People's Liberation Army (PLA) General Zhu Chenghu (
There is nothing much new with these kind of threats.
For some, Zhu's statements can be seen as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) letting the PLA blow off steam and act tough. Others may see it as one of many CCP trial balloons to see how the Western powers react. If their response is tough, the CCP can then deny that Zhu was speaking on their behalf. If however the Western powers show a possible softening of their position on Taiwan's defense, then Beijing can ratchet up the rhetoric.
What is more surprising about Zhu's statement, however, is his unabashed disregard for the lives of Chinese citizens. Chinese leaders have in the past had no qualms about making cannon fodder (and now nuclear fodder) of their citizens. Mao Zedong's (
Given that the US' arsenal includes nuclear arms in the submarines in the South China Sea, this statement would also include all cities south of Xian.
Two things stand out from Zhu's threats. First he reveals the typical manipulation of the Confucian superordinate-subordinate roles that pervade Chinese society. The general masses must always believe that the central government has their best interests at heart. Subordinates should always be ready to make appropriate sacrifices. After all, that is why the CCP controls all the media.
Second, Zhu's talk is the standard discourse of the bully who occupies a position of superiority. He points to the vulnerability of the opposition. "You may have weapons but you are vulnerable. We have weapons to destroy US cities and we don't care about our people. So, you better think twice and give in to our demands." Hitler effectively used such posturing with Chamberlain for "peace in our time."
Some Sinophiles in the US have been arguing in Chamberlain fashion that we just "need to understand China, then we can all live in peace." Hello? What part of "If you don't give in to my demands and do what I want, then I will nuke you," don't you understand?
Zhu threatens further that opposing China would be harmful to the US economy, but that vulnerability is a gate that swings both ways. If the US economy and the world's were harmed, China's would be devastated.
When you come down to it, China would be a lot easier to take out economically than most countries imagine. A country no longer needs an army to take out China -- one would not even have to place a single soldier in the country. All a country would have to do is to take out key energy and industrial locations and it would implode. This is a vulnerability that even Japan and other countries in the region could exploit when threatened by China.
China right now depends on its economy, which is rapidly growing at a rate of 10 percent to 15 percent a year. Beneath its surface is a pressure cooker building up. With its own internal troubles and unrest, the government realizes it must keep the lid on and let steam off periodically.
The government controls the media and constantly clamps down on any gatherings and potential sources of trouble. The ease with which the well-orchestrated anti-Japanese riots were turned on and off like a steam valve illustrate both the government's need to deflect the focus onto an enemy outside and the ease with which the media is used to manipulate the public.
What keeps the masses satisfied under such draconian control is the fact that the economy keeps growing and money is being made. People can put up with losses of liberty if money is being made, but what would happen if the economy stopped growing?
Some people might ask what would happen to the world economy without China, but how closely are the two linked? How long would it take to replace Chinese factories with factories in other countries? What would it take to replace Chinese consumers with consumers in other lands?
The factories of China recently stole the lion's share of textile and other production from the factories of Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand and Bangladesh. Such movements could be reversed. The factories of the above countries would be more than happy to see the shoe on the other foot. And as for a consumer market, India and Pakistan offer markets that, in terms of population, will soon exceed China's.
The days of marching an army against China are over; Japan tried that, but the Chinese always had more land to retreat to. But now Japan would not need a land army to set China back. After a war of missile exchanges and bombings, would not Japan recover much more quickly than China? It is also worth noting that Japan's air defenses are better than China's. Going a step further, in a tit-for-tat nuclear exchange with the US, who do you think would come out on top?
Given this situation, what the rest of the world has to examine and realize is that it does not depend on China as much as it thinks it does. Certainly not to the extent that it will let itself be held hostage by nuclear threats by the likes of people like Zhu. The economic role China plays as producer and consumer can be easily replaced by many countries that are less belligerent.
The world has also to realize the extent to which it is being manipulated and held hostage by China's market. I applaud a country like Italy for having the courage to stand up to China and grant President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) a visa so that he could attend the Pope's funeral. China -- is trying to control the Catholic Church -- then refused to send their own delegates.
No one wants war, but as long as the hawkish generals in the PLA feel that they can pressure the world at a whim, the threats will continue and increase. Does anyone recall how Hitler said he would be satisfied with the Sudetenland?
Zhu's threats should be a wake-up call to the world. Do we really need a trading partner that says, if you don't give in to my demands to take over a free and democratic country like Taiwan, then I will nuke you regardless of the cost? What demands will be next? The world is competing for dwindling oil reserves, water supplies and other resources; it is a time when rational minds will be needed to build a better world. Zhu has already shown the true face of China that those living in Asia have known all along.
It is true that businessmen often have more allegiance to the dollar than to their country or principles, and Taiwanese businessmen are no exception. However, as the world enters an era of dwindling resources, it is time to restructure paradigms. People like Zhu belong to a different age that can only see the world in terms of superordinate-subordinate relationships. They will sacrifice everything before giving up their position of superiority.
It is time to recognize China's true intent in business, the strings attached and the manipulation involved, before the threats get worse.
Jerome Keating is the co-author of Island in the Stream, a Quick Case Study of Taiwan's Complex History.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS