The past few years have served as a lesson to expect the unexpected. Despite expert warnings about the inevitability of a global pandemic, COVID-19 still caught the world unawares. Russia’s attack on Ukraine seemed to send us collectively careening further out of control, as few dared to believe that a hot war in Europe was likely. Now with Hamas and Israel locked in a brutal conflict, it is beginning to feel like none of the world’s flashpoints are to remain cool for long — Taiwan leading the list.
If this portrayal resonates with you, you would not be alone. Even before Hamas’ attack, the idea of a “polycrisis” was beginning to gain traction. Attendees of the World Economic Forum in Davos earlier this year favored the term coined in the 1970s to describe the interaction between disparate crises “such that the overall impact far exceeds the sum of each part.” Global anxieties were already trained on Taiwan, but with large-scale conflicts now raging in Palestine as well as Ukraine, a cross-strait conflict seems many times more likely than before.
Media have locked on to the concern, asking US officials how Washington is to handle the compounding crises. US President Joe Biden on Friday last week countered with a US$105 billion ask from Congress that combines aid for Israel and Ukraine. It also includes US$2 billion for Taiwan and Indo-Pacific security, bundling two conflicts with efforts to deter another, thereby inadvertently lending credence to the public expectation of conflict. In Taipei last week, American Institute in Taiwan Chair Laura Rosenberger also assured Taiwan that US support would not be affected amid fears of taut resources.
As tempting as it is to view global conflict as an inevitable collective, a flare-up in one place does not necessitate a total conflagration. Each actor has their own set of desires, concerns and cost-benefit analyses, Beijing included. It appears to be positioning itself carefully.
After Hamas’ attack on Oct. 7, Beijing has remained self-consciously neutral, declining to condemn Hamas as the aggressor and instead calling on “all relevant parties to remain calm, exercise restraint and immediately end the hostilities.” State media also said that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has offered to broker talks on a two-state solution. It is only the latest of China’s efforts to establish itself as a global mediator, after in March brokering a deal between Saudi Arabia and Iran, and on multiple occasions throwing its name in the ring as an option to facilitate talks between Russia and Ukraine.
In global politics, Beijing wishes to present itself as a great power alternative to the US. To do so, it needs to be viewed as a sober and reasonable actor that speaks on behalf of countries that have been ignored and condemned by those calling the shots until now. Playing by the rules while bending them to its wishes is how China has gotten this far, and there appears to be no immediate reason why it should change its playbook by starting a divisive conflict.
It is also important to remember that China itself is not a monolith. Al-Jazeera in an article published on Friday stressed that even within China’s military, not everyone believes the West to be the primary enemy, nor does everyone think the country should be “preparing for future conflicts that it might not win.” Xi has inadvertently confirmed this sentiment by instituting indoctrination campaigns and removing key leaders — including former Chinese minister of national defense Li Shangfu (李尚福) — which the reporter’s sources said they do not think are fully working. As much as Xi is trying to consolidate his power, it appears he still has a ways to go.
From what is known about Xi and his ambitions, everyone recognizes the causes for worry, but little is said about the causes for restraint. As the “polycrisis” feels more salient than ever, it is important to remember that no crisis is inevitable with the right preparation and balance.
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
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,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed