I RECENTLY stumbled upon a post on the Facebook account of someone named Mary Rose Quimson that features a picture of Adolf Hitler, the words “Fourth Reich in the Making” in red, and these words: “Oo, I mean, kinikilala natin ang One-China policy, pero kung papaano natin kikilalanin, huwag na nilang pakikialaman (Yes, I mean, we recognize the One-China Policy, but how to do that recognition, it’s none of their business).”
Begin from what the One-China policy is all about.
In 1949, the five-year Chinese civil war ended with the Communist Party of China lording it over the whole of mainland China with its establishment of the People’s Republic of China (PRC).
The Kuomintang/Nationalist government forces retreated to Formosa (now Taiwan). Because of continuous support by the United States, particularly with naval force which the PRC completely lacked at the time, the Kuomintang managed to survive on the island and there maintained its self-rule since then.
In 1971, the United Nations passed Resolution 2758, which recognized the PRC as the only legitimate representative of China to the UN.
The US, manifesting its proven expertise at double standard in approaching issues in the conduct of international relations, recognized the passage of the UN resolution, shifting official diplomatic recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 1979, while simultaneously passing the Taiwan Relations Act to ensure continued unofficial relations and defensive arms sales to Taiwan.
Readers will recall that such a deal worth billions of dollars was what US President Donald Trump was desiring to sweet-talk President Xi Jinping into agreeing when he visited China in May. Xi rejected the deal, warning both of them against falling into the Thucydides Trap.
From utterances in Xi’s recent visit to Washington, it was evident the Taiwan issue continues to be the predominant concern of the two leaders, and Xi was uncompromising in his repetition of what he had warned about a number of times before: that both US and China would lose from confrontation, but both would gain from cooperation. From the look of things, it would appear that Trump is not softening up on Taiwan, particularly on its arms deal from which he expects funds direly needed for his confrontation with Iran in the Middle East.
Big problem is that Xi is not giving an inch either.
The recent visit of Xi to Washington could be a desperation move to avert what is threatening to be a truly big clash. If so, then it is a most admirable humbling act aimed at sparing the world from the ultimate catastrophe.
How Xi appeared pastoring against animosity in favor of brotherliness, and note how Trump clearly was squeamish from a guilt feeling he could not hide, and at any rate, he was actually nursing.
Down to brass tacks, Xi must have found out Trump was into gargantuan shenanigans, and in all humility, he sought to personally implore: “Please don’t dare.”
If the Taiwan issue was what Xi was talking about, then take it from Philippine Defense Secretary Gilberto Teodoro Jr., America is not about ready to backtrack from its position since 1949 — protect Taiwan at all cost.
OK, the United Nations recognized the One-China policy in 1971, but just as soon, the US passed the Taiwan Relations Act, which since then has governed US diplomatic relations with Taiwan.
So, nothing keeps the US from treating the Taiwan issue the way it wants, not the way the United Nations had ruled it in 1971.
And how the US wants the Taiwan issue treated, Teodoro’s recent posts on social media become an unmistakable barometer: Bo way would Taiwan be reunited with China.
But then again, back in his term as Indo-Pacific Command Commander in 2021, Adm. Philip Davidson had already predicted China’s readiness to invade to reunify Taiwan come 2027, the centennial of the People’s Liberation Army (PLA). Thus for the US, the current period is one for insisting on its way of interpreting the One-China policy — necessarily in contravention of the United Nations resolution in 1971.
But isn’t the United Nations power absolute so that none of its members must be allowed to take exemptions from its rules?
On the contrary, none like that has proven true in history.
The territorial annexations in Ukraine by Russia, Israeli settlements in Palestine, the Syrian defiance far back in that country’s civil war.
What appears to maintain a semblance of political power by the UN body to make nations behave is the militarily powerful composition of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: United States, Russia, France, Great Britain and China. They carry the coercive force of making less-equipped nations toe the line.
There is no way the One-China policy can be invalidated by the Security Council simply because China, imbued with veto power like the other four permanent UN Security Council members, can overturn such an action.
While theoretically a resolution may be passed by the UN General Assembly declaring an abrogation of the One-China policy, China’s veto power as a permanent member of the UN Security Council guarantees this will never come about.
Thus, the One-China policy is here to stay.
And the reunification of Taiwan is an inevitability the US will have to live with, like it or not.
The Davidson Window is valid after all. China will have to invade to reunify Taiwan.
And the actions of Secretary Teodoro have been consistent in indicating that the US is just as unwavering in not letting go of Taiwan.
So, as the law of physics must prevail in such circumstances, who will give — China or the US?
On the question, the US has the comeuppance. It is thousands of miles away from its home shores, on a spot it has no business whatsoever to intervene except for imperialistic ends.
And such is the reality Secretary Teodoro has been doggedly upholding by doing a repeat of the US double-talk on the One-China policy: respecting it ostensibly but rejecting it essentially.
It is for this reason that this column labels it as empire-building.
Somewhat reminiscent of what Hitler did, annexing Poland first, and then going on a binge of conquering other territories in Europe, onward to Africa in World War II.
Hitler only stopped when finally rendered unable in his blitzkrieg by the snows of Moscow.
Indications are that the US is being motivated Hitler-like in taking up the cudgels for Taiwan, the end in view being the ultimate conquest of China.
That is a long shot, of course.
Nonetheless that, in history, is how reichs have all been made.
The First Reich was the Holy Roman Empire in (800/962 to 1806); the Second Reich, the Unified German Empire under the Hohenzollern dynasty (1871-1918) and the Third Reich (1933-1945) Nazi Germany under Hitler.
What is happening in the Taiwan conflict may seem far-fetched from the development of the German Reichs, but the elements of military methodology in territorial conquests do not differ. In Taiwan, the US practice justifies the comparison.