Could Europe be a Democratic “blue state” and Asia a Republican “red state?”
US presidential elections provide a near perfect test to understand the difference between European and Asian worldviews, even if the two continents are far from united internally. If you want the US to lead by the power of example, you favor Democratic Senator Barack Obama; if you want to be reassured by the continuation of US power in a traditional security sense, you probably prefer Republican Senator John McCain.
Whereas a majority of Europeans — with the exception of those who for historical and geographic reasons are obsessed with the return of the “Russian bear” — support Obama, a majority of Asians, particular among the elite, seem to support McCain. This difference stems above all from strategic considerations, but it probably also contains a cultural dimension.
In Asia, Indonesia may look “European” in its Obama craze, but it essentially constitutes an anomaly, easily explainable by Obama’s brief Indonesian upbringing. Otherwise, and for very different reasons, a majority of Asian elites are awaiting the growing possibility of an Obama victory with some bewilderment and even apprehension.
For example, Japanese elites tend to favor continuity over change. In their mind, the hard power of the US is more important than its soft power, and their vision of a US “bound to lead” is largely unchanged. For them, the US is above all the strategic counterweight needed to balance China.
But the Chinese, too, may very likely be favoring McCain, for the opposite reason. The decline of the US’ image and influence in the world does not annoy them. As Asia’s leading power, China has seized the mantle of “hope” from the US. The US could regain it under Obama, but not under McCain. Why favor change, when continuity works so well for you?
Indian elites reach the same conclusion for different reasons. The Bush years are seen positively, for they coincide with the consolidation of India’s international status and emergence as the US’ key diplomatic partner in Asia. In Singapore, ideological considerations reinforce strategic interests. A very conservative regime naturally tends to prefer a Republican candidate over a Democrat.
But, beyond strategic considerations, something else must be mentioned (with prudence). It is too early to say that the “yellow man’s burden” is about to replace Rudyard Kipling’s “white man’s burden” in world history. Asians are slow to acknowledge that power entails international responsibility.
But Asians who have more than caught up with the West may have difficulty adjusting to the idea that the US would for the first time in history not be headed by a white president. How can you define yourself to the West, when the West has so spectacularly and visibly changed its appearance, if not its essence?
In Europe, the reverse is true. The complex essence of Obama is an absolute plus. For the former colonial countries, who have no equivalent to Obama, to support him fully is a sort of exorcism, if not redemption. The US is once more paving the way for what Europeans should be able to achieve one day with their own minorities: a land of dreams made possible. In a more classical sense, the depth of anti-Bush sentiment in Europe explains the depth of pro-Obama feeling and Europeans’ relative distancing from McCain’s candidacy.
Europeans have felt oppressed by the US’ excessive demonstration of hard power. They would not mind a US that was more modest abroad and more ambitious at home. They are in fact secretly wishing that in these tough economic times, at least part of the “culture of hope” incarnated by Obama would reverberate on them and transform them for the better. They do not want the US only to protect them, but to transform them.
The perception that Obama can transform the view that the US and the West have of themselves is an important factor in the emotional gap that may exist between Asia and Europe on the eve of the US presidential election.
On that count, Asia tends to be a status quo continent, while Europe is a revisionist one. For many Europeans, a reinvention of the US is Europe’s last hope.
It is a noble hope, but also a dangerous one, for dreams can easily turn into nightmares. That might very well happen if the next US president fails to redress the financial and economic threats facing his country, and thus the rest of the world.
Dominique Moisi, a founder and senior advisor at IFRI (French Institute for International Relations), is a professor at the College of Europe in Natolin, Warsaw, Poland.
COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
US political scientist Francis Fukuyama, during an interview with the UK’s Times Radio, reacted to US President Donald Trump’s overturning of decades of US foreign policy by saying that “the chance for serious instability is very great.” That is something of an understatement. Fukuyama said that Trump’s apparent moves to expand US territory and that he “seems to be actively siding with” authoritarian states is concerning, not just for Europe, but also for Taiwan. He said that “if I were China I would see this as a golden opportunity” to annex Taiwan, and that every European country needs to think
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means