There was already considerable pent-up resentment among several Asian countries about China’s ambitions for world domination, but its recently released “standard map” showing sovereign territories of several countries as part of it has unleashed outrage and suspicion.
Although only a map, it is viewed by many of the affected countries as China’s attempt to covet their territories through its ploy of using “historical facts.”
The map, first released by the Chinese Ministry of Natural Resources, is also seen as an affront to many independent nations previously cautious about offending China due to its economic and military might.
The distortion of other countries’ national boundaries has caused a slew of protests by India, Malaysia, the Philippines, Russia and Vietnam; other countries affected by the map include Bhutan, Brunei, Japan and Taiwan. The map’s release, shortly before the start of the G20 summit in New Delhi was striking; it would have been quite embarrassing for Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) to face not only Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi, but also other leaders. Xi canceled his visit to the summit.
All the affected countries are appalled by the redrawing of their borders by a country whose “wolf warrior” conduct has been a source of concern and unease; they see China’s attempt to re-draw their territories — though on a map — as a blatant land grab.
Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Wang Wenbin (汪文斌) called the map’s release “a routine practice in China’s exercise of sovereignty in accordance with the law.” He hoped that all the “relevant sides can stay objective and calm, and refrain from over-interpreting the issue.”
What did he mean by China’s exercise of sovereignty in accordance with law? Foreign affairs experts in countries affected by this distortion were scratching their heads, wondering if there was any hidden message.
Reactions in India were characterized by outrage, disdain and dismissiveness at China’s blunt attempts to change India’s northeastern borders, including the state of Arunachal Pradesh, shown as part of southern Tibet in the new map. Aksai Chin, which China has militarily occupied since its 1962 war with India, was never shown as Chinese territory before the 1920s; it was historically part of India’s northeastern region of Ladakh, and always part of British India since the mid-19th century. China also occupies a piece of Kashmir ceded to China in 1963 by Pakistan which had seized it during an invasion.
China’s aggressive conduct has also generated anger within India’s public; some politicians in India’s ruling Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and the opposition alliance have called for upgrading ties with Taiwan, some even urging that the government give full Taiwan diplomatic recognition, unperturbed that this could lead to severance of India’s ties with China. Shashi Tharoor, an Indian politician belonging to the Congress Party and a former minister of state in India’s Ministry of External Affairs, urged the BJP government to retaliate and start issuing stapled visas in the passports of Chinese nationals from Tibet, as well as doing away with India’s “one China” policy.
China’s standoff with India at disputed border locations continues despite 19 rounds of talks between Indian and Chinese military experts to defuse tensions. Modi’s recent meeting with Xi at the BRICS summit in South Africa has not led to a disengagement so far.
China’s distortion has also upset other neighbors, particularly those claiming oil and mineral-rich islands in the South China Sea. The map reflects Beijing’s ambitions. It has been engaging in what critics call “salami slicing,” aimed at gradually usurping territories claimed by its neighbors. Brunei, Malaysia, the Philippines, Taiwan and Vietnam have reacted angrily. China’s “nine-dash line,” which covers the disputed territories, has now become a “10-dash line” with Taiwan included. China’s claims, based on “historical facts,” do not have any validity before international bodies; the Permanaent Court of Arbitration in The Hague rejected China’s claims in the case of the South China Sea islands claimed by the Philippines.
China has also resurrected claims over Russian territories, despite the two nations’ iron-clad friendship. Moscow rejected Beijing’s claim of ownership over Bolshoi Ussuriysky island, which China calls Heixiazi (黑瞎子島).
While the world thought China had just three border disputes — with India in Ladakh and Andhra Pradesh, with Japan over the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台列嶼, the Senkaku Islands in Japan), and the South China Sea — Beijing has expanded its territorial claims in 15 countries. There is also Taiwan, with which China does not share a border, but wishes to annex.
Given the strong backlash, many experts see China’s growing aggression as a source of instability. China’s leadership should realize that China could become isolated, with many countries becoming fearful and distrustful of it. No amount of economic coercion or incentives would then bring it out of isolation. Trust between nations is like the proverbial vase; once broken, it will always show cracks even after being fixed.
Manik Mehta is a New York-based journalist who writes extensively on foreign affairs, the UN, US bilateral relations, global economics, trade and business.
Father’s Day, as celebrated around the world, has its roots in the early 20th century US. In 1910, the state of Washington marked the world’s first official Father’s Day. Later, in 1972, then-US president Richard Nixon signed a proclamation establishing the third Sunday of June as a national holiday honoring fathers. Many countries have since followed suit, adopting the same date. In Taiwan, the celebration takes a different form — both in timing and meaning. Taiwan’s Father’s Day falls on Aug. 8, a date chosen not for historical events, but for the beauty of language. In Mandarin, “eight eight” is pronounced
In a recent essay, “How Taiwan Lost Trump,” a former adviser to US President Donald Trump, Christian Whiton, accuses Taiwan of diplomatic incompetence — claiming Taipei failed to reach out to Trump, botched trade negotiations and mishandled its defense posture. Whiton’s narrative overlooks a fundamental truth: Taiwan was never in a position to “win” Trump’s favor in the first place. The playing field was asymmetrical from the outset, dominated by a transactional US president on one side and the looming threat of Chinese coercion on the other. From the outset of his second term, which began in January, Trump reaffirmed his
US President Donald Trump’s alleged request that Taiwanese President William Lai (賴清德) not stop in New York while traveling to three of Taiwan’s diplomatic allies, after his administration also rescheduled a visit to Washington by the minister of national defense, sets an unwise precedent and risks locking the US into a trajectory of either direct conflict with the People’s Republic of China (PRC) or capitulation to it over Taiwan. Taiwanese authorities have said that no plans to request a stopover in the US had been submitted to Washington, but Trump shared a direct call with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平)
It is difficult to think of an issue that has monopolized political commentary as intensely as the recall movement and the autopsy of the July 26 failures. These commentaries have come from diverse sources within Taiwan and abroad, from local Taiwanese members of the public and academics, foreign academics resident in Taiwan, and overseas Taiwanese working in US universities. There is a lack of consensus that Taiwan’s democracy is either dying in ashes or has become a phoenix rising from the ashes, nurtured into existence by civic groups and rational voters. There are narratives of extreme polarization and an alarming
RSS