Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) speech at the Chinese Communist Party’s 19th National Congress has been watched and listened to closely in Western capitals.
Will the old and new Chinese leader tighten his grip on civil rights in the People’s Republic of China? Will he further infringe on Hong Kong? Will he threaten Taiwan?
Liberal democracies in the West might think parts of Xi’s speech in this regard were modest, but they were not.
The term “one China” leaves many Westerners clueless. This is why Xi’s remarks on Taiwan — in which he made it staunchly clear that any sort of movement on Taiwan that might be perceived as separatist would be met with drastic consequences — did not sound much of an alarm in Berlin, London or Paris.
Surely, Western powers are aware of the complicated situation and pending threat between China and Taiwan, but their electorates are not.
Declining support for the values of Western liberal democracy across the world in recent years, which not only led to the Brexit vote but also to a rise in mostly far-right xenophobic movements, does not serve as a breeding ground for compassion and action for a far-away nation such as restricted Taiwan.
Prior to Double Ten National Day on Tuesday last week, an article was widely shared and discussed on social media.
The text claimed that the Chinese military would finally meet the necessities required to invade Taiwan by the year 2020.
However, others would argue that China’s military would neither dare nor have the capacity to conduct a long-term invasion and occupation of Taiwan. Alas, that does not mean that Taiwan will not see some serious infringement on its liberal democracy.
For Beijing, Taiwan is a threat because the leader of the Chinese Communist Party sells the idea to his followers and the West alike that being Chinese and a liberal democrat is not compatible. The great, and exclusive, tradition of Confucianism can only live on in the form of a one-party state. Emerging therein to the very top is only possible by applying the highest ethical standards.
Xi’s fight against corruption and moral misconduct needs to be seen as him catering to the narrative that he has deployed in his first term as president.
In the West, where liberal democracy is often deliberately limited by the rights of the individual or specific groups such as minorities, leaders do not cease to praise the Chinese president — and leaders before him — as visionary, innovative and thoughtful. What they mean is that, due to autocratic one-party rule, Beijing is capable of following through with policy ideas — such as tackling climate change — that would take years in a democratic framework.
However, the existence of Taiwan reminds Xi and the West of the existence of a democracy in a Confucian context.
In fact, Taiwan is not the only liberal democracy in the region. It has potentially powerful allies in South Korea and Japan. All three are allies of the US and all three have a similar set of interests when it comes to fighting off a power-hungry China.
Yet, for historic reasons, the three have not elaborated on their common policies and it is doubtful that they will do so anytime soon.
China is all but sad about the disagreements of its democratic rivals across the sea. In Taipei, Seoul and Tokyo, observers might already be nervous when they anticipate US President Donald Trump’s visit to China in a few weeks. The US president has been marveling at autocratic rule.
One can only hope that the result of the meeting between these two power-hungry men with a dubious mindset and character when it comes to civil liberties and liberal freedom will not frighten the three truly democratic nations in the region.
As for Taiwan, the leadership and the people should be eagerly trying to strengthen their ties with Western allies and the liberal democracies in South Korea and Japan, as China might not be able or willing to invade the nation, but it will also not tolerate any further development of a free and independent society for this might, in the logic of Beijing, inevitably lead down the road of independence.
Alexander Goerlach is a defense of democracy affiliate professor at Harvard College and a fellow at the center for humanities at the University of Cambridge, England. He is publisher of the online magazine saveliberaldemocracy.com and a visiting academic at National Taiwan University this year.
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators have twice blocked President William Lai’s (賴清德) special defense budget bill in the Procedure Committee, preventing it from entering discussion or review. Meanwhile, KMT Legislator Chen Yu-jen (陳玉珍) proposed amendments that would enable lawmakers to use budgets for their assistants at their own discretion — with no requirement for receipts, staff registers, upper or lower headcount limits, or usage restrictions — prompting protest from legislative assistants. After the new legislature convened in February, the KMT joined forces with the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) and, leveraging their slim majority, introduced bills that undermine the Constitution, disrupt constitutional
RSS