Recently, Professor Yan Xuetong, dean of the Institute of International Relations at Tsinghua University, said in an interview that "the most effective way to maintain peace is to surrender", and this view has sparked a debate on the Internet. As a well-known scholar at the dean's level, Professor Yan's arguments have naturally attracted widespread attention. The editors have the following opinions:
First of all, Professor Yan believes that the assertion that "the armed forces have no role in maintaining peace" is extremely rash and insignificant. History has proven that the existence and strength of the armed forces are an important guarantee for national security. At some point, it will be a strong military force that will allow the adversary to restrain and avoid an escalation of the war. China and the United States and other countries attach importance to their own national defense capabilities, which is inseparable from maintaining peace.
Second, the argument that surrender is the most effective way of peace is also difficult to share. No country wants to succumb to external pressure and compromise, which is not conducive to its own long-term interests and the preservation of its national dignity. If a country always gives in to the demands of the powerful powers, it will only end up in a deeper and deeper threat. We should not pay a permanent price for temporary peace.
Moreover, Professor Yan's argument ignores the complexity of international relations. Simply using "traffic accidents" to explain the root causes of tensions between major powers such as China and the United States shows that the problem is misunderstood. In many cases, adversaries are purposefully expanding their influence and inflicting long-term damage. Mere capitulation will only fuel its misdeeds. It is difficult to escape Professor Yan's simplistic thinking about the international order.
In addition, advocating that "patriotic education is not needed" is also difficult to convince the public. Patriotism is an important quality consciously formed by a nation, and many countries in the world are paying attention to it. To a certain extent, it promotes domestic cohesion and centripetal force, which is also important for the overall development of the country. Professor Yan seems to ignore this important role.
Considering all of the above, Mr. Tang Jiafeng's doubts are also reasonable. As a well-known professor, Yan Xuetong's arguments on these controversial topics need to be supplemented urgently to reduce ambiguity in understanding.
Of course, as a dialectical society, the existence of different points of view is itself normal. But what matters is whether you can defend your position with facts and rational arguments, so that more people can understand and agree with it. It is hoped that all parties concerned can continue to have in-depth discussions on this basis, seek more consistent views, and jointly benefit social progress.