Ancient Greek historian Thucydides’ saying that “the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must” explains the cruelty of a state in its pursuit of military power to maintain its continuity and survival in an anarchic world.
Today, more than 2,000 years later, the conditions required for a nation’s survival no longer depend solely on military strength — sometimes the ability to form alliances and exert influence that arises from a country’s political system, cultural values and way of life are more effective than warfare.
After the Democratic Progressive Party returned to power, cross-strait relations have stalled on whether there is a so-called “1992 consensus” or if it was in fact a matter of reaching “no consensus in 1992.”
Since then, China has bullied Taiwan on countless occasions, with the result that President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and her administration, which have expressed goodwill toward Beijing and remained humble for two years, have been forced to protest against China’s overbearing actions, saying that “we will no longer tolerate” them.
In an interview with Agence France-Presse, Tsai called on the international community to constrain China’s infringements on free and democratic countries.
She also urged other nations to unite with Taiwan in defending itself against China’s expanding hegemonic influence.
Roger Boyes, a columnist on international diplomatic affairs, exhorted the international community not to tolerate China’s bullying of Taiwan in his article titled “China Can’t be Allowed to Bully Democracies.”
Since Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) took over as the fifth-generation leader, China has abandoned the foreign policy strategy of concealing its strength and biding its time devised by former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) in response to the drastic changes in Eastern Europe, and replaced it with Xi’s doctrine of “striving for achievement.”
To the outside world, China is promoting a new model of international relations as it expresses its disagreement with the global governance proposed by Western democracies and challenging the liberal democratic world order.
As for its Taiwan policy, China has adopted “namefare” tactics, which, much like “shamefare,” a term coined by Harry Kazianis, a senior fellow for defense policy at the Center for the National Interest, uses non-military means to comprehensively eliminate Taiwan’s status as a de facto sovereign state from UN bodies and non-governmental organizations to global chain enterprises international and airline companies.
Meanwhile, China keeps producing fake news to create the illusion that Taiwan is a part of China.
China’s bullying of Taiwan is the behavior of a hegemonic power on the rise, displaying its confidence and showing that it is not afraid of interference from a democratic alliance led by the US as it strives for hegemony.
It also attacks the distribution of power at the top of the global governance system.
By waging namefare to eliminate the Republic of China and Taiwan, Beijing intends to define actions and regulations it has drafted unilaterally in the international community, drawing a clear-cut red line and making it clear to other countries what its national core interests are.
China could make a comeback to hegemonic power on the back of continuing economic growth, as it plans to once again dominate Asia and establish a new tributary system. This makes it the “most destabilizing factor in Asia,” in the words of former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).
Facing China’s namefare bullying, the most effective defense for Taiwan is to persist with its democratic system and open civil society.
In addition to forming an alliance with the international community based on democratic values, Taiwan also needs to take stock of, integrate and take an innovative approach to its soft power, in particular by deploying public diplomacy, using various diplomatic strategies, such as informational, cultural, financial, and elite-to-elite relations, showcasing its political values, culture and way of life, to counter China’s bullying.
After all, as China is acting like the bully by pressuring the world with fake news, it is going against the times.
Masao Sun is a former diplomat.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
On May 7, 1971, Henry Kissinger planned his first, ultra-secret mission to China and pondered whether it would be better to meet his Chinese interlocutors “in Pakistan where the Pakistanis would tape the meeting — or in China where the Chinese would do the taping.” After a flicker of thought, he decided to have the Chinese do all the tape recording, translating and transcribing. Fortuitously, historians have several thousand pages of verbatim texts of Dr. Kissinger’s negotiations with his Chinese counterparts. Paradoxically, behind the scenes, Chinese stenographers prepared verbatim English language typescripts faster than they could translate and type them
More than 30 years ago when I immigrated to the US, applied for citizenship and took the 100-question civics test, the one part of the naturalization process that left the deepest impression on me was one question on the N-400 form, which asked: “Have you ever been a member of, involved in or in any way associated with any communist or totalitarian party anywhere in the world?” Answering “yes” could lead to the rejection of your application. Some people might try their luck and lie, but if exposed, the consequences could be much worse — a person could be fined,
On May 13, the Legislative Yuan passed an amendment to Article 6 of the Nuclear Reactor Facilities Regulation Act (核子反應器設施管制法) that would extend the life of nuclear reactors from 40 to 60 years, thereby providing a legal basis for the extension or reactivation of nuclear power plants. On May 20, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) legislators used their numerical advantage to pass the TPP caucus’ proposal for a public referendum that would determine whether the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant should resume operations, provided it is deemed safe by the authorities. The Central Election Commission (CEC) has
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
RSS