Editor's note: Tom Fowdy is a UK-based political analyst. The article reflects the author's views, and not necessarily those of CGTN.

In an exclusive interview for BuzzFeed News on October 19, the CEO of Apple, Tim Cook, has explicitly denied that his company was a victim to allegations of “Chinese spying” through tiny microchips planted into imported hardware.

The company is not the first to deny it either. The allegation, reported in a story by Bloomberg several weeks ago, alleged that numerous leading tech firms had been infiltrated by such technology.

Now, Cook has requested that Bloomberg retract the allegations and stated there is no evidence to support it. But there are wider political forces at play. The release of the story was not a coincidence.

Rather, it has served to vindicate a growing anti-China and Cold War-centric narrative spun by the presidential administration, the break having occurred on the same week as an aggressive speech by Mike Pence which deliberately sought to inflame tensions with Beijing.

Nevertheless, Bloomberg cites “US officials” as sources for the story. This is part of the problem. Many members of the public fail to realize how the US government actively utilizes deception, often through intelligence “leaks” to core media outlets, as an active part of legitimating its foreign policy agenda.

The assumption is that only non-democracies do so, allowing stories in this mold to become all the more convincing.

The greatest success of Western countries has been convincing their populations that propaganda is something that only “other” countries do, such as given enemies or authoritarian regimes.

Liberal western political thought is so convinced of its own self-supremacy and enlightenment that it contains a fundamental ontological flaw, that in their ideology lies the “universal truth” which they have a political and cultural monopoly over.

This form of thinking assumes that in foreign policy, nobody on their side using it can possibly be lying, or have bad intentions. Similarly, it advocates the mindset that those who do not share this value system, or have another point of view, must always be lying or morally evil.

This creates a highly polarized and imbalanced view of the world. The West has “the truth,” the non-West does not. This coincides with the belief that the West similarly has a “moral mission” to deliver this "truth," thus again it cannot be sincere.

Whereas on the other hand, any view advocated that disagrees with the Western narrative or worldview is simply “propaganda” -- they can never, ever mean well. In summary, when a Western government says a non-democracy has done something bad, it is always true. If the non-democracy denies it, it is always a lie.

However, this idealistic and simplistic thinking is not how politics works.

People use moral sentiments as a justification to disguise other agendas, few are sincere. This is especially so with the West and foreign policy, where for centuries, politicians have utilized the rhetoric of “truth” and “self-righteousness” against “threats,” to deceive their populations in support of shady agendas, rarely questioned by the mainstream or ordinary people.

“Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq” stands as the most notorious example of such in modern history. In the United States, this style of politics is commonly conducted through “intelligence leaks” to core media outlets, which are always carefully timed. They do this to ensure that their narrative is maintained in these publications.

For example, a year ago when tensions between the two countries were high, given CIA “leaks” to the New York Times grossly exaggerated the DPRK's missile capabilities to hype up the narrative of a “threat” by Pyongyang. It was used to justify the rhetoric of a potential war.

The Bloomberg story is a noteworthy example of this kind of activity. Citing unspecified “US officials,” it is inherently political and almost McCarthyist in nature. The agenda is to damage enthusiasm for economic relations with China, legitimate the trade war and attempt to scare US companies from investing in supply chains in the country.

Whilst Bloomberg seems quite adamant about it, if the evidence was that strong, then would a number of CEOs risk their national credibility to deny it so firmly? Especially when they claim they have done thorough investigations. Are we really to assume they are all wrong?

When it comes to foreign policy deception by American leaders via the medium of the press, we should recite to ourselves the lyrics of a popular Green Day song “Don't want to be an American idiot, one nation controlled by the media, can you hear the sound of hysteria? It's going out to idiot America!”

(If you want to contribute and have specific expertise, please contact us at opinions@cgtn.com.)