President Chen Shui-bian (
I would like to suggest that Chen go one step further. He could ask the Chinese people to sponsor the following opinion polls:
First, should Beijing allow referendums in China? China claims that it is against only Chen's referendum. But does China support the democratic procedure of referendums? Premier Hu Jintao (
Second, do the Chinese people want to kill their son or daughter in an attack on Taiwan? The "one child" policy has limited the ability of Chinese families to expand. Do they really want to take the risk of losing their precious offspring in an attack on Taiwan? Let's have a referendum on whether the Chinese people want to die to retake Taiwan.
Third, how about a poll on reunification? There was a report that students at Beijing University wanted to ask their fellow Chinese whether or not they wanted to reunite with Taiwan. This proposal was quickly squashed. But why? Do the Chinese really want to absorb Taiwan into their new empire? How many really care about Taiwan? Let's ask some Tibetans, some Uighurs, some Hmong, some very rich people in Shanghai and Tientsin.
Four, what is the Chinese perception of the value for Taiwan to be united with China? We could ask several questions. Would the quality of life in Taiwan improve if it was part of China? (By the way, we would need to educate the Chinese about the meaning of the term "quality of life.") Would the income of the Taiwanese be improved? Would the Taiwanese have more freedom of speech, voting, religious expression? If nationalism is the only reason to reunify, what would the Chinese be willing to sacrifice for nationalism? Their environment? Their health? Their lives in a war with Taiwan? Last year I traveled on a moped in the hills around Hsinchu. As I puttered through little villages and ate at small restaurants, I tried to visualize how annexation by China would benefit these people's lives. I could think of nothing. Would either the Chinese in China or the Taiwanese really want to create another level of bureaucracy -- ie, Beijing -- to negotiate their happiness, welfare, economic activities, travel, religious rites and legal system? What type of person in Beijing would want to be posted in Taiwan to oversee the lives, livelihoods and living conditions of the Taiwanese?
Five, do people in Fujian want missiles aimed at Taiwan on their shore? Is the entire policy of uniting Taiwan with China nothing more than a prop for the military? Let's take this mobilization of wealth, people, militaristic policies, international threats away from the military. Who would benefit? The possibility of democracy? The daily lives of the Chinese people?
Six, what province would want to have the military building missiles on the their territory? Tibet? Xinjiang? What cities would want such missiles? Shanghai? Nanjing?
It is time, in the words of Mao Zedong (毛澤東), to have the Chinese people stand up. They should be given the opportunity to voice their concerns about China's aggressive and wasteful foreign policy toward Taiwan. They need to be educated about the consequences. They need to be asked their opinion. To use a variation on an old Chinese idiom: A long journey [to enlightenment] begins with a single thought.
Richard C. Kagan is professor of history at Hamline University.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS