Framing Resistance as Crime: China, Ukraine, Ansarallah, and the Narrative War of Empire

By Price Kapone | Weaponized Information

The U.S. media machine is foaming at the mouth again. This time, it’s pointing fingers at China—accusing it of providing satellite intelligence to Ansarallah (the Houthis) in Yemen and of supplying artillery to Russia. Two reports from the South China Morning Post, citing U.S. and Ukrainian officials, claim these actions “violate international norms” and pose a threat to “global stability.”

But let’s be clear: these are not “reports.” They are weapons of ideological warfare—crafted not to inform but to criminalize resistance, delegitimize multipolarity, and reproduce the moral authority of an empire in crisis.

The Narrative Machine: Manufacturing a Chinese Menace

The Western narrative is predictable: China is always the “malign actor,” the shadowy manipulator behind every crack in imperial control. Whether it’s in the Red Sea or Donbas, the message is the same—China is destabilizing the world. The irony? It’s the United States occupying the Red Sea, bombing Yemen, and pouring billions of dollars into Ukraine to prolong a war it helped provoke.

This isn’t journalism. It’s technofascist projection: a crisis-ridden empire exporting its own violence onto others to preserve legitimacy. What’s framed as “Chinese aggression” is, in truth, the erosion of U.S. hegemony.

Imperial Hypocrisy and the Logic of Western Violence

Let’s run the numbers. The U.S. has sent over $100 billion in weapons, surveillance tech, and logistical support to Ukraine. It shares real-time satellite intel with Israel as it commits genocide in Gaza. It armed and funded the Saudi-led slaughter in Yemen that killed hundreds of thousands. None of this violates “international law,” apparently.

But when China allegedly helps Russia or Ansarallah—the victims and resistors of U.S.-led aggression—it becomes a problem. Why? Because the real crime in the eyes of the empire is not war—it’s disobedience.

Our Framework: Hyper-Imperialism vs. Sovereignty and Multipolar Solidarity

What we are witnessing is not simply a dispute between rival powers. It is the crisis of hyper-imperialism: a phase of global capitalism marked by monopoly finance capital, tech-military integration, and permanent warfare. The U.S. and its allies can no longer dominate the world through consent—so they rule by coercion, including the weaponization of information.

And what of China? Let us be precise: China is not an imperialist state. According to the scientific criteria of imperialism—capital export, control of finance, colonial domination, and military enforcement—China does not qualify. It is a developing socialist-oriented nation, shaped by its anti-colonial revolution and its ongoing struggle for sovereignty in a hostile global system.

Its alleged support for Russia, for Iran, for the Houthis—whether confirmed or not—is not a scandal. It is a blow, however modest, to Western supremacy. Ansarallah, for their part, are not terrorists. They are a national liberation force fighting the combined weight of U.S., Saudi, Emirati, and Zionist domination. If China shares intelligence with them, that’s not “illegal.” That’s internationalist solidarity.

Narrative as Counterinsurgency: The Battle Over Meaning

The battlefield here is not just in the deserts of Yemen or the trenches of Donetsk. It’s in the headlines, the editorials, the hashtags. The empire doesn’t just drop bombs—it drops words: “terrorist,” “unprovoked,” “malign actor,” “illegitimate.” These are not descriptors—they are weapons of war, deployed to shape global consciousness and preserve the myth of Western moral supremacy.

As the Tricontinental Institute has shown, the U.S. war machine is as much about ideological warfare as it is about kinetic operations. Social media, press briefings, and NGO reports serve as digital airstrikes against multipolarity. Weaponized Information exists to intercept those missiles.

Conclusion: Repudiate the Frame, Not Just the Facts

Let’s be blunt. We don’t just challenge the facts in these reports—we repudiate the entire frame. We reject the colonial logic that says only Western-aligned states can exercise sovereignty, only Western wars are legitimate, and only Western violence is civilized.

If China is guilty of anything, it’s of helping to <strongerode the illusion of unipolarity. And if the Houthis are guilty of anything, it’s of refusing to die quietly beneath American drones and Saudi bombs.

When the empire cries “crime,” we don’t just ask for evidence—we ask, what system is being threatened by this act of defiance?

Because when the empire calls it ‘crime,’ we call it a crack in the system.