Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) speech at the Chinese Communist Party’s 19th National Congress has been watched and listened to closely in Western capitals.
Will the old and new Chinese leader tighten his grip on civil rights in the People’s Republic of China? Will he further infringe on Hong Kong? Will he threaten Taiwan?
Liberal democracies in the West might think parts of Xi’s speech in this regard were modest, but they were not.
The term “one China” leaves many Westerners clueless. This is why Xi’s remarks on Taiwan — in which he made it staunchly clear that any sort of movement on Taiwan that might be perceived as separatist would be met with drastic consequences — did not sound much of an alarm in Berlin, London or Paris.
Surely, Western powers are aware of the complicated situation and pending threat between China and Taiwan, but their electorates are not.
Declining support for the values of Western liberal democracy across the world in recent years, which not only led to the Brexit vote but also to a rise in mostly far-right xenophobic movements, does not serve as a breeding ground for compassion and action for a far-away nation such as restricted Taiwan.
Prior to Double Ten National Day on Tuesday last week, an article was widely shared and discussed on social media.
The text claimed that the Chinese military would finally meet the necessities required to invade Taiwan by the year 2020.
However, others would argue that China’s military would neither dare nor have the capacity to conduct a long-term invasion and occupation of Taiwan. Alas, that does not mean that Taiwan will not see some serious infringement on its liberal democracy.
For Beijing, Taiwan is a threat because the leader of the Chinese Communist Party sells the idea to his followers and the West alike that being Chinese and a liberal democrat is not compatible. The great, and exclusive, tradition of Confucianism can only live on in the form of a one-party state. Emerging therein to the very top is only possible by applying the highest ethical standards.
Xi’s fight against corruption and moral misconduct needs to be seen as him catering to the narrative that he has deployed in his first term as president.
In the West, where liberal democracy is often deliberately limited by the rights of the individual or specific groups such as minorities, leaders do not cease to praise the Chinese president — and leaders before him — as visionary, innovative and thoughtful. What they mean is that, due to autocratic one-party rule, Beijing is capable of following through with policy ideas — such as tackling climate change — that would take years in a democratic framework.
However, the existence of Taiwan reminds Xi and the West of the existence of a democracy in a Confucian context.
In fact, Taiwan is not the only liberal democracy in the region. It has potentially powerful allies in South Korea and Japan. All three are allies of the US and all three have a similar set of interests when it comes to fighting off a power-hungry China.
Yet, for historic reasons, the three have not elaborated on their common policies and it is doubtful that they will do so anytime soon.
China is all but sad about the disagreements of its democratic rivals across the sea. In Taipei, Seoul and Tokyo, observers might already be nervous when they anticipate US President Donald Trump’s visit to China in a few weeks. The US president has been marveling at autocratic rule.
One can only hope that the result of the meeting between these two power-hungry men with a dubious mindset and character when it comes to civil liberties and liberal freedom will not frighten the three truly democratic nations in the region.
As for Taiwan, the leadership and the people should be eagerly trying to strengthen their ties with Western allies and the liberal democracies in South Korea and Japan, as China might not be able or willing to invade the nation, but it will also not tolerate any further development of a free and independent society for this might, in the logic of Beijing, inevitably lead down the road of independence.
Alexander Goerlach is a defense of democracy affiliate professor at Harvard College and a fellow at the center for humanities at the University of Cambridge, England. He is publisher of the online magazine saveliberaldemocracy.com and a visiting academic at National Taiwan University this year.
After nine days of holidays for the Lunar New Year, government agencies and companies are to reopen for operations today, including the Legislative Yuan. Many civic groups are expected to submit their recall petitions this week, aimed at removing many Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers from their seats. Since December last year, the KMT and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) passed three controversial bills to paralyze the Constitutional Court, alter budgetary allocations and make recalling elected officials more difficult by raising the threshold. The amendments aroused public concern and discontent, sparking calls to recall KMT legislators. After KMT and TPP legislators again
In competitive sports, the narrative surrounding transgender athletes is often clouded by misconceptions and prejudices. Critics sometimes accuse transgender athletes of “gaming the system” to gain an unfair advantage, perpetuating the stereotype that their participation undermines the integrity of competition. However, this perspective not only ignores the rigorous efforts transgender athletes invest to meet eligibility standards, but also devalues their personal and athletic achievements. Understanding the gap between these stereotypes and the reality of individual efforts requires a deeper examination of societal bias and the challenges transgender athletes face. One of the most pervasive arguments against the inclusion of transgender athletes
When viewing Taiwan’s political chaos, I often think of several lines from Incantation, a poem by the winner of the 1980 Nobel Prize in Literature, Czeslaw Milosz: “Beautiful and very young are Philo-Sophia, and poetry, her ally in the service of the good... Their friendship will be glorious, their time has no limit, their enemies have delivered themselves to destruction.” Milosz wrote Incantation when he was a professor of Slavic Studies at the University of California, Berkeley. He firmly believed that Poland would rise again under a restored democracy and liberal order. As one of several self-exiled or expelled poets from
EDITORIAL CARTOON
RSS