Why would the us provoke China —as it is doing with Pelosi’s announced visit?
An interview on Sputnik News with retired US Air Force Lt.Col. Karen Kwiatkowski suggested two potential reasons *.
According to Col. Kwaitkowski:
“99% of all generals and admirals are completely political, as militaries generally are during long periods of peace. The 70 years of interference and military ops around the world since WWII have in fact qualified as the work of a highly politicized peacetime military, rather than a nation at constant war.
That's the background. From a military perspective, some risk is acceptable if it leads to a better understanding of the enemy and its capability. [The] US defense industry is among the biggest and most influential economic sectors in the US. China is the primary US economic military competitor (both in sales and direct military strength).* US politicians understand to fuel patriotism and support, nothing works better than an attack on a US target by a major enemy. (My emphasis) Risking the life of an unpopular 82-year-old speaker of the House in her last several months of service to accomplish these aims makes sense in some ways. *Further, initiation of conflict, even low level ones, often means debts are either ignored or repudiated (US owed China $1.1 trillion in 2021) or paid in kind through military support (the US owes Japan $1.2 trillion and Taiwan $235 billion). A small war in the East or even elevated tensions could serve as a financial reset -- allowing new US money creation and uninhibited borrowing by the US government.” —US Air Force Lt. Col. (ret.) Karen Kwiatkowski, former analyst for the US Department of Defense.