Saturday, April 09, 2005
Why so many posts on Taiwan?
Good question, if I do say so myself. I guess I see Taiwan as the biggest potential cause for conflict in Asia in this century, and would like to find a way to avoid it. This century, heck, this MILLENIUM, will likely be Asia's, and I'm very interested in events going on over there. There's a huge shift of power going on from West to East, and we need to think very hard about how that transition will take place.
There is no alternative to the shift. Asia accounts for half the world's population. They will (and are) demand(ing) a right to better themselves.
The only other question mark, North Korea, will likely implode on its own, leaving the rest of the world to scramble to put its unguarded nuclear arms under lock and key. China, however, will continue to grow in economic, political and military power. I think the era when countries attempt to use military might to rule the world is over. China, however, has a vision of its territorial borders based on historical conceptions. There are places where we should push back. China doesn't have a right to take territory from India, as an example.
The only thing keeping Taiwan from being part of China is America, though, and I simply see no reason for us to continue to do that. It's like Britain continuing to hold onto Hong Kong. No, America doesn't rule Taiwan as a former colonial power, but Taiwan and China have a weird history, and its time for them to work it out without America skewing the results.
We should encourage Taiwan and China to start discussions on reunification. Somehow I think the Chinese government would give them a great deal of de facto independence. China would likely demand control of foreign policy, but Taiwan HAS no foreign policy (partly due to Chinese isolation of Taiwan, to be sure), so that's not such a big tradeoff. That would leave Taiwan to run its own affairs in much the same fashion as they do currently.
That, at least, is what I THINK would happen. If I'm right, though, I question why its worthwhile to risk war in order to fight it, particularly when the Chinese totalitarian system has an expiration date of its own making (economic development and the desire for self-determination that brings).
Good question, if I do say so myself. I guess I see Taiwan as the biggest potential cause for conflict in Asia in this century, and would like to find a way to avoid it. This century, heck, this MILLENIUM, will likely be Asia's, and I'm very interested in events going on over there. There's a huge shift of power going on from West to East, and we need to think very hard about how that transition will take place.
There is no alternative to the shift. Asia accounts for half the world's population. They will (and are) demand(ing) a right to better themselves.
The only other question mark, North Korea, will likely implode on its own, leaving the rest of the world to scramble to put its unguarded nuclear arms under lock and key. China, however, will continue to grow in economic, political and military power. I think the era when countries attempt to use military might to rule the world is over. China, however, has a vision of its territorial borders based on historical conceptions. There are places where we should push back. China doesn't have a right to take territory from India, as an example.
The only thing keeping Taiwan from being part of China is America, though, and I simply see no reason for us to continue to do that. It's like Britain continuing to hold onto Hong Kong. No, America doesn't rule Taiwan as a former colonial power, but Taiwan and China have a weird history, and its time for them to work it out without America skewing the results.
We should encourage Taiwan and China to start discussions on reunification. Somehow I think the Chinese government would give them a great deal of de facto independence. China would likely demand control of foreign policy, but Taiwan HAS no foreign policy (partly due to Chinese isolation of Taiwan, to be sure), so that's not such a big tradeoff. That would leave Taiwan to run its own affairs in much the same fashion as they do currently.
That, at least, is what I THINK would happen. If I'm right, though, I question why its worthwhile to risk war in order to fight it, particularly when the Chinese totalitarian system has an expiration date of its own making (economic development and the desire for self-determination that brings).
Japan and China
100,000 chinese students marched in protest of Japan's bid for a permanent security council seat. This was triggered by the Japanese government's recent approval of a textbook that Chinese people think whitewashes past Japanese atrocities.
Germany faced such demands to come clean with themselves about their history, and Germany has largely succeeded in doing so. Often, it seemed they were bending too far backwards to accomodate complaints, but today, Germany isn't facing the same kinds of demands from the descendants of those affected by its imperial ambitions as Japan, who hasn't done as good a job of being honest about the fact that their wartime ambitions were at least as bad as the atrocities committed by the German Nazis.
Of course, were Koizumi to decide to start the process that would satisfy his neighbors, he would lose power in the next election. Japan is clearly a different place than self-reflective Germany.
What's more interesting about the article is evidence of pent-up demand for self-expression among the Chinese people. Extreme nationalism seems to be a common direction among people governed by repressive regimes who don't permit a political outlet. Still, it DOES make me nervous. 1.3 billion nationalistic Chinese can be a good thing (provided they direct it towards improving Chinese people) or a bad thing (as Japan's was during WWII). The ex-soviet republic of Georgia's rose revolution was an expression of nationalism, and it hasn't turned into the more virulent sort. Then again, Georgia is a small country that lacks the imperial history of China.
Even if China decides to aim its nationalistic bent towards self-improvement, I doubt they will stop coveting Taiwan. I simply see no alternative to some form of reunification. If the two parties start talking, maybe it could involve more of a separation of powers than exists in Hong Kong. Hong Kong had no history of self-government (save for the hastily assembled sort put together by the outgoing British administration of Chris Patten), whereas Taiwan does. Furthermore, the British negotiated with China, whereas Taiwan would be negotiating on its own behalf as owners of their own destiny with a moral right to demand fair treatment (versus a colonial power that really shouldn't have had control of Hong Kong in the first place).
The world would support their insistence that they continue to be able to govern their own affairs. Further, their example would provide a glidepath for the Chinese mainland to start thinking about a shift to democracy.
I think it would be good for Taiwan to reunify with China. Again, though, that's easy to say for this non-Taiwanese safely ensconced in his LA home. Things might seem like the right tactic when viewed from the eyes of the general overseeing the battlefield, but not so great when you are the soldier tasked with taking that enemy-controlled hill.
100,000 chinese students marched in protest of Japan's bid for a permanent security council seat. This was triggered by the Japanese government's recent approval of a textbook that Chinese people think whitewashes past Japanese atrocities.
Germany faced such demands to come clean with themselves about their history, and Germany has largely succeeded in doing so. Often, it seemed they were bending too far backwards to accomodate complaints, but today, Germany isn't facing the same kinds of demands from the descendants of those affected by its imperial ambitions as Japan, who hasn't done as good a job of being honest about the fact that their wartime ambitions were at least as bad as the atrocities committed by the German Nazis.
Of course, were Koizumi to decide to start the process that would satisfy his neighbors, he would lose power in the next election. Japan is clearly a different place than self-reflective Germany.
What's more interesting about the article is evidence of pent-up demand for self-expression among the Chinese people. Extreme nationalism seems to be a common direction among people governed by repressive regimes who don't permit a political outlet. Still, it DOES make me nervous. 1.3 billion nationalistic Chinese can be a good thing (provided they direct it towards improving Chinese people) or a bad thing (as Japan's was during WWII). The ex-soviet republic of Georgia's rose revolution was an expression of nationalism, and it hasn't turned into the more virulent sort. Then again, Georgia is a small country that lacks the imperial history of China.
Even if China decides to aim its nationalistic bent towards self-improvement, I doubt they will stop coveting Taiwan. I simply see no alternative to some form of reunification. If the two parties start talking, maybe it could involve more of a separation of powers than exists in Hong Kong. Hong Kong had no history of self-government (save for the hastily assembled sort put together by the outgoing British administration of Chris Patten), whereas Taiwan does. Furthermore, the British negotiated with China, whereas Taiwan would be negotiating on its own behalf as owners of their own destiny with a moral right to demand fair treatment (versus a colonial power that really shouldn't have had control of Hong Kong in the first place).
The world would support their insistence that they continue to be able to govern their own affairs. Further, their example would provide a glidepath for the Chinese mainland to start thinking about a shift to democracy.
I think it would be good for Taiwan to reunify with China. Again, though, that's easy to say for this non-Taiwanese safely ensconced in his LA home. Things might seem like the right tactic when viewed from the eyes of the general overseeing the battlefield, but not so great when you are the soldier tasked with taking that enemy-controlled hill.
Tuesday, April 05, 2005
This will piss the Swiss off
Apparently, a Microsoft ad placed Switzerland somewhere in the area of Moscow. The Swiss are rather prickly about Americans confusing where Switzerland is located. I can attest to the fact that many Americans are unclear on it. I lived in Switzerland for 2 years, and I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of times someone asked if I spoke Swedish. I guess in the database that is our brains, we have our "Sw" words indexed, and we get to Sweden (or Swaziland, my registered country on my credit card for three weeks until I noticed the error on my bill) first. My Swiss friends also sent streams of links to photos of major American news broadcasts (CNN made the mistake most frequently) that put Switzerland where the Czech Republic is located.
My response to these "Americans don't know Geography" Swiss types was "where's Illinois" or "where's British Columbia"? 9.8 times out of 10, they had no idea.
It just goes to show that you know the geography that affects you most directly. America is a nation of 300 million with a land mass as large as the entire European union. Most Europeans I've met don't know any more about Asian geography than Americans.
Apparently, a Microsoft ad placed Switzerland somewhere in the area of Moscow. The Swiss are rather prickly about Americans confusing where Switzerland is located. I can attest to the fact that many Americans are unclear on it. I lived in Switzerland for 2 years, and I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of times someone asked if I spoke Swedish. I guess in the database that is our brains, we have our "Sw" words indexed, and we get to Sweden (or Swaziland, my registered country on my credit card for three weeks until I noticed the error on my bill) first. My Swiss friends also sent streams of links to photos of major American news broadcasts (CNN made the mistake most frequently) that put Switzerland where the Czech Republic is located.
My response to these "Americans don't know Geography" Swiss types was "where's Illinois" or "where's British Columbia"? 9.8 times out of 10, they had no idea.
It just goes to show that you know the geography that affects you most directly. America is a nation of 300 million with a land mass as large as the entire European union. Most Europeans I've met don't know any more about Asian geography than Americans.
