Is a U.S.-China hot war imminent?|Lee Yee
In July, Pompeo claimed the American policy towards China is harsher than the one towards the Soviet Union in the Cold War era. The approach has been shifted from “listening to its words and watching its deeds” to “ignoring its words and only watching its deeds”. Recent developments show that the U.S. is striding closer and closer to a complete de-linkage with China. The recall of the ambassador from China was just a prelude. What followed was the U.S. official interpretation that “one China policy” is not equivalent to “one China principle”, plus the emphasis that “the U.S. holds no specific standpoint towards the sovereignty of Taiwan”. Furthermore, during the visit of Krach, U.S. Under Secretary of State, Tsai Ing-wen stated that “Taiwan has the determination to take the critical step”. Adding fuel to this, Hsiao Bi Khim, Taiwan’s delegate at the Taipei Economic and Cultural Representative Office in the U.S., introduced herself as the “Taiwan Ambassador to the U.S.” on Twitter. In view of all these, is the U.S. going to establish diplomatic relation with Taiwan? Will it turn out to be the “October surprise” before the U.S. presidential election? In response, China dispatched fighter jets to violate the airspace of Taiwan, and as “Global Times” put it, “this was not a gesture of warning, but an actual combat exercise of attacking Taiwan”. In return, Taiwan authority urged China “not to underestimate its armed forces' resolve in safeguarding Taiwan”. As tension keeps building up across the Strait, will the U.S. intervene and finally trigger a U.S.-China hot war?
For the last few months, while analyzing the situation, quite a few observers have drawn upon the “Thucydides trap” originated from an ancient Greek historian. According to this theory, when an emerging power threatens to displace an existing great power as an international hegemony, there will be an unavoidable tendency towards war.
To be frank, these observers may have well overestimated the strength of China. Thanks to its huge population, China has become the second largest economic entity in the world. But we are now living in an era that national strength is rather defined by technological advancement. In reality, China is militarily inferior to Russia and technologically lagging far behind major western countries. To put it simply, China is yet to be capable of challenging the American dominance.
Back in the 1980s, in the heyday of its economic development, Japan has significantly outperformed the U.S. in the capital market, and some American scholars have come to the “Japan No.1” conclusion. Despite this, there was never a sign of military confrontation between U.S. and Japan. A decade later, the formation of the European Union posed new challenge to the American supremacy. But again, the two did not come anywhere close to a war. So why has the emergence of China, which in fact lacks the capabilities to overwhelm the U.S., aroused much anticipation of war?
Rudolph Rummel, an American professor of political studies, have made a thorough analysis on the correlation between wars and democracy in human history. After humans surviving a thousand years of darkness, it was not until the independence of the U.S. in 1776 that unveiled a democratic institution with public elections, separation of powers, multi-party system as well as freedom of speech, press, religion and assembly. After more than a hundred years, in 1900 there were only 13 democratic countries in the world. And after another decade, in 2015 the rose to 130, and dictatorial states without meaningful elections have become the minority.
According to Rummel’s statistics, there were 371 wars between 1816 and 2005. Among them, 205 were fought between two dictatorial countries and 166 between democratic and dictatorial ones. Interestingly, there had not been a single war between democratic countries. The conclusion is all too obvious: if there were only democratic states on earth, wars would not happen.
And here lies the fundamental reason why the “Thucydides Trap” has been more valid in the old days when dictatorial systems prevailed, but has failed to apply in contemporary cases between two democratic countries. And it also explains why the competitions between the U.S. and Japan or the EU have not led to any war, while the challenge from China will probably end up differently.
In a democratic system, to wage a war requires a consensus among the government, legislature, media and public opinion. It is rather a matter of the people’s collective will than the ruler’s subjective decision. Whereas within a dictatorial structure, no approval from the legislature is needed, media and public opinion are never respected and judicial challenge simply does not exist. A dictator or oligarch can just go to war at will.
