In an article published in Foreign Policy magazine titled “China is a declining power — and that’s the problem,” two highly reputable academics use “power transition theory” (PTT) as a base for their arguments.
PTT was founded by my adviser at Claremont Graduate University, Jacek Kugler, and his mentor, A.F.K. Organski.
PTT believes that the unipolar world dominated by a single hegemony (from 1990 to last year) is the most stable setup in international relations compared with the bipolar (US-Soviet Union) or multipolar (Europe before World War II) world.
Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is undermining the current state of unipolar stability.
PTT believes that great power wars usually occur at the intersection of the rise of an emerging hegemony and the decline of the reigning “status quo” hegemony.
The two authors believe that in the past 150 years, emerging powers that have peaked and then plateaued — after experiencing a severe, long-term slowdown — usually do not quietly disappear.
Instead, they become arrogant and aggressive. They suppress dissent at home and try to regain economic momentum by establishing exclusive spheres of influence abroad. They invest a lot of money in the military and apply force to expand their influence.
This behavior usually triggers tensions between major powers. In some cases, it involves catastrophic wars.
The current situation of the Chinese Communist Party regime reflects the above scenario.
I must agree with most of the points of the Foreign Policy article. The good news is that the disastrous power of nuclear bombs might make all parties more prudent. The bad news is that misperception from China could still trigger a devastating major war.
My take, as well as that of the two authors, is that the fate of the world is in Xi’s hands and Taiwan is the main flashpoint.
Regardless of whether China’s power is declining or not, it is its elites’ perception that counts. Judging from Xi’s recent paranoid foreign and domestic policies, I conclude that he thinks he and his party are in trouble. That “misperception” will get the whole world into trouble.
I also conclude that Xi’s recent heavy-handed, centralized, overreaching economic and financial policies will stifle China’s economy; but it will take time to manifest unless everything I have learned since my college years is capitalist brainwashing garbage.
An authoritarian government that practices national capitalism such as Nazi Germany or China before Xi, under former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), may be a superior economic model if it can rein in its aggressive expansionism.
However, there is not a single government since the 20th century that has succeeded with the radical nationalization policy that Xi is now trying.
Xi has staked his reputation on Taiwan. When he turns 70 two years from now, he is going to become increasingly aware that his time is running out. People do not get into his position without having enormous egos, which they project out all through their lifetimes, so they become invested in the ridiculous belief that their “legacies” matter to them.
All in all, Taiwan is a big concern.
I hope Taiwan’s government and its people realize that. Buckle up everyone — the perfect storm is coming.
Simon Tang is an adjunct professor at California State University, Fullerton.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent