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.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS