The “Jasmine Revolution” is rolling over North Africa: first Tunisia, then Egypt and now Libya. Oppressed people are suddenly seeing that entrenched regimes are not forever, and are taking to the streets, giving people power new meaning.
However, it is having worldwide repercussions: Restlessness and unrest has not been confined to neighboring countries such as Bahrain, Yemen and Syria. This weekend, pro-democracy activists in China attempted to spread the word on the Jasmine Revolution, leading to an unprecedented crackdown by security forces, and an almost total clampdown on the Internet. In addition, the Chinese Communist Party politburo reportedly met to discuss measures to prevent the news of what is happening in North Africa from spreading in China.
Where this is going in China is anybody’s guess, but we need to ask the question: “Whose side are you on?”
In Egypt, people suffered under former Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak’s repression for many decades. His secret police was all-powerful and it had student spies at US universities, tattling on their fellow students.
However, during the decades when this went on, few in the West had an inkling of what was going on and even fewer saw what was coming. Mubarak was perceived as an ally of the West and the US and Western European governments didn’t want to “rock the boat” and upset the “sensitive relations” with the regime. In doing so, we neglected to maintain relations with the leadership of the democratic movement — those who will be important in the days ahead.
By the same token, many in the West are all too concerned about not “rocking the boat” and upsetting the “sensitive relations” with the repressive leaders in Beijing. We need to be on the right side of history and do a much better job in establishing and maintaining good relations with those who work for human rights and democracy — in China itself, as well as in Tibet and East Turkestan [Xinjiang]. The Dalai Lamas and Rebiya Kadeers of this world need to be guests of honor in the White House and presidential offices around the world all the time.
For Taiwan, there is a particularly important role. Under the government of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) it has moved toward “rapprochement” with China, but in the view of many observers, it has been too accommodating and has put insufficient emphasis on democracy and human rights.
Ma recently emphasized in an interview with the Washington Post that he wants US arms sales to proceed in order to negotiate with China “from a position of strength.” While we need to be fully supportive of US arms sales to Taiwan, we must also emphasize that Taiwan’s most important asset is its democracy. That gives it much more “strength” than all the weapon systems combined.
So, in its dealings with China, Taiwan needs to be up front with human rights and democracy, instead of keeping these issues on the back burner or avoiding them altogether. Taiwan can help China best by being much more supportive of China’s democratic movement. Taiwan should warmly welcome the Dalai Lama and World Uyghur Congress president Rebiya Kadeer instead of trying to keep these courageous leaders out.
If and when a monumental change takes place in China, as well as in Tibet and East Turkestan, we need to be able to say that we were on the right side of history. We need to be able to say that we helped push in the right direction. Taiwan has a proud history of democratic change. That needs to be held up as an example for China to follow.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS