Page 4 of 5 CHINA AND APPEASEMENT,
PART 1 Beyond Munich: Geostrategy
and betrayal By Henry C K Liu
working for "one country, one system" - the capitalist system, with direct US
support. This is the prerequisite condition under which the US will allow China
to recover Taiwan.
It is not at all clear that appeasement on the distortion of the OCTS principle
has redeeming positive impacts on the sustainable development of the economy in
China, or on the
reincorporation of Taiwan into Chinese sovereignty. The Taiwanese regime has
consistently rejected the OCTS principle as a basis for reincorporation back
into China. On the other hand, OCTS has been twisted by the United States to
legitimize the Hong Kong Relations Act and the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), two
pieces of US legislation that the US relies on to interfere openly in China's
internal affairs. The TRA further provides the legal basis for provocative US
arms sales to Taiwan.
Despite the fact that the OCTS principle allows Taiwan to keep its political
and economic system, even its military as a local defense unit, Taipei has
exploited the rise of US moral imperialism to cement Washington's commitment to
help defend a democratic and capitalistic Taiwan in the event that its
political offensive toward perpetual de facto separation or, worse, formal de
jure independence should provoke military conflict with the mainland.
Officially, there is no such US commitment, but the current regime in Taipei
banks on post-Cold War US hegemony to carry out its own pursuit of separatist
objectives that the US may not officially endorse, but which it tacitly also
does not disapprove as long as it serves US geopolitical interest in curbing
potential extension of Chinese power into the Pacific Ocean.
The Taiwan Relations Act
The TRA, US Public Law 96-8 of April 10, 1979, which came into being as an
anti-China counterweight to US normalization with the PRC, is a US domestic law
designed to appease right-wing intransigence toward communist China in US
domestic politics.
As a US law, the TRA carries a legal authority exceeding the three diplomatic
communiques, which are diplomatic expressions of understanding between two
states that carry no domestic legal authority - only diplomatic obligations.
Successive US administrations have based US policies on China and Taiwan as
defined by the three bilateral communiques, modified by the TRA.
There was a time when China refused diplomatic relations with any government
that maintained official relations with the Taiwanese regime, and trade
relations with companies that traded with Taiwan. Such policies of principle
have been all but abandoned by Chinese appeasement.
The US celebrates the spectacular rise of Taiwanese investment on the mainland
as a positive sign that the strategy of transforming Chinese socialism into
Taiwanese capitalism is successful.
The TRA, with a legal guarantee of future arms sales to Taiwan, was passed by a
veto-proof margin by both houses of Congress. The TRA is concrete evidence that
anti-China attitude in the US Congress is solid and obstinate, despite relative
geopolitical flexibility on the part of the successive executive branches of
the US government, not withstanding that the president is supposed to be the
commander-in-chief in foreign policy. The language in the TRA on the defense of
Taiwan contradicts US positions declared in the three communiques. The TRA
mandates in a legal framework a much closer security relationship with Taiwan
than was contemplated by the three communiques.
The TRA establishes a continuing relationship between the US and Taiwan on a
quasi-official basis to "preserve and promote extensive close and friendly
commercial, cultural and other relations" - short of official recognition. Even
the exchange of visits by high government officials between Taiwan and the US
is now routinely tolerated by Chinese appeasement, coupled by meaningless
protests.
The TRA also states that the US considers that "any effort to determine the
future of Taiwan by other than peaceful means, including boycotts and
embargoes, is a threat to the peace and security of the western Pacific area
and of grave concern to the United States".
However, domestic laws are not applicable beyond US jurisdiction. To China, the
TRA is a US law that illegally imposes extra-territoriality on Chinese
territory and a direct challenge to Chinese sovereignty. Yet the OCTS principle
gives the US a twisted pretext to uphold official Chinese commitment of "two
systems" in Hong Kong and Taiwan, weakening the charge of US interference in
Chinese internal affairs. The cost of US challenge to Chinese sovereignty
definitely outweighs the economic benefits of OCTS to China.
Locked on a long-term collision track
The national interests of the United States and China are locked on a long-term
collision track by enduring US hostility toward communism, despite temporary
relief brought about by the US obsession with its "war on terrorism".
Continued US antagonism toward socialist China in general and anti-China policy
on the Taiwan issue in particular will reinforce the prospect of China
concluding that war with the United States is ultimately unavoidable.
Escalating official government and military contacts between the US and Taiwan
are viewed by China as direct violations of the three communiques. President
Bush's reference to Taiwan as the "Republic of China" in a televised press
conference soon after his inauguration in 2001 was undeniably and decidedly
provocative.
