US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House is so far proving more nightmarish for US allies and friends than adversaries.
China certainly does not relish a trade war with the US, but it was better prepared than others for Trump’s tariffs, and both sides appear to be leaving room for a potential deal. Although Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) is poised for worse to come, the second Trump term is bringing Beijing opportunities as well as problems.
International respect for the US plummeted under his last administration. As the US president turns the screws on long-term partners, China is looking to take advantage.
Colombia quickly caved to Trump on the matter of migrant returns, but China’s ambassador has been celebrating the “best moment” in relations between Bogota and Beijing.
Under pressure from the Trump administration, Panama announced that it would allow its participation in China’s Belt and Road Initiative to expire. Yet behind-the-scenes arm-twisting had already begun tilting Panama back toward the US. Trump’s attempts to humiliate and bully might backfire there and across the region.
He is likely to find it harder going, too, away from his back yard, in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. The US has never been afraid to use hard power, but trade, aid and military alliances have also been key to its hegemony. No longer.
Trump’s attack on South Africa, cutting financial assistance, might delight Elon Musk, but pointlessly alienates an important middle power. His declaration that the US would expand its territory in various locations — using military force if necessary — shows his utter contempt for the law, as does his order to halt enforcement of US legislation banning the bribery of foreign officials.
China might well benefit by addressing some of the impact of the US axing aid — it funds at least one affected group — but it has focused more on loans and infrastructure than partnership with local organizations, and its record suggests it is unlikely to fill the financial holes left by the US.
There is little naivety about engagement with Beijing these days, but many nations will conclude that they have little choice but to hedge their bets. China is most likely to gain ground in multilateral institutions, and among middle-income nations that view it much more positively than high-income ones.
US Vice President J.D. Vance’s blast at European leaders at the Munich Security Conference, and promotion of the hard right, was a shocking moment of clarity. Yet far from holding out a velvet-gloved hand, Beijing has just appointed a controversial “wolf warrior” diplomat as its special representative for European affairs. Lu Shaye (盧沙野) sparked fury when, as ambassador to France, he questioned the sovereignty of former Soviet states and Ukraine’s sovereignty over Crimea. As China and the US contend, others are likely to find themselves not wooed, but pressured by both sides.
China rose more rapidly in the global order than it could have expected. Now it is watching US power deteriorate far more quickly. That is promising for a nation that wants a multipolar world without inconvenient universal values. Yet the question is not just how others react to Beijing’s growing power, but whether a security free-rider might find itself taking on roles it hoped to avoid, or having to cope with the vacuum left if it does not.
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which
RSS