Reading Esper's remark, one can only marvel at his hypocrisy

US Secretary of Defense Mark Esper published a column in The Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, saying that since the People's Liberation Army is a loyal tool of the Communist Party of China, the United States and its allies should be ready to defend themselves. In particular, he urged that nations "valuing freedom, human rights and the rule of law must stand together to counter the coercive role of the PLA in the Chinese Communist Party's aggressive attempt to undermine the sovereignty of nations".

Which brings us to the question: Is the US, as a country, "valuing freedom and human rights", and defending sovereignty and rule of law? Looking at the US' internal and external actions, one can safely reply in the negative.

Domestically, the US faces a round of human rights protests. From May to August, massive anti-racism protests across the US have shattered the myth of a democratic American society, narrowing the chances of the US president's re-election in November.

The Black Lives Matter protests started in May with the death of an African American, George Floyd, who died when a police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota, dug his knee into his neck while he was lying on a street with his hands behind his back. The latest victim of police brutality is another African American, Jacob Blake, who was shot multiple times in the back during an arrest by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin, on Aug 23.

Can Esper explain how a country "valuing freedom and human rights" consistently violates racial equality laws?

Externally, the US-led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, both sovereign countries, on the pretext of rooting out terrorism globally, have left hundreds of thousands of people dead and even more wounded, apart from causing humanitarian crises in the two countries.

Shouldn't Esper reflect on how the US caused such humanitarian disasters and violated international laws? Is his Republican Party and the US military to blame for that, or should the CPC and PLA take the blame?

The US police may have defended freedom and human rights, and the US military may have protected some sovereign governments. But does that give the US police the right to randomly kill and incarcerate black and colored people in the country, and the US politicians and military to indiscriminately kill and maim people and violate human rights across the world?

Preaching is easier than practicing, Secretary Esper!

More important, Esper should exercise caution while talking about Beijing (especially the Taiwan question), because the US, when establishing diplomatic relations with the People's Republic, agreed to abide by the one-China policy that there is only one China and Taiwan is an integral part of China. The US has violated the Three Joint Communiqués by using its domestic law to override its international legal commitments to China.

And contrary to what Esper implied in the WSJ column, the PLA has not fought a war in the past more than 40 years. Esper should also know that despite being under the leadership of the CPC, the PLA has multiple missions to execute, including defending China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. Since China is a vast country, it often experiences natural disasters, and the country's leadership often calls the PLA to carry out relief and rescue operations in areas hit by earthquakes, storms or floods. Besides, the PLA has been taking more active part in UN peacekeeping operations and regional maritime cooperation.

China has used diplomacy to settle border disputes with its neighbors. With this approach, it has successfully demarcated its land borders with the Democratic People's Republic of Korea, Pakistan, Russia, Myanmar and Vietnam, agreed with Japan and Vietnam to shelve differences in their maritime disputes, as well as "disengage along the Line of Actual Control" with India.

Esper is right to say the PLA accepts the Party's leadership, but he fails, rather doesn't want, to see that its role is to defend the nation and safeguard the Chinese people. And in contrast to the US, China largely uses dialogue and cooperation, not its military muscles, to resolve its differences with other countries.

The author is professor at and former executive dean of the Institute of International Studies, Fudan University. The views don't necessarily represent those of China Daily.