The trip to Taiwan by former US ambassador to the UN John Bolton shows there are at least a few people in the upper tiers of Washington who are prepared to speak in support of Taiwan and to act on their words by visiting and affording respect to the office of Taiwanese president. So, more strength to him and those like him.
But Bolton knows, as much as any informed friend or foe of Taiwan, that Taiwan's bid to join the UN is about the performance, not the result. When conclusions are foregone, sometimes there is hay to be made from the ritual of failure.
Regrettably, all too often this hay is left in the barn, so to speak, by diplomats who simply do not know how to communicate with Washington's jumpier officials.
Taiwan should therefore offer its gratitude to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, whose recent misuse of the UN Charter and UN Resolutions can only harm the credibility of the UN and assist Taiwan's cause. When Ban refused to accept a letter from President Chen Shui-bian (
Only a mistake of this seriousness could possibly take the heat off Chen and place it squarely on the UN itself -- even among pro-China forces in the US.
Even better, China has threatened to introduce a motion to the UN to affirm that Taiwan is a province of the People's Republic of China, an action that would be as strategically inept as any that Beijing has come up with in recent years. And this comes just as many begin to wake up to Beijing's attitude toward the rest of the world: If you have what we want, then we can be friends; if you dare cast light on our atrocities and neglect, then we can not.
If Beijing is stupid enough to up-end the "status quo" that pro-China forces in the US use to keep Taiwan in line, it will find little joy.
In the unlikely event that the matter goes to the Security Council, it will be vetoed by the US and possibly other nations. More likely, however, it would be put to the General Assembly, and this is where the fun would begin.
What would happen? Countries rich in natural resources that depend on China for investment will fall into line quite happily, though some in Asia might balk at the prospect of ramping up tensions. Communist states would also follow the party line. Meanwhile, Taiwan's two dozen allies would most likely vote against the motion. No surprises there.
China's problem lies in the majority that remains. Most countries have been happy to follow along with China's blustering and demagoguery because most of it has seemed to be hot air. Humor Beijing a little and keep things calm, so the reasoning goes, and economic benefits will be there for everyone.
But in demanding that this pragmatism turn into support for a symbolic statement that would authorize Chinese violence, Beijing will likely discover that many countries -- possibly most -- will be less tolerant. The result: a humiliating majority of abstentions and a number of "no" votes sprinkled among them, and a severe blow to the credibility of China's claim to Taiwan both at home and abroad.
Advocates of Taiwanese independence must be salivating at the thought of it: an international repudiation of Beijing's imperial agenda sparked by China's own stupidity.
Some in China must realize that there is this risk, and the whole affair may quietly disappear. But it remains tempting to say to China, and to its UN cheer squad: Bring it on, you oafs. Do your worst.
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