On the other hand, excessive appeasement on the part of the Chinese leadership
toward US belligerence only reinforced former US secretary of state George
Shultz's notion of a helpless China without options, causing the US to push its
lingering anti-China policies even harder. The danger of miscalculation in both
capitals continues to be very real, made more so by continuing Chinese
appeasement. No Chinese government can survive the independence of Taiwan; nor
can peace in Asia or even the world. Should Taipei declare independence, and
some have suggested next year's Beijing Summer Olympics as a window of
opportunity, China's newly enacted Anti-Secession Law and the US
Taiwan-Relations Act would collide head-on, forcing the two governments to
resort to military solutions as a matter of domestic law.
Just as Washington ignored, to the detriment of all, repeated messages from
China about its intention to enter the Korean War in 1950 should US forces
approach the Chinese border, the Taiwan issue is shaping up to be a potential
tragedy of miscalculation. The prospect of miscalculation is increased by
Chinese appeasement that encourages escalating US belligerence. The ideal
solution is a peaceful solution, which cannot occur without US withdrawal from
interfering with Chinese internal affairs. But there is no doubt that should
military conflict become necessary because of US miscalculation, China will use
it, regardless of cost.
US policy on Taiwan has been based on an adventurism in defiance of this
prospect, encouraged by Chinese appeasement pronouncements of patience, such as
that China could patiently wait 50 years for the final recovery of Taiwan, a
pronouncement that could easily turn into a self-fulfilling prediction. Such
appeasement-based miscalculation would lead to a military conflict with no
winners. The Chinese Communist Party cannot survive a separate Taiwan for
another 50 years. China, in dealing with escalating US provocation, can learn
lessons from the way the late US president John F Kennedy handled the Cuban
missile crisis with unmistakable resolve, rather than appeasement, to preempt
an unnecessary nuclear confrontation with the Soviet Union.
Preventing US miscalculation over Taiwan
The way to prevent US miscalculation over Taiwan is through credible Chinese
resolve away from dangerous appeasement toward continued US interference on
Chinese internal affairs and US violation of Chinese territorial integrity.
China needs to make it clear that it harbors no offensive intention toward the
United States and will not use force to challenge US interests in Asia and
elsewhere in the world. But China must make it clear to the US that it will not
tolerate continued violation of Chinese territorial integrity under any
pretext.
The new Chinese leadership's peaceful diplomatic offensive is strengthening
bilateral ties with the European Union, Japan, Australia, Russia, Egypt, Saudi
Arabia, Iran, Venezuela, India, and Latin American and African nations. US
policymakers need to realize that their anti-China policies are losing support
from most of the world, even among longtime allies.
China should take the high road to improve bilateral ties with Japan and India,
its two major neighbors in Asia, with magnanimous appeasement if necessary.
Particularly in the case of Japan, allowing lingering disputes over historical
grievances to prevent the positive strengthening of the bilateral relationship
and strategy partnership is counterproductive. The recent thaw in Sino-Japanese
relations is a positive trend that needs to be kept on track. The new approach
adopted by President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao in response to Prime
Minster Shinzo Abe's friendly overtures is highly encouraging.
Similarly, allowing the historical conditions of Taiwan and outdated US
policies to hamper a constructive relationship between China and the United
States is to lose the future in pursuit of the past. For China to pursue a
course of domestic economic development and adopt a policy of promoting peace
and stability, the Taiwan issue has to be settled first. Further delay will
only raise the final cost and make peaceful resolution more unlikely.
Taiwan and North Korea
The Taiwan and the North Korea situations are two dangerous military
flashpoints in the complex and challenging foreign- and defense-policy issues
facing the US in the Asia-Pacific region.
The North Korea nuclear issue cannot be solved without Chinese cooperation.
While it is obvious that the denuclearization of the Korean Peninsula is in the
interest of all, both the Korea and Taiwan issues had their origin in US
intervention in the Korean civil war. He who tied the knot should be the one to
untie it. Intransigence on Taiwan will yield intransigence on North Korea.
US military encirclement of China
Militarily, extensive deployments of US forces in Asia are strategically
encircling China. US bases in South Korea, Okinawa, Guam and Diego Garcia,
along with US troops in Afghanistan and other Central Asian countries, form a
ring of US military presence along all but China's northern flank.
This pattern of US encirclement will push China to seek a security alliance
with Russia, which is reportedly preparing its own military response to
controversial US plans to build a new missile-defense system in former Soviet
states in Eastern Europe that could spark a new arms race. US plans to mount a
missile-defense alliance with Japan, South Korea and Taiwan will strengthen
incentive for new Sino-Russian defense cooperation.
The powerful US naval task forces in international waters around China allow
the United States to cut off vital shipments of oil and gas to China at will,
as it once did to Japan, leading to the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in
December 1941. To counter
Head
Office: Unit B, 16/F, Li Dong Building, No. 9 Li Yuen Street East,
Central, Hong Kong Thailand Bureau:
11/13 Petchkasem Road, Hua Hin, Prachuab Kirikhan, Thailand 77110
