Clicking on banner ads enables JWR to constantly improve
Jewish World Review Feb. 28, 2000 / 22 Adar I, 5760

George Will

George Will
JWR's Pundits
World Editorial
Cartoon Showcase

Mallard Fillmore

Michael Barone
Mona Charen
Linda Chavez
David Corn
Ann Coulter
Greg Crosby
Larry Elder
Don Feder
Suzanne Fields
Paul Greenberg
Bob Greene
Betsy Hart
Nat Hentoff
David Horowitz
Arianna Huffington
Marianne Jennings
Michael Kelly
Mort Kondracke
Ch. Krauthammer
Lawrence Kudlow
Dr. Laura
John Leo
David Limbaugh
Michelle Malkin
Jackie Mason
Chris Matthews
Michael Medved
MUGGER
Kathleen Parker
Debbie Schlussel
Sam Schulman
Roger Simon
Tony Snow
Thomas Sowell
Cal Thomas
Jonathan S. Tobin
Ben Wattenberg
George Will
Bruce Williams
Walter Williams
Mort Zuckerman

Consumer Reports
Newswatch

Econophone

Trakdata


. . . The Right Response


http://www.jewishworldreview.com -- Nations usually use diplomatic manners to mask their malevolence, but China cultivates an impressive lack of graciousness, and now, at a propitious moment, has given another glimpse of that lack. Its extraordinary threat against Taiwan may cause foreign policy to intrude upon the presidential campaign.

While Al Gore and Bill Bradley spar over decidedly nonpresidential subjects such as racial profiling by state and local police, and George W. Bush and John McCain argue about who was a meanie first, China last week issued a reminder that the world is still a dangerous place. China said that "the Taiwan issue is one left over by the Chinese civil war" that ended half a century ago, and threatened to use war to end "the state of hostility" that has not been formally ended: "The Chinese government always makes it clear that the means used to solve the Taiwan issue is a matter of China's internal affairs, and China is under no obligation to commit itself to rule out the use of force."

This is the fifth recent development that has roiled U.S.-China relations. One occurred last May, when U.S. planes mistakenly bombed the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. Beijing cynically treated the mistake as deliberate and orchestrated an orgy of anti-Americanism, including a mob attack on the U.S. Embassy.

A second occurred last July, when President Lee Teng-hui of Taiwan stated the undeniable, that it was time to retire the fiction of "one China" by reconstituting relations between Taiwan and the mainland as a "state-to-state" relationship. The Clinton administration, always inclined to regard truthfulness as a faux pas, was very upset, having virtually adopted Beijing's position that Taiwan, the first democracy in 4,000 years of Chinese history, is a renegade province. In his 1998 grovel through China, President Clinton acceded to Beijing's demand for "three no's"--no independence for Taiwan (although Beijing has not had sovereignty over Taiwan since 1895), no two Chinas and no membership for Taiwan in international organizations for which statehood is a condition of membership.

A third development was Beijing's menacing deployment opposite Taiwan of short-range ballistic missiles, tactical aircraft and a Russian destroyer with advanced anti-ship missiles designed for use against U.S. aircraft carriers. A fourth was Beijing's arrest of more than 1,000 members of the Falun Gong religious movement, a crackdown that spoke volumes about the insecurities of the regime.

The example of Taiwan--its muscular economy (in the 20th century, world's fastest growth rate, 4.8 percent per year; 22 million people producing a GDP one-third that produced by the 1.2 billion mainland Chinese) and vibrant democracy--is the largest exacerbator of those insecurities. The Clinton administration, disposed to infuse even foreign policy with the therapeutic ethic, probably believes that the aim of U.S. policy should be to assuage those insecurities. The administration has tried to do so by aggravating Taiwan's insecurity, making the U.S. commitment to Taiwan more attenuated than at any time since President Nixon's 1972 visit to China.

Taiwan says democratization on the mainland is a prerequisite for reunification. Beijing last week called that "totally unreasonable" and--get this--"undemocratic." And, plunging into U.S. internal affairs, it denounced as a "gross interference in China's internal affairs" attempts by Congress to pass the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act and any plans to include Taiwan in a theater missile defense system. Which suggests two questions the presidential candidates should be asked.

First, do you favor a crash program for development and deployment of a ship-based theater missile defense system to be deployed near Taiwan as needed? Second, do you favor prompt passage by the Senate--the House has passed it--of the Taiwan Security Enhancement Act, which would establish close ties between the U.S. and Taiwan militaries, and would require the executive branch to inform Congress of the military supplies Taiwan seeks to purchase?

One reason all candidates should answer "yes" to both questions can be called Lord Nelson's Rule. Shortly before Trafalgar, Nelson, aboard HMS Victory with some of his officers, picked up a fire poker and said: "It matters not at all in what way I lay this poker on the floor. But if Bonaparte should say it must be placed in this direction, we must instantly insist on its being laid in some other one."

Which is why Congress should promptly respond to China's strictures against the Taiwan act and theater missile defense by demonstrating to Beijing that the Clinton era of infinite U.S. pliability is finite.



Comment on JWR contributor George Will's column by clicking here.

Up

02/24/00: Federal Swelling
02/22/00: Greenspan Tweaks
02/17/00: Crucial Carolina (and Montana and . . .)
02/10/00: McCain's Distortions
02/10/00: The Disciplining of Austria
02/07/00: Free to Speak, Free to Give
02/02/00: Conservatives in a Changing Market
01/31/00: America's true unity day
01/27/00: For the Voter Who Can't Be Bothered
01/25/00: The FBI and the golden age of child pornography
01/20/00: Scruples and Science
01/18/00: Bradley: Better for What Ails Us
01/13/00: O'Brian Rules the Waves
01/10/00: Patron of the boom
01/06/00: In Cactus Jack's Footsteps
01/03/00: The long year
12/31/99: A Stark Perspective On a Radical Century
12/20/99: Soldiers' Snapshots of the Hell They Created
12/16/99: Star-Crossed Banner
12/13/99: Hubert Humphrey Wannabe
12/09/99: Stupidity in Seattle
12/06/99: Bradley's most important vote
12/03/99: Boys will be boys --- or you can always drug 'em
12/01/99: Confidence in the Gore Camp
11/29/99: Busing's End
11/22/99: When We Enjoyed Politics
11/18/99: Ever the Global Gloomster
11/15/99: The Politics of Sanctimony
11/10/99: Risks of Restraining
11/08/99: Willie Brown Besieged
11/04/99: One-House Town
11/01/99: Crack and Cant
10/28/99: Tax Break for the Yachting Class
10/25/99: Ready for The Big Leagues?
10/21/99: Where honor and responsibility still exist
10/18/99: Is Free Speech Only for the Media?
10/14/99: A Beguiling Amateur
10/11/99: Money in Politics: Where's the Problem?
10/08/99: Soft Thinking On Soft Money

© 2000, Washington Post Writer's Group