From a dictator’s point of view, whether to enter a war or not is not subject to external circumstance, but the domestic status of his ruling. When a dictator’s position gets shaken by severe economic downturn and widespread public discontent, he will try to divert domestic dissatisfaction by means of foreign maneuvers. The dictator tends to single out those “non-conforming groups”, as so identified by the “little pink” Chinese patriots, and tries bullying them, as what the CCP is doing in India, Hong Kong and Inner Mongolia. The objective is to distract attention with extreme nationalism. More often than not, stirring up external instability has become a tactic to secure domestic stability of the dictator’s rule.
Perhaps a shrewd dictator will weigh up the strength of his counterpart before taking action. Nevertheless, the intrinsically defective system may hinder the dictator from understanding the reality and accessing different views. And personal intellectual and intelligent inadequacies may also breed unrealistic self-inflating belief. The resulted stupidity can make a tragedy more imminent than everyone may expect.
「conclusion of european union」的推薦目錄:
- 關於conclusion of european union 在 李怡 Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於conclusion of european union 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的精選貼文
- 關於conclusion of european union 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳貼文
- 關於conclusion of european union 在 The conclusion of the stability... - European Commission 的評價
- 關於conclusion of european union 在 The European Union - Conclusion - YouTube 的評價
conclusion of european union 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的精選貼文
【劍橋辯論會(Cambridge Union)演說:China is the New Imperial Power in Hong Kong】
雖不獲法庭批准離港,我仍在上週透過視像會議方式,參與英國劍橋辯論會(Cambridge Union)的辯論「This House Believes China is the New Imperial Power in Hong Kong」。
發言期間,除解說香港淪落為警察城市(Police State)的源由,直斥在習近平主政下,人民權利不斷受到侵害;我亦以武漢肺炎為例,提到政權面對疫情爆發,多番以中國國家利益與民族認同,凌駕港人切身安危。
其實官員拒絕完全封關和強制隔離入境陸客,同時兩地社會融合與經濟活動在過去十年越加頻繁,反倒成為香港憂慮疫情難以受控的主因,更說明港中區隔的當務之急,而管治失能只會促使民間自救呼聲越加頻繁,不再寄望和依賴政府。
https://youtu.be/xx0uGpJV38U
#眾志國際連結 #SelfGovernance
Cambridge Union Debate: This House Believes China is the New Imperial Power in Hong Kong
When we speak of Imperial Power, it doesn’t necessarily mean a colonial power. But we are referring to an act of expanding influence and authority over a territory through political, legal, economic or even military means. And indeed, the Chinese communist government has exerted that influence over Hong Kong since the Handover in 1997 and escalated that influence more rapidly and more aggressively after 2003.
The principle of ‘One Country, Two Systems’ is a fragile ruling philosophy defining China-Hong Kong relations, guaranteeing the global financial city its autonomy. But in the past 22 years, Beijing intervened on many fronts already, abusing this ruling philosophy and implementing authoritarian measures upon Hong Kong citizens.
-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-
My activism experience serves as a clear case for the motion. Hong Kong’s civil society has long been the constant target of state attack, and the motive is crystal clear: to eradicate opposition in order to maintain China’s dominating influence over Hong Kong. The Oppression of personal freedoms is merely one case in point.
Last year in June, shortly after serving my prison sentence, I went protesting against the controversial extradition bill, exercising my freedom to assembly. The government arrested me again and charged me of inciting people taking part in an unlawful assembly. Then I went contesting in local election, yet the government banned me from running for office because of my political stance.
I then turned to international advocacy, planning to fly to the United Kingdom and other European countries to explain our democratic and peaceful cause. Regrettably, the court thought this parliamentary hearing is not important and rejected my travel application. Every time I spoke in parliamentary hearings, no matter in person or via skype, the Chinese foreign ministry would condemn that parliament for colliding with a so-called separatist who has never advocated independence.
Following these encounters, it's become clear now I'm deprived of the right to the election, freedom of movement, freedom of assembly (not allowed to appear on designated area), and freedom of speech. The civil liberties guaranteed in the constitution are however no longer applicable to me. These oppressive measures are not out of political context.
-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-
#重點在此 I’d also argue that time and again, China’s national pride and interests override Hong Kong’s own interests. The development in the past decade has shown that many of the competitive edges of Hong Kong as a global financial city like rule of law, free flow of information, checks and balances are compromised and give way to Xi Jinping’s Chinese Dream. The Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak precisely explain this argument. Hong Kong, given its proximity to mainland China, is highly prone to infection and spread of disease.
Instead of taking strict measures to prevent public health crisis from erupting, the Hong Kong government, as of today, still refused to close the border, allowing countless potential cases flee to Hong Kong and further dampen the burden of Hong Kong’s medical services. From the moment that Xi Jinping’s image become the top priority, the autonomous decision-making mechanism of the Hong Kong government has collapsed.
The opposing side may argue that China is not imperial power in HK because integration and cooperation in the past have fostered but not encroached economic development in Hong Kong and our city does benefit from it. I’m afraid I cannot agree with this viewpoint at all.
Growing socio-economic integration with China, more connected transport infrastructure like the High-Speed Railway, are accounted for the city’s outbreak of Coronavirus. The first five patients confirmed positive to the virus were passengers of the Railway. Behind the grand narratives of ‘economic integration’ is more blatant aggression of the Hong Kong system. Hong Kong always has to give in and make up for its sovereign country’s faulty policy.
-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-\-
In conclusion, I have two questions for everyone. Can citizens in New York directly elected their mayor? Yes. Can citizens in London directly their mayor? Yes. We are not asking go too far, but just hope to ask for election rather that selection under Chinese rule to hand-pick those Beijing Loyalists.People in Hong Kong is not experiencing rule of law but only suffering from rule by tear gas. The root cause of crisi is police brutality, which included live round fired towards high school students, young lady being gang rape in police stations and 8000 people arrested from the age of 11 to 84.
When offenses are committed and the offenders are prosecuted as is now happening, there’s no damage to the rule of law at all. It’s only when police officers who beat people up and none of them has even been arrested, that the rule of law is damaged. There’s no rule of law when the brutality of police officers goes unpunished!
Therefore, the House should recognize the fact that China is not only the new imperial power in HK, but it is also an authoritarian and oppressive imperial power since Emperor Xi took over the power. The continuing intervention of the Chinese authorities in Hong Kong’s local affairs presents a fundamental challenge to the continuation of HK peoples identity and way of life.
We are proud to be HongKongers and we hope to determine our own future. That’s the reason for cross-generation of HKers to fight for freedom and wish you can stand with Hong Kong. Thank you.
conclusion of european union 在 黃之鋒 Joshua Wong Facebook 的最佳貼文
【劍橋辯論會(Cambridge Union)演說:China is the New Imperial Power in Hong Kong】
雖不獲法庭批准離港,我仍在上週透過視像會議方式,參與英國劍橋辯論會(Cambridge Union)的辯論「This House Believes China is the New Imperial Power in Hong Kong」。
發言期間,除解說香港淪落為警察城市(Police State)的源由,直斥在習近平主政下,人民權利不斷受到侵害;我亦以武漢肺炎為例,提到政權面對疫情爆發,多番以中國國家利益與民族認同,凌駕港人切身安危。
其實官員拒絕完全封關和強制隔離入境陸客,同時兩地社會融合與經濟活動在過去十年越加頻繁,反倒成為香港憂慮疫情難以受控的主因,更說明港中區隔的當務之急,而管治失能只會促使民間自救呼聲越加頻繁,不再寄望和依賴政府。
https://youtu.be/xx0uGpJV38U
#眾志國際連結 #SelfGovernance
Cambridge Union Debate: This House Believes China is the New Imperial Power in Hong Kong
When we speak of Imperial Power, it doesn’t necessarily mean a colonial power. But we are referring to an act of expanding influence and authority over a territory through political, legal, economic or even military means. And indeed, the Chinese communist government has exerted that influence over Hong Kong since the Handover in 1997 and escalated that influence more rapidly and more aggressively after 2003.
The principle of ‘One Country, Two Systems’ is a fragile ruling philosophy defining China-Hong Kong relations, guaranteeing the global financial city its autonomy. But in the past 22 years, Beijing intervened on many fronts already, abusing this ruling philosophy and implementing authoritarian measures upon Hong Kong citizens.
