ON SEPT. 11 this year, terrorists attacked Washington and New York, leaving thousands of US civilians dead or injured. The tragedy instantly evoked sympathy for the US people on the part of most governments and people in the world. They not only denounced the shameless terrorists but also expressed willingness to stand by the US' side to strike and eliminate terrorists.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair furiously reproached the terrorists, saying the UK would work with the US to wipe them out. Russian President Vladimir Putin also said he would assist the US in the campaign against terrorists and ordered the nation to observe three minutes of silence for the victims. The leaders of France, Pakistan and India also expressed their sincere condolences. Even Cuban President Fidel Castro, a long-term enemy of the US, said his nation would provide medical assistance to support the American people.
Chinese President Jiang Zemin (
The attitude of the Chinese leaders is a result of their long-held view that the US is a hegemonistic, imperialistic state and a monopolizer of world resources. They hope the US will collapse so that China can proceed to dominate the Asia Pacific region and even the world by virtue of its wealth and powerful military. On Chinese web sites, some Chinese were even applauding and cheering the terrorist attacks, saying "[The US] deserves it!" This is truly a shame for all Chinese people.
In the 1930s, when China was invaded by Japanese imperialists, the US people did not say that the Chinese had got their just desserts. Instead, during World War II, the US government and people threw all-out support behind China to defeat Japan. During the first few years after World War II, the US supported the Chinese Communist Party's proposal to form a coalition government with the KMT and the democratic parties. It also made great efforts to help China to follow a path of modernization toward democracy and freedom. China, however, took the path of authoritarianism and curried favor with Russia, finally creating two major antagonistic camps in the world.
Chinese leaders have always given priority to political and economic interests in handling international relations. They only think about how to become a greater superpower than the US, while giving little thought to the fact that human beings should care for and assist each other in a harmonious global village.
After more than 30 years of antagonism, Beijing and Washington finally established diplomatic ties in 1979. US leaders have repeatedly stated that a strong, democratic China is beneficial to the US and all humanity. But Chinese leaders believe a strong, democratic US is detrimental to China. They fear that American ideals, institutions and values will "peacefully transform" China, and help the Chinese people to see the truth and therefore opt for a democratic society, putting an end to authoritarian rule.
The Chinese government, on the one hand, intends to reinforce its authoritarian regime by treating the US as an enemy and lying to the Chinese people; but it hopes on the other hand to benefit from US capital, technology and markets in order to maintain its authoritarian rule, by getting close to the US even while remaining fearful of it. Inherent contradictions are created as a result. China's attitude toward the Sept. 11 attacks fully reflects these contradictions.
On the day of the tragedy, Jiang had no choice but to send his condolences to US President George W. Bush, but he did so reluctantly and dared not express too much sympathy. Jiang hoped that the US would not bounce back from the tragedy, but he also hoped that China could enter the WTO with US support and benefit from a US economic recovery. China's direct trade with the US last year totaled US$200 billion, a half of China's total foreign trade.
Jiang is afraid that the anti-US nationalism among Chinese people, long cultivated by the government, will rise up and completely ruin Beijing-Washington relations. But he is also unwilling to tell the people the truth about Sino-US ties. The Chinese Communist Party's central propaganda department has ostensibly ordered a ban on the propagation of anti-US sentiment and rhetoric, but it has also published an anti-US article on the web site of the People's Daily newspaper (人民日報). This string of contradictory behavior reveals the attitude of the Chinese leadership.
Some Chinese intellectuals and students also show signs of a self-contradictory mentality. Chinese university students, inspired by the idea that "China can say `no,'" raise their arms and yell out anti-US slogans. But meanwhile, they register for GRE and TOFEL exams and queue up overnight outside the US Embassy to apply for visas to study in the US. Once their application is turned down, they simply lash out against "US imperialism." These intellectuals and students take full advantage of the generosity and friendliness of the US government and people, but deep in their heart, they hate the US. Will these students -- the future leaders of China -- be able to lead the country to integration with the international community? Will they be able to handle Beijing-Washington ties in a peaceful and smooth manner? We doubt it.
To defeat terrorism, the US is working to organize an international anti-terrorism coalition, and has talked Pakistan and India into taking part. Russia has expressed its unconditional support for the war on terrorism, and given permission for US troops to be deployed in Tajikistan and Uzbekistan. Iran, however, remains neutral, not opposing US military action against Afghanistan.
As a result, Beijing fears that a US-led coalition may take shape southwest of China -- with its long-term ally, Pakistan, and its long-standing enemy, India, cooperating with the US. Beijing dreads the threat posed by the US-India-Pakistan coalition.
Recently, Japan, Germany, India, Saudi Arabia, Korea, the Philippines, Bangladesh, Portugal, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan have joined the anti-terrorism coalition, which is taking shape on a global scale. But, Beijing hopes that the coalition will operate under the control and guidance of the UN Security Council, in which Beijing has veto power. The council, however, lacks armed forces, financial resources and an integrated enforcement agency, so how could it carry out the anti-terrorism mission? The coalition can only be successful with US leadership and participation from NATO, and central and South Asian countries.
A commentary headlined "China's Obstructionism" published in The Wall Street Journal pointed out that "Beijing will try to block the war on terrorism and use it to turn ordinary Chinese against the democratic West."
Beijing will eventually turn out to be the loser if it refuses to join the anti-terrorism war sincerely and actively. When this war ends, the spectrum of regional political power will be re-defined around the world, and a new international order will emerge -- all these will be determined by countries' positions in the war on terrorism.
In the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks, Beijing-Washington relations reached a new turning point, which will have a profound influence on the two countries. US Secretary of State Colin Powell stated that the US would handle its foreign relations on the basis of the anti-terrorism principle. We believe that the US will gradually carry out comprehensive reviews of its foreign, economic, trade and financial policies, as well as immigration and foreign student policies. US security will be the priority in all these policies.
In the new international situation, Beijing's communist regime, for the sake of China's long-term development, should consider changing its policies on Beijing-Washington relations. These authors suggest the following five directions.
1. China should abandon its hatred toward the US and its policy of adopting military solutions to Sino-US hostilities.
2. China should change its authoritarian rule and end the suppression of its people. It should establish a democratic coalition government, which Mao Zedong (
3. China should actively participate in the war on terrorism and dispatch Chinese troops to join the US forces and deploy in Afghanistan. This will not only support US action against terrorism, but also enable them to defend China's western frontier. China should boldly engage in military exchanges and cooperation with the US and Western countries. Joining the anti-terrorism war against Afghanistan means safeguarding security in western China and preventing the rise of Xinjiang's pro-independence forces, which collude with Afghanistan's Taliban regime. Only if the Chinese military participates in the war can the powers of Beijing, Washington and Moscow reach a balance in the region and eventually achieve peace.
4. While participating in the war on terrorism China should at the same time maintain friendly relations with Islamic countries. This will boost China's reputation and status in the Central Asian region and among Islamic countries.
5. Only by cooperating with Washington in the Central Asian region can Beijing ensure that oil from Central Asia and the Middle East can be safely transported to China.
Consider the friendship China and the US enjoyed when the two joined forces to defeat Japanese imperialists during World War II. How genuine and valuable is friendship that is established through victory over a common enemy. Clearly, the successes of China's modernization would have been very difficult to achieve without US support. Beijing and Washington should engage in long-term and amicable development, thus benefiting their two peoples and all of humanity.
Chris Wu is editor in chief of the China Spring and China Affairs magazines. Kam Yiu-yu is a former editor in chief of the Hong Kong-based Wen Wei Po. Yu Haocheng is a visiting professor at UCLA.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath