Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), taking with him his ideas of the “Chinese dream,” will soon be feasting at a state banquet, courtesy of US President Barack Obama.
However, given Xi’s rather boorish behavior, both in China and overseas, Obama needs to be firm with the Chinese leader and have a word with him about democracy, human rights and international responsibilities.
Obama has good cause to do so, but Xi seems to be wanting to include the values of democracy and rule of law into his Chinese dream.
Obama cannot allow him to talk of such things with his alternative definitions of what they mean, cheapening Western democracy abroad and pretending to govern the nation according to the rule of law, while actually suppressing human rights.
In a society governed according to the rule of law, there has to be lawyers who specialize in safeguarding people’s rights and challenging the government when it breaks the law or abuses its power.
Xi’s version of the rule of law is unilaterally creating ever more stringent laws and arresting lawyers who speak out against human rights.
In the interests of maintaining his hold on power, Xi says one thing, but does the opposite.
Should Xi attempt to characterize democracy as interfering with domestic affairs, Obama can always come back with something Mao Zedong (毛澤東) said.
Speaking to US diplomat John Service in 1945, Mao said that the Chinese Communist Party just wanted democracy and that the US should exert pressure on then-Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) director-general Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), forcing him to implement democracy in the nation.
Mao added that the US should strive for democracy and that this “would not be considered intervening in domestic affairs.”
The US’ policy of engagement with China is, through its efforts to try to put China in the direction of democracy and development.
At the moment, this policy of engagement is not controversial, but now that China has used it to its benefit, leading to its economic and developmental gains, its approach in other areas has not softened.
At home, Beijing has become more oppressive, while internationally it has started to throw its weight around. It has become more greedy with trade and is not playing by the rules of the game.
Obama should bring up the idea of the “Chinese dream” with Xi and encourage him to have China act like a superpower and to behave more responsibly on the international stage while doing more to improve the lives of its citizens.
In Xinjiang, people have adopted violent opposition. In Tibet, they have chosen self-immolation. Corruption among business in collusion with Chinese government officials is rife, while the disparity in wealth is huge.
For these messes, Xi should be ashamed.
On the “Taiwan question,” Obama needs to try to move things in a new direction.
The “Three Communiques” approach is showing its age. Obama needs to sing the praises of the way Taiwan has democratized and demand that Xi respect the mature operation of the nation’s democracy.
Times have moved on from the era of the Three Communiques, and freedom, democracy and human rights have already taken hold in Taiwan.
When the two leaders are face-to-face, Obama needs to impress upon Xi his support for this great democratic achievement.
James Wang is a media commentator.
Translated by Paul Cooper
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past