People often seek security through means which challenge the security of others. An even worse scenario is created when the pursuit of self-interest by the individual leads to a poor outcome for all.
The classical "prisoner's dilemma" is based on the idea of two accomplices to a crime being arrested and each offered their freedom in return for testifying against the other. Each party has two choices, namely cooperate with each other or confess to the authorities. Each must decide without knowing what the other will do. No matter what the other does, defection yields a higher payoff than cooperation.
When it comes to recent cross-strait dynamics, a "prisoner's dilemma" occurred when leaders of the pan-blue camp kept knocking on China's door and left President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration in a dire situation. All four parties in the game -- Chen, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰), People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) -- have tried to take advantage of the others' weaknesses while maximizing their own interests, regardless of the ultimate consequences for all.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has incorporated both good-cop and bad-cop tactics to downgrade Lien's visit to China. Since claiming Lien was falling into Beijing's "divide and conquer" trap, the DPP has used every possible means to denounce the KMT's actions as part of a plan to delegitimize government authority while running the risk of selling out Taiwan's national interests. After warning the opposition about the consequences of bypassing the government to reach a deal with the Beijing authorities, Chen made a goodwill gesture by inviting Lien and Soong to consult with the government before heading to China.
Lien finally made a courtesy phone call to Chen before he embarked on the trip and clearly defined the visit as "personal," stressing that he did not represent the government. To avoid being labeled a tool of Beijing's unification campaign, Soong also publicly denied the accusation that he planned to sign official agreements with the leaders of China.
The Chinese authorities under Hu's leadership, apparently trying to minimize the negative impact of the "Anti-Secession" Law, have undoubtedly earned political points by attracting pan-blue leaders to shake hands with them. It is clear that Beijing's goal is to isolate the Chen administration and sabotage the rise of Taiwan consciousness by extending its economic leverage to the Taiwanese business community and the pan-blue camp.
Since no central authority can force each party to abide by the rules of the game, solving the cross-strait prisoner's dilemma constitutes the key challenge for the Chen administration. While preventing the opposition parties from reaching a deal with China, Chen needs to skillfully manage and integrate the pan-blues' maneuvers to further Taiwan's key national interests.
The prisoner's dilemma game is simply an abstract formulation of some very common and interesting situations in which what is best for each person individually leads to mutual defection, whereas everyone would have been better off with mutual cooperation. In view of China's unpredictability and lack of democratic understanding, it is essential for Chen to set the boundaries for the pan-blue camp (the punishment for defection) and utilize public support for equal, dignified and mutually beneficial engagement with China.
Chen did a relatively good job by mobilizing public concern to minimize the possibility of Lien compromising Taiwan's sovereignty. However, the government needs more decisiveness and strong leadership to convince the pan-blue camp to place Taiwan's national interests ahead of their engagement with China.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
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