Last Tuesday, Chinese police shot dead at least three villagers during protests in Dongzhou Village, Guangdong Province, over forced appropriation of land for the construction of a wind farm. The protest deteriorated into a battle between the police and the villagers when relatives were not granted access to the bodies of those who had been killed.
Officials blocked the release of the story for three days, but it became public last Friday when it was revealed that the death toll may have been 30 or more -- which would make it one of the bloodiest crackdowns on protesters since the 1989 student-led protest in Beijing's Tiananmen Square.
According to Reuters, quoting Chinese Security Minister Zhou Yongkang (
The official figures for the number of confrontations between the public and the police probably underestimate the scale of such incidents, and the Chinese government has been glossing over the extent of the unrest. The international community is not convinced by Beijing's claims about the benefits of "social democracy with Chinese characteristics," and is even getting a little sick of them. It is beginning to realize that Beijing's sense of superiority is based on the government's willingness to shoot and kill civilians in order to retain its grip on power. After unleashing the military on the Tiananmen protesters, the government took no political or moral responsibility for its actions. It cannot be criticized by the Chinese media, and cannot be voted out of office.
On Oct. 19, the Information Office of China's State Council issued a document of more than 30,000 characters titled Building Political Democracy in China. The document put special emphasis on the fact that "China's democracy is a people's democracy under the leadership of the CCP [Chinese Communist Party]." This should be revised to state that China's democracy is one in which the people can be massacred by the CCP.
This document has been regarded by many in the international community as a white paper on China's political development. The document notes that democracy springs from the people and is not imposed from outside. The government's own words go to show that Beijing has no intention of introducing democracy in China.
The question must be asked: If China has not achieved democracy in the course of its 5,000-year history, are its people condemned to be denied it forever? Would not any benevolent government seek to learn from other nations and bring about a more civilized system of rule? Is not a system of counting heads preferable to one of breaking them?
The people of Taiwan are concerned about the development of democracy in China. They sincerely hope that China will attain democracy as soon as possible, and that it will not lightly resort to armed conflict to resolve the cross-strait impasse.
But from what we have seen of this massacre of villagers, the Chinese government has yet to learn the lesson of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. If it treats its own people with such violence, it would surely act with even greater harshness against the people of Taiwan. Surely those who advocate unification with China cannot be blind to this?
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS