise men, separated by more than half a century, independently arrive at the same conclusion and offer counsel to America? Because the United States is the leader of the democratic and free world, while the Chinese Communist Party, a dictatorship and tyranny, regards the United States as its primary enemy.

At the same time, this also shows that over the past sixty-five years, the United States has not made a substantive leap in its understanding of the nature and habits of the Chinese Communist Party, allowing the CCP, under the cover of lies and利益, to wreak havoc on the world and on America.

By carefully reading and comparing the counsel and advice that these two experts on the CCP offered to the United States, one finds many identical or similar viewpoints and understandings.

1. Both reveal that communism and the free world are fundamentally incompatible

In his “sermon,” Chiang Kai-shek said: “The anti-God ideology of communism makes peace between the communist world and the free world impossible. Marx, in the Communist Manifesto, pointed out that there exists an unbridgeable chasm between the communist world and the free world. He said: ‘Communism does not need eternal truths; moreover, it seeks to abolish all religion and all morality.’ He also said on another occasion: ‘Down with God, down with the Church, support communism, and you will obtain everything in the world.’”

In his letter to American elites, Yu Maochun said that communism is fundamentally incompatible with a rules-based international order because it denies the sovereignty of rules themselves. “This is not a cultural difference, nor a diplomatic misunderstanding, but the very nature of communism.”

In Beijing’s logic, the Party possesses absolute and unchallengeable sovereignty; the law is merely a tool subordinate to the Party’s will. Agreements are meant to bind others, never itself. And while the international system can accommodate various forms of government, it cannot withstand the CCP’s systematic bad faith.

2. Both expose the gangster nature of the Communist Party (the CCP) as one that never keeps its word

In his “sermon,” Chiang Kai-shek said: “If the free world still attempts to seek peace with the Communists, to negotiate disarmament agreements with aggressors, or to believe that once the Communist bandits are allowed to enter the United Nations they will accept the constraints of international organizations, then this hall of peace will become a den for harboring thieves. We must not forget that our Lord Jesus once said to the twelve disciples: ‘The thief comes only to steal and kill and destroy.’”

In his letter to American elites, Yu Maochun, drawing on the CCP’s repeated breaches of trust in international relations, offered a more comprehensive exposure of the CCP’s long-standing gangster habits:

When the CCP applied for China’s accession to the World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2001, it made a long list of solemn promises: market opening, information transparency, non-discrimination, limits on government intervention, and so on. But twenty years later, the CCP uses state subsidies to distort industries, inserts Party branches into enterprises, forces technology transfers through coercion, and continues black-box management and highly politicized rule.

“For China (the CCP), WTO rules were never meant to restrain the Communist Party’s interference in the free-trade market economy; they were meant to fatten the Communist Party and strengthen it,” the article states.

On the Hong Kong issue, the CCP followed exactly the same playbook.

The 1984 Sino–British Joint Declaration is a formal, legally binding international treaty registered with the United Nations, clearly guaranteeing Hong Kong a high degree of autonomy and civil liberties until 2047.

But once the CCP obtained sovereignty over Hong Kong, it began to claim that the agreement was “outdated,” and then dismantled Hong Kong’s autonomy system piece by piece. This was not an “accidental breach of contract” by the CCP, but a precisely calculated strategic deception.

As for human rights, the CCP continues to commit crimes against humanity and acts of genocide in regions such as Xinjiang and Tibet.

Yu Maochun said: “These are not isolated incidents, but a consistent operational pattern: sign first, take first, selectively comply, and evade responsibility indefinitely.”

“This is not a cultural difference, nor a diplomatic misunderstanding, but the nature of communism,” Yu Maochun said. “Put (Communist) China into any major field—trade, security, human rights, regional diplomacy—and you will see the same fixed pattern: sign agreements to get benefits; once the benefits are in hand, reinterpret the obligations of compliance, dilute them step by step, and finally discard them outright.”

The CCP does not occasionally cross the line; it systematically violates international agreements. The article notes that the international order rests on one most basic premise: that law can constrain power. All countries recognize rules and act accordingly. But the CCP fundamentally denies this premise. And it does not occasionally cross the line; it persistently, deliberately, systematically, and institutionally violates international agreements.

3. On U.S.–China trade

On October 27, 1960 (the 45th year of the Republic of China), Chiang Kai-shek gave an interview to the American writer Judd Way, during which he discussed U.S.–China trade.

Reporter: At present, there are quite a few voices within the United States advocating for easing trade restrictions with the Communist bandits. Would Your Excellency care to offer some views on this?

Answer: If the United States were to relax its current trade restrictions on the bandits, it would be tantamount to handing a sharp blade to the enemy. Even if the relaxed trade were limited to non-strategic materials, supplying the Communist bandits’ economic needs would thereby assist them in expanding their war-making capacity, which would be unwise. Moreover, the distinction between strategic and non-strategic materials is not permanently fixed; a non-strategic item can easily acquire strategic value. When Japanese militarists launched a surprise attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, the fuel used by their aircraft was American gasoline, and the bombs they dropped were made from American scrap iron. This historical fact should not be lightly forgotten.

In his letter to American elites, Yu Maochun said, “For China (the CCP), WTO rules were never meant to restrain the Communist Party’s interference in the free-trade market economy; they were meant to fatten the Communist Party and strengthen it.”

“China’s (Communist China’s) role within international institutions—allowing China to join the World Trade Organization (WTO) back then—was based on the CCP’s own promises and on fantasies about ‘what it might become,’ not on the reality of the CCP’s political and economic system at the time. The result was that the entire system of international free trade was corrupted by the CCP.”

“This mistake must not be repeated,” he said. “Where compliance cannot be enforced, entry should not be allowed; where obligations are ignored, privileges must be withdrawn. This is not hostility, but basic risk management.”

4. Completely abandon illusions about the CCP

Reporter: It is said that the Communist bandits are making large-scale efforts in Southeast Asia to win support and are launching a massive smile-offensive. Has there been a significant change in their strategy compared with before? Are the Communist bandits following the so-called softening line of the Russian empire?

Answer: The Communist bandits have indeed recently put on smiling masks. This merely indicates that they believe that, under current conditions, adopting a smile-offensive will yield greater results than military aggression. In fact, their smile-offensive and their use of force are both forms of aggression.

The Communist bandits will continue to use sweet words to lull the world into a false sense of security, and then, with their final blow, achieve their goal of conquering the world. Even judging only from the present, it is difficult to say that the Communist bandits have completely abandoned the use of force. Their recent dispatch of troops to invade border areas of Burma demonstrates that whenever they anticipate no strong resistance, they can launch armed aggression at any time.

In his letter to American elites, Yu Maochun said that even today, in Washington, Brussels, and several European capitals, there are still people—though fewer in number—who stubbornly believe that the Chinese Communist Party can still be “persuaded” into making a big deal; that as long as talks last long enough and the posture is gentle enough, Beijing might be convinced to “help” end the wars in Ukraine or the Middle East, stabilize global markets, and even correct the trade imbalances and intellectual property theft that the CCP has spent decades deliberately creating.

Yu Maochun pointed out that in this line of thinking, China under CCP rule is not the main driver of global turmoil, but rather an indispensable partner that will repay patience and cultivation if only it is given time.

Yu Maochun said: “For decades, Western China policy has relied on wishful thinking—believing that engagement and participation would make the CCP more moderate, believing that CCP promises represented sincerity, and believing that tomorrow’s (Communist) China would fulfill today’s promises.”

“The problem is that this belief still exists not because there is solid evidence to support it, but because admitting it was wrong is emotionally painful. It would amount to admitting that the core post–Cold War Western assumption—that ‘engagement would bring change’—collapsed long ago. To put it more bluntly, you thought you were inviting it into the ‘house,’ but instead you invited the wolf into the living room.”

Conclusion

Sixty-five years ago, Chiang Kai-shek issued a warning to the United States in his “sermon”:

“In the grand plan by which the communists seek to conquer the world, they regard the United States as their principal enemy, and they are determined to belittle it, slander it, and destroy it. Unless the American people clearly recognize this urgent danger and take the necessary measures to fight or contain it, not only their free way of life, but also Christianity, which occupies a most important place in the lives of their entire nation, will together be enslaved and buried.”

Regrettably, even today, Western society’s general understanding of the nature of the CCP, and its recognition of the CCP as a mortal enemy and public enemy of both the United States and humanity, have not reached the depth and level attained by Chiang Kai-shek.

The two men, in issuing warnings to the United States, in fact acted as America’s “whistleblowers.” And the purpose of this article is to fuse the whistles that span sixty-five years of time and space into a three-dimensional symphony, to transmit it to the ears of American elites, so that in their life-and-death confrontation with the CCP, they may gain a little more clarity of mind.
△