Bartering Taiwan for better ties with China is a mistake. Ambitious powers see such concessions as an appetizer, not dessert.
Writing off Taiwan for the sake of Sino-American amity probably qualifies as optimism of a kind—unless you have the misfortune to actually live on the island. Writing in the latest issue of Foreign Affairs, George Washington University Prof. Charles Glaser maintains that to date, ‘the China debate among international relations theorists has pitted optimistic liberals against pessimistic realists.’ The former, he says, believe today’s liberal international order can accommodate China’s rise, building on economic interdependence. The latter point to China’s mounting economic and military strength, prophesying that power will impel Beijing ‘to pursue its interests more assertively, which will in turn lead the United States and other countries to balance against it.’
For realists of such leanings, this cycle of action and reaction is apparently apt to produce ‘at least a parallel to the Cold War standoff between the United States and the Soviet Union, and perhaps even a hegemonic war.’ Times of transition bring established powers intent on preserving their privileged positions into conflict with rising powers determined to remake the system to suit themselves.
What should be done? Glaser claims there’s a third way, namely a ‘realist optimism’ in which power politics makes not for conflict and war, but for a manageable peace—the established power should give up things that are of secondary value in order to satisfy a rising power that places inordinate value on these things. But this vision has a disturbingly 19th century ring to it. In effect, Glaser would abandon Taiwan, a secondary object for the United States, to China while reaffirming the alliances with Japan and South Korea. But buying peace with land has been tried many times before—with ephemeral results at best.
So how would this work? Glaser maintains that ‘structural forces’ aren’t propelling the Asia-Pacific heavyweights inexorably into combat. Now (as always) the vast emptiness of the Pacific Ocean separates the two main antagonists, limiting frictions while making it hard for them to get at each other militarily. And US nuclear superiority remains unchallengeable. Such structural factors apply a damper to transpacific competition while imposing restraint on Chinese actions. By this logic, Washington and Beijing should be able to fashion an arrangement through mutual concessions, fending off war. So far, so good. The United States should make every effort to enlist China as co-guarantor of the international system over which it has presided since 1945—a system that benefits all stakeholders in globalization, including China and fellow Asian nations. But with apologies to President John F. Kennedy, Washington can’t pay any price for an Asia-Pacific entente.
Glaser apparently would. He terms Taiwan a ‘less-than-vital’ US interest. In international relations-speak, that means an interest for which the United States shouldn’t fight. The island and its residents—US friends of long standing—would be the most obvious casualty of this effort to create a new normal in East Asia. The author admits Americans will find this ‘disagreeable.’ But sympathy for stricken friends is not the only thing at stake for the United States. It’s far from clear that trading the island away would stabilize broader Sino-US relations or Asian security.
Photo Credit: US Navy
View as Single Page
Reddit
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Technorati
Yahoo
Google
Plurk
Jonathan
The above commentators are totally ignorant of recent history. The separation of Taiwan from China is a relic of the colonial era (when Japan took Taiwan forcibly from a weak China) and the Cold War (when the defeated corrupt Chiang Kai Shek fled to Taiwan). If it weren’t for the U.S. Six Fleet, Taiwan would have been liberated just like Tibet and Sinchiang. To end the vestiges of Colonialism, Britain returned Hong Kong to China and Portugal returned Macao to China. Taiwan was returned to China after Japan got defeated in World War II. Following the Cold War, 4 countries were separated. Two have been reunited: Germany by peaceful means and Vietnam by force of arms. Both the Koreas and the two Chinas want to be reunited. North Korea tried it by force of arms and failed. China want to reunite with Taiwan by peaceful means if possible-the “One country, two systems” approach applied successfully to Hong Kong and Macao. The whole world (particularly the U.N.), with the exception of a few small inconsequential countries bought off by Taiwan, recognize that Taiwan is a part of China. Therefore any form of Independence would give China justification to use arms against Taiwan. This is why China is preparing herself militarily. Commentators like to tout Taiwan’s democracy but are ignorant of the fact that Taiwan and likewise South Korea had nearly 50 years of dictatorship before they became democracies. The latter came about only after they attained a relatively high standards of living. China is going along a similar path, but has not reach those levels and will not for many more years. In any case, China will never allow democracy until Taiwan has been reunited with China, because to do otherwise will simply mean the invitation of Taiwan to become permanently separated from China just like the Ukraine and Belarus’ separation from Russia after the demise of the Soviet Union and the adoption of Democracy in Russia.
smoker
The Chinese need a military victory over Taiwan to justify their emotional investment. The Chinese military needs to fly the Communist flag over Taiwan – they need this more than they need to go on living. That is the psychology of the region. Everything China has done in 30 years has been geared towards a takeover of Taiwan. This is the point of modernization, it is the reason to exist for the Chinese Communist state. They modernized for this reason, and for this reason alone. They have a capitalist economy for this reason, and this reason alone. Their military was hopelessly behind the American/Taiwan capabilities, they shrewdly recognized this, and have “opened” to the West precisely as little as possible while still getting their hands on advanced military capabilities.
These kinds of ancient hatreds and feuds are the real motivators of human behaviors, and the West is clueless about it. Yesterday Tibet, today Hong Kong, tomorrow Taiwan. China is a military dictatorship that exits to expand.
Kimpo
The Taiwan has stood as an independent nation and its people have achieved great heights. Mainlanders try to steal our hardwork as that is what they are best at, at stealing. Copyright of others they will steal, design of other they wil steal an country with much more wealth and open education and govt. they will try to steal that too. Taiwan stands for more than an nation, it iz an symbole of resistance against the tyrants.