While the row between Japan and China over the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) has caught international attention, a democratic Taiwan needs to keep the bigger picture in mind on this issue.
It began as a small incident: During an incursion in the waters surrounding the Diaoyutais, a Chinese trawler bumped into two Japanese Coast Guard vessels. The Japanese arrested the Chinese captain and crew, allowed the crew to go after a couple of days, but held the captain for further legal procedures.
However, the matter quickly evolved into a major political dispute when China ratcheted up the tension. It summoned the Japanese ambassador in Beijing early in the morning for a dressing down, suspended high-level exchanges between the two countries, while officials, including Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶), threatened “further action” by making threats about what would happen if the captain was not released.
In this tense situation it is extremely important that Taiwan makes the right decisions and doesn’t let its actions aggravate the situation even further. Against this background it was not wise to allow a fishing boat from Taiwan with several activists on board to set sail to the Diaoyutais in the middle of this month. The media in Taiwan reported that the activists, including several from Hong Kong, went there to assert “Chinese” sovereignty over the islands.
Taiwan needs to side with the forces of democracy.
It should be clear to even a casual observer that China is pushing its model of “strong economic growth combined with strict political control” — some refer to this as the “Beijing consensus” — on the world.
Taiwan, on the other hand, is still clearly a member of the democratic camp: Countries which value democracy and understand that true and equitable economic growth can only occur through adherence to the basic principles of democracy.
Looking toward the future, Taiwan needs to decide in a democratic way what the people of the island want for their future: Drift closer to China, which will inevitable mean a loss of democracy and human rights, or remain a free and open democracy.
If it wants the latter, it needs to align itself with other nations that adhere to the same value system. That means Japan: It is the closest democracy and if Taiwan’s existence is ever threatened by China, Japan and other allies in the region would no doubt align themselves with the US and come to Taiwan’s defense.
This means that Taiwan needs to maintain good relations with Japan and not let the fracas over a few goat-inhabited rocks damage ties with a friend whose support Taiwan will surely need in the future.
The importance of Japan as a partner was also emphasized recently by US Vice President Joe Biden.
At a function in Washington he stated: “I don’t know how it works without our partner in that part of the world.”
China’s upping the ante in the territorial claim over the islands and the arrest of the fishing boat captain shows that it still has to learn how to be a responsible stakeholder in the world. If it behaves in this way over such relatively “small” matters, one wonders if it will play by fair rules when a bigger conflict arises, say over the future of Taiwan? Will it respect the wishes of the people of Taiwan or run roughshod over them, like they did in Tibet and East Turkestan?
Taiwan will therefore need to keep the bigger picture of its future as a free and democratic nation in mind and let its decisions be guided by longer-term strategies. True statesmen will have the wisdom to make the right decisions.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS