US Ruling Elite frustrated over China’s resilience! Why China just don’t die? A lot of garbled words to say that they still want regime/systems change in China destroying China? 美國統治菁英對中國的韌性感到沮喪！ 為什麼中國不滅亡？ 一大堆亂碼說他們還想中國政權更迭, 摧毀中國.

https://archive.md/d69Mf#selection-3471.0-3483.178

In introducing his 2022 National Security Strategy, U.S. President Joe Biden promised to “win the competition for the 21st century.” But what winning means remains unclear. Indeed, senior officials within the Biden administration reject the notion that the United States should aim for a specific end state—which usually describes a situation following the completion of an objective—when it comes to China. Instead, Campbell and Sullivan have advocated that the United States “seek to achieve not a definitive end state akin to the Cold War’s ultimate conclusion but a steady state of clear-eyed coexistence on terms favorable to U.S. interests and values.” They reject end states in favor of “accepting competition as a condition to be managed rather than a problem to be solved.”
…
So neither collapse nor condominium [co-existence, power-sharing] appears to be a practical end state around which to build consensus. They have something else in common: neither seems possible under Xi. Another concerted American attempt at engagement appears unlikely to shift Xi’s worldview, including his assessment that “Western countries led by the United States have implemented all-around containment, encirclement, and suppression of China.” Even if American leaders could change Xi’s views of the bilateral relationship, there is no political appetite on either side of the aisle in Washington to test this proposition. U.S. officials from both parties appear to concur with Orville Schell, who has argued that it was “Xi’s aggressiveness that put a stake through the heart of ‘engagement’ as a viable U.S. or Western policy.”

It is ironic that American strategists have spent much of the last few years playing the “Kennan sweepstakes” by trying to develop a phrase akin to containment that might guide American strategy. A better strategy is simply to adopt Kennan’s own phased approach: patience and firmness today while awaiting the mellowing or breakup of the CCP tomorrow. This is no panacea. It will have critics in Washington, Beijing, and beyond. But combining these two concepts is not as radical as it might seem.

Indeed, Zoellick ended his responsible stakeholder speech by insisting, “We can cooperate with the emerging China of today, even as we work for the democratic China of tomorrow.”