Next year will mark the 70th anniversary of the founding of the People’s Republic of China (PRC). Mao Zedong (毛澤東) and his fellow revolutionaries created a new state, proud and independent, as well as authoritarian and murderous. That era seemed over, but oppression with totalitarian overtones has returned to the PRC. What should the US do?
China’s history is long and tortured. Once a great empire that dominated its neighbors, it turned inward, falling behind both its neighbors and more distant Western powers. However, on Oct. 1, 1949, in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square, Mao Zedong proclaimed the establishment of the PRC.
The communists became the new elite and for nearly 30 years, Mao dominated his nation. Estimates of the total number who died under the man known as the “Red Emperor” range between 35 million and an astounding 100 million. Only his death in 1976 finally freed the Chinese people. Economic reform soon followed, with perhaps the greatest reduction in poverty in such a short time in human history. Moreover, personal autonomy greatly expanded, with people increasingly free to live their lives — outside of politics, anyway.
Finally, the intellectual atmosphere relaxed. Political opposition was verboten, but the Chinese Communist Party had little credibility. There was hope that Western contacts, economic development and increased wealth would lead to a steadily freer Chinese society.
Then along came Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
He has often been compared to Mao in terms of the power that he has amassed, but more important is his role as the anti-Mikhail Gorbachev and even anti-Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平). Increasing his personal authority obviously is a priority, but so is empowering the state.
His government has assaulted intellectual freedom, Internet access, religious liberty, foreign business and economic autonomy. This attack is also evident in Hong Kong, once promised legal autonomy, and even against Taiwan, still beyond Beijing’s control. Perhaps most creepy is the attempt to create an essentially totalitarian system of surveillance and social control.
Xi might ultimately fail in his attempt to remake the PRC. Still, it seems naive to imagine that China is destined to evolve in a more liberal direction. That means the US and its allies are likely to face a wealthier and more authoritarian China controlled by a president setting a consciously anti-Western course.
That does not mean Beijing poses a direct military threat. Historically, China’s reach has been limited and there is no evidence that the PRC has global military ambitions. Moreover, it is encircled by potential adversaries with which it has fought in the past: India, Russia, (South) Korea, Japan and Vietnam.
Finally, the US possesses a significant military lead and will easily preserve the capability to deter the PRC from any aggressive moves on US territory.
Even China’s apparent economic gains are less than they appear. Beijing, like the US during the Cold War, has found Africa to be tough going. By pursuing politically driven projects with poor, inefficient and corrupt governments around the world, the Belt and Road Initiative risks expensive failure.
The harder the PRC pushes, the more other nations shove back, most notably in its own neighborhood, as Southeast Asian nations increasingly welcome Indian and Japanese military involvement.
Nevertheless, Washington and its friends cannot ignore the transformation taking place within China. While outside influence over the PRC’s internal affairs is extremely limited, it would benefit from a more liberal Chinese society. Trade provides Western nations with enormous economic benefits, but Chinese investment, even in civilian industries, raises increased concerns with Beijing appearing to consciously target liberal democracy.
It is imperative for Washington to avoid war — the PRC would be no pushover, and even if the US and its allies won the first conflict, it would be only the first one.
A la Germans one century ago, nationalistic Chinese would likely be energized and initiate another round, but how to encourage the PRC’s often fractious neighbors to cooperate to constrain what threatens to be an overwhelming superpower?
Western policy must evolve. About the only certainty is the importance of not treating Chinese as enemies.
However, with events in the PRC moving speedily and dramatically in the wrong direction, allied states should consider its response. China remains far freer than it was when the Red Emperor ruled, but how far Xi intends to go is not evident.
The West could eventually find itself facing a more rational version of Mao ruling a far more powerful China. We should start preparing for that time today.
Doug Bandow is a senior fellow at the Cato Institute and a former special assistant to then-US president Ronald Reagan.
When US budget carrier Southwest Airlines last week announced a new partnership with China Airlines, Southwest’s social media were filled with comments from travelers excited by the new opportunity to visit China. Of course, China Airlines is not based in China, but in Taiwan, and the new partnership connects Taiwan Taoyuan International Airport with 30 cities across the US. At a time when China is increasing efforts on all fronts to falsely label Taiwan as “China” in all arenas, Taiwan does itself no favors by having its flagship carrier named China Airlines. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs is eager to jump at
The muting of the line “I’m from Taiwan” (我台灣來欸), sung in Hoklo (commonly known as Taiwanese), during a performance at the closing ceremony of the World Masters Games in New Taipei City on May 31 has sparked a public outcry. The lyric from the well-known song All Eyes on Me (世界都看見) — originally written and performed by Taiwanese hip-hop group Nine One One (玖壹壹) — was muted twice, while the subtitles on the screen showed an alternate line, “we come here together” (阮作伙來欸), which was not sung. The song, performed at the ceremony by a cheerleading group, was the theme
Secretary of State Marco Rubio raised eyebrows recently when he declared the era of American unipolarity over. He described America’s unrivaled dominance of the international system as an anomaly that was created by the collapse of the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War. Now, he observed, the United States was returning to a more multipolar world where there are great powers in different parts of the planet. He pointed to China and Russia, as well as “rogue states like Iran and North Korea” as examples of countries the United States must contend with. This all begs the question:
In China, competition is fierce, and in many cases suppliers do not get paid on time. Rather than improving, the situation appears to be deteriorating. BYD Co, the world’s largest electric vehicle manufacturer by production volume, has gained notoriety for its harsh treatment of suppliers, raising concerns about the long-term sustainability. The case also highlights the decline of China’s business environment, and the growing risk of a cascading wave of corporate failures. BYD generally does not follow China’s Negotiable Instruments Law when settling payments with suppliers. Instead the company has created its own proprietary supply chain finance system called the “D-chain,” through which
RSS