The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has once again resorted to its age-old tactic of blaming the US for China’s woes. The Financial Times on Sunday reported that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) told European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that China would not invade Taiwan because it was a trap set by the US. This is not just an attempt to deflect blame, but also a textbook example of the CCP’s “divide and conquer” strategy to sow discord between Europe and the US.
However, the blame game reveals deeper problems.
Xi’s power rests on the support of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which he has bought off through a distorted allocation of resources. Maintaining the threat of military action against Taiwan serves the interests of the CCP and the PLA, but with China’s ongoing economic woes, this arrangement is becoming unsustainable.
Xi saying that it is a US conspiracy behind the push for military unification makes one wonder if the CCP is seeking a way to justify military spending cuts.
For years the CCP has used the threat of military force against Taiwan to keep its indoctrinated supporters in line. They have peddled the narrative that, sooner or later, the nationalist goal of unification will be achieved.
However, as the feasibility of this goal diminishes, the CCP finds itself in a bind. If it does not act, it risks a backlash from the very nationalism that it has cultivated.
The CCP, once wary of the forces that could be unleashed through nationalism, embraced fanaticism after the collapse of the Soviet Union. Eventually, nationalism took on a life of its own, leaving the CCP with no choice but to blame the US and the rest of the West for its problems. As economic growth slows, stoking nationalist sentiment is the CCP’s only trick to legitimize its monopoly on political power.
The CCP, like the Qing Dynasty before it, finds itself grappling with the double-edged sword of nationalism. The Qing’s downfall was precipitated by the Boxer Rebellion, a nationalist uprising supported by the Qing Empress Dowager Cixi (慈禧太后), who saw it as a useful tool to consolidate power and rally support.
However, when the rebellion’s violence spiraled out of control, regional military leaders refused to heed the call of duty. This refusal, known as the Mutual Protection of Southeast China movement, significantly weakened the Qing’s authority and contributed to the dynasty’s eventual collapse.
The CCP, having stoked the flames of nationalism for its survival, now risks a similar fate. If it fails to deliver on its promises or its nationalist rhetoric leads to conflicts it cannot control, it might find its authority undermined, as happened to the Qing more than a century ago.
We Hong Kongers experienced firsthand the toxicity of CCP’s nationalistic schemes.
Since the 2014 “Umbrella movement,” the CCP has consistently accused our democratic activists of being traitors and foreign agents.
In 2019, when the CCP overstepped by pushing the extradition bill through the Hong Kong Legislative Council, Hong Kongers took to the streets in mass protests, demanding the bill’s withdrawal.
Our five demands were straightforward: Total withdrawal of the extradition bill, retraction of the “riot” characterization of the protests, release of arrested protesters, an independent investigation into police brutality and the implementation of universal suffrage.
None of these demands had anything to do with foreign interference, let alone the US. Yet, the CCP’s propaganda machine went into overdrive, using every trick in the book to paint us as collaborators with foreign powers, especially the US. It spread disinformation and fake news, and manipulated social media to push its narrative.
The ultra-nationalist “little pinks” in China, brainwashed by the CCP’s propaganda, now harbor a deep hatred for Hong Kong and Hong Kongers, seeing us as traitorous puppets of the West, rather than fellow citizens fighting for our fundamental rights and freedoms.
The CCP might cloak itself in ideological rhetoric, but it is a practitioner of raw political realism at its core. Its strategy is simple yet effective: Divide and conquer. By sowing seeds of distrust, hatred and conflict among the public, the CCP aims to fragment society into disparate, warring factions. This fragmentation serves a dual purpose:
First, it prevents the formation of a unified opposition that could challenge the party’s authority.
Second, it creates a climate of fear and uncertainty in which the public, desperate for stability and security, are more likely to turn to the CCP as their protector and savior.
It is a bleak vision of society, one in which the state thrives on the discord and misery of its citizens. However, for the CCP, it is a price worth paying to preserve its power and privilege.
Many China observers praise the CCP’s long-term strategic thinking, but I disagree. The inconsistencies in its narratives reveal a myopic, play-by-play approach. The parallels between the CCP and the late Qing are becoming increasingly apparent. The CCP, like the dynasties before it, is riding a tiger it cannot dismount. That, I believe, is the reality Xi faces.
Simon Lee is a former executive and columnist of Hong Kong’s now-defunct Apple Daily who moved to the US in 2020.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS