The US released two separate reports on China on July 12 and July 15. One was the Defense Department's report Military Power of the People's Republic of China and the other was the first annual report of the bipartisan congressional US-China Security Review Commission.
These two reports evaluate China's military power and threat to the US and Taiwan in a relatively frank and conscientious manner. The latter primarily pertains to issues of economics, finance, politics and diplomacy.
Some of the wording of the reports could never have been stated so bluntly in the era of the Clinton administration. For example, the defense department report raises doubts about China's commitment to unifying with Taiwan by peaceful means. It states, "The PLA's offensive capabilities improve as each year passes, providing Beijing with an increasing number of credible options to intimidate or actually attack Taiwan. Should China use force, its primary goal likely would be to compel a negotiated solution on terms favorable to Beijing. Such an approach would necessitate a rapid collapse of Taiwan's national will, precluding the United States from intervening."
In the security review, the most remarkable part is the recognition that the origin of the China threat lies in US goodwill, ie, that Chinese authorities are abusing friendly relations with the US to obtain economic, military and other benefits. In the end, the report says they will become a major threat to the US.
After threatening to attack Taiwan many times without effect -- apart from creating a sense of unrest in the international community and provoking a strong reaction from the US -- China has now entered a period of "concealing its ability and biding its time."
Some political figures and media organizations have praised China for its flexibility and goodwill. But how could they have forgotten the motive for Liu Bei (
Unfortunately, the "Committee of 100" (C-100,
Whether or not China is threatening Taiwan militarily depends on China's words and actions, not on the words of C-100 -- unless China announces that the C-100 is its spokesman and its tool. China has never been willing to abandon the policy of using force to unify with Taiwan. Is that or is that not a military threat?
In Fujian Province, China has deployed 350 to 400 missiles aimed at Taiwan, and every year 50 new missiles are added. This isn't a military threat? Official Chinese academics like Xin Qi (
China ignores the plight of peasants and laid-off factory workers, ignores serious deficiencies in its education budget and ignores the need for a major campaign to prevent the spread of AIDS, but somehow finds a way to buy large amounts of advanced weaponry from Russia, becoming the largest weapons importer in the world. Are they buying all these toys for the kids to play war games?
If China's military threat results in prejudice against Chinese-Americans within the US, then C-100 can criticize China while reminding the US government its principles on the other hand. But it absolutely is not acceptable to simply act as China's mouthpiece. "We are deeply saddened, if not outraged, by the questioning of our loyalty as Americans," said the C-100 statement. Who would have suspected their loyalty if they had not been so close to speaking for Beijing? For an American to speak frequently for authoritarian China is to betray the ideals for which the US was founded. The loyalty of these people should be questioned -- not the loyalty of every C-100 member, but the loyalty of people who wave flags and shout on Beijing's behalf under the name of C-100.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
Ursula K. le Guin in The Ones Who Walked Away from Omelas proposed a thought experiment of a utopian city whose existence depended on one child held captive in a dungeon. When taken to extremes, Le Guin suggests, utilitarian logic violates some of our deepest moral intuitions. Even the greatest social goods — peace, harmony and prosperity — are not worth the sacrifice of an innocent person. Former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁), since leaving office, has lived an odyssey that has brought him to lows like Le Guin’s dungeon. From late 2008 to 2015 he was imprisoned, much of this