China’s response to US President Barack Obama’s plan to “pivot” US attention and military power from the Middle East, Iraq and Afghanistan to East Asia has been remarkably mild.
Obama and US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said last month in Hawaii, Australia, the Philippines, Thailand and Indonesia that the US would give security priority to Asian allies and friends, as well as US forces in the Pacific. Obama pledged that coming budget cuts would not affect this plan.
Experience shows China often greets such strategic designs with outraged cries that the US is seeking to “contain” China or impose US “hegemony” on Asia.
However, in this instance, the initial response came in a routine statement from Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Liu Weimin (劉為民), who was limited to saying: “When developing state-to-state relations, one should take into account the interests of other countries as well as the whole region, and peace and stability of the region.”
Subsequent statements last week were equally bland, some with a touch of sarcasm, others with a tone of condescension and still others with a murmur of confusion. The intriguing question: Why the subdued pushback?
It might be that China’s leaders, who have repeatedly shown that they do not understand the US, do not know what to make of Obama’s new strategy in Asia.
Perhaps the members of the Chinese Politburo, like many Americans, want to see whether Obama takes action to execute his new security posture.
“If [the US] sticks to its Cold War mentality and continues to engage with Asian nations in a self-assertive way, it is doomed to incur repulsion in the region,” Xinhua news agency said.
Another possibility is that Beijing sees this as evidence of the decline of US power, that the US will soon be confronted with the reality of its economic weaknesses and that it is desperately seeking a way to cover up the consequences of that.
“It was not a good time for US President Barack Obama to attend the EAS [East Asia Summit], given the unstable state of the American economy, and the Congressional supercommittee’s failure on the federal budget,” the China Daily said.
“The biggest challenge facing the United States is its sluggish economy, so China should pay greater attention to the economic measures of the superpower, which is actively seeking a ‘return’ to Asia,” the People’s Daily said in a commentary.
“The United States should depend on its own efforts to recover its economy. If it only cares about strengthening its dominant status ... no Asian country will have time or interest to play the old strategic poker game with the United States,” it added.
Another Chinese assessment is that Obama’s strategy in Asia is intended to support his re-election campaign.
“No sooner had the curtain fallen on the summit meetings in Bali, Indonesia, than Obama sent home the message that he had garnered business deals to support hundreds of thousands of jobs for his countrymen,” the China Daily said. “His country’s struggling economy needs them. His chances of re-election need them. That is why Obama portrayed his nine-day trip around the Pacific Rim as a hunt for new markets.”
The most concrete response seems to have been the establishment of a strategic planning department within the headquarters of the People’s Liberation Army. This must have been planned for some time, but was announced last week by Xinhua.
“The newly-founded strategic planning department has been tasked with studying key strategic issues, drawing out development and planning for the military’s growth, and raising proposals on the general allocation and macro control of the military’s strategic resources,” Xinhua said.
Richard Halloran is a commentator based in Hawaii.
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
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
RSS