After US president George W. Bush took office, China launched an all-out diplomatic offensive with the aim of preventing any major changes in US policy toward Beijing. "Red Guard ambassador" Li Zhaoxing
On the eve of stepping down from his post, Li made a quick trip to Houston to visit Bush senior. According to revelations made by Li himself at a pro-Beijing gathering, Bush requested that Li tell Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and "the Chinese people" to please believe that he was the person who best understood his son. But what does he best understand about his son? Is it that George W. Bush will continue to promote Clinton's policy of currying favor with Beijing?
Because Li reported his "good news" to Beijing as requested, he caused China to focus its diplomatic efforts on Bush senior with the aim of influencing US policy.
In early February, Beijing sent its former ambassadors to Washington, Li Daoyu (李道豫) and Zhu Qizhen (朱啟禎), to the US. For their first stop, they rushed directly to the Houston home of Bush senior. Beijing had just launched a massive political campaign to expose and criticize Falun Gong (法輪功). Thus the Taiwan issue, originally the most sensitive problem in US-China relations, was supplanted by the Falun Gong issue. The two envoys demanded, via Bush senior, that the US government not support the sect either directly or tacitly.
For their second stop, the pair met up in New York with the former ambassador to Canada, Zhang Wenpu
Only for their third stop did the envoys go to Washington. But the trio didn't meet with Secretary of State Colin Powell or White House National Security Advisor Condoleezza Rice. Their host was Under Secretary of State Alan Larson, who is in charge of economic, business and agricultural affairs. Although the appointment of Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage hasn't yet been confirmed, having Larson meet the diplomats seems to indicate that the focus of US interest is the economy and furthermore indicates that there isn't much interest in the message being lobbied by the three visitors.
The decision by Beijing officials to focus diplomatic efforts on Bush senior is understandable because they are accustomed to going through the backdoor and using connections, Chinese style. Thus, they consider Houston to be the backdoor to Washington and they use the front door only after entering the backdoor.
Furthermore, according to the traditional, feudal and autocratic thought of the Chinese Communist Party, the patriarch of a family is the authority in a household and political elders are the authorities in the political world. Bush senior is therefore doubly qualified, making him doubly the object of their diplomatic offensive. Furthermore, they remember the elder Bush serving as the first chief of the US liaison office in Beijing after Richard Nixon signed his joint communique with China. He is an "old friend of the Chinese people."
But he is not the only older Bush with China connections. His older brother, Prescott Bush junior, is the chairman of the US-China Chamber of Commerce (
While the CCP's mouthpieces publicize the visit of the ambassadors to Bush senior to show their connections aren't commonplace, the spokesman for elder Bush said the visit was a courtesy call and not a policy meeting. The spokesman, however, was not willing to elaborate on the details of the meeting, as though there were secrets he couldn't reveal.
George W. Bush is a president elected by the people and not a successor chosen by Bush senior in the way that Deng Xiaoping (
Considering all the scandals spreading in the wake of former Bill Clinton's departure from office, and with public calls for a thorough investigation into whether Clinton administration officials accepted bribes from Beijing, President Bush and the White House have naturally raised their level of vigilance. More importantly, Beijing's preference for political backdoors causes Americans to dislike China even more. They are "demonizing" themselves.
The proof that Beijing's diplomactic efforts are failing and and may even backfire is that since Feb 16, when the US conducted air strikes on Iraq, Washington has thrice demanded that China explain its helping Baghdad lay a fiber optic network, in disregard of the UN sanctions. On Feb 21, when the new ambassador Yang Jiechi presented his credentials to Powell in what was merely a 10-minute courtesy call, Powell demanded that Beijing explain this problem. Yang wasn't given any room whatsoever to save face.
Of course, it is very hard to say whether US policy toward China will change direction again. Currently there is a relatively obvious tendency toward a tougher line, but the policy of interaction won't be suspended. The attitude toward Taiwan will be somewhat friendlier, but the "one China" principle won't be abandoned.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS