People often seek security through means which challenge the security of others. An even worse scenario is created when the pursuit of self-interest by the individual leads to a poor outcome for all.
The classical "prisoner's dilemma" is based on the idea of two accomplices to a crime being arrested and each offered their freedom in return for testifying against the other. Each party has two choices, namely cooperate with each other or confess to the authorities. Each must decide without knowing what the other will do. No matter what the other does, defection yields a higher payoff than cooperation.
When it comes to recent cross-strait dynamics, a "prisoner's dilemma" occurred when leaders of the pan-blue camp kept knocking on China's door and left President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration in a dire situation. All four parties in the game -- Chen, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (連戰), People First Party Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) and Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) -- have tried to take advantage of the others' weaknesses while maximizing their own interests, regardless of the ultimate consequences for all.
The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) has incorporated both good-cop and bad-cop tactics to downgrade Lien's visit to China. Since claiming Lien was falling into Beijing's "divide and conquer" trap, the DPP has used every possible means to denounce the KMT's actions as part of a plan to delegitimize government authority while running the risk of selling out Taiwan's national interests. After warning the opposition about the consequences of bypassing the government to reach a deal with the Beijing authorities, Chen made a goodwill gesture by inviting Lien and Soong to consult with the government before heading to China.
Lien finally made a courtesy phone call to Chen before he embarked on the trip and clearly defined the visit as "personal," stressing that he did not represent the government. To avoid being labeled a tool of Beijing's unification campaign, Soong also publicly denied the accusation that he planned to sign official agreements with the leaders of China.
The Chinese authorities under Hu's leadership, apparently trying to minimize the negative impact of the "Anti-Secession" Law, have undoubtedly earned political points by attracting pan-blue leaders to shake hands with them. It is clear that Beijing's goal is to isolate the Chen administration and sabotage the rise of Taiwan consciousness by extending its economic leverage to the Taiwanese business community and the pan-blue camp.
Since no central authority can force each party to abide by the rules of the game, solving the cross-strait prisoner's dilemma constitutes the key challenge for the Chen administration. While preventing the opposition parties from reaching a deal with China, Chen needs to skillfully manage and integrate the pan-blues' maneuvers to further Taiwan's key national interests.
The prisoner's dilemma game is simply an abstract formulation of some very common and interesting situations in which what is best for each person individually leads to mutual defection, whereas everyone would have been better off with mutual cooperation. In view of China's unpredictability and lack of democratic understanding, it is essential for Chen to set the boundaries for the pan-blue camp (the punishment for defection) and utilize public support for equal, dignified and mutually beneficial engagement with China.
Chen did a relatively good job by mobilizing public concern to minimize the possibility of Lien compromising Taiwan's sovereignty. However, the government needs more decisiveness and strong leadership to convince the pan-blue camp to place Taiwan's national interests ahead of their engagement with China.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS