Most people would like to see a reduction in tensions across the Taiwan Strait.
The outdated "Taiwan Crisis," as many news wires and think tanks melodramatically call a "dispute" that is usually quite boring, is generally cited as potentially one of the most explosive conflicts in Asia, if not the world.
Dramatizing China-Taiwan relations is all well and good for people trying to sell books championing policy proposals that are so unrealistic as to sound like parody (think Ted Galen Carpenter's America's Coming War with China, which essentially advocates a complete US withdrawal from all of Asia to stop the "coming war").
But when senior diplomats from the countries involved sensationalize the issue, people must first let their shock at the official's irresponsibility and callousness subside, before trying to determine what the motivation was.
Yesterday, China's ambassador to the UN, Sha Zukang (
"The China population is six times or five times that of the United States," Sha said. "Why blame China? [for it's rising defense spending] ... It's better for the US to shut up and keep quiet. It's much, much better."
Later, with regard to what China would do if Taiwan declared independence, he added: "We will do the business at any cost," which one can only assume means going to war.
"It's not a matter of how big Taiwan is, but for China, one inch of the territory is more valuable than the life of our people. We will never concede on that," Sha said.
Now, there isn't much here that hasn't been said before. Chinese military officers and academics often make threats of dire consequences if Taiwan declares independence.
There is little need to address the ambassador's emotionally charged ranting.
Obviously people aren't concerned about the relationship between defense spending and demographics: They're concerned about sudden and substantial increases in military spending by authoritarian states with a history of internal and external violence.
What is most shocking in this case is the fact that this was not a retired colonel writing a paper in an obscure Chinese defense journal; this was Beijing's envoy to the UN being interviewed by one of the most influential news agencies on the planet.
Why would he say such things now? The Taiwanese government hasn't done anything "provocative" lately. US-China relations aren't particularly bad at present, although they have been gradually worsening throughout the Bush administration.
Contrast these comments with recent events in Taiwan. Efforts to liberalize cross-strait trade restrictions are finally gaining momentum. Meanwhile, pro-unification supporters are in ascendancy as the ruling party implodes over a flurry of scandals.
So what do Sha's comments mean?
They mean that the world needs to be very alarmed. No one questions that China is a rising power. But there are a lot of people who are convinced that all China wants is a little respect: If they treat it like a responsible country, it will act like a responsible country. This is a mistake.
Beijing is not responsible. Tired of being the "Sick Man of Asia" that it was for most of the 19th and 20th centuries, China has been self-medicating with the only narcotic it knows: ethnic nationalism.
China isn't the Sick Man of Asia anymore: It's a drug addict.
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