Illustration: Chen Xia/GT

The Global Times on Sunday published an opinion piece that argues describing China's cooperation with Italy under the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) as a Trojan horse for "China's entry into the West" pushes the West off the course of globalization. Currently, the paranoia of the US and the West about the BRI is indeed very absurd. Their fear of this initiative has reached a level of dementia and logical confusion that is truly astonishing. This makes us wonder: Why do they think we need to resort to such shoddy methods as placing a "Trojan horse" in our cooperation with Europe or other countries?  

The US has been using the "China threat" theory to scare its European allies in order to keep Europe firmly tied to its chariot. Unfortunately, on a continent as vast as Europe, it is difficult to find a single entity that can stand tall instead of being a "puppet" under the protection of the US. Europe constantly calls for "strategic autonomy," but why does it lack any strategic confidence?

The US and the West accusing the BRI of being a "Trojan horse" is not just an "imaginative" idea, but a true confession of their real strategy. If you want to know what the US and the West have done in the past, just look at how they are now accusing China. If you want to know what the US and the West want to do in the future, just look at how they are smearing China's development blueprint. 

When the US and the West accuse China of "conducting cyberattacks and surveillance," we know where their expertise lies. When they criticize China for "trampling on human rights," we hear guns on American streets. When they say China doesn't follow the "rules," we find that the US and the West are the ones acting arrogantly according to their own set of rules in the world. Currently, the US and the West are implementing the principle of "opposing anything China supports and supporting anything China opposes." This is how the US and the West have turned themselves into such bizarre entities that are neither fish nor fowl. 

Rather than the BRI, the US' Marshall Plan provided to Europe after the end of World War II was the true "Trojan horse." 

Since the US infiltrated Europe with the Marshall Plan, it provided Europe with a lifeline and an opportunity for post-war reconstruction and revival. The Marshall Plan easily captured the hearts of Europeans and successfully penetrated the political hubs and power centers of Europe. As a result, Europe's "strategic autonomy" has since disappeared; the motto that "Europe is the Europe of Europeans" has become history; "Let Europeans handle European affairs" is now a wonderful wish.

The US used the Marshall Plan to make Europe an economic vassal of the US and "NATO" to make Europe a military "proxy" for US strategy. Thus, Europe has become the "base" to implement the US global hegemony. With the Marshall Plan (and a batch of other aid programs) and NATO, the US successfully separated the "head" and "body" of Europe: Europe's "body" remains on the continent, while its "head" has already been transplanted to the American continent.

Unfortunately, Europe has not yet come to its senses. The US "Trojan horse" program in Europe is a "US patent" that can't be duplicated. 

The US has not stopped the implementation of the "Trojan horse" program around the world, such as the US-Japan-South Korea cooperation, the AUKUS and the "Indo-Pacific Strategy." In particular, the US military assistance for the island of Taiwan is obviously a more arrogant and blatant "Trojan horse" program. In a word, when the US claims that the China-proposed BRI is a "Trojan horse," the US has already deployed its own Trojan horse plans worldwide, and the false accusations against China are just Washington's usual "camouflage."

The US framing of BRI as a "Trojan horse" may offer a new chance for the world to analyze, study, compare and judge: between BRI and those delicately packaged US cooperation initiatives, which one is the real "Trojan horse" and which is the "Noah's Ark" that saves people from danger? The answer is evident. 

The author is a senior fellow from the Chongyang Institute for Financial Studies at the Renmin University of China (RDCY). opinion@globaltimes.com.cn