---------------------------------
My activism experience serves as a clear case for the motion. Hong Kong’s civil society has long been the constant target of state attack, and the motive is crystal clear: to eradicate opposition in order to maintain China’s dominating influence over Hong Kong. The Oppression of personal freedoms is merely one case in point.
Last year in June, shortly after serving my prison sentence, I went protesting against the controversial extradition bill, exercising my freedom to assembly. The government arrested me again and charged me of inciting people taking part in an unlawful assembly. Then I went contesting in local election, yet the government banned me from running for office because of my political stance.
I then turned to international advocacy, planning to fly to the United Kingdom and other European countries to explain our democratic and peaceful cause. Regrettably, the court thought this parliamentary hearing is not important and rejected my travel application. Every time I spoke in parliamentary hearings, no matter in person or via skype, the Chinese foreign ministry would condemn that parliament for colliding with a so-called separatist who has never advocated independence.
Following these encounters, it's become clear now I'm deprived of the right to the election, freedom of movement, freedom of assembly (not allowed to appear on designated area), and freedom of speech. The civil liberties guaranteed in the constitution are however no longer applicable to me. These oppressive measures are not out of political context.
---------------------------------
#重點在此 I’d also argue that time and again, China’s national pride and interests override Hong Kong’s own interests. The development in the past decade has shown that many of the competitive edges of Hong Kong as a global financial city like rule of law, free flow of information, checks and balances are compromised and give way to Xi Jinping’s Chinese Dream. The Wuhan Coronavirus outbreak precisely explain this argument. Hong Kong, given its proximity to mainland China, is highly prone to infection and spread of disease.
Instead of taking strict measures to prevent public health crisis from erupting, the Hong Kong government, as of today, still refused to close the border, allowing countless potential cases flee to Hong Kong and further dampen the burden of Hong Kong’s medical services. From the moment that Xi Jinping’s image become the top priority, the autonomous decision-making mechanism of the Hong Kong government has collapsed.
The opposing side may argue that China is not imperial power in HK because integration and cooperation in the past have fostered but not encroached economic development in Hong Kong and our city does benefit from it. I’m afraid I cannot agree with this viewpoint at all.
Growing socio-economic integration with China, more connected transport infrastructure like the High-Speed Railway, are accounted for the city’s outbreak of Coronavirus. The first five patients confirmed positive to the virus were passengers of the Railway. Behind the grand narratives of ‘economic integration’ is more blatant aggression of the Hong Kong system. Hong Kong always has to give in and make up for its sovereign country’s faulty policy.
---------------------------------
In conclusion, I have two questions for everyone. Can citizens in New York directly elected their mayor? Yes. Can citizens in London directly their mayor? Yes. We are not asking go too far, but just hope to ask for election rather that selection under Chinese rule to hand-pick those Beijing Loyalists.People in Hong Kong is not experiencing rule of law but only suffering from rule by tear gas. The root cause of crisi is police brutality, which included live round fired towards high school students, young lady being gang rape in police stations and 8000 people arrested from the age of 11 to 84.
When offenses are committed and the offenders are prosecuted as is now happening, there’s no damage to the rule of law at all. It’s only when police officers who beat people up and none of them has even been arrested, that the rule of law is damaged. There’s no rule of law when the brutality of police officers goes unpunished!
Therefore, the House should recognize the fact that China is not only the new imperial power in HK, but it is also an authoritarian and oppressive imperial power since Emperor Xi took over the power. The continuing intervention of the Chinese authorities in Hong Kong’s local affairs presents a fundamental challenge to the continuation of HK peoples identity and way of life.
We are proud to be HongKongers and we hope to determine our own future. That’s the reason for cross-generation of HKers to fight for freedom and wish you can stand with Hong Kong. Thank you.
conclusion of european union 在 The conclusion of the stability... - European Commission 的推薦與評價
The conclusion of the stability support programme marks an important moment for Greece and Europe. It marks the beginning of a new chapter for Greece... ... <看更多>