On 24 November 2025, the Eurasia Center in Budapest hosted a symposium to celebrate the 50th anniversary of China–EU diplomatic relations. Among the speakers was Ambassador of the People’s Republic of China to Hungary Gong Tao.

In his opening remarks, Ambassador Tao highlighted that, amidst the resurgence of hegemonism, unilateralism, and protectionism, President Xi Jinping ‘remain[s] committed to the path of peaceful development, firmly safeguard world peace and tranquility, and work together to build a community with a shared future for mankind.’ He argued that ‘transcending differences in social systems and ideologies, and rising above distinctions in history, culture, and stages of development, [China] resonates with the cosmopolitan ideas in European philosophy, which advocate going beyond national and ethnic boundaries.’^[i]

The PRC’s peaceful rise and commitment to economic partnership and global security is a theme it has projected since its inception in 1949. There are, in fact, renowned scholars who affirm this as a reality, such as the economist Professor Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University. He has been adamant that not only can there be peaceful co-existence with Communist China, but that it can contribute to global harmony because of its professed ‘Five Principles’: mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, mutual non-aggression, non-interference in each other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit, and peaceful coexistence—principles that mirror the core values of Confucianism.

History, however, portrays a different picture. Under the rule of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), the PRC has been an antithesis to social harmony. Indeed, its so-called ‘peaceful rise’ as a global power has been marked by mostly failed military aggression and abetting draconian regimes, like

• its secret crossing of the Yalu River to support the North Koreans invade the Korean peninsula in 1950;
• the bombing of Taiwan’s offshore islands of Quemoy and Matsu in 1954 and once more in 1958;
• its 1962 invasion of India, which sparked the one month Sino–Indian War, as its forces entered the Ladakh border across the McMahon Line in the northeastern frontier under the false banner of ‘self-defense’—they pulled back when the U.S. sent an aircraft carrier to help India;
• its invasion of Vietnam in 1979 in support of the rule of the genocidal Khmer Rouge after the Vietnamese entered and occupied Cambodia in 1978;
• its brutal military suppression of democracy advocates in Tiananmen Square in 1989;
• its 2021 Comprehensive Strategic Partnership with Iran, which gave a $400 billion lifeline to Tehran, which helped bankroll Hamas, Hezbollah, and other terrorist proxies; and
• its continuing antagonistic approach to Taiwan, to just name a few.

There are also the CCP’s human rights violations, which under General Secretary Xi Jinping’s regime have led to heightened repression throughout the country, restricting freedom of expression, association, assembly, and religion. Human rights defenders and other perceived critics of the government are persecuted. The government considers the culturally and ethnically distinct Tibetans and Uyghurs as threats and subjects them to particularly harsh repression. Hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs remain imprisoned as part of the government’s crimes against humanity in the region. In addition, the CCP continues its relentless persecution of the underground Catholic Church, which resists Beijing’s control over religious matters, as well as other ‘unregistered’ church leaders, such as Pastor Ezra Jin of the Zion Church.

‘Hundreds of thousands of Uyghurs remain imprisoned as part of the government’s crimes against humanity in the region’

The American President’s constant praise of Xi and emphasis on personal diplomacy suggest that he believes China’s leader merely wants to strike a joint trade agreement that would benefit both countries and stabilize ties. China, however, seeks to surpass and replace America as the world’s most powerful and influential country, becoming a regional hegemon in the process. It aims to advance itself at the expense of Washington’s open economic model and its vision for the world.

When both leaders met during the APEC summit in South Korean this past October, Trump said it was a ‘great success’, a ‘12’ out of ten. The truth is that, notwithstanding the PRC making some commitments to the U.S., including a promise to help stem the flow of fentanyl from its mainland, these gains were achieved at the cost of significant concessions on export controls, trade, and shipbuilding.

China agreed to resume purchasing U.S. soybeans—12 million metric tons in total last year—which is less than half of what it bought in 2024. In return for these small giveaways, Xi sealed two sizeable victories: a suspension of U.S. port fees for Chinese ships and fewer export controls on American technology. To put it simply, the Chinese autocrat got his American counterpart to temporary halt efforts to reinvigorate U.S. shipbuilding and ensured that the subsidiaries of blacklisted Chinese firms can continue importing sophisticated technology. These concessions also come on top of the Trump administration’s decision in July to allow sales of various high-performance U.S. chips to China in exchange for a cut of the profits, which will enhance the PRC’s AI capabilities and bolster its military and technological advances.

The president did secure an $11.1 billion military package for Taiwan, approved by Congress toward the end of 2025, sending the CCP a clear message that it cannot simply walk onto the island and do as it wishes.

Libertarians, among others, who argue that China should not be contained but engaged—especially in the economic and trade sectors—fail to acknowledge that communism is communism, which is by its very nature a militant ideology. Like the Soviet Union before it, the PRC’s aggression is not an aberration but an existential requirement for achieving global dominance. This is the reality that must be addressed.

The views expressed by our guest authors are theirs and do not necessarily represent the views of Hungarian Conservative.

^[i] While the ambassador spoke in his native Chinese, his speech was translated into English on a monitor during the symposium, which I personally attended.

Related articles: