Tag Archives: geoeconomics

A significant ‘no-position’ position: ‘No position’ on sovereignty: Ned Price, Taipei Times: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

US Department of State spokesman Ned Price on Monday said that Washington does not take a position on the sovereignty issue between Taiwan and China, a position not often explicitly stated by US officials. Price was responding to a question at a news briefing on whether Washington’s “one China” policy supported the belief that “Taiwan is part of China and that the US respects Chinese territorial integrity and sovereignty over Taiwan.” The US “does not take a position on sovereignty,” Price said, adding that Washington’s “one China” policy has not changed and has been at the crux of the US’ approach to Taiwan since 1979, when the US’ Taiwan Relations Act went into effect.

Several important global and historical contexts usually missing in the general discourse on the Chinese communist problem. First, this “no position” position by the US, clearly stated, takes place a year after President Tsai’s significant democratic sovereignty Taiwan has never been a part of the PRC speech. The US, Japan, and EU did not respond to that speech – they neither endorsed, nor disavowed, President Tsai’s assertion that Taiwan has never been a part of communist China, that China and Taiwan exercise separate sovereignties, and that the future of Taiwan belongs exclusively to the twenty-three million citizens of Taiwan exercising their democratic sovereignty.

Since that speech, the emphasis of the US, Japan, and EU has been on the peaceful ‘status quo’ – meaning, as they see more and more menacing signs of Chinese communist plans for military options to annex Taiwan, the international line for acceptable behavior has been underlined and sharpened.

Finally, a more subtle but critical point. The US may have no “formal” position on Taiwanese sovereignty (and significantly, Price phrased this as sovereignty across the strait, meaning, Chinese communist sovereignty is also up for discussion ….) but the ‘body language’ of the US, Japan, and EU since the 2021 speech by President Tsai has been anything but position-less. The Taiwanese de facto embassy in Washington, DC, and Tokyo and major European capitals have been as active and public as they have been in decades. European and Asian diplomats visit the Taiwanese embassy in DC and Tokyo – Taiwanese diplomats meet regularly with their American, Japanese, and European counterparts across the globe. One may call all of this “unofficial” and “no position” and “no change in policy” all one wishes – what is one to make of all of this? A peaceful status quo marks the Chinese communist military option as a catastrophic international incident. No position on sovereignty saves a little bit of face for the Chinese communists – incidentally, President Tsai convincing her supporters to tolerate, for now, “RoC” does the same – while the US, Japan, and the EU in behavior push interactions with Taiwan up to the edge of all-but-formal-recognition.

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Taiwan and the global maritime empire: World history and geostrategery classrooms

Signal and noise, forest and trees. Many over-the-top reports about Chinese communist blockades and missiles and jet fighters around Taiwan Republic. Related to my earlier post about the nature of Taiwanese democratization and its resilience, compared to the 1996 Chinese communist crisis, this time Taiwan Republic is far more democratic, diverse, and less reliant on a centralized party-state. This is the same as the unruly democracy in Ukraine that confounded and surprised the invading Soviet Red Army and western experts. Imperialists, western or not, are always confounded when peasants have their own ideas – and are willing to fight for them.

Rather than being led by the western press and think tanks passing on Chinese communist scary talking points, and staring only at Speaker Pelosi’s visit or these Chinese communist military intimidations, none of what’s been happening makes any sense without understanding the nature of global shipping. It is not that Taiwan is unique or important per se, but that Taiwan is one of many, many global maritime chokepoints in the Chinese communist world war against the maritime global order imposed by the US Navy. From 1300 AD to now we have lived in an era of global maritime empires. Each leading maritime imperial power has had unique takes on how this empire building ought to proceed. But they ALL share a core principle – a ‘rules-based’ world order and a ‘free and open maritime environment’ that is to serve the global movements of goods, services, and labor. Anything, ANYTHING (and anyone) that interferes with this principle is pummeled.

The revival of the Chinese communist economy from 1980 to 2022 owes largely to this global maritime imperial order imposed by the US Navy. But as the Chinese communists ascend, and the US stalled or declined, this Globalization 1.0 world order frayed. This is why while it is important to study the Taiwan case, not connecting Taiwan to many many other global cases misses the central point – the Chinese communist navy bases in East Africa, Mideast, South Asia, and Southeast Asia. Chinese communists claimed the entirety of the South and East Seas. Chinese communists recently declared the Taiwan Strait as Chinese territorial water, functionally choking off critical supplies for Japan and Korea. Chinese communist military expansions into the south Pacific. Chinese communist “corporations” buying major global shipping harbors – and shares of the Panama and Suez canals. The main point is that this present Chinese communist crisis over Taiwan Republic is not occurring in isolation – and all of them are related to a long-standing effort by the Chinese communists to subvert the maritime empire created and led by the US Navy.

Once we understand the historical and global context, then it is easier to guess what the US Navy, Japanese Navy, and NATO navies will do if the Chinese communists come anywhere near a blockade of the Taiwan Republic. And no of course this is not about friendship. It is not even about democracy though it really doesn’t hurt. It’s actually not even about dollars and cents per se. A global maritime imperial order requires steadfast enforcement of precedence. The two ‘recent’ historical precedents I can think of are the Libyan attempt to claim the tiny, far less economically important than the Taiwan Strait Gulf of Sidra, as their own – the US Navy showed up in less than a day and pummeled the Libyan military. And the Iranian attempt to blockade the opening to the Pershing Gulf – US and allied navies showed up immediately and annihilated the Iranian navy. 3.8.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Taiwan Republic

Deterring a Chinese war of annexation with the Taiwan Policy Act of 2022: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

When you install an alarm system for your home are you “provoking” and “escalating” against your neighbor? Only if one believes your neighbors have the right to access your home. The simple but clearest way to think about Taiwan Republic and Ukraine.

Global studies-information warfare pro tip: think of the narratives generated by Moscow and its echo chambers in western academia, media, think tanks, and officialdom against democratic Ukraine (It’s about NATO, the pandemic made Putin crazy, we need offramps and golden bridges for Moscow, de-escalation but only by Ukrainians conceding land and democratic sovereignty …. Nuclear war!); and the propaganda generated by the Chinese communists, their amen corners in western academia, media, think tanks against Speaker Pelosi’s routine visit to Taiwan Republic (The Fourth Taiwan Strait Crisis, dictator Xi’s fragile ego and coronation as dictator for life, apparently someone in the White House has a Chinese Communist farmer’s almanac and it shows American officials may not visit Taiwan on “PLA Day,” don’t forget “face”!) as global information warfare dress rehearsals. Then understand the “Taiwan Policy Act of 2022 will raise tension/anger the snowflakey Chinese/nucular war etc etc” hot takes coming from western experts in this context.

I have written about the Taiwan Policy Act so will not repeat here This should have been done during the 1990s. Think of the TPA as a decades late updating of the Taiwan Relations Act, TRA 2.0. As to angering the Chinese — wake me up when they are not hysterical about something, that would be the real news/moment to notice. The fallacy held by many in the west is also the key lesson that remains unlearned from the west’s deadly mistakes in Ukraine. While we should never purposely provoke a dictatorship, we should also remain clear-eyed that a dictatorship’s choices are often not tied to actions chosen by global democracies. Did the west ‘provoke’ the Chinese communist genocide against Tibet? Or the genocide against East Turkestan? Was the Putin invasion of Ukraine provoked by anyone in DC or Kyiv (I know, to some in the west, by Ukrainians and Taiwanese merely daring to democratically elect their leaders and have an opinion about their own future they are ‘provocations’ ….) So we return to the key issue for all frontline democracies – not lofty jargon and theories which did nothing to prevent the loss of lives and suffering in Ukraine and elsewhere – How do democracies prevent-deter war launched by dictators without capitulation and surrendering one’s democratic sovereignty? Taiwan Policy Act of 2022 is an important step in clarifying to Beijing that an invasion to annex Taiwan will be treated by the global democracies as an international incident, not a domestic affair. It should raise the price for war for Beijing, hopefully, high enough cost to prevent a war of annexation.

台灣政策法案出委員會 美國務院感謝國會力挺台 https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/world/breakingnews/4059671

Taiwan Policy Act would help Taiwan boost defense more swiftly: Scholars https://focustaiwan.tw/politics/202209150018

US’ Taiwan bill adds new arms spending https://www.taipeitimes.com/News/front/archives/2022/09/16/2003785398

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Internationalizing Taiwan to deter a Chinese war of annexation – “Lithuanian office opens in Taipei,” Taipei Times: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

Lithuania’s first representative to Taiwan, Paulius Lukauskas, on Monday applied to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs for diplomatic documentation, marking the official opening of the Lithuanian Trade Representative Office in Taipei, the ministry said yesterday …. After Taiwan established the Taiwanese Representative Office in Lithuania in Vilnius in November last year, the Lithuanian government said it would also establish an office in Taiwan, Department of European Affairs Director-General Remus Chen (陳立國) said …. Lukauskas arrived in Taiwan earlier this month and on Monday requested that the ministry issue documentation recognizing him as a foreign dignitary, Chen said.

Recent breakthroughs in Taiwan Republic’s foreign relations, Baltics and Eastern Europe, Somaliland, and the South Pacific are vital to deter a Chinese communist war of annexation. This is why the arguments over “symbolic” versus “substantive” are, much like other recurring arguments over hawks or doves, realists or unrealistic, beside the point. Will Lithuania ever play a dominant role in Taiwan’s GDP? Probably not. Yet Lithuania represents a sea change in American, Japanese, and European attitudes toward the threat posed by the Chinese Communist Party upon the world. Lithuania and Somaliland also represent creative re-thinking on how best to recognize Taiwan’s democratic sovereignty, without full breaks with the Chinese communists. To edge towards internationalizing Taiwan as much as possible, so as to prevent Beijing and its allies in Taiwan and the west from claiming that an invasion is a “domestic issue.” This is why it is important for the US and Japan to think more broadly about the threats posed by Beijing, and how best to prevent a war. Integrating Taiwan into the US-Japan-EU-led global economic, cultural, educational, and technological systems will go a long way in doing so. A more proactive approach by the US to export its Taiwan Relations Act+ model to like-minded allies will also undercut any efforts by the Chinese communists, its allies in Taiwan, and the west, from sabotaging international efforts to prevent a Chinese invasion of annexation.

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Deterring a Chinese communist war of annexation against Taiwan – “U.S. considers China sanctions to deter Taiwan action; Taiwan presses EU” CNBC: Geoeconomics and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

The United States is considering options for a sanctions package against China to deter it from invading Taiwan, with the European Union coming under diplomatic pressure from Taipei to do the same, according to sources familiar with the discussions. The sources said the deliberations in Washington and Taipei’s separate lobbying of EU envoys were both at an early stage — a response to fears of a Chinese invasion which have grown as military tensions escalate in the Taiwan Strait. In both cases, the idea is to take sanctions beyond measures already taken in the West to restrict some trade and investment with China in sensitive technologies like computer chips and telecoms equipment. The sources did not provide any details of what is being considered but the notion of sanctions on the world’s second-largest economy and one of the global supply chain’s biggest links raises questions of feasibility.

The most reassuring part of this report is the indication that the US and Taiwan Republic are collaborating. Remarkable progress in that the US is allowing the Taiwanese ambassador to the US to do this, in public – what a difference a few decades make. Would be even better if Japan co-lead this effort. The Chinese Communist Party ‘war’ against the world is all domain, multidimensional – and so seeing geoeconomic tools as a part of the efforts to deter a war of annexation against Taiwan makes sense. The main lesson from the Russian invasion and war of annexation against Ukraine is that a dictatorship like Russia and China will have very different ways of calculating “acceptable economic sacrifices.” And so I suspect the two main tools for the US, Japan, EU, and Taiwan to dissuade dictator Xi from launching a war of annexation remain convincing dictator Xi that such a move would lead to the end of his dictatorship. A parallel to the Ukraine case is the dictatorship’s information bubble – somehow Putin either convinced himself or selectively only listened to those inside Russia and Ukraine that assured him that Kyiv would fold and that most Ukrainians would welcome an invasion. One suspects Xi has created a similar information bubble, wherein he has selectively listened only to the most extreme anti-democracy anti-Taiwan voices inside Taiwan – assured, falsely, that Taipei would melt the way Chiang Kai-shek and his party-state did in 1949 and that the majority of Taiwanese would welcome a Chinese communist annexation. How the US, Japan, EU, and Taiwan find effective and convincing voices to change this perception in Beijing will go a long way to dissuade dictator Xi from resorting to an invasion.

