If we take a look at the way China has been treating Taiwan over the past few years, we will find that it has been using unorthodox methods that have made it a laughing stock in the international community. The incessant attacks on Taiwan make it clear that the mental make-up of Chinese leaders is different from that of normal people. In most international conflicts, there has been hatred between the opposing peoples and national borders have changed, but this hatred has subsided with time. It is rare that such national hatred continues for decades. Except for the hatred between Arabs and Jews, this kind of hatred is probably only found within the Chinese nation.
China has been defeated once by Britain, once by France and three times by Japan. These humiliations have been deeply impressed in the Chinese nation's collective memory. The goal for modern China, whether under the leadership of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) or the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), has been to restore China's past glory.
These two parties subscribe to different ideologies and have fought one another. Both parties have been steeped in blood, violence and extortion, and their long battle has distorted the minds and dispositions of their leaders. In particular, they have taken forceful revenge on states and political parties that treated them violently in the past.
The Chinese nation is filled with anxiety. It wants to restore its past glory, but has no way of doing so. Instead its government is applying hate to foreign relations and using xenophobia to build national confidence.
The CCP fought several large wars after its rise to power. During the Korean War the CCP shouted "Oppose the US and help Korea" while during the Vietnam War, the slogan was "Resist US imperialism." Japan was protected by the US, so the People's Republic of China (PRC) couldn't start a war with Japan and was instead forced to start a "cold war."
After establishing diplomatic relations with Tokyo, the PRC demanded Japanese aid as an unwritten condition for not seeking war indemnities. Yet Beijing often vilifies Japan and demands apologies, thus forming a unique variety of "apologetic diplomacy." In April, Beijing initiated anti-Japanese hysteria that led to the sacking of some Japanese businesses and a refusal to purchase Japanese goods. Japanese Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi was made to once again apologize for Tokyo's action's during World War II.
What kind of diplomacy is that? Sixty-five years have gone by since World War II ended. It is very rare to see such sustained international hatred. China has risen to become one of the world's great nations and should as a result command respect and praise. Instead it takes this kind of attitude on the international stage, which makes one wonder if today's Chinese government is any different from the Qing dynasty. Its diplomacy is a strange mixture of superiority and inferiority.
Fighting between the US and Japan during World War II was no less intense than the fighting between China and Japan, so when the allied powers defeated Japan, it would only have been right for the Japanese to hate the US. So why don't they?
The US and Vietnam fought a nearly decade-long war, longer than World War II. Afterwards, however, Vietnam did not hate the US, but wanted to establish diplomatic relations. Instead it was the US that fretted and was unwilling to establish ties. The situation was normalized in 1995, but I have never heard any requests for apologies for any actions during the war. The Vietnamese people are instead mistrustful of China, despite all the aid Beijing gave them during the war.
Another recent example is East Timor, which was occupied by Indonesia in 1976. The local people rose up in a resistance that lasted for 23 years before they, with the help of the UN, won their independence in a referendum. East Timor became an independent state in May 2002, and Indonesia's then-president Megawati Sukarnoputri attended the independence ceremony. Indonesian diplomacy displayed flexibility and maintained no hatred toward East Timor for breaking away.
Looking at the diplomatic behavior of these nations, we see that intense war has not stopped them from looking to the future and establishing relations between both the countries and people following the end of the fighting.
But if we look at the cross-strait relationship from the same perspective, things look very different. China is hostile and devious in its dealings with Taiwan, and the destruction of the Taiwanese government has become an obsession for Beijing's leaders. Prior to 2000, Beijing attacked the KMT government. Now that the KMT is out of power, the CCP has established friendly relations with it and instead attacks the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government. Such behavior is a blatant show of the darker sides of the human character.
China legitimizes its claims on Taiwan by continuing to talk of the Chinese Civil War, but such empty talk is only an excuse to pressure Taiwan and a talisman which Beijing's leadership uses to consolidate their hold on power. The pressure China applies to Taiwan may not fill a book on the PRC's diplomacy, but it would account for a substantial part of it.
China recently launched a "fruit war" against Taiwan by unilaterally lifting import tariffs on 15 types of fruit from Taiwan and holding meetings about the plan with non-governmental Taiwanese groups selected by Beijing.
