Every time I see Dr. Joe Hung’s photo in the commentary section of the China Post, I can’t help but smile. He looks like a kindly old grandpa, and I’m sure that in person he’s a lovely man. So perhaps it’s his kindly nature that motivates him to write nonsense like this:
China does not have to launch any propaganda campaign to tell the world its rise is peaceful. All historians know China, after its invasion of Korea in the second century before Christ, has never tried to expand by force except the brief period in which it was ruled by the Mongols. The invasion of Korea was ordered by the Emperor Wu Ti of the Han Dynasty before he finally made Confucianism the state cult. Cheng Ho visited Southeast Asia and part of Africa, but none of the territories he visited were colonized, albeit Ming China, at the height of a dynastic cycle and with Lady Luck smiling on it, could have easily expanded its empire.
No one should be afraid of an expansionist jingoist China. Not even Taiwan. There will be no Chinese invasion, so long as Taipei refrains from declaring independence for Taiwan. (emphasis added)
QED. And for the Doctor’s next trick, maybe he can scour the historical records to somehow "prove" that the Red Guards won’t wreck China’s historical treasures or the Khmer Rouge won’t empty out the cities. Heck, if he’s right about the past being 100% predictive of the future, you can throw away your smoke detector or the lock on your door and it won’t make one bit of difference. Better still, SELL them and blow your windfall on something you like – a trip to the movies, or maybe some chocolate. You’ve never had your house burn down or be burglarized before, so what on earth makes you think it’ll happen in the future?
In fact, the China Post has, in the past, made precisely that argument regarding Taiwan’s defense needs. Appease China by not declaring independence and Taiwan won’t NEED any weapons. Then Taiwan can take all the money it saves on useless armaments and spend it all on the political equivalent of chocolate: social programs.
Mmmm. Social programs. Politicians love ’em. Give enough of ’em to the voters, and they’ll forgive you almost anything.
To be fair though, the folks at the China Post has been inconsistent in making this argument, so it looks like not even THEY fully believe it. As for Dr. Hung, well, he kind of contradicts some of his own rhetoric:
Without the luck of a Godsend support from the United States after the Korean War in 1945 (sic), Mao Zedong could have easily "washed Taiwan with blood."
China wanted to wash Taiwan in blood? And you’re telling me it’s peaceful? Hoo boy, you’ve got me convinced!
Now, I don’t have a PhD in Chinese history like Dr. Hung does, and I’ll be the first to admit that he knows far more Chinese history than I EVER will. But it seems to me that in his paragraph-long summary of Chinese history, he’s neglected to mention a few things – events that happened not within the Han or the Sung or the Ming Dynasties, but within the last 60 years. And these things are not particularly supportive of his thesis.
First, there’s the inconvenient matter of the invasion of Tibet. Then, there’s the war with Taiwan. Next, the one with South Korea, America and the UN.
But don’t stop me, ’cause I’m on a roll here. Does Dr. Hung forget China’s border clashes with Russia? With India? With Vietnam?
Forgive me if I’ve missed any. Like I said, I’m no expert.
Somehow, the fact that "peaceful" China has fought virtually every single one of its neighbors within a span of a mere 60 years managed to slip Dr. Hung’s mind. Or, is it that none of these really count, because China was somehow "provoked" into it – each and every time?
How fortunate then, that China wound up with atheistic communism as its political ideology. Who needs the Buddhist mantra, "Om mani padme om," when, "The other guy made me do it," is so much more useful in justifying a gunfight?
(It’s not quite as poetic, I’ll grant you, but maybe it sounds better in the original Mandarin.)
Dr. Hung’s vision is a beautiful one, and I certainly hope he’s right. Like I said earlier, he looks like he’s a perfectly decent man. It’s just that one of the problems with decent men is that they’re sometimes willing to give the benefit of the doubt to those who are decidedly unworthy of it. Since we’re talking history, I’ll close with a little quote from the Melian Dialogues in Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War. It reflects a more sober, more tragic, and I fear, more real view of human nature:
"Of the gods we believe, and of men we know; that by a necessity of their nature, they rule as far as their nature permits."
The translation’s a little rough to navigate. Essentially it means that people are liable to use the power that lies at their disposal. Unfortunately, the aphorism provides no exceptions; not even for "peaceful" countries which expand their military 15% a year while furiously building blue-water navies and maintaining 2.3 million man armies.
UPDATE (Mar 15/06): Recall the China Post‘s arguments that Taiwan doesn’t need arms, and can safely spend the money on social programs instead. Today’s China Post and Taiwan News both had pics of an anti-American weapons sales protest by a couple of dozen outside the American quasi-embassy in Taiwan. This photo’s from the Taiwan News. (Sorry, no link available):
To call them ‘capitulationists’ almost seems too kind.
i-1