Caveat Emptor – Australia Should Stay Closer to Its Longstanding US Alliance While it Dallies in China’s Illusory Honeypot

The New York Times today, in an article by Damien Cave, suggests a quandary for Australia, having to choose between its longstanding alliance with the US and increasingly deeper economic ties to Communist China, a slippery slope for most countries beguiled by China’s imaginary endless markets, which are heavily regulated and controlled by the Chinese Communist Party along political trajectories.

There is no real conflict, it is an imaginary drumbeat to create issues because of Trump’s chaotic presidency. All intelligent people know that the US democracy elects a president every four years come hell or high water, and the country continues to function as the world’s only superpower whoever is sitting in the White House.

The notion that there is a difficult decision between survival (e.g. the century old military alliance with the United States, both vibrant democratic countries) and trade with China, a totalitarian behemoth which has traditionally operated politically in foreign affairs through blackmail and propaganda is a false issue. This is not really a choice. The dangers of becoming too dependent on China’s trade only mitigates in favor of not becoming “captive” of a totalitarian nightmare, especially a nation which can be economically suffocated by too many entanglements with China.

Of course, anyone can do business with China, but obviously doing business with China comes with conditions which require diplomatic decisions and concessions (often turning reality on its head, such as the One-China fiction) favoring the hegemonic plans China has more recently become bolder to pursue. The conflict is not whether Australia will continue to ally itself with the United States, a military and political alliance essential to Australia’s safety and high profile in international affairs, but whether Australia should be cautious when doing business with China, the world’s largest and most dangerous propaganda and blackmail machine, and one of the best regimes at floating a honey-trap for overly eager and unsuspecting trade partners, who may become addicted to what China allows to be doled out to further its own hegemony.

While China may be Australia’s largest trading partner, China allows that to be the case so long as Australia adheres to the policies China requires of it (which begs the question of “independence” the detractors from US influence in Australia (such as former PM Paul Keating (a serial sinophile, who sits on the advisory board of China Development Bank and has met with Chinese President Xi Jinping) who said Australia should not “put all its chips” on its relationship with the US.) are fond to argue – is it better to be influenced by the world’s strongest democracy, or by the world’s most horrific totalitarian dictatorship (having murdered as many as 80 million of its own people throughout its history, and currently stifles even the smallest hints of freedom of expression or speech, human rights, or justice, and stomps its heavy boot on the commerce of all around the globe who do not kowtow to its hegemony and fictional “One-China Policy”)?

It doesn’t seem to be such a difficult choice, unless too much emphasis has been made on doing business with the devil, and Australia has become hopelessly entangled with (or addicted to) Communist China beyond its own control. Caveat emptor, let the buyer beware.

Democracy with Chinese Characteristics

There are those in Taiwan who clamor for unification with Communist China, many of whom believe Taiwan is already unified with it, others who go on about the Republic of China, as though it is a breathing living thing and not the deceased remnants of the Guomindang (KMT) never to rule as the “legitimate” China.

Beijing sits on the dock dangling unification and “One Country-Two Systems” in the water as bait, expecting Taiwanese, who already live and breathe freely, as freely as any democratic system in the world, to bite. Only the delusional KMT die-hard will go for this. One need only look at Hong Kong for the truth of what One Country Two Systems really means. In Hong Kong it is almost impossible for a supporter of democracy to prevail in any election (which is ironic, considering it is supposedly a democratic election), and if a maverick manages to get elected, they face imprisonment for any number of the usual charges the Communist Party uses to get rid of annoying upstarts who go on about such things as freedom, human rights, due process, or democracy.

For an explanation of this phenomenon, one must look at the Chinese Communist Party Manual of Commonly Misunderstood Terms to see the definition of One Country Two Systems: “One country only, China, and China decides everything”. For clarification, it is important to also take note of the Manual’s definition of “Democracy”, which is primarily “the right to vote for whomever the Communist Party tells you to vote for, or else.” and secondarily, “No Democracy”.

In Hong Kong, recent events tell us that getting elected as a democrat will result in arrest because the Chinese Communist Party (“CCP”) cannot allow the Hong Kong Legislative Council to be muddied by democracy, or dissent. The only acceptable legislative body in Hong Kong is one that obeys the CCP without dissent.

One Country Two Systems, like the ROC, is a mirage, a delusion floated by the CCP as bait to catch Taiwanese who want to believe they are part of something bigger than Taiwan, without ever realizing Taiwan is enough by itself. Better to be a smaller excellent democracy than a huge totalitarian behemoth chewing up freedom and spitting out oppression. No one should aspire to be China, least of all Taiwanese, who already live in one of Asia’s most vibrant democratic systems.

Project Syndicate’s Naive China View

Yasheng Huang was born in Beijing and writes for Project Syndicate. Throughout many of his articles and books, I find an apologist for China’s rise and its hegemony. It is not unexpected. One of the themes harped on by Project Syndicate is that the “detente” between the US and China regarding Taiwan has been a successful dance avoiding “conflict”.

“Success” is a relative term of course, and a Chinese writer naturally would think that “success” means Taiwan is not an independent country (which it already is). But the ridiculous “One-China Policy”, which basically turns the truth on its head out of the expediency and political correctness of yielding to China’s hegemonic designs while making it clear simply taking Taiwan is unacceptable, is not “success” for the 23 million people of Taiwan, who only yearn to have their de facto independent and free nation recognized. In fact, the entire world, in order to appease China in exchange for Kommunist Kash and opportunities in China, have basically decided Taiwan is a part of China (which it is not), is not a country (which it is), and has no standing in the world, despite the fact that its economy is among the most successful in the world, it has a democratically elected government, offers all of the freedoms (and is officially a “free country” according to Freedom House) China does not offer to its own oppressed billions, has its own currency, military, borders, post office, government, judiciary, law, Constitution, elected President, and flag.

“Success” for Taiwanese would be when the world in one voice tells China to get over it already after almost 70 years. All that Trump did in a visceral moment before he was corrupted by the status quo hawkers was basically tell the Emperor his new clothes are not clothes and he is a naked weakling, and he called Taiwan’s leader a President, which is precisely what she is. Imagine that, the temerity to tell the truth to China’s face.

A new paradigm would involve the truth, and begin a transition in which China no longer can blackmail the world to uphold its utter fraud concerning so many things and its plans to by the slowest degrees change the world into a world order with Chinese characteristics, Xi’s personal dream. No one knows what havoc Trump may cause, but it can’t be worse than the decades of numbing political correctness ignoring the truth so Beijing’s “feelings” aren’t hurt (and that political correctness is something promoted by Project Syndicate, which I find quite odd indeed).

Taiwan is not a sacrificial lamb, it is a wonderful, amazing, free, democratic, vibrant nation of 23 million people, who have no intention of ever being part of the world’s worst tyranny. It is difficult to understand why Mr. Huang, having spent so many years benefiting from the freedoms offered where he hangs his hat, does not see this, or perhaps it is an accommodation, like so many nations are forced to adhere to, in order to continue, another of China’s requirements. Project Syndicate’s pandering to China is appalling, but, sadly, not unexpected.


Strait Talk discusses issues affecting Taiwan, China, Hong Kong, Tibet, the United States specifically, and Asia and other related world issues in general. The content is intended to focus on government, democracy, justice, freedomĀ and a host of other issues in a frank, and at times ironic way. Please bring your sense of humor for a visit.

Rational and reasonable discussion is welcomed. Trolls are not.