Beijing has trumpeted "economic globalization" at the recently held Boao Asian Forum (
Economically, China has absorbed resources from Southeast Asian countries and built an East Asian economic sphere centered around itself. Politically, it has tried to win over neighboring countries through various types of bilateral talks and strategic partnerships, and to create an environment for peaceful development.
This outcome has allowed China to expand its power and given it opportunities to become a new Asian hegemony. It has also increased China's confidence in seeking the status of a global superpower.
In the past century, this kind of strategic move -- centered around political and economic development -- was shackled by military-centered "new interventionism" from the US. Amid the encroachment of "human rights diplomacy" and "peace and democracy" critiques, the idea of a "China threat" still loomed over Asian countries, hampering China's expansion process.
At the Boao forum, China brought in Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad to sing the praises of "Asian values." Having handed the anti-US and anti-hegemony banners to Malaysia, China has instead raised a "globalization" banner, which it has criticized in the past as a new ideological tool for US hegemony over the rest of the world. China has also started advocating the establishment of a new political and economic world order that is fair and reasonable. Beijing is also talking about how it cannot stand outside the trend toward economic globalization.
Such a self-contradictory strategy -- accepting the idea of globalization lock, stock and barrel and yet not completely abandoning the "Asian values" dictum -- can be compared to a sword dance performed to conceal a murderous intent.
By speeding up the liberalization of the Chinese market and having Mahathir sing the praises of Asian values at the same time, China can continue to rally Asian countries, solidify its influence across Asia, and turn up its nose at the rest of the world.
Such a strengthening of power also allows China to move toward the global arena. This strategic move is built and operated on the basis of two different views inherent in the concept of "globalization."
According to the first view, "globalization" is an expansion process of the capitalist system. The development of knowledge-based economies and information technology is shrinking the temporal and spatial distance between between different parts of the "global village" and turning the idea of sovereignty into an anachronism.
In contrast, according to the second view, the "localization" movement that comes along with the globalization process will also create a kind of "politics of identity" or "politics of recognition" in various parts of the world. As a result, fundamentalists in some areas will advocate regionalism and challenge modern hegemony.
Certainly, the poorer and more marginalized a country is, the more likely it is to embrace the latter view. In contrast, rich and powerful countries are more likely to accept the former. Before the 1990s, China chose to side with Third World countries and championed the latter view, maintaining that sovereignty is inalienable and human rights are not universal values. China also tried to rally Third World countries to build an anti-US front.
However, in the face of the US' two-pronged strategy of containment and engagement, China's "post-colonialist" argument failed to resonate around the world. Instead, China placed itself in an antagonistic position against capitalist countries.
At the beginning of the new century, China has not given up the latter view, but it is gradually embracing the former and trying to get closer to the current ideologies of the Western world. In a process of "peaceful evolution," China is trying to use its economic power to win over the Western countries, thereby easing Western hostility toward it on the one hand and opposing US hegemony in favor of a multi-polar international order on the other hand, so as to disperse the influence of US hegemony around the world.
Such a strategy is much more attractive to the world than China's past emphasis on sovereignty.
Recently, China has seized every opportunity to push for negotiations on its entry into the WTO and promote its ideas. It has also showed off its economic prowess through its bid to host the 2008 Olympic Games. While the US economy is remaining sluggish and other capitalist countries are facing the worst economic conditions since the 1997 Asian financial crisis, China has used its national clout to boost its stock markets.
The recent opening of the B-market to local investors is further proof of its attempt to attract capital. Once it has absorbed enough capital from other parts of the world, China can take over the international economic power slipping away from the sluggish US economy.
The Boao forum gives a picture of China's global strategic blueprint -- to build up positions across East Asia, ride on Asia's peaceful development, rally the Pacific Rim nations, help the Third World rise to its feet, and break the US and European monopoly on the world.
These goals will be Taiwan's biggest challenge as it opts to embrace the latter view of globalization and persists on the "localization" process that has been under way since Lee Teng-hui's (
Wang Kun-yi is an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies at Tamkang University.
Translated by Francis Huang
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