Beijing will show restraint with Taiwan’s new leader for now
- Despite what most Western pundits think, both sides will test each other’s intentions in a way that may lead to a temporary easing of tensions
As expected, William Lai Ching-te of the Democratic Progressive Party will become the next Taiwan president. But the DPP has lost control of the Legislative Yuan to the opposition. The Taiwanese electorate has shown a preference for balance of power rather than DPP dominance.
Because of Lai’s electoral win, it’s now a virtual consensus among the Western commentariat that Beijing will throw a fit and dial up the aggression. That is exactly what Washington wants – for an excuse to fortify the Taiwan island and the Philippines as it recommits to containing China in its so-called pivot to Asia.
For the Americans, the crises in Ukraine and the Middle East will end sometime; the Asia-Pacific is where the real fight lies. That alone may be reason enough to think that Beijing will do the opposite or at least show some restraint for now to test Lai’s intentions.
By now, mainland China must face up to the political reality that the DPP is an establishment party, and it is not going away. A more nuanced modus operandi, with both carrot and stick, is needed rather than showing aggression as the default response.
Lai’s victory speech is tentatively a hopeful sign. “We must replace encirclement with exchanges, and confrontation with dialogue, in order to achieve peace and co-prosperity, and the only way out is to have peace, equality and a democratic dialogue,” he said.
“This is most in line with the interests of the people of the two sides of the Taiwan Strait, and is the only way for a win-win situation.”
“Win-win” is a favourite phrase of Chinese diplomacy. Given mainland China’s myriad economic problems, Beijing will want to avoid going toe to toe with the US over the island.
There is the claim frequently made by US pundits and politicians that Beijing wants to escalate tensions and even risk a war to distract its domestic population from problems at home. That has been the US’ historical and current experience but it is not that of the Chinese.
Risk-averse and war-avoidant, Beijing is far more likely to worry that tensions overseas will exacerbate troubles at home.
So it all depends on how Lai will talk and act in the coming months. The outgoing DPP president, Tsai Ing-wen, has made the island a virtual partner of Washington in the region and provoking Beijing practically a policy.
If Lai continues down that route, then Beijing will likely respond aggressively. His past statements betray an unmistakably secessionist streak.
But now that he is in power, he may show more pragmatism. As poll after poll has shown, an overwhelming majority of the Taiwanese public prefers the status quo, which is de facto self-rule rather than de jure independence.
There is a clear case of the prisoner’s dilemma in game theory here. Both sides across the Taiwan Strait will benefit if all agree to de-escalate. But mutual distrust means they will end up escalating only to benefit the US, which is the interrogating cop in the game.
Politics, though, is rarely one-off, but is rather made of repeating games. Empirical experiments with human test subjects in a prisoner’s dilemma situation show it’s possible to de-escalate through small reciprocating steps.
If one side takes a “micro-non-aggression” step, the other side should reciprocate in kind, and so on.
Of course, it can go the opposite way, and Washington is betting on exactly that, with full encouragement to the island and provocation against mainland China.
Taiwan election: Biden says US does not support independence
It’s possible for Taipei under Lai to politely decline or at least discourage visits by hawkish US lawmakers and former government officials. Mainland China may in turn fly fewer PLA fighter jets near the island’s airspace.
Of course, if Lai decides to go down the path of Tsai and even doubles down, then Beijing will have no choice but to respond in kind. But it will not be the only one to blame.
It takes two to tango, and three, with the US, to meddle.
