By Andrew Wells
I drove by a group of protesters on my way to work Monday morning who held signs saying, “Wage Diplomacy Not War.” This struck me as exceptionally odd because, after observing Russia’s tactics in Georgia in 2008, Ukraine has gone out of its way to avoid military escalation, despite Russian aggression and the annexation of its territory since 2014. For the last several months, the Ukrainian Government, the Biden Administration, our NATO allies, and the EU have done nothing by negotiate with Putin and yet it has not stopped him from invading Ukraine. If anything, recent events have proven that de-escalation is impossible when your adversary is bent on military conflict. That’s not to say that America should deploy forces to defend Ukraine, but simply that some conflicts cannot be resolved with words alone.
This lesson is ominous when considering other areas of political and potentially military conflict around the world.
At the same time the Biden Administration and other Western leaders have been negotiating with Russia over Ukraine, they have also been feverishly working to negotiate a new nuclear agreement with Iran. If these negotiations fail or Iran pursues nuclear armament in violation of a treaty, there is little doubt that Israel will preemptively attack Iran. This could, in turn, initiate a widespread conflict in the Middle East. Given Iran’s persistence in the face of US diplomacy and crushing sanctions imposed over the last decade, it would be naïve to believe this outcome is anything other than an eventuality.
China also asserts that Taiwan is a Chinese territory, despite being a self-governing democracy since the 1940’s. China’s claim is not unlike Russia’s claims about Ukraine. While many have astutely asserted that war in Ukraine does not have to precipitate conflict in Taiwan, the rhetoric surrounding the two nations is strikingly similar. Ukraine is a former Soviet territory, ethnically similar to Russia, with a developing economy and a developing democracy that represents a threat to the Russian political order. Likewise, Taiwan is a former Chinese territory, ethnically similar to China, with a developed economy and a developed democracy that represents a threat to the Chinese Communist political system.
In both cases, Russia and China do not recognize the sovereignty of Ukraine and Taiwan, they have unequivocally expressed their desires to reestablish political control over the two countries, and suggest that the westernization of Ukraine and Taiwan, respectively, pose existential threats to their own security. When considering the Chinese invasion of Tibet and recent take over of Hong Kong, we have no choice but to believe that diplomacy on this front will eventually fail.
China’s playbook is not difficult to decipher.
While in Anchorage last March, the Chinese foreign affairs chief, Yang Jiechi, lectured U.S. officials about its moral short comings. He stated, “We hope the United States will do better on human rights,” even as China actively limits free speech, commits genocide, and threatens its neighbors’ territorial water rights. Jiechi then went on to advocate for “Chinese-style democracy”, insisting that “The United States itself does not represent international public opinion, and neither does the Western world.”
In a recent joint statement Vladimir Putin and Chinese President, Xi Jinping, asserted:
“Russia and China [are] world powers with rich cultural and historical heritage [and] long-standing traditions of democracy, which rely on thousand-years of experience of development, broad popular support and consideration of the needs and interests of citizens… Certain States’ attempts to impose their own ”democratic standards“ on other countries, to monopolize the right to assess the level of compliance with democratic criteria, to draw dividing lines based on the grounds of ideology, including by establishing exclusive blocs and alliances of convenience, prove to be nothing but flouting of democracy and go against the spirit and true values of democracy. Such attempts at hegemony pose serious threats to global and regional peace and stability and undermine the stability of the world order.”
Stated another way, “Democracy is in the eye of the beholder, to suggest that authoritarianism is not democracy is a threat to Russian and Chinese national security, and to form defensive alliances in opposition to authoritarianism invites conflict.” While laughable, today’s America and the Western world as a whole have no response to such an insult.
In the coming years, it is not hard to imagine the Chinese government will assert that Western escalation led to the conflict in Ukraine. If Iran succeeds in developing nuclear weapons and faces an assault from countries aligned with America, China can easily point to Iraq and state that the West has a history of aggression under the false banner of nuclear non-proliferation; and, they will likely point to the Quad and a buildup of forces in Taiwan to suggest that their national security is threatened by decidedly defensive measures.
Just like Russia demanded NATO adopt language stating that it would never admit Ukraine, China may demand that the US officially recognize Taiwan as a Chinese province and demilitarize the nation. These are demands to which America and our allies can never agree and would violate established US law, yet China may use them as a pretext for military action.
While many might suggest that the average Chinese citizen’s affinity for America would make such a conflict politically challenging, it should be recognized that Russia successfully galvanizes its people by manufacturing foreign attacks. Should China employ similar tactics in the wake of a Taiwanese defensive armament, public sentiment may quickly change.
It is also worth noting that China, Russia, and Iran are increasingly developing diplomatic ties, even holding trilateral military exercises. While the countries have in no way created an alliance, there’s no denying a consolidation of modern opposition to Western democracies. In light of this, it behooves us to take these countries at their word.
Diplomacy did not save Tibet, it did not save Hong Kong, it has not saved Ukraine, it likely will not stop Iran from developing nuclear weapons, and it is not likely to save Taiwan. Rather than committing themselves to endless diplomacy, I encourage those waving signs at the bridge to instead consider the appropriate time and place for military action.
• Andrew Wells resides in Juneau. Columns, My Turns and Letters to the Editor represent the view of the author, not the view of the Juneau Empire. Have something to say? Here’s how to submit a My Turn or letter.
