After having read Arthur Waldron's article ("China's rise and world democracy," Sept 21, page 8) I would like to make a few comments. Any opinion about China contains always and only part of the truth, and yours is of no exception. Just let me use an example to illustrate my opinion about China's friends in the world.
The relationship between the US and its friends (France, Germany and so on) is also strained in one way or another (eg, war in Iraq, trade and other issues). The president of the US is also a good friend of oil-rich dictators from the Middle East and elsewhere. So where is the difference in this respect between China and the US?
It is also of my opinion that the arrogance of the US as expressed by some Americans, and illustrated by your article, constitute certainly one of the factors that gets the US into trouble in many places in the world, such as Iraq. It is also forgotten that those who first settled in the US many many years ago not only mistreated the local indigenous people, but even killed most of them.
I certainly agree that China needs to do better, but those who want to give lessons to others need to be clean first. As far as I know, that is certainly not the case for the US.
Francois Zhang
France
Arthur Waldron replies:
Nothing is more gratifying to a writer than feedback from intelligent readers. Obviously you are not happy with what I said. But allow me to make a few points. First, no one who has spent his entire adult life studying Chinese language, literature, history, and so forth could have anything but the highest opinion of Chinese civilization. It would be insane to devote yourself to something you did not profoundly admire.
Second, although you do state that "any opinion about China contains always only part of the truth" you do not in fact adduce any new facts about China that contradict those I have given, or that might affect the inferences I have drawn. So unless you can show me where my facts or inferences about China are incorrect, I will not be able to learn much from you.
Third, I sense your real concern is not so much with China as with the US. That is fair, but remember that had I been speaking about the US, I would have given a very different speech, and one that you might have found more congenial.
Certainly my country has many faults, and you mention some of them. But if alliances with corrupt or dictatorial regimes (Saudi Arabia), or use of force (Iraq) or the killing of indigenous peoples is wrong, then they are wrong for China, too. Nothing is gained by showing that the US, too, sins and falls short. My loyalty is to a set of ideals, not to a particular country, and when my country goes wrong, I will speak out.
Furthermore, I would ask you to weigh the two systems. Is a government-controlled press equivalent to a free press? Is pressure for democracy -- ? not everywhere, but very clearly in Taiwan, South Korea, Philippines, and so forth--equivalent to support for dictators everywhere? Is a system where people do not vote to be equated with one where they do? For all its blemishes and errors, I think freedom -- ? what we find not just in America but in Taiwan and India and Japan and France and Poland and South Africa -- is to be preferred to what we find under Communism in China or North Korea or Vietnam or Cuba. Furthermore, I think that China will change.
If you disagree with these propositions, please explain exactly why and how, and to support yourself with facts, so that your work will rise to the level of rigorous, factually grounded intellectual argument.
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
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
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.
Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, people have been asking if Taiwan is the next Ukraine. At a G7 meeting of national leaders in January, Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida warned that Taiwan “could be the next Ukraine” if Chinese aggression is not checked. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has said that if Russia is not defeated, then “today, it’s Ukraine, tomorrow it can be Taiwan.” China does not like this rhetoric. Its diplomats ask people to stop saying “Ukraine today, Taiwan tomorrow.” However, the rhetoric and stated ambition of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on Taiwan shows strong parallels with