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.
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