Chinese President Jiang Zemin's (
According to Chinese Foreign Minister Qian Qichen (錢其琛), this has occurred because of Washington's new focus on terrorism after the Sept. 11 attacks on the US. It is argued that the US was looking for a new enemy after the Cold War, and China seemed to fit the role. Qian implies that because the US has now found its new enemy in global terrorism, this has created an important area of convergence between the two countries. Beijing was encouraged after the US branding of Xinjiang's East Turkestan Islamic Movement as a terrorist organization. This has given Beijing a license to crush separatism in its strategic northwest province.
Beijing is cautious, though, about the future of Sino-US
relations. It worries about US global hegemony, particularly its increased presence on China's periphery in the former Soviet central Asian republics.
But Qian is hopeful that as Sino-US cooperation develops, it will further isolate "anti-Chinese forces inside America." He, therefore, counsels that even "when relations experience setbacks and hardships [at times], we have to cope stoically and remain confident of victory."
Jiang's visit reflects such stoicism. There seems to be a new awareness that China has more to gain from dogged perseverance to keep Sino-US relations on an even keel, than from creating a power rivalry. The US is simply too powerful and belligerent for China to risk confrontation. Such caution is all too clear regarding Iraq, with Beijing leaving France and Russia to do much of the talking against a possible US invasion.
But there are issues, like Tai-wan's unification, where China is adamant. However, being aware that Bush is committed to doing "whatever it takes" to help Taiwan defend itself, Beijing has been averse to manufacturing a crisis. The fact, though, remains that its "sovereignty" over Taiwan is non-negotiable, and hence it remains a flashpoint. China has amassed a large number of missiles along its southeast coast facing Taiwan.
But is China's missile threat credible? Basically, China's military threat is a terror tactic designed to demoralize the Tai-wanese while simultaneously enticing them into a rewarding economic relationship. The lure of China's vast market and investment opportunities is probably a greater threat -- at least in the medium and long term -- to Tai-wan's separate identity than a military invasion. A military attack would seriously damage China's economy by stalling and disrupting its exports and investments, and could lead it into direct military conflict with the US.
But one can not rule out adventurism on China's part. Shen Dingli, a Chinese expert on strategic affairs, has said, "Once the Taiwan front is closed [following its annexation], we may turn to the South China Sea," where China claims all the islands and the surrounding waters. This will make the South China Sea into its inland lake with power to regulate and control all shipping lanes, maritime trade and naval movements.
Indeed, Shen believes that "we have a third issue to resolve" -- after gaining Taiwan and South China Sea sovereignty -- and that is the recovery of the Diaoyutai Islands from Japanese "occupation." This is just for starters. China also has the undeclared "historical mis-sion" of establishing its overlordship of the Asia-Pacific region. It is, therefore, difficult to see how Sino-US relations can develop into a constructive equation.
What China basically seeks is US facilitation or neutrality regard-ing its regional ambitions. In other words, it is aiming to edge out the US from the Asia-Pacific region to become the area's hegemon, a charge it levels at Washington. But as shown in its new National Security Strategy blueprint, the US is determined not to allow any country to ever challenge its political and military supremacy.
How realistic, therefore, are China's hegemonic ambitions? There are two aspects to this. First, there is probably a feeling that the US will, sooner or later, overreach itself in its global anti-terrorism campaign with its elusive targets. This will create a lot of resentment and unrest among countries required by the US to toe its line, making it increasingly unpopular. China's steady course, on the other hand, will consolidate its economic and political power and win it greater credibility, even if by default.
Like any neat analysis this has its problems. As Shen has pointed out, China has the unfinished business of recovering its sovereignty over vast stretches of Asian land and sea mass. It has long-standing territorial and maritime disputes with its neighbors. If for no other reason, the US is needed in the region as a protective counterweight to China, a regionally ambitious power. Besides, with its large Pacific coast and regional economic ties, the US is a Pacific power in its own right. It also has close security ties with countries in the region. Therefore, the US is integral to the Asia-Pacific region. And whatever its trials and tribulations, it will be around for a long time to come.
Second, in terms of military power, China is way behind the US. Although it is modernizing its military machine, it is in no position to challenge or supplant US power. It lacks the capacity to sustain military operations much beyond its borders. And this gap is unlikely to be bridged, because Washington is determined to maintain its superiority and supremacy.
China is undoubtedly an important regional military power. But, as Jonathan Pollack of the US Naval War College has pointed out, "Let's not make them out to be 10 feet tall."
Sushil Seth is a freelance writer based in Sydney, Australia.
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations