This is good! Finally and RIGHTFULLY shaking off that title.
Everything’s coming up
This is good! Finally and RIGHTFULLY shaking off that title.
Everything’s coming up
God i hope so. This has been the right thing to do for so many decades. Its an embarrassment for other countries to carry on this farce for so long…hoping the USA commits fully and doesnt just flop later on. Nit holding my breath though. When its signed and on paper, i will feel much more safe
But for now, we even get booted from WHO and being an observer. disgraceful.
Yes, I saw this. One of the few good things Trump did (granted probably half out of ignorance of the established diplomatic ties, and half out of spite for China) was establish stronger ties with Taiwan. I’m glad Biden seems to be following that pattern, and that more Western countries are rebuffing China and, at least unofficially, embracing Taiwan. It seems the world is waking up a bit to the fact they’ve let the fox into the hen house by letting China get too close in the past.
I think Trump made it very hard for Biden to walk it back. And now that he’s gone, people who hated Trump are less likely to hold back their true negative views on China. The sentiment towards China has become very negative during Trump and even more so after him.
I think credit where credit is due. Biden is tougher than I expected him to be. Thank god we didn’t get some of those other Dem also-ran candidates in the White House, because I could see a couple of them sucking up to China and trying to reverse course.
Before Trump, the policy, as promulgated by Clinton, was to integrate China more into the international order. Then China will want to be a responsible player, and liberalize and democratize. The internet will pressure China to change.
Didn’t happen. Once China sees that you’re soft, they’ll just keep pushing and pushing.
Trump had advisers like Peter Navarro that knew China really well and pushed him to change course.
I think you mean to say promulgated by Nixon
No. Nixon did it for strategic, anti-soviet purposes.
Sanders I wouldn’t have had confidence in at all in this regard. He seemed interested in a reaction to the military industrial complex that would be too extreme, like a hands off approach to world influence.
As you said, Trump bumbled into the correct general stance on China, though if Clinton were elected I think we would have had a hawk with a brain on the issue. For example.
Clinton has a long history with China, dating back to her time as First Lady. In 1995, Clinton gave a rousing speech on human rights in Beijing at the UN World Conference on Women, in which she declared that “women’s rights are human rights.” Fourteen years later, when she assumed office as secretary of state, Clinton was proud enough of this moment to specifically list it in her official State Department biography, but the incident left a lasting negative impression on China, which keenly resented being embarrassed on the world stage.
That was not the case. A year later, in 2010, when Google publicly accused China of hacking into the email accounts of human rights activists and dissidents, Clinton used the incident as the basis for a sweeping speech on internet freedoms. That sparked a testy response from state news agency Xinhua, which said her speech was “inconsistent with the facts.”
Later, in a 2011 interview with Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic , Clinton spoke harshly of China’s “deplorable” human rights record, calling the government’s efforts to crack down on dissent “a fool’s errand.” In October of the same year, in a Foreign Policy article outlining U.S. Asia strategy, Clinton listed “advancing democracy and human rights” as one of the “six key lines of action.” To Chinese leaders, who are on constant watch against U.S. attempt to foster “color revolution” by drumming up human rights issues, Clinton’s remarks were ominous indications of hostile intent.
Clinton only cemented China’s suspicion in 2010, when she waded into the South China Sea disputes at the ASEAN Regional Forum in Hanoi. While emphasizing that Washington had no stake in the territorial disputes, she laid out U.S. interests in the South China Sea: “a national interest in freedom of navigation, open access to Asia’s maritime commons, and respect for international law in the South China Sea.” In addition, Clinton said that “legitimate claims to maritime space in the South China Sea should be derived solely from legitimate claims to land features”
Clinton’s vocal stance on the South China Sea led many Chinese analysts I’ve spoken with to conclude that she — not Obama — was the mastermind behind U.S. “interference” in this realm. Her remarks also set a precedent for the South China Sea being raised at each and every ASEAN meeting – a change China abhors (it has repeatedly stated ASEAN forums are not the proper venue for raising the disputes).
Meanwhile, Clinton never seemed to miss a chance to snipe at China while visiting third party countries, whether it was accusing China of “new colonialism” in Africa or warning, from just across the Chinese border in Mongolia, that countries “cannot, over the long run, have economic liberalization without political liberalization.”
Regardless of the purpose, the method is the same, integrating China into the global economy.
Yes, but the circumstances were completely different.
Take the two scenarios:
Same act, different motivation.
Clinton was answering a new question, without the Cold War in the background: what to do with an economically ascendant China?
Probably listening to some pro-China hobo like Lee Kuan Yew, decided it was better to integrate China into the global world order than to isolate it and turn it into a pariah.
The person who actually made that call would be George Bush, the one who actually had experience in China, and told his children about the mystic sword of Chang the warrior. George Bush was POTUS when the Tiananmen massacre took place, and when the Soviet dissolved. Aside from condemning China, little else was done. I mean the H. W. suspended military sales and canceled visits to that country, but investments went on as usual.
I was in Taiwan when Tiananmen happened, and remember Taiwan’s brave two-pronged reaction:
Absolutely not true.
Even by 1996, which would be 7 years after Tiananmen, Lee Teng-hui was still urging corporations to “Don’t rush and Hold Tight (戒急用忍)”, which was panned by most of Taiwanese business leaders. Lee wasn’t the first to use such rhetoric, Sun Yun-xun said something similar back in 1987.
In the early 90s, the Formosa Plastics Group wanted to invest in China, and with the support of Hao Bochun, Lee Teng-hui threatened to ban Formosa Plastics Group from being traded in the stock market, freeze all their assets, and restrict FPG leaders from exiting the country. As a result, FPG forfeited their venture in China.
Most businesses felt they were being left behind by Japanese and Korean corporations taking advantages of the Chinese men power and market. Before the 2000s, it was the DPP who urged to end investment restrictions, and they called it “Boldly Move Westward”. They believed Taiwanese capital would change average Chinese citizens’ attitude towards Taiwan.
Lee’s 1996 “Don’t Rush and Hold Tight” policy continued to restrict any investment related to High Tech, over 50million US dollars, or infrastructure to China.
Ironically, much of that was undone by CSB when he was elected president.
Between 1992 and 1993 Taiwanese investment in China rose from zero to US $3.5 billion. It was restricted afterward, then loosened again in 1997, and reached over $4 billion- then was tightened again, then loosened again in 2000. In that decade were conflicts between businesses and some government elements- old-time KMT members were opposed to any opening to China and people like Lee Teng-hui were wary of Taiwan becoming dependent on China, but many people in government were go-go on China.
In those early days many were there illegally. Those who were there legally were mostly toy, shoe, and machine parts manufacturers, who enjoyed a hey day of Taiwanese businessmen in China. Most high tech industries only moved into China after the 2000s.