The world debate may be preoccupied with “hot” crises in the Middle East, the Islamic State group, eastern Ukraine and fighting Ebola. Yet tensions in East Asia have not subsided. Even though the region has seen quite a remarkable level of peace since China’s war against Vietnam in 1978 and 1979, there is a new uncertainty.
The major causes of past progress are the security guarantee provided by the US, coupled with China’s intent to “rise” peacefully. Another key stabilizing factor has been the gradual economic integration among the nations of Southeast Asia and of East Asia. Together, this has brought slow, but continuous, accommodation of one another’s political interests and objectives across Asia.
If there is talk now of rising tensions in East Asia and a growing apprehension, then usually it is China which is seen as responsible. More precisely put, the tensions are seen as a consequence of China’s rise.
As things stand, it appears that whenever a neighbor of China acts in a way that might be interpreted in Beijing as an even minor provocation, China will assert itself robustly and change the overall situation to its advantage.
To give one example, when the Philippine navy tried in May last year to expel Chinese fishermen from the Scarborough Shoal (Huangyan Island, 黃岩島), 240km from the Philippine coast (and 885km from the Chinese coast), the Chinese navy intervened. Today, the reef is de facto in Chinese hands. Taiwan also claims it.
It seems that the way in which China’s leaders regard the future role of their country in the region and the world has changed. Both the “peaceful rise” rhetoric and statements made just 10 years ago to express the intention that China’s rise would remain compatible with the interests of its partners seem to have made room for a new way of thinking.
This issue loomed again large in the background of last week’s APEC summit. For all the official focus on economic cooperation, geopolitical and strategic issues always lurk large, even though they are not on the “official” agenda.
While this is no surprise to Asians, what might surprise them is how much this is a matter also of global interest. The reason for that is twofold: First, looking ahead, Asia might eventually become the most important part of the global economy.
Second, China already has intense economic relationships all over the globe, including in Europe and the US.
That is why other nations outside of Asia are greatly concerned if China’s relationship with the rest of the continent remains unsettled.
One key question to ask at this juncture is what the other nations in Asia can do to keep their relationship with China on a constructive footing and to do their part in securing the future prosperity of Asia.
It is here that the European example and the importance of relying on trade relations as a key confidence-building measure might be of use. For real progress to be made, nations have to be able and willing to jump over the shadows of the past. That is no easy feat.
However, strengthened trade relations have the advantage of incentivizing nations in that critical regard. They offer up meaningful progress in people’s daily lives through greater economic integration across the entire region.
When progress toward freer global trade at the multilateral level moves at a glacial pace — at best — bilateral and regional trade deals assume a bigger importance. Despite general concerns that this might lead to a fracturing of the global trade landscape, certainly with regard to Asia such agreements — whether bilateral, trilateral or multilateral — could turn into true progress.
Far beyond the “China factor” in Asia, quite a lot of nations across the region have quite a loaded history when it comes to some of their neighbors. Trade agreements can be a very useful lever to overcome such shadows of the past.
One particularly inspiring example in this regard — and one that ought to give courage to other Asian nations with similarly fraught relationships to take similar steps — concerns the change in relations between South Korea and Vietnam.
Fifty years ago, South Korean troops fought in Vietnam alongside the US, all in the name of checking the Iron Curtain. Some of those troops have been accused of committing wartime atrocities against Vietnamese civilians.
In spite of that painful past, South Korea and Vietnam are now set to ink a free-trade agreement by year’s end. Constructive steps like that show the way forward for all of Asia.
Volker Stanzel is a former German ambassador to Japan and China, and former political director of the German Foreign Office.
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
The two major opposition parties, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), jointly announced on Tuesday last week that former TPP lawmaker Chang Chi-kai (張啟楷) would be their joint candidate for Chiayi mayor, following polling conducted earlier this month. It is the first case of blue-white (KMT-TPP) cooperation in selecting a joint candidate under an agreement signed by their chairpersons last month. KMT and TPP supporters have blamed their 2024 presidential election loss on failing to decide on a joint candidate, which ended in a dramatic breakdown with participants pointing fingers, calling polls unfair, sobbing and walking
RSS