Cautious optimism is the appropriate response to the US Republican party sharpening its rhetoric in support of Taiwan as part of its presidential campaign.
For Taiwanese who watch US politics, optimism is a precious and fleeting commodity. Not so long ago, it was sensible to assume that the US military intervention in Iraq — and to a lesser extent Afghanistan — would become so repulsive for voting Americans that the proposal to support a small country such as Taiwan against the designs of the Chinese juggernaut in the event of conflict would be laughable.
Adding to the gloom for pro-democracy Taiwanese was the swift retreat by US President George W. Bush, whose early, provocative comments supporting Taiwan gave way to the unenlightened China appeasement that defines the modus vivendi of the Department of State and much of US academia.
Today things are a little different. In the era of President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), China has offered little in the way of political reform, which surprises no one. But Beijing has found that its increasing economic power is beginning to unnerve even its supporters in other administrations — sometimes to become the whipping boy of politicians looking for a sound bite, as Democratic senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton vividly demonstrated a few months ago.
When China irritates people and governments, Taiwan gains. This is because the threat that Taiwan faces turns into a thing that others can appreciate — if only for a moment — in practical terms.
Now, by upping the ante on the political currency of cross-strait conflict, the camp of the Republicans’ presumptive candidate, Senator John McCain, is asking Americans to think carefully about what China is and what it could do, and why Taiwan is inseparable from this issue. The message is abrupt and not without risk, but it is safe to say that the Democrats will respond not by defending China but plugging presidential candidate Obama’s credentials to defend US interests should China become too obnoxious.
Obama’s running partner, Senator Joseph Biden, has traditionally run a line that promotes China and — at best — sidelines Taiwan. In this regard, his point of view is remarkably similar to the ideological basis of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). How this might affect an Obama administration is unclear, though the record to date of Obama’s future advisers on cross-strait matters is disturbing.
Either way, Taiwan and China are developing into a potential wedge issue for the Democrats. For Taiwan, this is not necessarily a good thing because the issue is not crucial to the vote, and because the tenor and content of the debate is completely outside Taiwan’s control. And even if Taipei could do something to tilt public sentiment in the US, it is unlikely that President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) administration would have the intelligence and ability to seize the initiative.
In his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention on Thursday, Obama warned that the US must learn to face the threats of the future and not be distracted by the mistakes of the past. Obama’s “threats” tend not to be states but extremism, environmental concerns and economic vulnerabilities, yet all of these concerns have a Chinese link.
With luck, the Republicans’ move to turn this into a point of debate will allow more truths about China, Taiwan and their stateside supporters to be aired before the next president takes his post.
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