China and change
Allow me to comment on Ai Weiwei’s (艾未未) insightful opinion piece (“Think sanctions hurt China? Then you are stuck in politics,” April 8, page 9).
China appears to have been in Friedrich Hegel’s mind when he was saying that quantity changes quality. China is a massive human quantity, a tiny proportion of which is elite. The elite, if it gains power, can transform the whole. No matter how many ideological slogans the West may shout out to China, even with sanctions, China, with its quantity, need not budge much.
In his article, Ai does not expect the Chinese regime to collapse because of some doings by external forces. However, a regime change might occur in China because of an implosion.
According to famous Chinese novelist Jiang Rong (姜戎) the fate of a nation hangs on its culture, not its politics or economics.
China’s history seems to indicate that it can change only after it experiences trauma. Once a change is forced, China reverts to uniformity and rigidity and corruption among the powerful elite, which builds up resentment toward another implosion.
One can find the explanation in the Chinese character itself nurtured by its culture. If one uses colorful language, China is a colossal solipsist. It does not really care about what lies outside its borders as long as it is left alone.
There is a glaring contrast between China and the US. The latter must keep telling the world that it is No. 1 to believe in its raison d’etre, while the former is happy if it does not even have to address the world. The ideology/religion/moral agenda of China seems to be that of China’s absolute being.
A challenging question for contemporary China and the world is how to transform mainland China into a country where diverse cultural, ideological and political forces can vie peacefully to accommodate a governance structure that serves the whole, with a mandate from and responsibility for it.
Democracy is multivocal. Proof of democracy is the presence of a flexible structure that allows and appropriates diversity as exemplified by Taiwan’s experiences.
One could dare say that mainland China will have changed when it stops threatening Taiwan, releases Hong Kong, Tibet and Xinjiang, frees all political prisoners and sheds its illusion that it has suzerainty over its small neighbors.
Throughout its long history, China produced remarkable humanitarian thought systems such as Taoism, Confucianism, and (Ch’an) Buddhism. It is sad to note that today’s mainland China seems to have thrown away its cultural legacy in the endorsement of mammonism, the cold interests of state power over and against human dignity and freedom, and the cultural and demographic genocide of Uighurs and other minority ethnic groups.
Yeomin Yoon, Professor, Seton Hall University
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has long been expansionist and contemptuous of international law. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), the CCP regime has become more despotic, coercive and punitive. As part of its strategy to annex Taiwan, Beijing has sought to erase the island democracy’s international identity by bribing countries to sever diplomatic ties with Taipei. One by one, China has peeled away Taiwan’s remaining diplomatic partners, leaving just 12 countries (mostly small developing states) and the Vatican recognizing Taiwan as a sovereign nation. Taiwan’s formal international space has shrunk dramatically. Yet even as Beijing has scored diplomatic successes, its overreach
In her article in Foreign Affairs, “A Perfect Storm for Taiwan in 2026?,” Yun Sun (孫韻), director of the China program at the Stimson Center in Washington, said that the US has grown indifferent to Taiwan, contending that, since it has long been the fear of US intervention — and the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) inability to prevail against US forces — that has deterred China from using force against Taiwan, this perceived indifference from the US could lead China to conclude that a window of opportunity for a Taiwan invasion has opened this year. Most notably, she observes that
For Taiwan, the ongoing US and Israeli strikes on Iranian targets are a warning signal: When a major power stretches the boundaries of self-defense, smaller states feel the tremors first. Taiwan’s security rests on two pillars: US deterrence and the credibility of international law. The first deters coercion from China. The second legitimizes Taiwan’s place in the international community. One is material. The other is moral. Both are indispensable. Under the UN Charter, force is lawful only in response to an armed attack or with UN Security Council authorization. Even pre-emptive self-defense — long debated — requires a demonstrably imminent
Since being re-elected, US President Donald Trump has consistently taken concrete action to counter China and to safeguard the interests of the US and other democratic nations. The attacks on Iran, the earlier capture of deposed of Venezuelan president Nicolas Maduro and efforts to remove Chinese influence from the Panama Canal all demonstrate that, as tensions with Beijing intensify, Washington has adopted a hardline stance aimed at weakening its power. Iran and Venezuela are important allies and major oil suppliers of China, and the US has effectively decapitated both. The US has continuously strengthened its military presence in the Philippines. Japanese Prime
RSS