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.
They did it again. For the whole world to see: an image of a Taiwan flag crushed by an industrial press, and the horrifying warning that “it’s closer than you think.” All with the seal of authenticity that only a reputable international media outlet can give. The Economist turned what looks like a pastiche of a poster for a grim horror movie into a truth everyone can digest, accept, and use to support exactly the opinion China wants you to have: It is over and done, Taiwan is doomed. Four years after inaccurately naming Taiwan the most dangerous place on
Wherever one looks, the United States is ceding ground to China. From foreign aid to foreign trade, and from reorganizations to organizational guidance, the Trump administration has embarked on a stunning effort to hobble itself in grappling with what his own secretary of state calls “the most potent and dangerous near-peer adversary this nation has ever confronted.” The problems start at the Department of State. Secretary of State Marco Rubio has asserted that “it’s not normal for the world to simply have a unipolar power” and that the world has returned to multipolarity, with “multi-great powers in different parts of the
President William Lai (賴清德) recently attended an event in Taipei marking the end of World War II in Europe, emphasizing in his speech: “Using force to invade another country is an unjust act and will ultimately fail.” In just a few words, he captured the core values of the postwar international order and reminded us again: History is not just for reflection, but serves as a warning for the present. From a broad historical perspective, his statement carries weight. For centuries, international relations operated under the law of the jungle — where the strong dominated and the weak were constrained. That
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
RSS