There have been reports that Tung Chee-hwa (
Tung's first term lasted five years. His policy implementation was ineffective, giving him little public support, and the Hong Kong economy was in the doldrums. Despite this, he was elected -- if that is what it can be called -- to serve a second term.
Apart from vigorous support from former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (
According to Deng Xiaoping's (
Although the CCP has gradually understood what a market economy is, its one-party autocracy remains unchanged, and the party makes all decisions for the Chinese people. As China continues with its economic experiment, perhaps the contradictions of such an autocratic system are not serious enough to cause significant conflict in its young and booming market economy. However, in highly capitalist Hong Kong, such totalitarian factors are out of tune with its market economy, which enjoys a great deal of freedom. This is also why, no matter how hard Tung tried, his performance was still unable to satisfy the people of Hong Kong. The territory's people, even though they never enjoyed the sweet taste of democracy during the days of colonial rule, are now discontent with the fake "one country, two systems." So how could the people of Taiwan, who enjoy a high degree of democracy and autonomy, possibly accept this policy?
The replacement of Tung before the end of his legal term could mean that Beijing has lost faith in the chief executive's ability to govern the territory. Beijing is therefore pushing him out before the situation worsens. Nevertheless, whether Tung's successor is Chief Secretary for Administration Donald Tsang (
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