Flag-raising raises suspicion
The smoke and mirrors chess game of international diplomacy is notorious for having at least two tiers: the actual strategy relations between nations and the visible ones played out in the media.
If the Wikileaks diplomatic documents revealed any constant, it is that what governments say in public and what they are trying to achieve in private are often two completely different — and sometimes diametrically opposite — things. It has therefore been both entertaining and educational to watch the latest “incident” involving the New Year’s Day raising of the Republic of China (ROC) flag at the Twin Oaks Estate — the historic residence of Taiwan’s representative in Washington — play out in local and international media.
Ever since the US cynically abandoned its recognition of Taiwan 36 years ago, there has allegedly been no such public ceremonial flag-raising at the estate, while Taiwanese representatives and officials in the US have been subject to tight restrictions on what they can and cannot do in their semi-official capacity as national envoys, including publicly displaying the ROC flag.
Any attempts to make relations between the nations more substantive or symbolic than “cultural ties” have always been quickly “neutralized” by the “US Department of State Door God,” otherwise known as the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
For its part, the Taiwanese government has long sought to bypass the Door God with varying degrees of failure, often depending upon how inclined the US State Department and current US administration are to poke back at China as part of their long-running Game of Hegemonies in the West Pacific region.
Whatever the New Year’s Day flag-raising ‘incident’ was, it certainly was not spontaneous, nor unapproved. In this regard, I am more inclined to believe the account of Representative to the US Shen Lyu-shun (沈呂巡), who said that US President Barack Obama’s administration granted permission to raise the flag as long as it was not widely publicized or videoed.
Shen is not a maverick representative known for stepping out of line and it is deeply implausible that he would sanction this ceremony without the green light from Taipei and Washington.
Predictably, State Department spokesperson Jan Psaki — a public relations master who has the Sisyphean task of spinning the US’ literally tortuously hypocritical and cynically exploitative foreign “policy” to the media — quickly decried the ceremony as “not consistent with US policy” and stated that the Obama administration had not been aware of it until after it had happened.
As she made the remarks to reporters, the press room was filled with the bittersweet odor of strategic ambiguity and plausible deniability. Analysts were left scratching their heads wondering how a 36-year moratorium had suddenly and very publicly been breached without unofficial US complicity.
Beijing has played its part, responding with its usual platitudes and stern admonishments about Washington maintaining its “one China policy.”
Back in Taiwan, Shen has reiterated his account of events and President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has publicly backed him, seeking to make political capital from this seeming symbolic “breakthrough” in international diplomatic space for the ROC — and that is what I suspect this whole “incident” really is: a way for the US to give Ma some much needed face after his and the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) crushing loss of political capital in the local elections on Nov. 29 last year.
With the presidential election campaign season beginning in about six months, Ma needs something to show for his last term in office that will provide the KMT’s candidate with a reason they can present to the public explaining why Ma’s foreign (China) policy must be maintained.
In this regard, symbolic diplomatic victories are as important as arms sales, such as the warships US Congress agreed to sell to Taiwan.
Once again, we are seeing the US talking non-interference in the sovereign democratic elections of other nations, whilst making very clear efforts to support one candidate and party over another — all in a manner that can be plausibly denied of course. I expect that Ma will receive more not-so-under-the-radar “gifts” to rewrap as “achievements” in the coming months.
Ben Goren
Taipei
ROC, wave your flag high
The US Department of State’s denial that there has not been a Republic of China (ROC) flag-raising in the US since 1979 is simply false — I know this for a fact.
I was present at a Flag Day raising ceremony two years ago. Where was it? It was at a Taipei Economic and Relations Office in one of the US’ major cities. I will not go beyond that without permission from the organizers.
For China to continually whine about such things just shows how frail the government in Beijing must be. It is a sad state of affairs when most civilized countries in the world shudder and cringe every time China’s feelings get hurt.
Keep the flag flying Taiwan; this is your right as a democratic country.
Tom Kuleck
Greater Taichung
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS