The White House on May 5 hit back at Beijing’s demand that US airlines comply with Chinese standards on how they refer to Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau, dismissing the demands as “Orwellian nonsense.”
Beijing’s Orwellian bent continues to be on display.
The state-owned Global Times reported that online commentators have been complaining about a T-shirt sold by US clothing retailer Gap, showing a map of China. The map omitted Taiwan, Tibet, part of the South China Sea and Aksai Chin, a large disputed border area between India and China.
Gap on Monday apologized and withdrew the T-shirts. Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesman Lu Kang (陸慷) noted the apology and said the ministry would be following the company’s actions.
Da Ai TV has withdrawn a historical drama, Jiachang’s Heart (智子之心), after airing only two episodes. The drama was inspired by the story of a Taiwanese nurse who served with the Japanese imperial army in China during World War II, when Taiwan was a Japanese colony.
Despite denials by Da Ai media development manager Ou Hung-yu (歐宏瑜), the decision to cancel the show reportedly followed pressure from China’s Taiwan Affairs Office, which was unhappy about the show’s favorable depiction of the Japanese army.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) maintains its political power through censorship and control of media through official outlets such as the Global Times. It is no surprise that the “omissions” in the map on Gap’s T-shirts were noted by Chinese online commentators. They are relentlessly fed the CCP’s propaganda about Taiwan belonging to China, as well as the rejection of dissenting voices. Neither is it surprising that official media outlets or China’s foreign ministry picked up on it.
In George Orwell’s dystopian novel Nineteen Eighty-Four, people’s minds are controlled by constant state surveillance, state-controlled historical revisionism and the pared-down, concept-poor language of “newspeak.”
The CCP subscribes to constant surveillance and historical revisionism. Its version of newspeak is the persistent repetition of a simple message. Pertinent to Taiwan, the messsage is: “Taiwan is part of China. Taiwan is part of China. Taiwan is part of China.”
However, historically and in terms of international law, there is little to commend that claim. It is certainly one that the majority of Taiwanese reject.
In Animal Farm, Orwell explored the power of messages and how its gradual and subtle modification can lead to the creeping extension of power. In the story, the rule “All animals are equal” becomes “All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others” overnight, giving more power to the pigs.
The CCP’s model of governance is its own business. It cannot expect organizations, broadcasters or retailers from other nations to comply with its dictates.
In November last year, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) told a forum for foreign political groups in Beijing that China “will not import other countries’ models, and will not export the China model.” Since then, it seems the message has become “China will not import other countries’ models, and will not export the China model, unless deemed necessary.”
In other words, Beijing wants to have its cake and eat it.
Foreign companies bow to Beijing’s bullying because of corporate interests, while the governments of other nations concede to Beijing’s unilateral historical revisionism due to political and economic expediency.
Calling China’s tactics Orwellian is accurate. Being Orwellian, the normalization of the message and the gradual, almost imperceptible alterations to the narrative are pernicious. Not calling these out for what they are is the mistake.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
RSS