An article by University of Chicago professor John Mearsheimer titled “Say Goodbye to Taiwan” in the March-April issue of the National Interest is thought-provoking. In his essay, first published online on Feb. 25, Mearsheimer predicts that in the face of China’s continued rise, Taiwan will have to give up even its present de facto independent status and seek a Hong Kong-style accommodation with Beijing.
Mearsheimer, who is a political scientist from the “offensive realism” school of international relations, did do his homework for the essay and studied local political attitudes carefully. For instance, he presents recent statistics showing that — assuming that China will not attack Taiwan — the overwhelming majority of Taiwanese, 80.2 percent, would opt for independence.
He also writes that: “… most Taiwanese would like their country to gain de jure independence and become a legitimate sovereign state in the international system. This outcome is especially attractive because a strong Taiwanese identity — separate from a Chinese identity — has blossomed in Taiwan over the past 65 years.”
However, he concludes that, in spite of locals’ strong desire that Taiwan be accepted as a legitimate sovereign state in the international system, China’s continued rise will make it increasingly difficult to resist Beijing’s pressure toward unification.
The main flaw in Mearsheimer’s reasoning is that he believes in the inevitability of an unfettered continuation of China’s rise. In his attempt to apply his theoretical construct to the real world, Mearsheimer neglects a number of important aspects, such as the push-back from Taiwanese, from the US and from other nations in the region against a rising and increasingly aggressive China.
In addition, China’s continued rise is by no means certain because its economic and political fundamentals are weak at best: The economy has been liberalized, but the Chinese Communist Party’s political control is as tight as ever and there are manifold bubbles — like housing and banking — waiting to burst. This fuels internal tensions which could derail China’s aspirations.
Yet Mearsheimer’s essay is an important wake-up call to global policymakers: If the present “status quo” and “one China” policies are maintained, there is an increasing likelihood that democratic Taiwan will be absorbed by its neighbor.
This would not only be highly undesirable for Taiwanese, but it would also fundamentally upset the regional balance of power.
Mearsheimer describes how control over Taiwan could greatly enhance Beijing’s ability to project military power. This would certainly cause deep anxiety in neighboring countries like South Korea, Japan and the Philippines. Mearsheimer concludes that China will try to dominate Asia in the way that the US dominates the western hemisphere.
Mearsheimer reveals the perception that Washington and Taipei’s current policies have brought about a reduction in cross-strait tensions is only a short-term fata morgana. These policies simply do not form a solid basis for longer-term stability. At some point, the democratic aspirations of Taiwanese will collide with the designs of Beijing, leading to sharply higher tensions.
To ensure that Taiwan remains among free, democratic nations and to maintain a stable and free Western Pacific, it is essential that the US, Asian democracies and Western Europe significantly improve economic and political ties with Taiwan. Perhaps it is time to promote a “Community of Democracies in East Asia.”
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 to 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,