Expert Eye: Is Taiwan a Democratic Commodity in the US-Chinese Trials of Strength?

Published in United Daily News
(Taiwan) on 15 December 2021
by Tang Shaocheng (link to originallink to original)
Translated from by Matthew McKay. Edited by Gillian Palmer.
In early December, while President Joe Biden was hosting the global Summit for Democracy, Nicaragua severed diplomatic relations with Taiwan and established diplomatic ties with China. A short while earlier, China had released a white paper titled “China: Democracy That Works,” specifically detailing the development of democracy in China. Evidently, the hostilities between the United States and China continue their daily combustion — and Taiwan has a front-row seat.

Although the Summit for Democracy was well attended, as its themes were the prevention of authoritarianism, the fight against corruption and the promotion of human rights, it was more of an American stunt to further its alliance-building so as to contain China. In truth, American democracy has long been criticized due to its incessant racial disputes at home; the scourge of firearms; the wars and indiscriminate killings abroad; and this year, on Jan. 6, a mob storming Capitol Hill and going so far as to threaten the physical safety of members of Congress. The violent scenes are still fresh in our minds; it is truly astounding how the banner of American democracy has lost its luster. The most ironic example at the moment is Afghanistan, where the U.S. Army was stationed for 20 years before withdrawing, its tail between its legs, showing the limited and exclusionary nature of American values.

In particular, the summit’s participants included Turkey and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, countries which could hardly be described as democratic. Turkey’s support for the Uyghurs of Xinjiang meant that the United States turned a blind eye to the bloody reality of Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s iron-fisted crackdown on his own opposition party a year ago, bringing the Summit for Democracy into disrepute.

The issue of Xinjiang is the failure of terrorism as sown by Christians and Muslims, and of which the 9/11 attacks were the latest manifestation. Later on, the U.S.-orchestrated Arab Spring added fuel to the fire, with terrorist ideologies and models spreading to Muslims in Xinjiang and leaving the Chinese to bear the brunt of their disastrous effects — and this is grossly unfair. Besides, Beijing’s handling of matters has consisted entirely of counterterrorism and self-defense with a view to resolving the violence, both for its own benefit and for that of others. The West's high-handed criticism is an attempt to subvert China, and its motives are suspect. Conversely, were Chinese governance to lose control, the damage to the region and even the world would be unimaginable.

In contrast, prior to the summit, the Mainland released a 13,000-word white paper titled “China: Democracy That Works,” with content to the effect that the Chinese Communist Party is leading citizens in bringing about a whole-process people’s democracy and results-oriented democracy. The paper states, “The people’s status as masters of the country is the essence of a people’s democracy,” emphasizing that a country’s democracy should be determined by its people and should not be judged by outsiders, a stance that is not to be censured too strictly.

Moreover, “[d]emocracy is the right of the people in every country, rather than the prerogative of a few nations.” There are many ways to bring about democracy, and no “one size fits all.” To scrutinize a political civilization from a single point of view is undemocratic in itself, an argument which, to some non-Western countries, may not be wholly unappealing.

In fact, the maxim “Water can carry the boat, but can also overturn it” can be a practical test of democracy’s soundness: If the Chinese Communist Party were truly as authoritarian and forbidding as the West alleges, it would have been overthrown by the people ages ago. This goes to show the difference between Chinese and Western civilization. If anything, comparisons of the Mainland’s overall development today compared to past situations show that, in 1949 for example, the average life expectancy in China was only 40 years, while today it is 79, and so on. The evidence is as irrefutable as it is admirable.

Given the varying levels of development among countries, the number of developed countries in the West only accounts for about one-quarter of the nearly 200 countries worldwide, and only about 12% of the population, with the European Union and the United States combined only numbering 800 million people. If the United States wants to take the lead in changing the world in the way it has always done, it still has a long road ahead. In point of fact, for the vast majority of non-Western countries, the socialist democracy proposed by China is indeed more suited to its relatively backward and even agrarian situations, industrially and commercially speaking.

In relation to this, the case of Nicaragua can be analyzed on three levels. First, with Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista regime long being at odds with the United States, and the results of its general election in November of this year not being accepted by the West, Taiwan has adopted a distant attitude toward Nicaragua. Second, in terms of bilateral relations, due to the diplomatic assistance provided by Taiwan being mostly limited to financial aid, and Nicaragua’s demands having been exorbitant on several occasions, Taiwan has struggled to manage this relationship the way we would like it to.

Third, and more important, is the "Game of Great Powers:" The fact that Taiwan and Nicaragua severed diplomatic relations the very day of the Summit for Democracy showed not only that China and Nicaragua had long been collaborating closely, but it has also dealt the United States’ Taiwan Assurance Act of 2020 a major blow. Caught between the two, Taiwan would appear the innocent victim, but although it has sustained serious injuries, whether this will lead to any ripple effects remains to be seen.

In short, Taiwan is already choosing sides between the United States and China, but it remains debatable whether such a stubborn choice is in Taiwan’s interest. The current cross-strait alarm is a serious warning sign; how to resolve the hostilities should be the uppermost priority.


【專家之眼】台灣是美中角力下的民主商品?

2021-12-15 08:17 聯合報 / 湯紹成/政治大學兼任教授

就在12月初,拜登總統舉辦全球民主峰會之際,中美洲尼加拉瓜與台灣斷交並與大陸建交,同時中方還在稍早提出《中國的民主》白皮書,具體介紹中國的民主發展,可見美中對抗日熾,台灣躬逢其盛。

此次民主峰會的受邀者眾,但因其主題是防範威權主義、打擊貪腐與促進人權,此乃美方進一步結盟制中的行徑。其實,美國的民主也一直為人詬病,其國內黑白糾紛不斷,槍枝氾濫成災,對外征戰濫殺,今年一月六日暴民還衝進國會山莊,甚至威脅到國會議員的人身安全,其暴力情景還歷歷在目,美國民主典範的旗幟已經掉漆,確實讓人詫異。當前最為諷刺的事例就是阿富汗,美軍在當地駐紮20年,最後落得鎩羽而逃,顯見美國價值的侷限性與排他性。

尤其,此次大會的其參與者,還包括土耳其與剛果等國家,確實難以民主稱之。只因土耳其支持新疆維吾爾族,故美方漠視了厄爾端總統年前鐵腕清算國內反對派的血腥事實,確實讓此次民主峰會蒙羞。

而新疆問題乃牽涉基督徒與穆斯林所種下的恐怖主義敗因,911事件就是最新的展現。之後由美國所策劃的「阿拉伯之春」更是火上加油,而後爆恐思想與模式蔓延到新疆的穆斯林,還要中國人來承擔惡果,本來就極不公平。況且北京的處置全屬防恐與自保行為來化解暴力,利己利人,西方霸道批鬥的行徑企圖以此顛覆中國,動機可議。反之,若中國的治理失控,那對於區域甚至世界的危害將無法想像。

相對的,在此次峰會召開之前,大陸公布約2.4萬字的《中國的民主》白皮書,其內容包括:中共領導人民實現全過程人民民主和成果民主,並稱「中國的民主是人民民主,人民當家作主是中國民主的本質和核心」,強調一個國家的民主應該由該國人民來決定,而不應該由外人來評判,也無可厚非。

況且,「民主是各國人民的權利,而不是少數國家的專利」,實現民主有多種方式,不可能千篇一律,用單一的眼光審視政治文明,本身就是不民主。這種論述對於一些非西方國家而言,難說沒有吸引力。

其實,「水可載舟,亦可覆舟」,乃實際可以檢驗民主的良方,若中共真如西方所批評的如此專制極權與不堪聞問,早就被人民推翻了,可見中西方文明的差異。況且,若將當前大陸的整體發展與其過往的情況相較,比如1949年中國人平均壽命只有40歲,但如今已達79歲等等,鐵證如山,令人驚豔。

由於世界各國的發展程度不同,西方發達國家的數量只佔全球近兩百個國家的1/4左右,人口也只占約12%,歐盟加美國也只有8億人,美國要以其一貫的方式帶頭而改變世界,還有很長的路要走。而對於廣大的非西方國家,中方所提出的社會主義民主,確實比較符合其工商業較為落後甚至農業的國情。

與此相關的,在尼加拉瓜案方面,可從三個層面來分析。首先,由於尼國左派桑定政權與美國長期不睦,今年11月份的選舉結果也未被西方國家承認,以至於台灣對尼國也採取了保持距離的態度。再者,在台尼雙邊關係方面,由於台灣可提供的外交協助大多只限於金援,而尼方又數度獅子大開口,使得我方窮於應付而未如其願。

更重要的是大國博弈,由於台尼斷交之日正好是民主峰會之時,可見中尼雙方不但合作無間,更是給美方的「台灣保證法」相當的衝擊。而台灣夾在兩大之間好似無辜的受害者,但也受傷不輕,這是否會導致連鎖效應,還有待觀察。

總之,台灣已在美中之間選邊,但這種偏執的抉擇是否真的符合台灣的利益,確實值得商榷,當前兩岸風聲鶴唳就是嚴重的徵兆,如何化解干戈,才是當務之急。
This post appeared on the front page as a direct link to the original article with the above link .

Hot this week

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Israel: Trump’s National Security Adviser Forgot To Leave Personal Agenda at Home and Fell

Germany: Absolute Arbitrariness

Topics

Austria: Donald Trump Revives the Liberals in Canada

Germany: Absolute Arbitrariness

Israel: Trump’s National Security Adviser Forgot To Leave Personal Agenda at Home and Fell

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Russia: Political Analyst Reveals the Real Reason behind US Tariffs*

Related Articles

Austria: Donald Trump Revives the Liberals in Canada

Mexico: The Trump Problem

Taiwan: Making America Great Again and Taiwan’s Crucial Choice

Venezuela: Vietnam: An Outlet for China

Germany: US Companies in Tariff Crisis: Planning Impossible, Price Increases Necessary