The speeches at the Shangri-La Dialogue defense forum in Singapore from Friday last week to Monday predominantly focused on maintaining peace, prosperity and international law, but it was difficult to ignore the underlying sense of frustration and menace.
These were apparent in what was left unsaid, in implied, but not explicitly stated motivations driving policy, and — in the case of Chinese Minister of National Defense Dong Jun (董軍) — breathtaking achievements in willful contortions and untruths.
Regional players such as the US, Indonesia, the Philippines and China presented their viewpoints. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy made an appearance on Sunday. It was unfortunate that there were no representatives from Taiwan given a chance to speak or even attend.
US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin spoke about Washington’s new approach to maintaining security in the region, talking about the concept of a “new convergence” of networks of multilateral alliances to replace the former “hub and spokes” policy.
Austin listed some of the nations and groupings the US was including in this new approach: Japan, South Korea, India, the Philippines, Australia, Indonesia, Thailand and Papua New Guinea, as well as the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue and ASEAN.
He laid out the common principles at the heart of the “shared vision” that brought these countries together, including respect for sovereignty and international law, and the peaceful resolution of disputes “through dialogue, not coercion or conflict, and certainly not through so-called punishment.”
What he left unsaid was why this new approach and the gargantuan effort that it requires was necessary in the first place. Despite clearly referring to the Chinese People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) Joint Sword-2024A military exercises conducted as “punishment” — ostensibly for President William Lai’s (賴清德) May 20 inauguration speech — Austin did not mention China once.
Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr did refer to China late in his speech when he spoke about the necessity for Beijing and Washington to manage regional tensions responsibly.
Earlier in his address, Marcos spoke of his nation’s history of helping to create and protect regional and global rules-based order and peace, which are “in stark contrast to assertive actions that aim to propagate excessive and baseless claims through force, intimidation and deception.”
He did not mention China explicitly in this remark, but it was clear who he was referring to.
Zelenskiy was more forthcoming, being openly critical of China for supporting Russia’s brutal war in Ukraine and for helping Moscow disrupt a Swiss-organized peace conference on the war planned for later this month.
Austin did not mention China as the sole driver behind the “new convergence” approach; Marcos did not refer to China in the context of the South China Sea maritime disputes. Their two administrations are still holding out for a reduction in regional tensions.
That boat has clearly sailed for Zelenskiy. His country is already engulfed in war and he has lost patience with the idea of playing coy with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in the hopes that it would do the right thing.
Dong was more openly aggressive during his own speech, which was at most an attempt to convince the audience that the CCP and the PLA stand for peace and dialogue, despite warning Manila that there is a “limit to our restraint” over its pushback on Beijing’s aggression in the South China Sea and notwithstanding the unspoken threat to nail Taiwan’s elected leadership to the flaying post of history.
It is time that China was called out more explicitly for its behavior.
More importantly, it is time to include Taiwan in forums on regional peace and security.
“History does not repeat itself, but it rhymes” (attributed to Mark Twain). The USSR was the international bully during the Cold War as it sought to make the world safe for Soviet-style Communism. China is now the global bully as it applies economic power and invests in Mao’s (毛澤東) magic weapons (the People’s Liberation Army [PLA], the United Front Work Department, and the Chinese Communist Party [CCP]) to achieve world domination. Freedom-loving countries must respond to the People’s Republic of China (PRC), especially in the Indo-Pacific (IP), as resolutely as they did against the USSR. In 1954, the US and its allies
Mainland Affairs Council Deputy Minister Shen You-chung (沈有忠) on Thursday last week urged democratic nations to boycott China’s military parade on Wednesday next week. The parade, a grand display of Beijing’s military hardware, is meant to commemorate the 80th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in World War II. While China has invited world leaders to attend, many have declined. A Kyodo News report on Sunday said that Japan has asked European and Asian leaders who have yet to respond to the invitation to refrain from attending. Tokyo is seeking to prevent Beijing from spreading its distorted interpretation of wartime history, the report
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi arrived in China yesterday, where he is to attend a summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) and Russian President Vladimir Putin today. As this coincides with the 50 percent US tariff levied on Indian products, some Western news media have suggested that Modi is moving away from the US, and into the arms of China and Russia. Taiwan-Asia Exchange Foundation fellow Sana Hashmi in a Taipei Times article published yesterday titled “Myths around Modi’s China visit” said that those analyses have misrepresented India’s strategic calculations, and attempted to view
When Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) stood in front of the Potala Palace in Lhasa on Thursday last week, flanked by Chinese flags, synchronized schoolchildren and armed Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) troops, he was not just celebrating the 60th anniversary of the establishment of the “Tibet Autonomous Region,” he was making a calculated declaration: Tibet is China. It always has been. Case closed. Except it has not. The case remains wide open — not just in the hearts of Tibetans, but in history records. For decades, Beijing has insisted that Tibet has “always been part of China.” It is a phrase
RSS