The irony, not to mention cynical politics, that surrounds the visits to China by Taiwan's two opposition leaders is inescapable.
The irony first. One after the other, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰) and People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) paraded through China like provincial governors of old, visiting historic sites and ancestral homes before arriving in Beijing where they performed symbolic kowtows before the Dragon Throne, this time bearing the trappings of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
The Chinese, who are masters of political and diplomatic charm, having taken in sophisticates such as former US secretary of state Henry Kissinger and former US president Bill Clinton, went all out to seduce Lien and Soong. They were feted and applauded at every turn, Lien telling reporters that "we have been warmly received by the central committee of the Communist Party."
The Chinese even offered Lien two pandas to take home.
While the press in China acclaimed the visits as a "historic moment bringing springtime" and polls in Taiwan were generally favorable, not everyone in Taipei was happy.
Protesters asserted that Lien and Soong were traitors who had sold out to Beijing. Chen accused Soong of breaking an agreement calling for self-determination for Taiwan. Chen, seeking a counterstrategy, invited Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) to visit Taiwan "to see for himself whether Taiwan is a sovereign, independent country and what our 23 million people have in mind." The Chinese rejected the offer.
Given the history of the KMT and the CCP, the KMT's about-face was startling. Under former president Chiang Kai-shek (
In 1949, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) drove Chiang and the KMT from the mainland to Taiwan. Chiang imposed a harsh dictatorship in which consorting with the CCP was punishable by death. The KMT claimed to be the legitimate government and Chiang's mantra was "reclaim the mainland."
The KMT's rule eased under Chiang's son, Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), and even more under Lee Teng-hui (李登輝). At the same time, an independence movement took hold among the Taiwanese, which provided support to the KMT's opponents, notably Chen. He beat Lien twice to wrest the presidency from the KMT.
Another irony. The KMT has blocked the purchase of arms and military equipment from the US for four years despite the US undertaking to warn China against invading Taiwan.
Although former US president Jimmy Carter switched diplomatic relations to Beijing from Taipei in 1979, the US continued a strong commitment to the nation's security under the Taiwan Relations Act. The failure to follow through on the arms sale has caused Americans, including in Congress, to question Taiwan's zeal for providing for its own defense.
Now the cynical politics. Lien and Soong have played a "China card" in a blatant attempt to undermine Chen's authority and political standing.
The KMT, having played the spoiler on several domestic issues since Chen took office in 2000, is clearly looking forward to winning back the presidency in 2008 when Chen's term expires.
This maneuver, however, may not provide the KMT with the political lift it seeks. The Chinese have said that Chen must amend certain provisions of the nation's Constitution and accept their version of the "one China" policy before they will negotiate, a demand that Taiwanese voters may contend is interference.
And Lien and Soong's freelancing in foreign policy and undermining of the president might be seen as disloyalty.
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
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