As dozens of protesting monks interrupted a group of foreign journalists being escorted through Lhasa last Thursday, one thing was made amply clear: Despite what China says, the situation in Tibet is not under control.
Once again, Beijing is devastating its own credibility a la "SARS 2003" by denying any legitimate causes for discontent and depicting Tibetan unrest as unprovoked "terrorist" attacks coordinated by the Dalai Lama.
But this time Beijing has an advantage: The political landscape has changed significantly. Its influence has grown in direct proportion to its economic clout, and the effects of this are clearer than ever.
Nineteen years ago, the EU responded to Beijing's violent crackdown on demonstrators at Tiananmen Square by imposing an arms embargo.
By contrast, over the weekend, EU foreign ministers meeting in Slovenia issued a statement on the situation in Tibet that could only be described as toothless and unconvincing. Leaders essentially contented themselves with hoping for better days in Tibet, without recognizing the underlying problems that have fueled discord there or condemning Beijing's crackdown on all manifestations of dissent, including peaceful protests.
Compared with many government responses to the situation in Myanmar only six months earlier, the West is saying disappointingly little about why Tibetan monks would be willing to risk their personal freedoms by marching on the street, an action that can mean years in China's extrajudicial laogai - or re-education through labor - camps.
Few top politicians seem willing to raise Beijing's hackles over Tibet - US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and German Chancellor Angela Merkel being notable exceptions. The reasons for this are well-known to Taiwanese, as the nation has watched its pool of allies gradually evaporate under the heat of China's fierce economic growth.
Taiwanese, Tibetans and all others who suffer from Beijing's authoritarianism face the same dilemma: An international community that is increasingly inclined to turn a deaf ear to their calls for help and a blind eye to blatant oppression.
Yet while China's undeniable political and economic sway risks silencing critics abroad, it is not the only lesson to be learned from the past weeks.
China has once again shown its ultra-sensitivity to Western criticism of its record - even weak criticism - and that is a sentiment that opens doors. It is something for Taiwanese and Tibetans alike to seize upon and a tool that human-rights activists have harnessed in the past with promising results. Beijing's desire to escape further chastising over its rights abuses led to its welcoming a UN special rapporteur on torture for the first time in 2005; it led to the release of high-profile Uighur rights activist Rebiya Kadeer the same year; and led authorities to escort foreign diplomats on a tour of Lhasa last week.
But if the international community does not push beyond these first crucial steps, those efforts will remain purely symbolic, leading to little in the way of concrete change. Furthermore, there is a risk that China will become increasingly adept at manipulating these gestures to erect a facade of sincerity.
Never before had democratic countries been so reliant on a single authoritarian regime than they are on China in today's globalized economy. If the result is that governments inscreasingly refrain from criticizing oppressive regimes, their talk of promoting universal human rights will become mere guff.
But as China has shown very little initiative of its own for democratic reform, the West may come to regret having offered its silence on human-rights issues at such a cheap price.
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
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
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
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
RSS