Is "regime change" unacceptable terminology? It "has been demonized in popular discourse, slandered as reckless adventurism or imperialist hubris," wrote Miles Yu, director of the China Center at the Hudson Institute.
However, "when America confronts autocratic regimes that threaten the very fabric of its national existence, regime change is a strategic choice, a moral obligation and a means of self-preservation, Yu wrote in a June 23 analysis for The Washington Times.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) "has infiltrated American political, corporate, academic and media institutions. It has coerced or co-opted our elite decision-makers, diluted our public discourse with weaponized narratives and systematically undermined American sovereignty," noted Yu who is former Geostrategy-Direct.com contributing editor.
The CCP "is reshaping our consumer habits to favor its dominance, hollowing out our industrial core, stealing our intellectual property and flooding our communities with fentanyl via drug cartel proxies. Through subtle but comprehensive penetration, Beijing seeks not merely to compete with America but also to replace its values, its systems and, ultimately, its identity," Yu wrote.
For those reasons, CCP "regime change" is a "necessity," Yu contended.
"It is no coincidence that the greatest autocrats of our time react most hysterically to even the suggestion of regime instability," Yu continued.
Communist Party leader Xi Jinping's security law essentially killed the last vestiges of freedom in Hong Kong. His ultimate paranoia is a U.S.-inspired “color revolution” or a “peaceful evolution” demanding freedom, human rights and democracy.
"A robust U.S. posture that makes regime change a possibility rather than a taboo would serve as a powerful deterrent. When adversaries know that existential retaliation awaits them for existential aggression, the rules of engagement are fundamentally recalibrated in favor of the free world," Yu wrote.
"To support regime change is not to impose values. It is to affirm the values that already reside in the hearts of those yearning to be free. The United States is merely the amplifier and supporter of their aspirations. When regime change comes to China, as it must, it will not be a foreign dictate. It will be a native demand for justice. We either stand with the oppressed or we empower their oppressors."
Yu concluded:
Regime change is not a relic of Cold War dogma. It is a necessity in the face of 21st-century threats. It is a tool of deterrence, a strategy of liberation and a declaration that freedom will not be extinguished by fear or fatigue.
If we do not endeavor to change the regimes that seek to destroy us, then we will be changed silently, slowly and irreversibly. The time for hesitation is over. The time for strategic courage has arrived.
