A- A A+

Behind Trump's 'Happy Gilmore' moment with Taiwan

2 Comments
Jeremy Clarke |  08 December 2016

 

President-elect Trump's phone call with President Tsai Ing-wen is to diplomacy what Happy Gilmore's slap shot was to the Pro Golf Tour. It defies all convention, is appallingly out of context — and should not even work — but it might just augur a new way of doing things.

Chris Johnston cartoonThat conversation disrupted previous norms, some of which resulted from decades of delicate, often secret, negotiations. Trump's action was supposedly not an accident, although he later petulantly tweeted, 'the President of Taiwan CALLED ME ... ' In the midst of the predictable, confected outrage it is worth considering the event within the context of contemporary US-China relations.

As with all matters Chinese, an historical perspective allows a more nuanced understanding of what went on, and whether or not it really mattered at all.

Taiwan's enduring capacity to pull heartstrings in the US is due largely to the following reason.

The commitment to Taiwan is viscerally linked to the descent of the iron curtain in 1945 and the initiation across the globe, east and west, of cold war hostilities. This mindset saw the new world order as a death struggle between atheism and Christianity, communism and democracy.

On the one hand were figures like Stalin and Mao, and on the other were Churchill and Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen of New York, broadcasting anti-communist talks on television, the then new media.

At the time, China's ruling party (the Guomindang, led by Chiang Kai-shek) was losing to insurgent rebels (the Communist Party of China, led by Mao Zedong). Chiang's best weapon was his wife, Madame Chiang, or more properly, Soong Meiling, the youngest of the influential Soong sisters. (Sun Yatsen married another sister, Soong Chingling.)

Soong had successfully wooed the US media and politicians, appearing on the cover of Time magazine three times by 1943. It helped her, Chiang and the Republic of China that she was a Christian who had graduated from Wellesley College, Massachusetts and spoke fluent English with a southern US accent.

 

"The phone call was not only a courtesy call but also a strong expression of support for what Taiwan is perceived to represent to this type of politician in the US — a democratic nation in the shadow of an atheist bully."

 

To the anti-communist US public, therefore, Chiang Kaishek and his band of Chinese Christian democrats were just like them. US support remained strong for the Republic of China and its exiled power couple, now on nearby Taiwan. Such a worldview was only bolstered by the Korean War years. Everybody lauds a winner, and in the USA folks become even more vociferous in their support for the sympathetic yet vanquished loser.

Even though nations like Great Britain, France, Canada, Italy and a slew of the non-aligned post-colonial nations granted recognition to the People's Republic of China over the 1950s and the 1960s, the USA continued in its support of the exiled Republic of China until the late 1970s. The Taiwan lobby in the US was very connected and worked these relationships resolutely. They still do, through soft-power groups like the Chiang Chingkuo Foundation, Taiwan's equivalent to the PRC-backed Confucius Institutes.

Consequently, there exists much support for Taiwan among the US public that divides global politics into communism bad and atheist, democracy good and blessed. Rightly or wrongly, the People's Republic of China, led as it is by a communist party (so-called), is thus a ready target of enmity for such-minded analysts. Trump has many of these as his advisers, who read with dread books about China's rise and who see with loathing China's products in their malls.

Thus, the phone call between the President-elect and the President of Taiwan (herself a graduate of Cornell Law School) was not only a courtesy call but also a strong expression of support for what Taiwan is perceived to represent to this type of politician in the US — a democratic nation in the shadow of an atheist bully. It did nevertheless break a protocol in place since 1979, when President Carter formally recognised the PRC and thereby the doctrine that there is only one China. (Nixon's 1972 visit started the process, but it took several years to overcome the Taiwan lobby's rearguard action.) Xi Jinping and his advisers would certainly not have seen this coming, and initially viewed it as an unintended gaffe.

And yet, ultimately, does Trump's action matter?

Before Nixon's visit to the PRC, as noted by Margaret MacMillan in Nixon and Mao, he wrote in Foreign Affairs in 1967 'Taking the long view, we simply cannot afford to leave China forever outside the family of nations, there to nurture its fantasies, cherish its hates and threaten its neighbours.' Arguably, as the US now may be turning toward a more 1950s view of engagement, Trump's phone call could force the PRC to make sure that the US is the one 'not isolated, cherishing its own hates and nurturing its own fantasies'.

It might well be that in the 21st century, 'as China goes, so goes the world', but China can't do that with a USA that is not only not going with it but is also playing a game without discernible rules. Trump's call might just have started an entirely new, much broader conversation — and that's without even mentioning the role of Russia in this triangular relationship!

 


Jeremy ClarkeDr Jeremy Clarke is a visiting fellow in the Australian Centre on China in the World at the ANU and Director of Sino-Immersions Pty Ltd.

Original artwork by Chris Johnston

 



Comments

Comments should be short, respectful and on topic. Email is requested for identification purposes only.

Word Count: 0 (please limit to 200)

Submitted comments

The persecution of religious monorities in China deserves our collective contempt. "No one is safe under the Communist Party’s regime but Falun Gong — a spiritual meditation based on the guiding principles of “truth, compassion and tolerance” — practitioners are the main targets. "( Meagan Palin news.com.au 14/ 11/2016) Why are they the main target? Organ harvesting is big business for the PRC Government across 114 Chinese hospitals and human life is cheap. Once incarcerated your life is worthless. PRC are big and bullying. In Vietnam 2 years back we visited an offshore island from Hoi Ann. The Chinese navy had just sunk a Vn gunboat in the South China Sea. PRC believes it all belongs to them. Hence the insidious spread of small military bases throughout the SCS. Their long running invective of the Taiwon Government knows no bounds because it embodies values that distinguish Taiwan from the brutality and contempt for human rights of Communist PRC. Recent images shown on TV display PRC army smashing crosses off churches and officers recording sermons within. Why? PRC are afraid of any rival idealogy. Afraid to lose their tenuous and police state grip on power. Well done Trump. Beware China.

francis Armstrong 12 December 2016

An issue to keep in mind is that the Guomindang were widely hated amidst the Chinese population for some decades, essentially being seen as an endemically corrupt assortment of landlords, Mafia elements (Kai-shek himself had concrete ties to the criminal underworld), hegemonic capitalists and militarised bureaucrats with self-evident ties to foreign powers, the US in particular. As much as it's plausible to critique the modern PRC, the Guomindang's defeat and flight to Taiwan and imposition upon the local population would not have happened had they any real moral or political legitimacy left on the mainland. The subsequent deployment of US naval assets to essentially intimidate the PRC into abandoning all hope of unification has been a sore point for Chinese nationalism ever since. With good reason. Trump's apparent inability to comprehend this speaks volumes as to his character and capabilities as a politician.

Daniel Read 15 December 2016

Similar articles

When we give ourselves permission

12 Comments
Fatima Measham | 08 December 2016

Racist posterIt is hard to overstate the sort of things that become permissible when the dominant political culture appeals to our darker nature. Take the cascade of brutality in the Philippines, or the stream of hateful incidents in the US. In Australia, white supremacist groups staged 'victory rallies' after the US election, and posters appeared last weekend at Melbourne University telling 'dunecoons, shitskins, niggers, chinks' to get out. This permissiveness isn't just about Trump, though he is a catalyst.


Khmer stories illuminate our world's present brutality

3 Comments
Andrew Hamilton | 29 November 2016

Writing for Raksmey by Joan HealyI spent some summers in the border camps around the same time as Healy. This was life-changing: it made me subsequently look at policies from the perspective of those affected by them. But on reading these stories told by from the perspective of the Khmer people I recognised how much of their life I had not noticed. This gap between perception and reality may be pertinent to reflection on how we are to respond to the startling recent shifts in our world and to the brutality that runs through them.


Marcos burial dents Duterte

5 Comments
Fatima Measham | 24 November 2016

Heroes' Cemetery, PhilippinesTechnicalities seldom withstand moral grievance. So it is with Philippine president Rodrigo Duterte's justification for allowing the remains of a reviled dictator to be buried at Libingan ng mga Bayani - the Heroes' Cemetery. Young Filipinos, observing recent political disorder, had begun wondering whether Marcos was really that bad. But the disgusted response of millenials and others to the sneaky burial suggests that the pushback against historical revisionism is paying off.


History comes to strife in Stratford-upon-Avon

3 Comments
Patrick McCabe | 29 November 2016

Stratford-upon-AvonSomeone I read in high school, so probably Shakespeare, once said 'The past is a foreign country, they do things differently there.' Well, whoever it was clearly hadn't been to Stratford-upon-Avon (so maybe not Shakespeare then). Here, you truly can visit the past, without a passport. As one peruses the shops, houses, supermarkets and ATMs, one cannot help but speculate as to the links between Shakespeare's works and what must have been the commonplaces of his everyday life.


Empathy for Russia after Trump's ascent

6 Comments
Justin Glyn | 15 November 2016

xxxxxIf a failure of empathy marks our understanding of internal politics, its effects are magnified, with even worse results, in the international arena. A classic example is Russia. Since the fall of the Soviet Union, the west has failed to take Russian interests seriously. I endorse neither the present Russian government nor its point of view. However, knowing that the other side has a point of view and what it is is vital in avoiding miscalculations. You don't get a second chance with nuclear weapons.