The Chinese Communist Party's third generation leader Jiang Zemin (
Does this mean that Hu's time has arrived? It is still too early to say.
Hu's rise has been shrouded in mystery. When he took over the presidency and the position as party leader, international media could not pin down his political beliefs. Even though he had already wielded considerable power, he was careful not to impinge on Jiang's power. He did not pronounce his policies, probably because he was prudent. What he did was a likely necessary political calculation during a leadership change in an authoritarian regime.
With Hu's replacement of Jiang, will there be a policy change? In the short term, Hu is unlikely to modify Jiang's policies too much. Beijing will continue to stay on good terms with the US. Not challenging Washington, it will however embrace policies that increase its presence and influence in the Asia-Pacific region and globally. Though Hu's proposal of "peaceful rising" for China was shot down by hawks like Jiang, the country's continued economic development will inevitably force Hu to downplay the intimidating force China represents. Hu's use of strategies is expected to be more flexible since he now does not need to worry as much about pressure from hawks in the military.
Jiang has held power for over a decade and has been a dominant influence on cross-strait relations. "Jiang's eight points" are on a par with Deng Xiaoping's (
In the two years that Hu has been in power, he has focused primarily on battling corruption and building up the economy. While Hu will, in the short term, assess the results of the US presidential election and Taiwan's legislative election, he will certainly not depart from Jiang's Eight Points. This does not rule out a more active posture in developing cross-strait trade as a means of using commercial pressure to bring about unification. This is something that Taiwan needs to guard against.
In his videoconference with the UN Correspondents Association last week, Chen sought to engage Hu in a dialogue. Taiwan recognizes that Hu is now established in power, but any thaw in the cross-strait relationship will probably have to wait till spring next 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
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS