Has the administration of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) thought through its headlong embrace of China? The deals to expand relations covering shipping, air transport and postal services might look like progress but the question is: who is calling the shots?
It is certainly not the Ma government. So far, Beijing has not moved an inch in terms of acknowledging Taiwan’s identity. Describing the advance in relations, China’s top negotiator, Chen Yunlin (陳雲林), called it “a crystallization of the joint efforts of many compatriots across the Strait.”
In other words, it is a process of integrating Taiwan into China.
China’s infiltration into Taiwan through such expanded contacts will be a nightmare to monitor and regulate. From the exchanges between the two sides so far, one doesn’t get a sense that the Ma administration is seeking to guard Taiwan’s sovereign identity.
The sense rather is that the Ma administration is acting as a facilitator. And any opposition to this is being harshly handled, sometimes draconian measures have been used against political dissent.
There are even fears that there might be a concerted attempt to undermine democracy in Taiwan to promote Beijing’s agenda.
The Ma government has a mandate to govern but not to diminish or barter away Taiwan’s sovereignty. The will of the people should determine Taiwan’s future.
It is pertinent to remember that most polls have indicated an overwhelming popular desire to maintain Taiwan’s distinct political status.
Now that a series of deals about expanding services have been concluded, the two sides will obviously move on to the political agenda.
Will China enter into a peace treaty? That would seem highly unlikely, suggesting a relationship of sovereign equality between the two sides that is anathema to Beijing.
Will China allow Taipei some space on the international stage in forums like the UN and its agencies? Again, it would seem highly unlikely.
The arguments generally given in favor of greater integration and eventual unification with China are three-fold.
First is the argument of a common and shared culture and language.
By that logic, Australia and New Zealand, which not only share a common language and heritage but also have geographical proximity, should have merged into one country long ago.
In the Middle East, where people in most countries speak Arabic and share a common Islamic heritage, national identities are as important as ever.
And such examples can be multiplied.
Taiwan has a distinct political identity and is a middle-sized nation of more than 20 million people, about as much as Australia and about five times the population of New Zealand.
The second argument favoring Taiwan’s integration is to further peace and harmony across the Taiwan Strait.
This again doesn’t seem terribly smart and convincing. If in the process of buying peace, a country has to surrender its sovereignty, the world would be a very turbulent and unhappy place.
In such a world, very few small countries will be able to maintain their independence and sovereignty when faced with aggression from a powerful neighbor.
The third argument is to expand Taiwan’s economic prosperity by throwing in its lot with China. However, so far, despite all the fanfare of moving in with China, concrete results in terms of economic advantage are not yet apparent.
Besides, Taiwan hasn’t done badly without needing to be submerged into China. It has been one of Asia’s most successful economies.
So why is the Ma administration in such an unseemly haste to hitch Taiwan’s wagon to a wayward Chinese engine?
Is there a sense that Taiwan’s time as an independent political entity has run out? With China so powerful and the US mired in the Middle East, Taiwan might seem so vulnerable that a deal with China seems the only alternative.
That is not necessarily the case. Indeed, if the US interest in Taiwan were to slacken (and don’t bet on it, with president-elect Barack Obama keen on revamping US strategic priorities), Beijing won’t have to fear that Taiwan could be turned into a US base of sorts to threaten China.
Taiwan will hardly be a threat to China.
Taiwan indeed can remain as a successful pilot project for democracy in China at some future time if the latter were to descend into social instability.
A close relationship between China and Taiwan can develop as it has between Australia and New Zealand, with neither fearing the other while partaking of all the benefits of a shared heritage.
The Ma administration needs to be a bit more creative in its dealings with China. It doesn’t need to crawl when all it needs is a steady walk, assuming that it wants to save Taiwan from China.
Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.
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