Why is Taiwan's relationship with China so intractable an issue? Why, when they share common economic interests -- 1 million Taiwanese live in China, working in some 50,000 firms in which Taiwanese have invested over US$400 billion -- does China aim 500 short-range missiles at Taiwan?
The run-up to the presidential election tomorrow is one current source of tension. President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has initiated a referendum process that might someday be used to ask Taiwanese if they want to formalize today's de facto independence. This infuriates China.
ILLUSTRATION: MOUNTAIN PEOPLE
After all, as Mao Zedong (
China's new leadership often evinces a new judiciousness and moderation in its diplomacy. But Luo Yuan (羅援), a senior colonel at the Chinese Academy of Military Sciences, recently declared that if Taiwan's leaders "refuse to come to their senses and continue to use referendums as an excuse to seek independence, they will push [their] compatriots into the abyss of war."
In an age when national self-determination is a hallowed principle, how is it possible that Taiwan -- which has been part of China during only four of the last eleven decades, and has never been under the control of the PRC -- is shun-ned by every nation when it deigns to wonder aloud why it should not be allowed to go its own way?
The reasons have deep historical roots. When Mao and the Chinese Communists came to power in 1949, they promised "reunification of the Motherland," which included bringing Xinjiang (the Muslim desert regions of the West), Tibet, Mongolia, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan back under central government control. It became a matter of national pride for a country that had been guafen (
reunification as a "sacred" duty.
As Tibet, Hong Kong, and Macau returned "to the embrace
of the Motherland," Mao's commitment seemed close to realization. The fact that only Taiwan stands in the way makes unification all the more non-negotiable.
But, there is another dynamic at work. Over the last two decades, almost every other plank of the Communist Party's platform -- world-wide people's war, proletarian struggle leading to a classless utopia, a triumph over global capitalism, etc. -- has been abandoned. This leaves unification as the last tie to Mao's revolution and justification for one-party rule. China's leadership plays up this "revolutionary" commitment, for it helps generate nationalist sentiment, one of the few things -- besides strong economic performance -- that legitimizes the Communist monopoly on power.
China's leaders ought to reflect on the fact that their country is no longer the "sick man of Asia." It is increasingly powerful, globally proactive and economically robust. So it is a timely moment to reappraise its position and to begin acting from strength, not weakness. In short, it is time for China's leaders to change the chemistry of their long feud with Taiwan.
After all, China and Taiwan have struggled politically even as their economies become increasingly unified. In due course, they may well be able to become more unified on the political front -- if they do not push their disagreements too aggressively. For economic convergence, if allowed to ripen, could set Taiwan and the PRC on an evolutionary course toward common sovereignty.
How can such a scenario be realized? China must declare, loudly and clearly, that greater democracy, not mutant Leninism, is its ultimate political goal, and that as this evolutionary process takes place and the political climate becomes more congenial, they look forward to discussing how to better weave a political, as well as an economic, fabric with Taiwan. Such a declaration alone would give Taiwanese the ability to imagine that they may one day find it in their interest to be part of China.
For its part, Taiwan needs to calm down. Its leaders must understand that, even though "independence" may sometimes seem like a logical scenario, Taiwan is a small, vulnerable island, and China an emerging superpower. Even though Taiwan may have a "right" to independence, its leaders need to remind their people that provocative actions will gain them little.
In 1973, as Sino-US relations were thawing, Mao admitted to Henry Kissinger that, though he did not believe reunification would come peacefully, "We can do without Taiwan for the time being, and let it come after 100 years ... Why is there a need to be in such great haste?"
Mao's advice is not bad. China must take to heart its newfound dynamism and strength, and write a new scenario for its relations with Taiwan that emphasizes persuasion instead of missiles. For the first time in 50 years, China and Taiwan share real interests. What blocks matrimony is China's lack of democracy. Most Chinese would probably like to see this absence remedied as much as they favor full reunification. Only democracy in China can bring lasting peace to the Taiwan Strait.
Orville Schell is a historian of China and dean at the University of California at Berkeley. Copyright: Project Syndicate
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS