One of the benefits of being a big-spending world power is that much of the world — especially its autocratic and venal parts — is a briber’s market.
Unlike democratic governments, which are subject to at least a semblance of accountability among civic groups and watchdogs, China, the most aggressive of emerging world powers, offers no substantial space for civilian organizations to criticize diplomatic activities.
Instead, for some time, the international media have been focusing on the growing presence of Chinese investment in Asia and Africa in particular, and some analysts and reporters have asked whether the fiscal benefits for local economies and raw material benefits for the Chinese government will not be undone in the longer term as Beijing’s neo-colonial behavior triggers resentment in those locations.
In other regions, however, China is learning that cash doesn’t always deliver the goods. Despite threats of reprisal, in recent weeks Australia and Japan have issued exiled Uighur activist Rebiya Kadeer a visa — allowing her to speak freely of Chinese atrocities in Xinjiang.
The failure of Chinese state-controlled Chinalco to take greater control over Australian mining firm Rio Tinto was, in Chinese eyes, just as great a provocation, but with more practical consequences. Some of the firm’s employees are now in custody in China and preparing for a farcical corporate show trial, while the Australian media are finally waking up to the nature of the beast they have admired for so long.
After weeks of rising tensions, it is pleasing to see the Australian government respond to China’s hypocrisy and infantilism with something approaching self-respect. Perhaps Canberra realized that the average Australian has far less tolerance for Chinese insults to Australian values — be they commercial, cultural or moral.
In so doing, Australia helps to teach the Chinese a lesson: There are limits to what you can do or say to self-respecting foreigners; ignoring this forces a choice between moderation and the kind of extremist rhetoric and vengefulness characteristic of China in the late 1960s. Indeed, reporting on the Rio Tinto case and tensions with Australia in general, the Chinese media in the last few weeks have displayed a passion for exactly this kind of mad language.
In Taiwan, the latest — and most spectacular so far — example of gunboat fiscal diplomacy ironically arrives in the aftermath of Typhoon Morakot. Non-Partisan Solidarity Union Legislator May Chin (高金素梅) this week personally received a check worth US$2.9 million from the Chinese government, ostensibly to assist Aboriginal communities suffering from the typhoon’s devastating impact on remote areas in Taiwan’s south.
May Chin has been running a China-friendly line of no relevance to Aborigines for some time, along with some other Aboriginal politicians and activists who have connections and a ready audience among unificationists in China. But she also has no shortage of enemies in the Aboriginal community. For the Chinese to donate such a large amount of money to her and a group of fellow travelers instead of genuinely non-partisan groups or the government, therefore, is a corrupt act intended to strengthen one segment of Aboriginal politics at the cost of others and seed pro-China propaganda.
As always, China can’t help itself. But now, in the unfortunate context of Typhoon Morakot, the corrosive influence of Chinese “aid” is taking on a new and more conspicuous form as Beijing openly seeks to manipulate legislative and ethnic politics.
Taiwan’s semiconductor industry gives it a strategic advantage, but that advantage would be threatened as the US seeks to end Taiwan’s monopoly in the industry and as China grows more assertive, analysts said at a security dialogue last week. While the semiconductor industry is Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” its dominance has been seen by some in the US as “a monopoly,” South Korea’s Sungkyunkwan University academic Kwon Seok-joon said at an event held by the Center for Strategic and International Studies. In addition, Taiwan lacks sufficient energy sources and is vulnerable to natural disasters and geopolitical threats from China, he said.
After reading the article by Hideki Nagayama [English version on same page] published in the Liberty Times (sister newspaper of the Taipei Times) on Wednesday, I decided to write this article in hopes of ever so slightly easing my depression. In August, I visited the National Museum of Ethnology in Osaka, Japan, to attend a seminar. While there, I had the chance to look at the museum’s collections. I felt extreme annoyance at seeing that the museum had classified Taiwanese indigenous peoples as part of China’s ethnic minorities. I kept thinking about how I could make this known, but after returning
What value does the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) hold in Taiwan? One might say that it is to defend — or at the very least, maintain — truly “blue” qualities. To be truly “blue” — without impurities, rejecting any “red” influence — is to uphold the ideology consistent with that on which the Republic of China (ROC) was established. The KMT would likely not object to this notion. However, if the current generation of KMT political elites do not understand what it means to be “blue” — or even light blue — their knowledge and bravery are far too lacking
Taipei’s population is estimated to drop below 2.5 million by the end of this month — the only city among the nation’s six special municipalities that has more people moving out than moving in this year. A city that is classified as a special municipality can have three deputy mayors if it has a population of more than 2.5 million people, Article 55 of the Local Government Act (地方制度法) states. To counter the capital’s shrinking population, Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an (蔣萬安) held a cross-departmental population policy committee meeting on Wednesday last week to discuss possible solutions. According to Taipei City Government data, Taipei’s