Nov
4
While the world had its eyes peeled to the US election, riveted by the yearlong drama finally coming to a close, November 4, 2008 will be remembered for something else in Chinese history.
For the first time since 1950, direct air, shipping and mail links will be established between Taiwan and mainland China. The agreement came swiftly, on just the second day of the direct talks between Chinese and Taiwanese representatives in Taipei. The deal will be in effect within 40 days - before the end of 2008.
It was a win-win of sorts. For China, the symbolic agreement at least provides the perception that Taiwan, separated from the mainland at the end of the Chinese Civil War, is coming to a closer embrace. For Taiwan, the benefits are more tangible, as the island’s economy is now inextricably linked to that of the mainland, and these links will allow Taiwan to serve as the gateway to the burgeoning mainland market.
Not everybody in Taiwan is happy about closer ties to China. The opposition Democratic Progressive Party is making its living off stirring anti-China sentiments. But for the majority of the island’s 23 million residents there is an understanding that whether they like it or not, China will be in their future - for better or for worse - so they may as well make the best of it.
Oct
30
If physically assaulting a visiting dignitary is proof of a vibrant democracy, then please, bring back Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek!
This can’t be all that Taiwan has to show for being Asia’s freest society.
With another Chinese delegation scheduled to visit next Monday, topic No. 1 on everyone’s mind is whether they will receive proper protection. A protest is scheduled. A demonstration is planned. And perhaps another assault is being mulled. All the more reason the Taiwanese need a new opposition to replace the ideologically bankrupt Democratic Progressive Party (DPP).
The DPP had been a transformational force, the vanguard that helped usher in true democracy to Taiwan after years of authoritarian rule under Chiang and his Kuomintang Party (KMT). It won the island’s first free and fair election in 2000, bringing about a peaceful transfer of power as Chen Shui-bian took office as president.
But in the intervening eight years, it all went south. Chen proved to be a corrupt political opportunist, doing everything he could to funnel funds to his and his family member’s bank accounts. He rigged the election in 2004 to stay in power, and in the meantime, has done little other than stir the pot to raise the temperature in the Taiwan Strait.
The collateral damage to Chen’s incorrigible behavior was his party. The DPP, under his stewardship, became a one-trick pony: Being anti-China at all cost. The party’s only platform and raison d’etre was, and is, the promotion of fictional Taiwan “independence,” and with it igniting ethnic tensions between the mainlanders and islanders.
But the Taiwan electorate, fickle but with growing maturity, resoundingly rejected the DPP in this year’s elections. First, in the Legislative Yuan, the former majority party is now relegated to irrelevance as the KMT picked up an astounding three-fourth majority. Then, in the presidential election, KMT’s Ma Ying-jeou won 60 percent of the votes to easily sweep into office.
Ma’s campaign slogan was pretty much “It’s still the economy, stupid!” With Taiwan’s economy underperforming amidst a global boom, the Taiwanese wanted to get back in while the getting was still good. Unfortunately for Ma, his timing was awful.
And his political skills were equally inept. With a milquetoast personality, Ma seems ill-equipped to take command of his mandate and deal with opposition intransigence forcefully. He was right to open channels of communication with China, but so far he has not been able to effectively answer the criticism that he’s “soft” on the communist dictatorship.
To be sure, Taiwan’s frayed relationship with the mainland will require years of fence-mending; it can’t be done overnight. Repairing that relationship will become more crucial to Taiwan’s welfare in the face of sagging U.S. support. With the U.S. increasingly reliant on China to stabilize the current financial crisis, Taiwan will have little chance of receiving unflagging American backing should things get hot in the Strait.
Of course, the DPP, marginalized as it is, jumped on Ma’s perceived weakness toward China as a tool for its own long march back to relevance. It orchestrated last week’s unprovoked physical attack on Zhang Mingqing, vice chairman of mainland China’s semi-official Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Strait (ARATS), while he was touring in Tainan. Afterward, the DPP - and the always-bombastic Chen - had the temerity to insinuate that Zhang “asked for it.”
Instead of unleashing a torrent of condemnation, Ma’s reaction was muted, further enhancing his image as someone incapable of standing up to anyone. While China remains undaunted and pledges to stick with Monday’s visit as scheduled, the situation is so out of control it remains to be seen if anything can get done at this time.
For Taiwan’s democracy to survive, and thrive, it is necessary for it to have a meaningful opposition party that’s dedicated to protecting the best interests of its citizens. The DPP isn’t it. The party’s sole agenda, if carried out, ensures the island’s physical annihilation - hardly something worth voting for.
The DPP needs to reform itself, moderating the anti-China, de-Sinicization nonsense into something more in tune with reality. Taiwan may - and should - continue to fight for international space and deal with China. And there are other issues dear and near to Taiwanese people: The economy, first and foremost.
If the DPP is incapable of generating new ideas and reforming itself, it should get out of the way in favor of a more meaningful and moderate opposition party. The fear is not a potential KMT hegemony - it can easily lose the next round of elections - but what a return to power by the DPP may bring for Taiwan.
If last week’s event is any indication, don’t expect China to turn the other cheek the next time around.
Oct
16
China and the Financial Crisis
Filed Under China
I was the guest Thursday on The Ed Morrissey Show on Hot Air. You can listen to the entire 30-minute banter here. This is part of our continuing effort to get RealClearWorld into different media. There may be more appearances in the future.
Aug
11
Jesse Owens was the star of the Berlin Games in 1936. True.
Adolf Hitler used the Olympics as a propaganda opportunity to sell Nazi Germany. Also true.
Owens’ runaway success debunked Hitler’s Aryan superiority theme, rendered the Berlin Olympics a colossal failure and brought personal humiliation to the Fuhrer himself.
False, false, false. A thousand times false.
History has a funny way of repeating itself. What’s not funny is this kind of revisionist history — wrong and sending the wrong message.
It’s become de rigueur to draw comparisons between the Games in Berlin and this year’s Beijing Olympics. It’s easy to see the parallels: Totalitarian regimes. Human rights abuses. State-sponsored planning and “cleansing.” And a bubbling nationalism that’s difficult to miss.
But in order for those comparisons to make sense it’s paramount to understand what actually had happened in 1936 and what long-term consequences came of the Berlin Olympics. Thinking that they were a setback for the Nazis would be the wrong place to start.
The 1936 Games were a spectacular success for the Nazis, one that made Hitler’s future genocidal pogroms and aggressive wars possible. Germany was the undisputed winner on the competition fields and in the arena of public opinion.
To assuage the fears of foreign visitors, “Jews not welcome” signs were quietly removed from all over Berlin. The omnipresent Gestapo were made conspicuous by their absence. Even Julius Streicher’s notoriously anti-Semitic Der Sturmer disappeared from the newsstands. Athletes, media and tourists were treated to lavish receptions.
For those visiting Nazi Germany for the first time, they saw a first-rate world power with magnificent infrastructure, clean streets, friendly people and a benevolent government.
For Owens, in particular, it was an unforgettable experience – and a positive one. He was adored by the German public, with crowds chanting his name when he entered the stadium and mobbing him on the street for autographs. And unlike in his segregated homeland, he was free to use whichever public facilities he pleased.
Much has been made of the “Hitler Snub,” a reference to the German leader’s refusal to shake his hand after victories. That was utter nonsense, too. Warned by the IOC to be impartial to competitors, Hitler greeted no one after the first day of the Games. (Who knew Avery Brundage had that much pull?) Owens himself said that Hitler did in fact stand up and acknowledge him during competition. It was Franklin Roosevelt who declined to take his hand upon his triumphant return to America.
The Nazi Games owed part of their success to Olympia, superbly cinematographed by Leni Riefenstahl. The Olympic torch relay, now considered an ancient ritual, was in fact a Riefenstahl invention for the film. For the Berlin Games, the torch run was the first of many glorious moments.
The torch relay for the Beijing Games, in contrast, was marred by international protests of the Chinese regime’s behavior in Darfur, Tibet and in China itself. On that point alone, it’s clear that the Beijing Games will bear little resemblance to its 1936 predecessor.
The Nazis were simply and vastly better at sinister manipulation.
The Beijing Games, three days old, would already have to be considered a mild PR disaster. Showing few abilities to grasp the subtleties the Chinese are purportedly famous for, the communist regime has failed several important tests.
The torch relay was the first opportunity. It would have been better to allow the protesters to run amok instead of strong-arming them with track-suited secret police – on foreign soil. Then came the reneging on a pledge to allow the visiting media unfettered internet access, for which the Chinese government earned universal scorn before somewhat relenting.
With tantrums resembling a neighborhood gangster instead of a global power, the regime caught few breaks from the international press descending on Beijing. Everything it does is viewed with cynicism. Every decision it makes is scrutinized, mostly unfavorably.
For all that, we should all breath a sigh of relief. The Chinese authorities just aren’t as shrewd and devious as Hitler. The Nazis were willing to do anything and everything – even demurring to the toothless IOC – to advance their ultimate agenda. The communist authorities simply can’t help but be their bullying selves.
So for history lessons, there’s limited value in comparing these Games 72 years apart - except hopefully this: Olympics do not lead to happy endings for totalitarian regimes.
Nine years after the Berlin Games, Hitler’s Germany lay in rubble and swastikas were wiped off the face of Europe. Nine years after the 1980 Moscow Olympics, the Berlin Wall fell and the Soviet Empire soon dissolved. Nine years after the 1984 Games in Sarajevo, Tito’s Yugoslavia was no more.
Can’t wait to see what will happen in 2017.
Jul
31
Yesterday, “negotiations” went on between the IOC and Chinese authorities regarding unrestricted internet access for the media covering the Olympics. Today, we know how it all went down.
Just call it an unconditional surrender.
The bullying Chinese government has won the day and once again proved that rules are for suckers and promises are meant for babes. Despite all its previous assurances guaranteeing press freedom, China had no intention of keeping its word at all.
According to the International Herald Tribune:
Since the Olympic Village press center opened Friday, reporters have been unable to access scores of Web pages — among them those that discuss Tibetan issues, Taiwanese independence, the violent crackdown on the protests in Tiananmen Square and the Web sites of Amnesty International, the BBC’s Chinese-language news, Radio Free Asia and several Hong Kong newspapers known for their freewheeling political discourse.
The restrictions, which closely resemble the blocks that China places on the Internet for its citizens, undermine sweeping claims by Jacques Rogge, the International Olympic Committee president, that China had agreed to provide free Web access for foreign news media during the Games. Rogge has long argued that one of the main benefits of awarding the Games to Beijing was that the event would make China more open.
“For the first time, foreign media will be able to report freely and publish their work freely in China. There will be no censorship on the Internet,” Rogge told Agence France-Presse just two weeks ago.
Rogge and the IOC simply capitulated. Unable to persuade the Chinese Communist regime to stick to its pledge, the IOC just shuffled off and threw up its hands. Unwilling to take a stand at the risk of damaging his brand, Rogge preferred to eat his own word.
With one week to go before the Games, the totalitarian regime has gradually revealed its ferocious fangs. It has proven that it intends to carry out its will with impunity. And so far, no one has dared to challenge it. The IOC could’ve threatened to pull the Olympics out of Beijing altogether. But taking a page out of Marshal Petain’s book: Why fight when it’s so much easier just to surrender?
There is but one person with enough clout to at least make Beijing squirm: George W. Bush. Previously I had counseled in favor of Bush attending the Opening Ceremony to provide China some cover for relaxing its death grip on all matters relating to freedom. But in the face of renewed and heightened Chinese intransigence, it’s clearly time for Bush to reconsider.
Somebody should resort to the stick after all the carrots are devoured, right?
keep looking »