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
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS