China, Taiwan, HK and "Asian crisis"

[Snefaldia]

To begin, I am an American living and working in Shanghai. My university focus was on Asian history and culture, and since coming to China I've started following politics in Asia a lot more, often with ensuing depression and outrage.

Shanghaiist posted this article today:

Taiwanese singer-songwriter Bobby Chen had Chinese netizens up in arms and Taiwan/Hong Kong residents downright giddy when he remarked in a recent interview that mainland tourists should stay away from the island and learn to shut the door when they go to the bathroom.
Taipei Times reports:
Chen, an erudite singer-songwriter and leader of the popular New Formosa Band (新寶島康樂隊), said he does not sacrifice his principles, unlike other entertainers who kowtow to China with apologies and try to curry favor with the Chinese government.

Instead of China shutting him out, Chen said: “I shut out China. That is what I am most proud of, staying here and bolstering Taiwan to become a bigger market. Since I don’t need the money, therefore you [China] cannot do nothing about me. All I need is Taiwan’s domestic market.”

In the interview, Chen voiced his opposition to the cross-strait service trade agreement, adding: “We don’t need more Chinese tourists coming to Taiwan. Do we have to suffer more and sacrifice our quality of living?”
Of course, a spokesman for China's Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits said in a statement that these "extreme views" don't represent most of Taiwan.
Still, Chen has apparently been praised for his statements in both Taiwan and Hong Kong. Hong Kong's Passion Times Magazine began circulating a poster of Chen with a slogan depicting him as a 'heroic man', according to Taipei Times.
“He is a real Taiwanese with courage. Money can not influence his upright standing of righteousness,” one Hong Kong netizen wrote.
“Everyone should learn to have a strong backbone like Chen, then Chinese tourists will not act in such arrogant ways," another said.

Xinhua recently cited the comments in an editorial calling for an end to biased remarks about mainland China.
"It needs to be pointed out that remarks from singers or other public figures in Hong Kong and Taiwan ostensibly targeting the misconduct of tourists were not made to help strengthen ties," it read.
"Taiwan has been a big beneficiary of the mainland's opening up and economic development. The same is true for Hong Kong."
The editorial also made reference to ol' piss gate, which began when a young mainland couple let their toddler urinate on a busy Mong Kok street while visiting Hong Kong and ended with intervention by the World Toilet Organization.

To make a long story short, there's a lot of bad blood between a newly rich China and people in Hong Kong and Taiwan. On top of that, China's foreign policy has been increasingly muscular with regards to other nations- the Senkaku Islands with Japan, the Spratlys with the Philippines, the South China Sea with Vietnam, Indonesia, and Brunei- just to name a few. There's been a lot of bad blood created between not just non-Chinese countries and China, but also within the "Greater China" area. Bobby Chen's comments are pretty indicative to me of a resentment with mainland Chinese policies and behaviors, and I find them pretty persuasive, although some Taiwanese I've talked to are pretty pessimistic about increasing mainland control.

I wonder what NSG's opinion about China and the relationship between Taiwan, Hong Kong, and the other areas in Asia are, because I sometimes feel on the inside here and would like a bit of perspective. What do you think about the "One China" policy, or the "One Country, Two Systems" policy in particular? Do you agree with the PRC's positions on the disputed territories?

[Neragua]

China has basically become late-19th century America: it's flexing its muscles in relatively close quarters and you can bet China will become expansionist in future. It's already eyeing up the various Himalayan disputes it has with India; not to mention the easy to nab islands you've already mentioned.

Every nation on the rise goes through the same routine: get big, get rich, get militarised, lather, rinse, repeat.

Luckily, nowadays, we have technology and quicker reactions. If China was at this point 100 years ago, the lack of any ability to readily condemn (let alone respond) would mean China would be essentially unchallenged in taking over any conquest it pleased.

Anyway, back to the subject, I think international pressure will at least have a limiting effect on China's increasingly aggressive foreign antics. Well, that's my hope, anyway. China is beginning to see the first (small) leaks in its economic growth and it won't want to risk that. Not to mention China's military might still pales in comparison to the US's and even Japan can pack a punch. Hopefully, economic wobbles and the prospect of being militarily embarrassed will - I hope - limit China.

It's the wider effect of Chinese militarism, however, that worry most. Japan is increasingly looking to abandon neutrality and re-establish a proactive military and others will probably step up their military spending and armament to shore up their defences. Escalation caused by China which China will then cite for its own escalations!

[Marcurix]

China's claims in the south China Sea are extensive, and bound to cause issues in the region given their extent. In that regard it would be better if China eased off from its most recent spate, given it's more aggressive policy in 2010 only pushed east Asian countries to forge closer ties with the USA.

HK and Taiwan will feel animosity towards China because it is growing increasingly modernized in its economic output, and these two areas were among the Asian Tigers that enjoyed rapid industrialization and increase in the standard of living between the 1960s and 1990s. With that economic superiority disappearing, people of these areas will feel resentful to a degree, and like the singer look down upon the mainland Chinese because of this.

The singers comments are extreme though, that is true.

[Magna Libero]

While I think that China's actions are wrong I don't know if the sovereignty of HK would actually be the best thing. China is a big and dangerous master that doesn't care about human rights and freedom of speech, but Hong Kong not having to care about a military seems to be a partial reason for why HK is so prosperous financially.
Obviously, Taiwan seems to be its own country and should be allowed to secede by China -- or granted independence (not sure about technical terms).

It's easy for me to claim things about places I've never been to and not heard much of, but my general reactions toward China are mostly bad, due to various reasons.

[Snefaldia]

I have no idea how I made this mistake in the OP; I don't live in Taiwan- I live in Shanghai on th mainland.

[Neragua]

I have no idea how I made this mistake in the OP; I don't live in Taiwan- I live in Shanghai on th mainland.

Quote the Italian captain from 'Allo 'Allo, "What-a mistake-a to make-a!"

[Costa Fierro]

Obviously, Taiwan seems to be its own country and should be allowed to secede by China -- or granted independence (not sure about technical terms).

Taiwan has even renounced its claims over mainland China and hasn't maintained that the PRC is part of Taiwan since the early 90's. Taiwan and the PRC actually have some rather substantial differences, chief among which is that Taiwan is in most parts, significantly more developed and is significantly freer than the PRC is (students recently occupied the Taiwanese parliament building amid recent mass protests which is not something that you see in the PRC) not to mention the broad linguistic and cultural differences.

I think at this stage, Beijing should recognize that it has no hope in hell of trying to regain control of Taiwan and recognize it for what it is: an independent nation.

[Snefaldia]

Taiwan has even renounced its claims over mainland China and hasn't maintained that the PRC is part of Taiwan since the early 90's. Taiwan and the PRC actually have some rather substantial differences, chief among which is that Taiwan is in most parts, significantly more developed and is significantly freer than the PRC is (students recently occupied the Taiwanese parliament building amid recent mass protests which is not something that you see in the PRC) not to mention the broad linguistic and cultural differences.

I think at this stage, Beijing should recognize that it has no hope in hell of trying to regain control of Taiwan and recognize it for what it is: an independent nation.

This is not correct; the Republic of China continues to claim ownership of ALL of Mainland China, including the nation of Mongolia. Official maps still show this. The problem with your suggestion, though, is that Beijing will never do that- furthermore, significant section of Taiwanese society also don't want that- the Pan-Blu (Kuomintang) groups favor reunification, with stipulations.

China has basically become late-19th century America: it's flexing its muscles in relatively close quarters and you can bet China will become expansionist in future. It's already eyeing up the various Himalayan disputes it has with India; not to mention the easy to nab islands you've already mentioned.

Every nation on the rise goes through the same routine: get big, get rich, get militarised, lather, rinse, repeat.

Luckily, nowadays, we have technology and quicker reactions. If China was at this point 100 years ago, the lack of any ability to readily condemn (let alone respond) would mean China would be essentially unchallenged in taking over any conquest it pleased.

I realize there are parallels to be drawn but there are strong differences; China is not a young state with wide-open borders dealing with the decaying empires of Europe; Vietnam, Japan, South Korea, the Philippines and even India are young and vibrant independent countries. I think it has less to do with militarism than with a desire for regional hegemony and resource control- and it's a stretch to say they would be essentially unchallenged.

