Perhaps it was unrealistic to expect that the 60th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China would produce festivities symbolizing a new era of peaceful co-existence and cooperation with China’s neighbors. Even so, it is disappointing to note that the evolving use of the concept of “peace” or “peaceful” in Chinese government rhetoric simply had no place in a parade that bristled with Stalinist symbolism and offensive weaponry.
A number of analysts have pointed out — somewhat in China’s defense — that the bravado and military pomp primarily targeted a domestic audience, and that relationships with other governments continue to be guided by more congenial and sensitive techniques.
The Beijing Olympics opening ceremony was an excellent example of the Chinese government going out of its way to merge the requirements of both locals and foreigners — and largely succeeding in pleasing both sets of audiences. This was, admittedly, in the context of an international sporting event, but sport did not stop previous Olympic hosts, for example, from commandeering a celebration of internationalism in the service of something noxious.
If the National Day parade’s message was primarily domestic, it was still going to have an international dimension, and in this instance, with the aggressive display of indigenous weaponry, it seems the Chinese government is unconcerned that it might be portrayed as tilting toward the hardliners.
With so many ordinary Chinese expressing pride in their country not in terms of its own merits and standards but in terms of comparisons to other nations whose wealth and power they covet, the overall atmosphere justifies concerns over China’s intentions in the region — not just for Taiwan, for which Beijing’s goal is explicit, but also Japan, India, the Russian Federation and the US, for example.
Indeed, it is difficult to see how foreign governments — particularly Western governments and Japan — are going to find solace in the gargantuan bombast and cultural misappropriations that not only characterize China, but oppressive regimes everywhere.
As to the political effect on Taiwan, the reaction has largely been “more of the same” from both sides. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government can point to overtures of peace in speeches on the day and explain away the display of weaponry as stock behavior for any nation’s birthday celebrations. The Democratic Progressive Party, however, can rightly ask how China can be taken seriously in cross-strait negotiations when its primary measure of national might is the capacity for military threat rather than the ability to synthesize diverse regional interests.
For most ordinary Taiwanese, however, the parade will have simply acted as a reminder that people across the Strait are ruled by a political machine that, for all of its strength, is struggling to steer a complex, changing environment at home and to live up to the expectations of democratic states in its international activities.
Whether domestic or global, the pressing, shared problems of the world can no longer be unilaterally solved by great powers, nor by the exercising of power through the barrel of a gun.
Neither reality had any role to play in Thursday’s parade, and if the tenor of that celebration of national features, which ironically expelled ordinary Chinese from the surrounds, is a harbinger of China’s dealings with the region in the foreseeable future, then that is a tremendous shame — and another clear warning.
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
US President Donald Trump created some consternation in Taiwan last week when he told a news conference that a successful trade deal with China would help with “unification.” Although the People’s Republic of China has never ruled Taiwan, Trump’s language struck a raw nerve in Taiwan given his open siding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression seeking to “reunify” Ukraine and Russia. On earlier occasions, Trump has criticized Taiwan for “stealing” the US’ chip industry and for relying too much on the US for defense, ominously presaging a weakening of US support for Taiwan. However, further examination of Trump’s remarks in
It is being said every second day: The ongoing recall campaign in Taiwan — where citizens are trying to collect enough signatures to trigger re-elections for a number of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators — is orchestrated by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), or even President William Lai (賴清德) himself. The KMT makes the claim, and foreign media and analysts repeat it. However, they never show any proof — because there is not any. It is alarming how easily academics, journalists and experts toss around claims that amount to accusing a democratic government of conspiracy — without a shred of evidence. These
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
RSS