“Today we’re in one era, and tomorrow we’ll be in a different era,” US President Donald Trump loudly proclaimed from the White House Rose Garden, as he hiked US tariffs to their highest level since 1909. “No one’s done anything quite like this.”
Not true.
On Oct. 1, 1949, then-Chinese Communist Party (CCP) chairman Mao Zedong (毛澤東) stood atop the Tiananmen, the entrance gate of Beijing’s Forbidden City, and declared China’s own “liberation day.” The CCP thenceforth divided the 20th century into two eras: “before liberation (解放以前),” under Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), and “after liberation (解放以後),” under Mao, who threw China into three decades of political and economic chaos. Now Trump’s “Liberation Day” promises similar tumult and disruption, but on a global scale.
For Europeans, in particular, it is as if the sun had suddenly burned out: The geopolitical system has lost its coherence and predictability, as planets begin careening from their orbits. Once reliant on the US, even as they sometimes looked down on its crudeness and naivete, Europeans now find themselves on their own, without gravity and forced to confront a US leader who is the ne plus ultra of baseness and ignorance.
Now that the old geopolitical order has been canceled, China and Russia are ready to step into the vacuum and create their version of order. However, one is a deracinated Marxist-Leninist regime with lots of military hardware, geography and natural resources, but an economy smaller than Canada’s, and the other is a rejuvenated Leninist one-party state with a massive economy, a thin-skinned leader and a vibrant global tech hub. Does Europe really want a world made safe for autocracy?
Instead of remaining a “dish of loose sand (一盤散沙),” as Sun Yat-sen (孫中山) once said of post-dynastic China, Europe must not only crank up its military industries to defend itself, but also seek to restore a modicum of democratic global order.
EUROPEAN RESOURCES
After all, Europe is not without important resources it could share with others. There is the French-British nuclear arsenal that could become an umbrella of deterrence for the continent; Germany’s Rheinmetall-like arms producers; Ukraine’s drone technology expertise; the UK’s BAE; France’s Airbus; and the Netherlands’ ASML, with its monopoly on the extreme ultraviolet lithography technology needed to produce advanced microchips.
However, Europe has yet to launch an effort to adopt the alliance structure that the US has now abandoned. By reaching out to Taiwan, Japan, South Korea, Philippines, New Zealand and Australia, Europe would let CCP leaders know that the world without the US at the helm is not theirs.
Given Trump’s hostility to NATO, Europeans and Asians who care about democracy and world order need to awaken to the dangers of their dependency on the US militarily and on China economically, and build new kinds of a partnerships among themselves and like-minded countries. An ever-prickly India certainly agrees with that, and could become a cooperative partner as well.
Such a new structure is exactly what Charles de Gaulle once advocated for France. In the 1950s, after France joined NATO, De Gaulle feared that the US might not come to Europe’s aid if the Soviet Union attacked, even bluntly telling the Americans he doubted they would ever sacrifice New York to defend Paris.
So, De Gaulle developed France’s own nuclear force de frappe and then, in 1966, withdrew from NATO’s military command (though France remained a member of the alliance). At the time, many regarded De Gaulle’s move as mere petulance — but his logic now suddenly looks prescient.
RACE TO THE TOP
More negotiations, dialogue, trade agreements, cultural exchanges and public diplomacy — the usual stuff of EU foreign policy over the decades — will not transform the likes of Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) or Russian President Vladimir Putin. They are not seeking partners for ensuring global peace and stability; they want to replace the US atop the world order — and then change the order itself.
Mao once said: “Without destruction there can be no construction (不破不立),” and there is some truth to this adage. Trump is also an agent of destruction; but if Europe can rise to the occasion, Trump could paradoxically become, malgre lui, an agent of construction, the midwife of a new non-US-centric world order.
However, lest Europeans forget, the US already tried a strategy of accommodation, not only with post-Soviet Russia, but also with China, as 10 presidents since 1972 (including the first Trump administration) supported different versions of “engagement” with the government in Beijing.
Alas, these efforts all failed, because CCP leaders remain wedded to their belief that the US is fundamentally bent on overthrowing its one-party rule, no matter what US presidents say. They regularly recall that then-US president Dwight Eisenhower’s secretary of state, John Foster Dulles, declared in 1953 that “liberation” from Soviet rule might better occur through a “process short of war,” namely, by peaceful “internal pressures ... bound to alter the character of the communist regimes.” And in 1958 Dulles counseled US diplomats to “accelerate [such] evolution within the Sino-Soviet bloc” through peaceful means.
Mao was alarmed by what he called “peaceful evolution (和平演變).” He saw it as a “much more deceptive tactic” than open warfare, because it sought to corrupt, and finally overthrow, China’s Communist system. Xi, too, has always perceived the US as an inalienably “hostile foreign force (敵對勢力).”
So, Europeans must not delude themselves about China. The best guarantee of peace in a world of emboldened autocracies is deterrence through military strength, alliance unity and economic influence. With the US no longer willing to lead the world’s democracies in this endeavor, Europe must step up. No one else can.
Orville Schell, director of the Center on US-China Relations at the Asia Society, is a coeditor (with Larry Diamond) of China’s Influence and American Interests: Promoting Constructive Engagement.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Many foreigners, particularly Germans, are struck by the efficiency of Taiwan’s administration in routine matters. Driver’s licenses, household registrations and similar procedures are handled swiftly, often decided on the spot, and occasionally even accompanied by preferential treatment. However, this efficiency does not extend to all areas of government. Any foreigner with long-term residency in Taiwan — just like any Taiwanese — would have encountered the opposite: agencies, most notably the police, refusing to accept complaints and sending applicants away at the counter without consideration. This kind of behavior, although less common in other agencies, still occurs far too often. Two cases
In a summer of intense political maneuvering, Taiwanese, whose democratic vibrancy is a constant rebuke to Beijing’s authoritarianism, delivered a powerful verdict not on China, but on their own political leaders. Two high-profile recall campaigns, driven by the ruling party against its opposition, collapsed in failure. It was a clear signal that after months of bitter confrontation, the Taiwanese public is demanding a shift from perpetual campaign mode to the hard work of governing. For Washington and other world capitals, this is more than a distant political drama. The stability of Taiwan is vital, as it serves as a key player
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
RSS