Might
China grab Taiwan
whilst America is preoccupied?
By
Jonathan
Power
February 14, 2003
LONDON - The United States is rushing full tilt at
Iraq when, as Joschka Fischer, the German foreign
minister said a few days ago, "we haven't finished the
first job [in Afghanistan]; we can't see the end
of it". He puts his finger right on the sore point: where
is Osama bin Laden whom President George Bush is meant to
be "smoking out", the overriding foreign policy objective
until the diversion of Iraq suddenly appeared (or was
concocted)?
Just to be mischievous the current issue of Prospect
magazine, the leading British political monthly, muddies
the waters even more. What if China chose this moment,
when America is preoccupied with Iraq, North Korea, and
Afghanistan and supposedly bin Laden to launch an attack
on Taiwan? This could be the perfect moment to strike and
regain the renegade island for the motherland whilst the
U.S. has its hands full. After all since 1972 and the
Shanghai Communiqué Washington has recognised that
Taiwan is part of China. Would it really risk war with
China at a time when it is already overstretched to stop
what most American strategists believe is inevitable one
day? According to Prospect, the National Security Council
official responsible for this corner of the globe says
the White House, even in the midst of all these other
crises, thinks hard about Taiwan "twice a week".
Michael Mandelbaum in his new insightful book, "The
Ideas that Conquered the World" says the Taiwan Strait
"qualifies as the most dangerous spot on the planet". And
Robert McNamara, the former U.S. Secretary of Defence, in
his recent book says that "many believe that the day of
reckoning over Taiwan is coming". "Why has this relic of
a Cold War long since over become a potential flashpoint
for a Great Power conflict in the 21st century?" he
asks.
The short answer is that at the moment it is not a
flashpoint. Beijing is too consumed with his political
transition from one generation of leaders to the next and
has too much invested in its own long term relationship
with Washington for it to suddenly lurch into action and
become opportunist over Taiwan. Even if it were of a mind
to, it would certainly pause for a long time before it
leaped, aware not only of Taiwan's not insignificant
military capability but the 72 American F-15s based in
nearby Okinawa and of America's ability to deploy a
carrier task force if necessary, not to mention its Los
Angeles-class attack submarine on regular patrol in these
waters. Even the much feared Chinese missile deployments
on its coast facing Taiwan, while capable of wrecking
havoc among a fearful Taiwanese population, are fewer and
of lesser quality than those used by U.S. forces in
Kosovo and Afghanistan. Beijing doesn't need to be told
that it remains in an inferior position.
The only extraordinary event that could push the
Chinese leadership to become aggressive to the point of
taking enormous military and political risks is if the
Taiwanese government declared the island's formal
independence. But this is highly unlikely and it
certainly would not happen whilst the U.S. is up to its
neck with other problems. Besides, President Chen
Shui-bian, although privately has leant in that direction
for many years knows what happened when his predecessor,
Lee Teng-hui, spoke publicly of Taiwanese sovereignty. It
did not advance Taiwan's cause in Washington. The U.S.
continues to practice what is called "double deterrence".
This means deterring China from an invasion or
intimidatory tactics on the one hand and deterring
Taiwan's political elite from being tempted to formally
declare their country independent. Indeed, this is the
basis of a useful formulation of what diplomacy should
aspire to made by Joseph Nye, the respected Harvard don-
Beijing should pledge not to use force against Taiwan
which, in turn, should pledge not to declare
independence.
Of course, there are many Taiwanese who understandably
think Nye's suggestion is a step too far because they
feel there is something profoundly inequitable in an
equation that seems to ignore that it was only towards
the end of the nineteenth century that Taiwan was claimed
by China as a province and that lasted a mere ten years.
Beijing never ruled Taiwan throughout the twentieth
century. There is a big principle of justice and human
rights at stake here.
China knows it cannot get away with a military
solution and Taiwan knows that the status quo, as long as
it is not actively threatened, gives it the leeway to get
on with the most important part of life- running a
democratic, free-speech, state that has 100 % autonomy
over its domestic economy and political system. True, in
international relations its initiatives are limited by
non-recognition by most of the outside world, but that is
a small price to pay for an American security blanket and
for the freedom to be as it is today- a prosperous haven
of democracy, pushing forward its own standards on human
rights and developing economically at a very steady pace.
All of which is an active role model for what China could
become. Only if China itself becomes democratic and
conscious of the importance of human rights might its
ultra-nationalism become muted and the Taiwan issue be
settled amicably.
I can be reached by phone +44
7785 351172 and e-mail: JonatPower@aol.com
Copyright © 2003 By
JONATHAN POWER
Follow this
link to read about - and order - Jonathan Power's book
written for the
40th Anniversary of
Amnesty International
"Like
Water on Stone - The Story of Amnesty
International"
Tell a friend about this article
Send to:
From:
Message and your name
 
|