Two elections, one in the US and the other in China, have produced weakened governments that are not likely to be well-equipped to handle crises arising from misunderstanding or miscalculation.
Consequently, this could leave the US, with the world’s largest economy and most powerful military force, and China, with the second-largest economy and the fastest expanding military force, dangerously pitted against each other.
In the US elections, US President Barack Obama was re-elected by a narrow margin, getting only 50.5 percent of the popular vote. He carried only 27 of the 50 states as well as Washington. His Democratic Party retained a slim hold on the US Senate, while the opposition Republicans have solid control of the US House of Representatives.
Thus Obama hardly has a mandate to strike off in new directions, including policy toward China. Moreover, his foreign and security policy team is about to break up and will most likely be replaced by newcomers who will need some time to find their footing.
US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has said she will leave office at the end of this term. US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta may step down early next year, as might Secretary of the Treasury Timothy Geithner. Former CIA director David Petraeus resigned after disclosing an extra-marital affair.
Furthermore, a rift between the president and the military surfaced the day before the election, when 500 retired generals and admirals publicly endorsed then-Republican US presidential candidate Mitt Romney.
That was their constitutional right under the First Amendment, but it was of questionable propriety when US tradition dictates that military officers stay out of politics.
Against this divisive backdrop, any of Obama’s initiatives toward China that require political and public approval could be in jeopardy from the start.
In China, the 18th Party Congress called to “elect” Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平) to replace President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) heard the outgoing leader rail against rampant corruption that imperils the CCP’s rule.
Hu delivered a 90-minute keynote speech, in which he said: “Combating corruption and promoting political integrity, which is a major political issue of great concern to the people, is a clear-cut and long-term political commitment of the party.”
“If we fail to handle this issue well, it could prove fatal to the party, and even cause the collapse of the party and the fall of the state,” Hu said.
Xinhua news agency said that pressing tasks include “stopping the flagrant abuse of power and corruption among government officials and businesspeople — issues that have triggered a series of protests.”
Xi is a graduate of Tsinghua University, which is similar to the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and is a technocrat who has risen steadily through the ranks of the CCP. He visited Washington to meet with Obama in February last year, but is not known for experience in foreign policy.
On national defense, Hu asserted that acquiring “powerful armed forces that are commensurate with China’s international standing” is a strategic task.
He said China should “intensify military preparedness and enhance the capability to accomplish a wide range of military tasks, the most important of which is to win local wars.”
Hu did not refer to the growing rift between the CCP and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA), which comprises all of China’s armed forces. The highly nationalistic PLA has been seen recently as more aggressive in asserting China’s claims in the South China and East China seas.
However, the PLA’s highest-ranking officer, General Guo Boxiong (郭伯雄), brought it up indirectly.
Guo, who is more a political general than a military one, was quoted by Xinhua as saying the PLA must “adhere to the principle of [the] party’s absolute leadership over the armed forces more voluntarily.”
Three more times in a nine-paragraph dispatch, Xinhua called for adherence to the “absolute leadership” of the CCP over the PLA. Those who read Chinese tea leaves say this harping can only mean the CCP is unhappy with the PLA’s defiance.
Against this divisive backdrop, any Chinese initiatives toward the US that require both political and PLA approval would also be in jeopardy from the very start.
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