China analogy wrong
Lin Cho-shui (林濁水) mistakenly tried to draw an analogy with China following the recent unrest in North Africa (“Beijing strangely silent on Mideast,” Feb. 24, page 8), as did Wang Dan (王丹) (“Revolution in N Africa has lessons for Chinese,” Feb. 23, page 8, and “From little acorns can grow mighty oak trees,” Feb. 25, page 8).
Lin pointed to the levels of GDP in Egypt and Tunisia, expressing surprise that economic growth did not prevent the overthrow of the regimes there and suggesting that China is nervous of the apparent precedent it sets — hence the censorship of the news from North Africa by the Chinese state.
Of course, China doesn’t want to allow its population to draw any inspiration from North Africa and is nervous of the possible precedent, but the cases are nowhere near comparable. Crucially, Lin mistakes the headline GDP rate for the economy as a whole. The fact is that in the Arab world, authoritarian regimes have over the last two or three decades encouraged high levels of education, but have been unable to find jobs for an increasingly university-educated middle class.
Indeed, massive levels of unemployment and subsequent frustration at the lack of political change is a key factor in the rise of Islamic fundamentalism. Although not without disturbances in rural areas, China, on the other hand, has on the whole managed its economic development far more successfully, including providing work for its educated people.
The closest China has come to anything like the events in North Africa ended in a bloodbath at Tiananmen Square in 1989. These protests were characterized by “youth,” to paraphrase Wang, but not the “Internet,” which had yet to become public.
Overall, the Internet generally has failed to live up to expectations as an agent of political (or social) change, the 2004 Ukrainian Orange Revolution notwithstanding. It has not played a significant role in the overthrow of any authoritarian government to date. The failure of the so-called “Jasmine Revolution” shows exactly that. At best, in Egypt (but not Tunisia) it helped get the message of protesters out — but so did the traditional international news media.
Despite this, Wang claims that the Internet is a powerful tool for change in China, but it is no more so than any other medium. To think otherwise is to potentially make the mistake many made at the time over Iran’s so-called “Twitter Revolution” in 2009. At first, it seemed that Internet-based social media were instrumental in organizing the protests. However, later analysis showed this not to be the case at all.
The key factor is always the army, police and government insiders. If these key people have more to lose defending the regime, they’ll turn against it. Otherwise they’ll defend it, as they did in Tiananmen Square. And as long as enough people in China generally, including the university educated, continue to find jobs and feel increasingly affluent, then there will be little appetite for revolution, in the short term at least.
The existence of the Internet itself is unlikely to usher in democratic change in China. One commentator talking about Iran warned of the danger of confusing the reality on the ground with an online “visual bubble,” saying that movements are not about technology but people. He could easily have been saying the same thing about China.
PAUL DEACON
Kaohsiung
Return to roots difficult
Though I mostly agree with your editorial “Taiwan faces a dietary time bomb” (Feb. 25, page 8), I have one question.
How can Taipei residents “return to their rural dietary roots” when the capital area’s population is increasing steadily, agricultural land is being squeezed out and food (for the most part) has to be transported in from elsewhere?
Let us not forget that Taiwan’s economic miracle has transformed many jobs from manual labor to sedentary, office-cubicle finger exercise.
MICHAEL TSAI
Tainan
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.