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The Taiwan Policy Act of 2022 and updating the Taiwan-US ‘status quo’ 宋國誠專欄:掏空一中原則的準軍事同盟──美國「台灣政策法」重點釋義 Up Media: Geostrategery and Taiwan Republic 台灣国 classrooms

美國國會參眾兩院將在9月份開始審議一項決定台美關係大躍進的重要法案「2022台灣政策法」(The Taiwan Policy Act of 2022)。這是由參議院外交委員會主席梅南德茲(Robert Menendez)和共和黨議員格雷厄姆(Lindsey Graham)聯名提出的。這項法案若經審查通過並交付總統拜登簽署執行,不僅是一項跨黨派、重磅級的挺台法案,更是台美重建一種「沒有官方之名的官方關係」的重大起步,台美之間將逼近1979年(美中建交)之前「全政府形式」的官方關係。法案共分三大篇、九大主題、107頁,立足於結構性增補《臺灣關係法》的基礎,納入《六項保證》的精神與規定,以「包裹立法」(a package of legislation)的方式,展現美國全面支持臺灣民主政體的立場。儘管法案聲明以不與台灣恢復外交關係為前提,但法案開宗明義指出,法案的目的在「促進台灣安全」、「確保區域穩定」、「遏制中國對台侵略」,以及採取嚴厲制裁中國對台灣的「敵對行動」(hostile action)。這是一項設計完備、包羅萬象、具體可行的護台法案,一旦付諸執行,將是40多年來美國對台政策最清晰的法律表達,最重要的是,法案的施行將徹底支解並淘空中共的「一中原則」,以極限逼近「軍事同盟」的軌道,促使美台關係朝向「高階/準官方」的模式邁進。

I am not as optimistic as Dr. Song – if the Taiwan Policy Act of 2022 passes without major revisions, and if it is signed by President Biden, the executive branch has many tools to slow-walk and water down the measures (see also, legislation re: the Chinese communist genocide in East Turkestan.)

What these major legislative push shows are three main things. First, decades of mediocre American presidents have long delayed much-needed reevaluations of US-Taiwan policies. Such reviews started way back during the Clinton administration, and for one or another reason, expectations were never matched by results. Bureaucratic inertia, foreign entanglements, domestic scandals, “the blob” being its blobby selves, etc etc. Therefore, it is good to see sustained pressure coming from both political parties in Congress.

The second context is this. DC policy circles are mostly stuck in the imperious idea that they are “managing” or “creating” the world as we experience it, overestimating their roles and underestimating factors out of American control. Whether DC chooses to adjust to the dynamic, changing meaning of the “status quo,” Taiwan Republic, communist China, and even the US in 2022 are vastly different than 1972, or 1978. Rather than seeing this legislative effort as “changing the status quo,” it is a belated updating of formal policies to catch up with geopolitical reality.

Finally, this reminds me of the no-we-are-not-maybe-we-will Ross and Rachel dance between the US and the PRC from 1949 to 1978. While the US embassy to China remained in Taipei, and while the official statements kept asserting that US policy remained unchanged, salami slicing continued unabated, with changes in world conditions, the nature of contact between DC and Beijing changed, substantially, and rapidly. Given the dismal performance of the Biden White House on the Pelosi episode, I am not holding out high hopes for this. A wise and creative executive would minimize fighting against Congress on this issue, and use this as an opportunity to “internationalize” America’s policies on Taiwan – i.e., exporting the Taiwan Relations Act+ model to fellow democracies of Japan and EU. Using this approach as one of many other policy tools to prevent a Chinese communist war of annexation against Taiwan from ever starting. If we learn nothing else from the democratic west’s failure in Ukraine, it ought to be that porcupine or not, finding credible ways to prevent an authoritarian belligerent from starting an invasion is key for all of our interests. 7.9.2022

Additional report: 重構美對台政策 美國會9月將審理《2022年台灣政策法》

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

The End of the “One China” Trap: World history and geostrategery classrooms

Historical knowledge, particularly world history level analysis, is so vital for policymaking. A few big-picture ideas and predictions.

The world is dynamic, yet humans shape the world as if it is static. When America and communist China normalized their relations in the 1970s unresolvable issues were purposely fudged. The status of Taiwan is one of those – this is why there is the confusing ‘One China Principle’ versus the ‘One China Policy’. Long story short: in the 1970s and 1980s, Taiwan was a China KMT colonial dictatorship, the Chinese communists did not have the means to invade and annex Taiwan, the two dictatorships did not have a disagreement about One China – merely over which side is the real China and which side are the bandits. It was far easier for Beijing and DC back then to sidestep the issue over the status of Taiwan.

This is not the reality of 2022 – for several decades starting with President Clinton successive administrations have talked about adjusting policies to changing reality. A stronger but authoritarian, ethnonationalist, imperialist communist China, a democratic and technologically advanced Taiwan Republic where the sovereignty is arrived at via peaceful fair and free national elections. And yet by our bad luck, we have had decades of mediocre presidents, each distracted by his own scandals and mistakes. My observation is that with the end of Globalization 1.0 – leaders can either get ahead of changing circumstances and shape and guide – or, as in the case of US Indo-Pacific policy, we can passively wait until we are forced to deal with it. That is where we are now, the room and time for kicking the can down the road have run out.

Military. For at least a decade the Chinese communists have had the ability to plausibly annex Taiwan by force. At the very least to cause a ton of damage and disruption to the region. America had been distracted by its wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the GWoT. Not until the Obama second term did we pivot to the Indo-Pacific, and even now it has been half-hearted. Not only have we not focused on the military preparation for the China Threat, but we have also been slow in changing the diplomatic-political conceptualizations necessary to deter and defeat China’s ambitions. Meaning, the 1970s fudging about the status of Taiwan was basically a ‘agree to disagree’ – Red China had no power to act, and both DC and Beijing wanted to focus on the USSR. However, by 2022 it is long past the time for a US-led global adjustment on Taiwan – is it a nation? would a Chinese communist invasion to annex Taiwan violate international norms? Strategic ambiguity can no longer function while serving the vital national interests of the US and its democratic allies in the Indo-Pacific.

That strategic ambiguity era is gone; the status quo is dynamic. The previous pattern that used to work – kind of like with the North Koreans, is changing rapidly. Every time Beijing wants something it throws a military tantrum – and then their partners in the west would push for “de-escalation/talks” – and then DC would concede something. This is how we ended up with so many communique. That era is over not because “hawks” are in charge – the material and geostrategic realities have changed.

So while there are long overdue military-strategic changes that this latest Chinese communist missile crisis will provoke – Japan will change its constitution and double its military; Japan-Taiwan-US will no longer hide their military-intelligence collaborations. The counterstrike capabilities of both Japan and Taiwan will massively increase – Japan will become a nuclear power before the end of this decade. Assuming American democracy can keep it together long enough to deal with real-world problems, the largest overdue project is an American-led global democracy consensus on the status of Taiwan. My guess is that it will be the internationalization of the Taiwan Relations Act adopted by Japan and NATO and Quad. Think of it this way – during the annual RIMPAC maneuver in the south Pacific the “group photos” of the alliance carriers and destroyers and submarines – there will be a diplomatic-economic parallel to this. What we know about the Chinese communists is that they can target and sanction smaller nations like Lithuania – but when democracies take collective action, they are too vulnerable alone to act. 7.8.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Migration, demography, the strength of nations: World history and geoeconomics classrooms

See earlier post re: demography and geography. Humans lie with words, so to triangulate the truth, watch where they send their kids for college, where they park their can’t-afford-to-lose retirement funds, and whose embassies and consulates have a line waiting for immigration visas. And while Chinese keyboard super-patriots are louder and more obnoxious than before, if you use these three metrics, you will find plenty of American, EU, Canadian, and Australian passports. While there are always essentialist ethnonationalist idiots: the fact remains, that there is nothing about supposed Chineseness, or Russianness, or Americaness, that makes a nation naturally more or less attractive to migrants. And students are always surprised when I gently remind them that millions of migrants wanting to come to America now does not make this ‘natural’ nor ‘eternal’ — and I find it super insulting when people on different sides of the ideological spectrum assume that migrants primarily are driven by money alone. The same kind of offense I take at assumptions that American citizens join the military primarily for money. Sure a job is important, but plenty of places on earth for jobs. America promises an unrivaled degree of stability, legal protection, equality, and social mobility, that though flawed and worthy of critique and improvements, relatively speaking, is unmatched by most nations on earth. We Americans of 2022 are doing a horrible job understanding and improving our own American democratic story, which is terrible for us, and bad news for the democratic world. 20.8.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Demography in World History classroom

Demography and geography are not quite destiny, though close.

1. This is a terrible time to be American higher ed thought leader unless you are in the 1% of highly financed higher ed factories with prestige in engineering and healthcare. If Arizona State can accumulate 100,000 plus online students, imagine what Stanford can do when it decides it needs this revenue stream.

2. Given how important immigration has always been to American prosperity, it is amazing how little Americans actually talk about it. Without immigration, American demography would have collapsed decades ago. And while the labor crisis now is complicated (as is inflation), it is also interesting to see the dominant narrative twisting into whichever imaginary direction (can’t find workers because welfare is paying too much for The Poor to buy meth and be couch potatoes ….) except to understand the centrality of immigration in American labor.

3. Would be lovely to get a human wellness-centered study on what it is about this capitalist modernity we have imposed on the globe, that no matter the religion or race or history, a nation hits certain macroeconomic indicators and the birthrate collapses. A kind of paradox. Rather than the usual media-talking head blame women blame religion blame government blame this blame that, I just want to know why, and if humans having fewer or no children are overall happier or not happier. 19.8.2022

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized

Geostrategery, Geoeconomics, and world history classrooms: It’s the Economy, stupid

“《TAIPEI TIMES》US seeks to boost trade with Taiwan. BOLSTERING TIES: The US is ‘developing an ambitious road map for trade negotiations’ with Taiwan and plans to continue transits through the Taiwan Strait, a US official said. AFP and Reuters, WASHINGTON and TAIPEI. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs yesterday expressed “sincere gratitude” toward the US for taking “concrete actions” to maintain security and peace in the Taiwan Strait and the region, after the White House on Friday said it would boost trade with Taiwan and insist on the right of air and sea passage in the area in response to China’s “provocative” behavior. A new trade plan is to be unveiled within days, while US forces are to transit the Taiwan Strait in the next few weeks, US National Security Council Indo-Pacific Coordinator Kurt Campbell told reporters in a teleconference.”

https://news.ltn.com.tw/news/focus/breakingnews/4024663

Even though I have little interest in partisan domestic politics in the US and in the Taiwan Republic, I have repeatedly warned that chaos in American democracy carries grave danger for global democracies – particularly for vulnerable frontline democracies like Ukraine, Baltic States, and the Taiwan Republic. A weakened and chaotic United States makes a military attack on Ukraine and Taiwan more tempting to Moscow and Beijing. But it also carries other public policy risks, such as the inability of the US to think strategically and to lead a pro-democracy global economic order.

The world history level big picture: the core of this modern struggle between democracies and autocracies, the “Third World War,” is geoeconomics. Globalization 1.0, circa 1980 to 2019, entailed self-defeating deregulation and tax cuts for the wealthy multinationals led by the US, defunding of these democracies, and opening their door to global strategic corruption. In the aggregate, trillions in profits were made, but creating highly unstable polities with economic inequalities, all creating the precondition for populist extremisms and democratic instability. This Globalization 1.0 has also transferred trillions in funds and technological know-how to modern autocracies – Putin’s regime, and Xi’s Chinese communist war machine. This is the first time in world history where the leading superpower, the US and its allies, voluntarily funded and shared technological know-how with their enemies. For decades!

Compared with the flashy military scaremongering headlines, trade negotiations are boring. Yet these trade talks between the US and the Taiwan Republic, and eventually a broader regional free and fair trade pact between the US and its democratic allies, are as important to Taiwanese, American, and regional security as missile defense. Hence we return to the idea that stable and healthy American democracy with two pro-democracy parties is vital to Taiwanese and world democracy security. An American democracy that is confident and outward-facing, not paranoid and isolationist, is key to actively creating a pro-democracy and pro-US national interest, free and fair trade Globalization 2.0. A global economic system where trade and economic activities are tied to their service to democratic consolidation and human rights, and minimizing the phenomenon of the democracies directly funding autocracies such as the Chinese communists. A global democratic supply chain that enhances the prosperity and relative equality of democracies will also promote healthier, less acrimonious, non-extremists democracies.

On the Taiwan Republic specifically. Ever since 1945 the consensus between the China CCP and the China KMT is to turn the “Taiwan Question” into a domestic problem – i.e., a civil war between the two China political parties. So anything that the US, Japan, and NATO can do to internationalize Taiwan – particularly in trade, science, education, space, agriculture, media, and arts – the more Taiwan’s security is enhanced.

© Taiwan in World History 台灣與世界歷史. This site grants open access for educational and not-for-profit use. Maps and illustrations are borrowed under educational and not-for-profit fair use. If you are the rights holder and prefer to not have your work shared, please email TaiwanWorldHistory (at) Gmail (dot) com and the content will be removed.

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized