Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) held a huge parade in Beijing’s Tiananmen Square — the “Gate of Heavenly Peace” — to commemorate the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II. At the conclusion of the parade, 80,000 doves of peace were released.
Representing the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), at least according to Chinese state media, was former KMT chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱). Hung happily provided the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) the optics of the opposing sides in the Chinese Civil War — the CCP and the KMT — coming together to share in a happy celebration.
In Taipei, President William Lai (賴清德) spoke of the lessons to be learned from WWII, and the aspirational thought that “aggression would inevitably fail.”
The same day had messages of peace, reconciliation and the ultimate folly of aggression. It is amazing what cherry-picking of facts and optics can do for a narrative. In the end, that narrative was deliberately formed to demonstrate the truth of a lie.
While Xi waxed lyrical about peace, he was presiding over a full-throated expression of destructive potential. He did that while flanked by dictators, warmongers, authoritarian leaders and representatives of countries on only one side of the globe.
At the same time, Xi spoke of the “unstoppable” rejuvenation of the Chinese nation, and that the Chinese people “firmly stand on the right side of history.”
It is a nice thought, spoiled by the obvious menace of the military hardware being paraded in the square. Xi was not even showing a “them and us” mentality with references to the “Chinese nation” and the “Chinese people.” It really is just “us.” Everyone else can get out of the way.
Yes, he did also mention “humanity’s cause of peace and development,” and the choices of peace, dialogue and “win-win outcomes.” These were paired with war, confrontation and zero-sum games. Again, the military menace illustrated his point.
Hung should not have allowed herself to be used in that way. The KMT leadership made clear that she attended in the capacity of a private individual, but Chinese state media turned her attendance into pure propaganda.
That was fitting, because the whole message behind the parade was propaganda. If Xi wants China to be on the right side of history, he should confess about his willful distortions of it.
It is said that history is written by the victors. WWII was a complex conflict, and to a degree the way it can be told depends on one’s legitimate perspective. Western leaders focus on the European theater. Russian leaders focus on Russia’s role in the Nazi defeat. Chinese historians are more interested in the Asian theater.
As US historian S.C.M. Paine wrote in The Wars for Asia, 1911-1949: “the long Chinese Civil War precipitated a regional war between China and Japan so that by the time the conflict became global in 1941, the Chinese were fighting a civil war within a regional war within an overarching global war.”
There is plenty of scope within that hot mess to find cherries, but somebody should tell Xi that it was the KMT, not the CCP, that fought the Japanese in China. Presumably, Hung, in her capacity as a “representative of the KMT,” did not avail herself of the opportunity to point this out.
There is a robust attempt to swing the pendulum of power to the side of a group of dictators and authoritarians who stand behind Xi.
Lai says that aggression would inevitably fail. He did not mention the millions of lives that would be mangled before “unstoppable” aggression is halted, even if it can be stopped.
It is not looking good, Taiwan.
“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
A response to my article (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” Aug. 12, page 8) mischaracterizes my arguments, as well as a speech by former British prime minister Boris Johnson at the Ketagalan Forum in Taipei early last month. Tseng Yueh-ying (曾月英) in the response (“A misreading of Johnson’s speech,” Aug. 24, page 8) does not dispute that Johnson referred repeatedly to Taiwan as “a segment of the Chinese population,” but asserts that the phrase challenged Beijing by questioning whether parts of “the Chinese population” could be “differently Chinese.” This is essentially a confirmation of Beijing’s “one country, two systems” formulation, which says that
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