After the first confirmed case of 2019 novel coronavirus was reported in Tibet, the virus has spread to the entirety of China. This is far more ferocious than the SARS epidemic.
Before Wuhan was locked down, 5 million people had traveled from the Chinese city to other parts of the world. No one knows how many potential time bombs are hidden among those people.
Despite leading 19 task forces, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has left the hard work of annihilating the virus to Chinese Premier Li Keqiang (李克強). This is clearly a political power struggle over who should be the scapegoat.
Locking down cities and tens of millions of residents is clearly a desperate move aimed at cutting losses, leaving people in the locked-down cities to fend for themselves.
It has been three weeks since the lockdown of Wuhan, yet the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Chinese People’s Armed Police Force (PAP) are still sitting on their hands. The PLA and PAP are Xi’s most valuable assets, and Xi must be remain in firm control of both.
The PLA and the PAP are the two pillars of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) regime and China’s most effective forces, while Li’s anti-epidemic team only includes Chinese Minister of Public Security Zhao Kezhi (趙克志), but no members of the Chinese Central Military Commission. This means Xi wants to reserve his strength and will not rashly invest his bottom-line resources.
Past dynastic transitions usually occurred together with natural and human-caused disasters, most commonly civil unrest and pestilence. The last Ming Dynasty emperor, Chongzhen, blamed civil and military officials for misleading him, as weak morale, combined with a plague among his troops, allowed Nurhaci — considered the founder of the Qing Dynasty — and his 200,000 mounted soldiers to defeat the 1 million-strong Ming force.
In the 14th century, one-third of Europe’s population died after the Crusaders brought the plague home with them.
Xi might have been called a “country bumpkin,” but surely he must know all this.
The PLA has only allocated small logistics resources to take over medical institution management and field troops have not been involved in city lockdowns, to their detriment.
Apart from advocating patriotism, the CCP propaganda department has ignored the opposition and hostility caused by villages sealing off roads to protect themselves. This is reminiscent of what happened in connection to the Mutual Protection of Southeast China during the late Qing Dynasty, when some local governments refused to carry out the imperial decree.
As of yesterday, the CCP had confirmed 42,638 cases of coronavirus infections and 1,016 deaths — about one-10th of expert estimates — mostly in Wuhan. If the epidemic spreads to first-tier cities like Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen and Guangzhou, the casualties and economic losses would become unbearable, and it is only a matter of time before the PLA is deployed.
However, fighting a war and combating a spreading virus are two different things. In war, the targets are visible and it is clear who the enemy is. On the other hand, a virus is invisible and indiscriminate. An army is normally an isolated group of people who eat, sleep, survive and die together. Once it joins the front-line fight against the virus, it will become its main target.
The army is unlikely to be deployed in the fight against the virus in the short term, but if the outbreak spreads and endangers the CCP regime, PLA deployment will be inevitable. History shows that once the virus captures the army, it might be the death knell for Xi’s regime.
Chen An is a senior media worker.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS