China is Myanmar's UN Security Council protector and patron. This stark fact is the first thing to consider before entering into a long-winded debate about how much pressure China should apply to Myanmar diplomatically, or in any other way.
Given that Myanmar's military government has done very well for itself in the face of present sanctions, any sensible retaliation against it by the international community will require new tactics. But sending in a UN envoy to smooth over atrocities and lend the junta dignity by advocating half-cocked solutions is not one of them: The UN will be toyed with in the same way that Myanmar has toyed with the world over the fate of activist Aung San Suu Kyi.
The severity of the international response to Myanmar's latest assault on unarmed civilians and basic human dignity will need to be felt more by Myanmar's unofficial partners -- China, India and Singapore, in particular -- than the regime itself, at least for the moment.
Tighter sanctions are unavoidable and necessary, even if in the medium term they appear ineffective. However, their impact would be greatly increased if Myanmar's advocates were also carefully targeted. States and companies that continue to sustain this military government with non-humanitarian aid, weapons, economic opportunities or international influence must have real pressure placed on them. Otherwise, it's all hot air.
The US and the EU in particular must seize this opportunity to punish countries and companies outside their borders that profit from the misery of the Burmese people. In this regard, it is encouraging that some in Europe are seeing through the nonsense that China spouts about non-interference in the domestic affairs of other countries -- and naming the Beijing Olympics as a possible point of retaliation over China's ignoble history in Burmese affairs.
One fundamental reason why China will not transform the style of Myanmar's government is that Beijing uses the same methods to control its own population. China has deployed troops against its own unarmed civilians before, and will do so again if corresponding circumstances present themselves.
It is also important to note that a genuinely democratic Myanmar would jeopardize Chinese interests in Southeast Asia.
Yet, if Taiwan's envoy to the US is to be believed, the latest violence may see the US cozying up to Beijing -- again -- in the belief that the Chinese are in the best position to bring this vicious little junta to heel, as with the North Koreans.
We can only hope that the US State Department will have the wisdom not to allow engagement with China on this matter to turn into a gambling chip for cross-strait maneuvering. In so doing the US would reward China -- again -- for its support for repressive governments.
As with China's enthusiasm for autocracy at home and abroad, the truth about Myanmar is stark and unforgiving.
It will not compromise unless it is forced to do so. It understands only the brutality that sustains the garish privileges of the ruling clique at the expense of the welfare -- and lives -- of ordinary people.
Donald Trump’s return to the White House has offered Taiwan a paradoxical mix of reassurance and risk. Trump’s visceral hostility toward China could reinforce deterrence in the Taiwan Strait. Yet his disdain for alliances and penchant for transactional bargaining threaten to erode what Taiwan needs most: a reliable US commitment. Taiwan’s security depends less on US power than on US reliability, but Trump is undermining the latter. Deterrence without credibility is a hollow shield. Trump’s China policy in his second term has oscillated wildly between confrontation and conciliation. One day, he threatens Beijing with “massive” tariffs and calls China America’s “greatest geopolitical
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) made the astonishing assertion during an interview with Germany’s Deutsche Welle, published on Friday last week, that Russian President Vladimir Putin is not a dictator. She also essentially absolved Putin of blame for initiating the war in Ukraine. Commentators have since listed the reasons that Cheng’s assertion was not only absurd, but bordered on dangerous. Her claim is certainly absurd to the extent that there is no need to discuss the substance of it: It would be far more useful to assess what drove her to make the point and stick so
The central bank has launched a redesign of the New Taiwan dollar banknotes, prompting questions from Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — “Are we not promoting digital payments? Why spend NT$5 billion on a redesign?” Many assume that cash will disappear in the digital age, but they forget that it represents the ultimate trust in the system. Banknotes do not become obsolete, they do not crash, they cannot be frozen and they leave no record of transactions. They remain the cleanest means of exchange in a free society. In a fully digitized world, every purchase, donation and action leaves behind data.
A large majority of Taiwanese favor strengthening national defense and oppose unification with China, according to the results of a survey by the Mainland Affairs Council (MAC). In the poll, 81.8 percent of respondents disagreed with Beijing’s claim that “there is only one China and Taiwan is part of China,” MAC Deputy Minister Liang Wen-chieh (梁文傑) told a news conference on Thursday last week, adding that about 75 percent supported the creation of a “T-Dome” air defense system. President William Lai (賴清德) referred to such a system in his Double Ten National Day address, saying it would integrate air defenses into a
RSS