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
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then