|
|
|
Jewish World Review March 18, 2005 / 7 Adar II 5765 Its economy reeling, China rattles saber at Taiwan By George Friedman
http://www.JewishWorldReview.com |
With the Middle East continuing to boil, foreign policy attention has shifted toward China, which passed a controversial law authorizing the use of force should Taiwan declare its independence. On its face, the law appears to serve no purpose.
Begin with the fact that Taiwan does not formally dispute China's claims that it is a province of the People's Republic. For Taipei, a declaration of independence would be legally radical, but in all practical ways, Taiwan is an independent country already.
If Taiwan is part of China, then, from a strictly legal viewpoint, Beijing could do what it deems is necessary in its "province" without any special legal authorization. And if Taiwan is not part of China, then Beijing doesn't need a law to invade a foreign country. It's done all the time, and passing a law won't make anyone feel better about it.
Viewed from a strictly military perspective, China would not have an easy time invading Taiwan. The People's Republic doesn't have much of an amphibious force, and what it does have is certainly not in a position to fight its way across the Taiwan Strait against Taiwan's air force and missiles, land an invading army and maintain supply lines. Add the United States to the mix, and Chinese forces aren't going anywhere.
True, China could carry out a nuclear strike against Taiwan, but that would burn up some very valuable economic infrastructure — not Beijing's goal. It could also try to isolate Taiwan by firing anti-ship missiles at merchant vessels heading to and from the island. But missiles can go both ways.
So China didn't need this law from a legal sense; and the passage of the law doesn't change the military reality, which is that a full-blown war is unlikely. Therefore, since China is a serious country that doesn't do things frivolously, why in the world did the National People's Congress pass this law?
The answer is rooted in a point I've made before, but which bears repeating: China is not doing nearly as well economically as it appears. True, its exports are surging, but that doesn't mean the exports are profitable. Bad debts in China total an astounding $600 billion, according to Standard and Poor's — and I'd put the number higher. The Chinese economic miracle, which has been nothing to sneeze at, is running out of steam, as the rest of Asia did before it.
This poses a tremendous political challenge to the Chinese government. The Communist Party's claim to authority no longer rests on the ideological claims of Mao Tse-tung and Karl Marx; it rests on the fact that the Communist government of China delivered prosperity. It didn't deliver it throughout China's geographic expanse and it didn't deliver it equally, but it did deliver it more quickly and broadly than imaginable. Success in China, as in politics everywhere, is the root of popularity.
For the past 30 years, Beijing's problem was to manage accelerating prosperity. That's not hard to do. Imagine, however, that China's boom were to end and the government had to manage an economy that was growing much more slowly than before, or even contracting. That is a much tougher political problem.
If China no longer can call on the revolutionary zeal of the workers and peasants, how does it maintain its popularity and legitimacy? The one thing that remains — and is a very powerful force indeed — is Chinese patriotism and nationalism. If the Communists can't rally the masses to Marx, they can rally them to China.
Passing a law authorizing war in the event of secession makes no sense, if one assumes that China is economically healthy. If, on the other hand, one thinks of China as facing hard times, increasing the level of tension with Taiwan makes perfect sense. Even if Beijing has no intention— or ability — to invade, Taiwan is a patriotic issue, and the threat of war generates social solidarity and support for the government.
Over the past few weeks, observers have noted an odd hardening of China's foreign policy and a harsher edge to its tone. I would argue that China is in economic difficulty and a Chinese government in economic trouble is also in deep political trouble. Therefore, acting like a superpower is an antidote to economic problems, and legally committing itself to protect China's sovereignty makes a certain kind of sense.
The Chinese government knows its economic condition better than anyone. It is preparing the ground for a shift in its international behavior based on worsening economic conditions. This doesn't mean war, but it does mean a lot more discussion of war — and another headache for the United States at a time when Washington doesn't need any more foreign policy headaches.
Every weekday JewishWorldReview.com publishes what many in Washington and the media consider "must-reading". Sign up for the daily JWR update. It's free. Just click here.
George Friedman is chairman of Strategic Forecasting, Inc., dubbed by Barron's as "The Shadow CIA," it's one of the world's leading global intelligence firms, providing clients with geopolitical analysis and industry and country forecasts to mitigate risk and identify opportunities. Stratfor's clients include Fortune 500 companies and major governments.
© 2005 TMS
| |||||||||||
