Two elections, one in the US and the other in China, have produced weakened governments that are not likely to be well-equipped to handle crises arising from misunderstanding or miscalculation.
Consequently, this could leave the US, with the world’s largest economy and most powerful military force, and China, with the second-largest economy and the fastest expanding military force, dangerously pitted against each other.
In the US elections, US President Barack Obama was re-elected by a narrow margin, getting only 50.5 percent of the popular vote. He carried only 27 of the 50 states as well as Washington. His Democratic Party retained a slim hold on the US Senate, while the opposition Republicans have solid control of the US House of Representatives.
Thus Obama hardly has a mandate to strike off in new directions, including policy toward China. Moreover, his foreign and security policy team is about to break up and will most likely be replaced by newcomers who will need some time to find their footing.
US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has said she will leave office at the end of this term. US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta may step down early next year, as might Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner. Former CIA director David Petraeus resigned after disclosing an extra-marital affair.
Furthermore, a rift between the president and the military surfaced the day before the election, when 500 retired generals and admirals publicly endorsed then-Republican US presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
That was their constitutional right under the First Amendment, but it was of questionable propriety when US tradition dictates that military officers stay out of politics.
Against this divisive backdrop, any of Obama’s initiatives toward China that require political and public approval could be in jeopardy from the start.
In China, the 18th Party Congress called to “elect” Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平) to replace President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) heard the outgoing leader rail against rampant corruption that imperils the CCP’s rule.
Hu delivered a 90-minute keynote speech, in which he said: “Combating corruption and promoting political integrity, which is a major political issue of great concern to the people, is a clear-cut and long-term political commitment of the party.”
“If we fail to handle this issue well, it could prove fatal to the party, and even cause the collapse of the party and the fall of the state,” Hu said.
Xinhua news agency said that pressing tasks include “stopping the flagrant abuse of power and corruption among government officials and businesspeople — issues that have triggered a series of protests.”
Xi is a graduate of Tsinghua University, which is similar to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and is a technocrat who has risen steadily through the ranks of the CCP. He visited Washington to meet with Obama in February last year, but is not known for experience in foreign policy.
On national defense, Hu asserted that acquiring “powerful armed forces that are commensurate with China’s international standing” is a strategic task.
He said China should “intensify military preparedness and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local wars.”
Hu did not refer to the growing rift between the CCP and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which comprises all of China’s armed forces. The highly nationalistic PLA has been seen recently as more aggressive in asserting China’s claims in the South China and East China seas.
However, the PLA’s highest-ranking officer, General Guo Boxiong (郭伯雄), brought it up indirectly.
Guo, who is more a political general than a military one, was quoted by Xinhua as saying the PLA must “adhere to the principle of [the] party’s absolute leadership over the armed forces more voluntarily.”
Three more times in a nine-paragraph dispatch, Xinhua called for adherence to the “absolute leadership” of the CCP over the PLA. Those who read Chinese tea leaves say this harping can only mean the CCP is unhappy with the PLA’s defiance.
Against this divisive backdrop, any Chinese initiatives toward the US that require both political and PLA approval would also be in jeopardy from the very start.
Richard Halloran is a commentator based in Hawaii.
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS