By Kim Sang-woo
 |
Aerial incursions across the median line have continued on a daily basis, ushering in a new and increasingly volatile status in the strait and U.S.-China relations.
The important question is why China responded to the trip this way. It was an overreaction of choice. The scale and the complexity of the response indicates that it had been planned in advance.
China's internal political and economic situation can provide some explanation. President Xi Jinping's priority is to be appointed as leader of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) for an unprecedented third term. But the country's economic performance, a key sign of the legitimacy of Chinese leaders, is no longer viable, as growth slows, unemployment rises and financial bubbles burst.
It seems Xi is turning to nationalism as a substitute. When it comes to generating popular support in China, nothing compares to asserting the mainland's sovereignty over Taiwan.
The danger is obvious. With China indicating that its military activities close to Taiwan are the "new normal," there is a great risk of an accident that could spiral out of control.
Even more dangerous is that China will determine that "peaceful reunification" option is fading ―although this was because China alienated many Taiwanese by violating the "one country, two systems" model in Hong Kong.
Regardless, China may decide that it must act militarily against Taiwan to bring an end to its democracy and to head off any move toward independence.
To prevent this, the U.S. must strengthen Taiwan's ability to resist China's use of force, increase U.S. and Japanese military presence and coordination and promise to come to Taiwan's defense if necessary.
In addition, economic relations with China need to be re-addressed. Countries in Asia, as well as in Europe, and the U.S., have become so dependent on trading with China that in a crisis, sanctions might not be a viable option.
Moreover, China might be in a position to use economic leverage to influence the actions of others. We must reduce our trade dependence on China.
The U.S. also needs a coherent and sensible Taiwan policy. There is no place for unilateral action, be it aggression by the mainland or assertions of independence by Taiwan. Whatever the final outcome, it's important that it will be done peacefully and with the consent of the Taiwanese people.
Regional responses to Pelosi's visit have varied, leading to concerns that tensions around Taiwan could contribute to divisions in the wider region, upending regional stability and impeding maritime commerce.
South Korea was very cautious about the visit. Although Pelosi's support of a democratic Taiwan falls in line with the Yoon administration's foreign policy of focusing on freedom and democracy. However, Seoul worries that the Taiwan Strait issue could directly spill over to the Korean Peninsula.
Yet what made Pelosi's visit controversial both within and outside the country was the confusion involving her meeting with President Yoon Suk-yeol. At first, the U.S. delegation had no scheduled meeting because the visit coincided with Yoon's summer vacation. But after his trip got cancelled Yoon stayed in Seoul. Yet he did not meet the delegation, having a phone call instead, which led to speculation that he avoided the meeting to avoid antagonizing China.
Nevertheless, South Korea's stance on the Taiwan issue is consistent with the U.S. position. At the East Asia Summit and the ASEAN Regional Forum (ARF) in Cambodia, Foreign Minister Park Jin stated that while South Korea supports the "One China" policy, the South is opposed to the growing instability in the Taiwan Strait and any attempts to change the "status quo by force."
In less than a week after China began its military drills around Taiwan, Park held a meeting with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi and reiterated South Korea's stance on the "One China" policy and stressed the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
Since Pelosi's visit, Beijing may now be facing a domino effect as other high-profile politicians aim to visit the island.
Yun Sun, a senior fellow and director of the China program at the Stimson Center, said "I think the current backlash from China, including military threats, will lead to more democracies thinking they have to align together to stand against China."
Patrick Cronin, the Asia-Pacific security chair at Hudson Institute said, "They see the visit as hollowing out the 'One China' policy and accelerating the gradual independence of Taiwan." "What they don't say but may also think is that Xi Jinping and the CCP to control the narrative and policy direction over Taiwan requires demonstrating China's resolve and power in the face of what they believe to be a declining hegemonic power, the United States."
Asked to comment on Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, Graham Allison of Harvard University responded that it was "reckless and irresponsible."
Allison added: "Especially given the reality of a great rivalry between a rapidly rising power and a colossal ruling power, if the best we can manage is diplomacy as usual, we should expect history as usual." "And that would mean a war that would be catastrophic for both the United States and China."
Never allow a crisis to go to waste, as the saying goes. The current crisis over Taiwan should be heeded. The clock is ticking ― can the Gordian knot be cut? That is the question that we need to answer for posterity.
Kim Sang-woo (swkim54@hotmail.com), former lawmaker, is currently chairman of the East Asia Cultural Project. He is also a member of the board of directors at the Kim Dae-jung Peace Foundation.
![[INTERVIEW] Putin uses summit with NK leader to stop Seoul from helping Ukraine: expert](https://img.koreatimes.co.kr/upload/thumbnailV2/a943fc209add47cf8ea82d3a78faf9b3.jpg/dims/resize/178/optimize)