Anyway, back to the subject, I think international pressure will at least have a limiting effect on China's increasingly aggressive foreign antics. Well, that's my hope, anyway. China is beginning to see the first (small) leaks in its economic growth and it won't want to risk that. Not to mention China's military might still pales in comparison to the US's and even Japan can pack a punch. Hopefully, economic wobbles and the prospect of being militarily embarrassed will - I hope - limit China.

It's the wider effect of Chinese militarism, however, that worry most. Japan is increasingly looking to abandon neutrality and re-establish a proactive military and others will probably step up their military spending and armament to shore up their defences. Escalation caused by China which China will then cite for its own escalations!

I definitely agree. The economic situation is pretty worrying, even though the government won't admit it. There's a worrying trend in PLA officers to be less careful and more aggressive when it comes to international incidents, which is dangerous in a military that hasn't had a military engagement since the late 70s. It doesn't bode well when certain officials are straight-facedly suggesting a "short" war with Japan to take back the Diaoyu Islands, as if that's possible.

HK and Taiwan will feel animosity towards China because it is growing increasingly modernized in its economic output, and these two areas were among the Asian Tigers that enjoyed rapid industrialization and increase in the standard of living between the 1960s and 1990s. With that economic superiority disappearing, people of these areas will feel resentful to a degree, and like the singer look down upon the mainland Chinese because of this.

The singers comments are extreme though, that is true.

I don't feel they're extreme statements at all, not when you compare it to the massive protests in HK over mainland tourists and the steady erosion of media freedoms. HK sentiment is pessimistic and resentful because they fear, rightly, that Beijing is stifling them and trying to eliminate their culture. I think they're a very valid expression of the fears of a powerful, totalitarian neighbor that they feel is eyeing them like sheep.

[Snefaldia]

As soon as I posted I read this article.

[Brutland and Norden]

Do you agree with the PRC's positions on the disputed territories?

Hey Snef. Fancy seeing you here in NSG.

Anyway, you know I hail from one of those countries china has a territorial dispute with. So, of course, I don't agree with China's expansive and absurd "nine-dash-line". I've found a nice read here, from France's Institut de Recherche sur l'Asie du Sud-Est Contemporaine. Juicy quote below:

In fact, the Chinese believed that the Spratly Islands and Paracel Islands or Xisha were exactly the same group, but that the French had just changed the name as a trick to confuse the Chinese government. To ascertain the position of the Spratly Islands, the Chinese Consul in Manila, Mr. Kwong, went, on July 26, 1933, to the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey and discovered, with surprise, that the Spratly Islands and the Paracel Islands were different and far apart.This big blunder, showing a complete lack of knowledge about the Spratly Islands, was recognized by the Chinese authorities in their internal documents. For example, the director of the influential newspaper, the Peiping News, Mr. Wang Gong Da, wrote to the Foreign Affairs Secretary, Mr Luo:

“The Spokesperson of the Foreign Affairs said that a protest was prepared if it was proven that the nine islands [Spratlys] were part of Xisha [the Paracels]. Don’t make a diplomatic blunder; these islands are not part of Xisha. Triton Island [in Xisha] is the southernmost part of our territory. South of Triton Island, there is no connection with the Chinese territory. Our so-called experts, geographers, Navy representatives, etc., are a shame to our country”

Anyway, onto topic: China has complicated historical relationships with many east Asian and southeast Asian countries. With Japan, Vietnam, and Korea, there is some historical animosity between them and China. With Malaysia and Indonesia, there seems to be resentment with the Chinese elite's control over the economy and privileges, such that both Malaysia and Indonesia have borderline discriminatory policies against Chinese (ex. those favoring bumiputra). The Philippines, despite also having Chinese elite, does not seem to have resentment against its Chinese elite - yet. (Also, it is interesting to note that the current Philippine President is of Chinese descent.)

China's newfound aggressiveness (unprecedented in modern history, it's only during the recent years that China is stirring up the pot) already scared off nations in its near neighborhood, and these countries are seeking shelter under American umbrella (even Vietnam is drifting to the USA). Anti-Chinese sentiments may eventually increase in many countries, as we've seen in Vietnam during the past few days. While there is a difference between overseas Chinese and mainland Chinese (like the difference between mainlanders vs. Taiwanese or Hong Kongers ~ sometimes they don't like each other), the ordinary masses usually cannot distinguish.

If anti-Chinese sentiments boil over, it will have negative repercussions on the relationships between peoples - a gap more difficult to mend than a simple intergovernmental dispute. In many Asian countries, the mindset is still stuck in the 19th century, and governments such as those of Japan, Korea, China, and Vietnam will drum up nationalist sentiments. The latter three routinely invoke Japanese atrocities during WWII to link it with current Japanese actions. Other Southeast Asian countries, such as the Malaysia and Indonesia, are less keen on invoking nationalism, but there are latent anti-Chinese sentiments that can easily be brought to the fore.

Economic repercussions will eventually follow, not only because the Chinese elite control much of the southeast Asian economies, but the economies of China and its eastern and southeastern neighbors are historically intertwined. China is the economic hinterland of the rest of east and southeast Asia. The economic separation was started during the Cold War, and so countries such as Japan were forced to look to other countries for raw materials (ex. iron from Australia). The result was an interconnected economic network between Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, the southeast Asian countries, Australia, New Zealand, and the USA. This economic system worked well throughout the later decades of the 20th century for many (but not all) countries that are part of it (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, etc); while mainland China remained mired in underdevelopment.

Now that economic reintegration of China into the greater Asian economy is bringing much success to its economy and people, hopefully the Chinese government will realize that its newfound soft and hard power is dependent on having influence on its near neighbors and on helping maintain peace and security in the region (not threatening it, as it is currently doing). Xinhua may be loath to admit it, but it is mainland China itself that is the primary beneficiary of its opening up to the world. If China had not opened up, Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Malaysia, Indonesia, the Philippines, etc., will continue to benefit from the existing Cold War economic network they have built. China will remain excluded, alone in its economic system, with only North Korea around.

China's government should realize that thawing frozen territorial disputes will also have a detrimental affect on itself and with the Chinese people. These disputes are best resolved through diplomacy and arbitration; not through military means, bullying, trade wars, or playing the nationalism card. (It will be ironic, though, that if China attempts to disrupt the economies of many Southeast Asian nations, the Chinese there will lose a lot, too.) That's why I applaud my government's referral of the Scarborough issue with International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea for arbitration. (China, somewhat unsurprisingly, rejected the referral of the issue to the ITLOS, seeing as it would have more chances of success in bullying its smaller neighbor.) Diplomacy and arbitration is the way to go, but we would be foolish to expect that it will always work. Si vis pacem, para bellum.

[Snefaldia]

Do you agree with the PRC's positions on the disputed territories?

Hey Snef. Fancy seeing you here in NSG.

It feels good! So good.

And incidentally, I agree with everything you've said- I've had a substantially similar conversation with my Filipino coworker. China would be much more successful if they were attempting to engage in at least some kind of diplomacy. It seems like their goal is to piss off as many nations as they can as quickly as possible. I wonder if it's a calculated move to provoke a military response, and then use that pretext to grab more land?

Edward Luttwak suggested as much in his recent book about China, but he also said that traditional Chinese tactics of making little gains here and there, or provoking small incidents and resolving them quickly will probably not work with the US, which has a tendency to overreact massively and immediately to any kind of threat.

[Brutland and Norden]

And incidentally, I agree with everything you've said- I've had a substantially similar conversation with my Filipino coworker. China would be much more successful if they were attempting to engage in at least some kind of diplomacy. It seems like their goal is to piss off as many nations as they can as quickly as possible. I wonder if it's a calculated move to provoke a military response, and then use that pretext to grab more land?

That also seems to be the general consensus here, perhaps knowing that at least we can face China more equally on the diplomatic front than on the grossly unequal military one. Thank goodness most of my countrymen are calm and sane enough not to resort to hatred against ethnic Chinese. Hate the government, not the people.

China had been successful so far with their salami tactics, but there's a limit to everything...

Edward Luttwak suggested as much in his recent book about China, but he also said that traditional Chinese tactics of making little gains here and there, or provoking small incidents and resolving them quickly will probably not work with the US, which has a tendency to overreact massively and immediately to any kind of threat.

Those small islands are tiny for an aspiring great power. If I were China, I would magnanimously let the smaller nations get the islands, and then work with them so that I can exploit the natural resources there without any fuss. Not only did I get the goodwill of the smaller nations, I also pull them closer to my orbit. With the Chinese economic elite in these nations (particularly in Southeast Asia), the foundations for economic cooperation and resource exploration are there. But unfortunately, I'm not China...

Speaking of the USA, I'm actually having doubts as to whether it will really honor the mutual defense treaty. The Obama administration has been treading really carefully with regards to disputes with China. The Americans, possibly fearing being dragged into a conflict by the MDT, helped "resolve" the Scarborough spat by negotiating an agreement stipulating that both Chinese and Philippine vessels depart the area: the Philippines did depart, China did not honor the agreement. America was passive when China breached the agreement it brokered. But then, a security blanket like the MDT is better than being naked and exposed in the water.

[Zoboyizakoplayoklot]

I think HK is fine the way it is now, and I do think Taiwan rightfully belongs to China but if they do what they did with HK and make it a SAR that would probobly be the best.

[Canaore]

I'm against the cross-strait trade agreement for a variety of reasons, most importantly, the danger it poses to the independence and well-being of Taiwan. Needless to say, I don't agree with the PRC's position on the disputed territories, they belong to their respective countries. I'm aware of the bad blood that exists between the nations you mentioned, but that's a historical question and it should be treated and resolved as such. Furthermore, I'm relatively supportive of the idea of having Tibet and East Turkestan as independent nations. Hell, I'd even like Taiwan to be come de jure independent from China.

However, I'm deeply offended by Chen's comment, since I have Chinese grandparents from the mainland. By insulting mainlanders, he's not shutting out China or commiting any heroic act. He's just passing as a fool, which I'm quite sure he's not.

[Marcurix]

HK and Taiwan will feel animosity towards China because it is growing increasingly modernized in its economic output, and these two areas were among the Asian Tigers that enjoyed rapid industrialization and increase in the standard of living between the 1960s and 1990s. With that economic superiority disappearing, people of these areas will feel resentful to a degree, and like the singer look down upon the mainland Chinese because of this.

The singers comments are extreme though, that is true.

I don't feel they're extreme statements at all, not when you compare it to the massive protests in HK over mainland tourists and the steady erosion of media freedoms. HK sentiment is pessimistic and resentful because they fear, rightly, that Beijing is stifling them and trying to eliminate their culture. I think they're a very valid expression of the fears of a powerful, totalitarian neighbor that they feel is eyeing them like sheep.

Had his statement not included the bit about tourists, I'd be inclined to disagree. However “We don’t need more Chinese tourists coming to Taiwan. Do we have to suffer more and sacrifice our quality of living?” is not a statement concerning his rights, it's that he doesn't like mainland Chinese tourists.

That's extreme.

[The Serbian Empire]

Obviously, Taiwan seems to be its own country and should be allowed to secede by China -- or granted independence (not sure about technical terms).

Taiwan has even renounced its claims over mainland China and hasn't maintained that the PRC is part of Taiwan since the early 90's. Taiwan and the PRC actually have some rather substantial differences, chief among which is that Taiwan is in most parts, significantly more developed and is significantly freer than the PRC is (students recently occupied the Taiwanese parliament building amid recent mass protests which is not something that you see in the PRC) not to mention the broad linguistic and cultural differences.

I think at this stage, Beijing should recognize that it has no hope in hell of trying to regain control of Taiwan and recognize it for what it is: an independent nation.

Beijing knows it can defeat Taiwan in a military invasion based on human wave tactics once China has a navy capable of moving those human waves between China and Taiwan.

[Pingxiang]

Certain so called people of Hong Kong and Taiwan are just jealous of the rise of the mainland.

China is big and has regional differences. Many people come from rural regions. So I would not expect a rural person from Jiangxi province to be has culturally sophisticated has some well educated and loaded with money has someone from Hong Kong and Taipei Taiwan which are small and have more access to the worlds culture.

The PRC government knows this is a problem so they have made guides for Chinese itravelers to other nations on how they should behave.

And the Chinese economy seems to be doing quite well. This news is from last month.

The US is on the brink of losing its status as the world’s largest economy, and is likely to slip behind China this year, sooner than widely anticipated, according to the world’s leading statistical agencies.

.
Article - http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/d79ffff8 ... z32BOIrPjS

When it comes to the Spratlies. The nations surrounding it like the Philippines should have paid attention to those islands. But they could care less. Seeing no one there, the PRC decided to fill the vacuum and move people and troops to some of the islands.

[Greater Istanistan]

Lolnope. The US Seventh Fleet is kind of in the way.

[The Serbian Empire]

Lolnope. The US Seventh Fleet is kind of in the way.

Too bad that Obama seems to be afraid of China and doesn't cut and slash like Bush would on China. Obama pretty much lets China do as they please by not forcibly removing the PRC from the Spratlies after the Philippines vacated the islands.

[The Victorian Empire]

ROC > PRC

[Pingxiang]

Lolnope. The US Seventh Fleet is kind of in the way.

Too bad that Obama seems to be afraid of China and doesn't cut and slash like Bush would on China. Obama pretty much lets China do as they please by not forcibly removing the PRC from the Spratlies after the Philippines vacated the islands.

When the US controlled the Philippines even they did not pay any attention to the Spratlies.

Edited made mistake.

[The Serbian Empire]

Too bad that Obama seems to be afraid of China and doesn't cut and slash like Bush would on China. Obama pretty much lets China do as they please by not forcibly removing the PRC from the Spratlies after the Philippines vacated the islands.

When the US controlled the Philippines even they paid any attention to the Spratlies.

At that time, China wasn't even a threat to take those islands. Japan was a greater threat due to the likes of Hideki Tojo and Hirohito.

[Bombadil]

A problem for China is that their moral structure is built around a system that flagrantly disregards those morals. When the party issues moral codes, yet its representatives lie, steal and cheat, then it's hard to blame the average population for doing the same.

Hence I've seen mainland people in shops switch price stickers and then argue loudly when charged the correct price - and anyone in HK has experienced parents letting their child urinate or defecate in the street or in malls.

The excuse given is that these are uneducated people from the hinterlands but that's not really the case. The entire party credence is based on honouring the simple peasant.. regardless of the actuality - hence many party people talk to being like a peasant regardless of whether their lifestyle matches that talk.

I've often said to people in HK that, really, they should view themselves as a great influence on China. For everyone who comes down and sees a highly well-run city, and what is generally a very polite society.. it provides an ideal of how to act in contrast.

In regards to islands, well imagine the US was invaded and run by a variety of foriegn nations before collapsing and being taken over, and treated horrendously, by a neighbour country. China's sense of history and importance - Zhongguo meaning 'middle kingdom' - is indelibly scarred by that experience, and so it creates two reactions. 1. The idea of owning what is, if only perceived, rightfully China's. 2. A sensitive yet belligerent attitude to that ownership.

It's akin to a hard man being taken down and then lashing out at those around him once over the initial shock.

Having said all that.. China has a history of enormous culture and civilisation, it has leading intellectuals who are incredibly nuanced and intelligent in thier opinions - it's in no way a thug, either in terms of visitors or government, per se.

As much as I've said 'China', that would be similar to viewing the USA through the actions of some hillbilly in Buttfuck, Mississippi - and I wish that place existed - as someone else noted, China is incredibly diverse, more akin to a united Europe than the USA, with different languages, cultures and more.

..and tourism is kind of key, the more people who leave and experience different countries, different cultures and bring that back, the better China will be.

[Baader-Meinhof Gruppe]

Taiwan and Hong Kong are parts of China. The only reason they are not under Chinese control is due to the imperialist actions of tyrants such as Thatcher. They must rejoin China and stop their terrorist actions

[Greater Istanistan]

Taiwan and Hong Kong are parts of China. The only reason they are not under Chinese control is due to the imperialist actions of tyrants such as Thatcher. They must rejoin China and stop their terrorist actions

Terrorists? Wut?

I'm sorry, but with all due respect there has been to the best of my knowledge no evidence that Hong Kong or Taiwan have been orchestrating acts of terror against the People's Republic of China.

Oh, and for the record, China is not a Communist state, so I see no reason why you should irrationally support them given your apparent views.