We can't help asking if such domineering behavior is the behavior of a civilized state. If China really wants to establish contact with Taiwan it would, in fact, be as easy as going through appointed organizations authorized by both sides.
In order to help the economic situation in Indochina, China has signed an agreement lifting import taxes on agricultural products from Thailand as well as pacts giving Cambodia, Laos and Myanmar preferential commodity and import taxes. But this is not the approach it uses toward Taiwan. Instead its actions have given an impression of deviousness. What is supposed to be a good thing leads to a lot of side effects that outweigh the gains.
The fundamental problem is that Beijing's leaders are afraid of taking a good, straight look at Taiwan. They are influenced by a minority of people with ulterior motives, which in turn leads to unorthodox methods that have a negative impact on the PRC's international standing.
Beijing cannot control Taiwan, nor can it attack Taiwan militarily, and even if it did, it would not be able to guarantee long-lasting peaceful rule.
Why can't the CCP leadership learn from the ancients who said that as long as the local population is happy, more distant nations will also flock around? Judging from the speed of China's current development, it won't be long before it can join the ranks of developed states and win the respect of its neighbors.
Beijing's relentless pressure on Taiwan will not force Taiwan into submission -- it will only cause widespread resentment. The fact is that Taiwan is not hostile to China, nor is it trying to challenge the Beijing government. The wishes of the Taiwanese people are very simple: we want to lead our own lives, without being pressured by foreign powers. Taiwan does not accept Chinese rule, and this is a view that does not differ much between different parties or peoples.
China, however, continues to use Taiwan independence as an excuse for creating cross-strait hostility, despite its addiction to Taiwanese capital and technology. What kind of mindset is that? China is molding itself into a government with ulterior motives, filled with the ambition to annex Taiwan, and then it says that it is offering the people of Taiwan advantages. How could such behavior help them build credibility? Maybe Beijing's leaders are unaware that the Taiwanese people are fed up with their methods.
China needs to move toward becoming a "normal state." Only by placing itself in a position where it is willing to shoulder international responsibilities, see Taiwan's existence for what it is and stop playing name games will China gain the respect of the international community.
Chen Hurng-yu is a professor in National Chengchi University's history department.
Translated by Perry Svensson
Speaking at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit on May 13, former president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) said that democracies must remain united and that “Taiwan’s security is essential to regional stability and to defending democratic values amid mounting authoritarianism.” Earlier that day, Tsai had met with a group of Danish parliamentarians led by Danish Parliament Speaker Pia Kjaersgaard, who has visited Taiwan many times, most recently in November last year, when she met with President William Lai (賴清德) at the Presidential Office. Kjaersgaard had told Lai: “I can assure you that ... you can count on us. You can count on our support
Denmark has consistently defended Greenland in light of US President Donald Trump’s interests and has provided unwavering support to Ukraine during its war with Russia. Denmark can be proud of its clear support for peoples’ democratic right to determine their own future. However, this democratic ideal completely falls apart when it comes to Taiwan — and it raises important questions about Denmark’s commitment to supporting democracies. Taiwan lives under daily military threats from China, which seeks to take over Taiwan, by force if necessary — an annexation that only a very small minority in Taiwan supports. Denmark has given China a
Many local news media over the past week have reported on Internet personality Holger Chen’s (陳之漢) first visit to China between Tuesday last week and yesterday, as remarks he made during a live stream have sparked wide discussions and strong criticism across the Taiwan Strait. Chen, better known as Kuan Chang (館長), is a former gang member turned fitness celebrity and businessman. He is known for his live streams, which are full of foul-mouthed and hypermasculine commentary. He had previously spoken out against the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and criticized Taiwanese who “enjoy the freedom in Taiwan, but want China’s money”
A high-school student surnamed Yang (楊) gained admissions to several prestigious medical schools recently. However, when Yang shared his “learning portfolio” on social media, he was caught exaggerating and even falsifying content, and his admissions were revoked. Now he has to take the “advanced subjects test” scheduled for next month. With his outstanding performance in the general scholastic ability test (GSAT), Yang successfully gained admissions to five prestigious medical schools. However, his university dreams have now been frustrated by the “flaws” in his learning portfolio. This is a wake-up call not only for students, but also teachers. Yang did make a big
RSS