Perhaps it was unrealistic to expect that the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China would produce festivities symbolizing a new era of peaceful co-existence and cooperation with China’s neighbors. Even so, it is disappointing to note that the evolving use of the concept of “peace” or “peaceful” in Chinese government rhetoric simply had no place in a parade that bristled with Stalinist symbolism and offensive weaponry.
A number of analysts have pointed out — somewhat in China’s defense — that the bravado and military pomp primarily targeted a domestic audience, and that relationships with other governments continue to be guided by more congenial and sensitive techniques.
The Beijing Olympics opening ceremony was an excellent example of the Chinese government going out of its way to merge the requirements of both locals and foreigners — and largely succeeding in pleasing both sets of audiences. This was, admittedly, in the context of an international sporting event, but sport did not stop previous Olympic hosts, for example, from commandeering a celebration of internationalism in the service of something noxious.
If the National Day parade’s message was primarily domestic, it was still going to have an international dimension, and in this instance, with the aggressive display of indigenous weaponry, it seems the Chinese government is unconcerned that it might be portrayed as tilting toward the hardliners.
With so many ordinary Chinese expressing pride in their country not in terms of its own merits and standards but in terms of comparisons to other nations whose wealth and power they covet, the overall atmosphere justifies concerns over China’s intentions in the region — not just for Taiwan, for which Beijing’s goal is explicit, but also Japan, India, the Russian Federation and the US, for example.
Indeed, it is difficult to see how foreign governments — particularly Western governments and Japan — are going to find solace in the gargantuan bombast and cultural misappropriations that not only characterize China, but oppressive regimes everywhere.
As to the political effect on Taiwan, the reaction has largely been “more of the same” from both sides. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government can point to overtures of peace in speeches on the day and explain away the display of weaponry as stock behavior for any nation’s birthday celebrations. The Democratic Progressive Party, however, can rightly ask how China can be taken seriously in cross-strait negotiations when its primary measure of national might is the capacity for military threat rather than the ability to synthesize diverse regional interests.
For most ordinary Taiwanese, however, the parade will have simply acted as a reminder that people across the Strait are ruled by a political machine that, for all of its strength, is struggling to steer a complex, changing environment at home and to live up to the expectations of democratic states in its international activities.
Whether domestic or global, the pressing, shared problems of the world can no longer be unilaterally solved by great powers, nor by the exercising of power through the barrel of a gun.
Neither reality had any role to play in Thursday’s parade, and if the tenor of that celebration of national features, which ironically expelled ordinary Chinese from the surrounds, is a harbinger of China’s dealings with the region in the foreseeable future, then that is a tremendous shame — and another clear warning.
A nation has several pillars of national defense, among them are military strength, energy and food security, and national unity. Military strength is very much on the forefront of the debate, while several recent editorials have dealt with energy security. National unity and a sense of shared purpose — especially while a powerful, hostile state is becoming increasingly menacing — are problematic, and would continue to be until the nation’s schizophrenia is properly managed. The controversy over the past few days over former navy lieutenant commander Lu Li-shih’s (呂禮詩) usage of the term “our China” during an interview about his attendance
Bo Guagua (薄瓜瓜), the son of former Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Central Committee Politburo member and former Chongqing Municipal Communist Party secretary Bo Xilai (薄熙來), used his British passport to make a low-key entry into Taiwan on a flight originating in Canada. He is set to marry the granddaughter of former political heavyweight Hsu Wen-cheng (許文政), the founder of Luodong Poh-Ai Hospital in Yilan County’s Luodong Township (羅東). Bo Xilai is a former high-ranking CCP official who was once a challenger to Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) for the chairmanship of the CCP. That makes Bo Guagua a bona fide “third-generation red”
US president-elect Donald Trump earlier this year accused Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) of “stealing” the US chip business. He did so to have a favorable bargaining chip in negotiations with Taiwan. During his first term from 2017 to 2021, Trump demanded that European allies increase their military budgets — especially Germany, where US troops are stationed — and that Japan and South Korea share more of the costs for stationing US troops in their countries. He demanded that rich countries not simply enjoy the “protection” the US has provided since the end of World War II, while being stingy with
Historically, in Taiwan, and in present-day China, many people advocate the idea of a “great Chinese nation.” It is not worth arguing with extremists to say that the so-called “great Chinese nation” is a fabricated political myth rather than an academic term. Rather, they should read the following excerpt from Chinese writer Lin Yutang’s (林語堂) book My Country and My People: “It is also inevitable that I should offend many writers about China, especially my own countrymen and great patriots. These great patriots — I have nothing to do with them, for their god is not my god, and their patriotism is
RSS