History at any moment can be understood as a snapshot, telling us where we are, or as a moving picture, telling us not just where we are, but where we have been and where we might be headed. It is a distinction with an enormous difference.
Consider East Asia and the Pacific. A snapshot would show a region at peace, with stable societies, growing economies and robust alliances, but a moving picture would be considerably less reassuring. We may well come to look back on this moment as the time in which the most economically successful part of the world began to come apart.
North Korea is one reason. War has been avoided, not because North Korea has done anything to reduce the threat posed by its nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles, but because US President Donald Trump’s administration has not matched its fiery words with actions. The nuclear and missile threat posed by North Korea has actually increased since Trump embraced summitry with North Korean leader Kim Jong-un just over a year ago.
There is no reason to believe that the Kim regime will ever denuclearize. The question is whether it will agree to place a ceiling on its nuclear capabilities in exchange for some reduction in sanctions — and, if so, whether it lives up to the agreement and whether neighbors such as Japan believe they can be safe without developing nuclear weapons of their own.
The latter question makes the deterioration in relations between Japan and South Korea all the more disquieting. Japanese officials are uneasy with South Korea’s approach to North Korea, viewing it as too conciliatory, and are furious with South Korea for reviving its demand that Japan apologize and compensate Korean women abused by the Imperial Japanese Army before and during World War II. Tensions between these two American allies are spilling over into their trade relationship and will make it harder to coordinate policy toward North Korea and China.
Then there are the ongoing protests in Hong Kong. As mainland Chinese control over the former British colony has increased, the “one country, two systems” formula promised in 1997 has not played out as the people of Hong Kong had hoped, steadily giving way to “one country, one system.” This is unlikely to change, as China is less dependent on Hong Kong as a financial gateway and is concerned that a liberal approach toward demonstrators there will signal weakness and encourage protests — and even a leadership challenge — on the mainland. The authorities in Beijing are thus likely to do whatever they believe is necessary to maintain order.
China’s turn toward repression is even more starkly apparent in its policies toward its Uighur minority. At the same time, former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s (鄧小平) careful foreign policy has given way to a more assertive foreign policy under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). In the South China Sea, China is militarizing islands [which Taiwan also claims] in an effort to gain control of this strategically vital waterway and intimidate others into abandoning their claims. Likewise, with its Belt and Road Initiative, China is providing infrastructure loans to countries throughout Eurasia, often on onerous terms that enhance Beijing’s access and influence, while yielding questionable benefits for the recipients.
Taiwan’s future is also unclear. This year marks the 40th anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC). At that time, the US recognized the PRC government as China’s sole legal government, but pledged to maintain unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan. And in the US’ 1979 Taiwan Relations Act, it pledged to provide the island with arms, and stated that it would view with great concern any effort to determine Taiwan’s future other than peacefully.
It all made for an arrangement that finessed positions in the absence of a commonly acceptable solution, one that has worked well for four decades, as Taiwan has become a thriving democracy with a booming economy. Differences over Taiwan have not precluded a viable Sino-American relationship, and the lack of an official relationship has not prevented strong US-Taiwan ties.
Now, however, it seems as though Xi might decide to push this issue, as unifying Taiwan with the mainland appears to be integral to achieving his “Chinese dream.” Meanwhile, some in the US and Taiwan advocate closer ties or even recognizing Taiwan as an independent country. At some point, a crisis is likely to materialize when one or more parties cross a line the others cannot accept.
A final question mark over the region stems from US policy. The US has been central to Asia’s success. Its alliance with South Korea has reduced the chance of conflict on the Korean Peninsula; and its alliance with Japan has reduced the chance of a Japanese nuclear program, or a war between China and Japan over disputed islands.
However, Trump has publicly questioned the value and fairness of both alliances, suggesting that they are at risk unless South Korea and Japan pay more and adjust their trade policies. And, more broadly, Trump’s foreign policy is at its core unpredictable and disruptive, whereas strong alliances require predictability and confidence.
When all of these snapshots — a nuclear-armed North Korea, an uneasy Japan, a more assertive and repressive China, growing impatience over Taiwan and mounting uncertainty over US policy — are viewed as a moving picture, it becomes clear that the stability underpinning Asia’s unprecedented development can no longer be assumed. It is difficult to imagine the future being better than the past; it is not at all difficult to imagine it being worse.
Richard Haass is president of the Council on Foreign Relations, previously served as director of policy planning for the US Department of State, and was then-US president George W. Bush’s special envoy to Northern Ireland and coordinator for the future of Afghanistan. He is the author of A World in Disarray: American Foreign Policy and the Crisis of the Old Order.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under