The Führerprinzip of International Relations: Transcript of Speaker Nancy Pelosi Opening Remarks at Bilateral Meeting with Vice President of the Legislative Yuan of Taiwan and the Chinese Foreign Ministry Statement in Response

 

Pix Credit HERE

 Human Beings are really quite simple creatures. They tend to understand things only in relation to themselves.  Unless it is possible to personalize events, the events themselves remain incomprehensible, Perhaps that s why people still tend to envision the divine in their own image.

Perhaps that is why the constant need for the personification of great institutional or cultural movements remains appealing.  Perhaps as well, the persistence in the hope-belief that there is a core of individuals who personify the great abstract forces tat drive  human events.  The Führerprinzip of history--unless one can incarnate large historical forces into a person whose person hood is subsumed within a larger institutional body, then those large forces either do not exist or exist in a state of irrational chaos.

It is in this context that the leaders of large institution can be best understood as avatars of the more abstracted objects that they incarnate rather than represent. The difference is important--representation keeps the representative and the represented separate, the connection is exogenous; incarnation fuses the two so that the body of the person and that of the represented become inseparable--the abstracted institution becomes identified with the body  of those who bear its authority. The consequences can at times be dramatic--especially where collectives freely embrace this reconstitution of the body of a leader as the essence of the institution. 

The visit by the US Speaker of the House of Representatives to Taiwan presents one such important example of the type. For reasons that remain obscure, the ruling classes of China and the United States have chosen to invest the visit of Mrs. Pelosi with the significance of a medieval or feudal epic.  She--and her counterpart leadership core in China--now personify both nations, their peoples, and their respective wills, responsibilities, ideologies, and duties.  Their actions become the theater on the stages of which political tragedy may be played out.

That, in any case, is the way that the apparatus of both states have chosen to interpret Mrs. Pelosi's visit: a challenge, an incarnation of political will, an opportunity, and an expression of the quickly changing relative power of two empires played out against some unfinished  business left over from the Chinese Civil War and the quite changeable status of sovereign authority in Taiwan.  That, certainly, is how the Chinese vanguard has chosen to play this--as an intensification of what had been an irritant a generation ago, now willed into a moment of existential challenge. In some sense the same applies to the calculus of the US vanguard--though the calculus is more complicated because of the factionalized and functionally differentiated diffusion of power in that system within a broad and loosely connected governing collective. 

And so, what might have been treated as a matter-of-fact visit that underlines continued tension in the relationship between the US and China, within a key territory in which the widening gap between Marxist Leninist and liberal democratic  perspectives on sovereignty, international law, and self determination are refined, has become a contest over the exercise of power to impose one or the other position. Hong Kong in 2019-2020 might be now better understood as a dress rehearsal for what is happening in Taiwan today. And the victory of China in Hing Kong has provided their vanguard with the sense that something like that can be made to apply to Taiwan as well.  The international community which lost heavily in Hong Kong sees Taiwan in very different terms--as the territory in which it is possible to develop a more sophisticated implementation of international sovereign operation of territories  the ultimate political sovereignty of which is conceded. For the liberal democratic camp, Taiwan can remain formally a part of China, but that doesn't even begin to answer the question about the exercise of operational authority.  Formal territorial sovereignty can be detached from authority to govern or interfere. That follows where one accepts the principle that national sovereignty and governmental control are not identical. This position failed in the context of Hong Kong (see my discussion here, and here) but the idea survives.  And Taiwan might well prove to be a better context in which it can be successfully implemented.  

In their own crude ways, the avatars for the American and Chinese positions, self-consciously or not, in the drama of Mrs. Pelosi's visit to Taiwan, have brought this conversation back to center stage. Middling bureaucrats, academics, and press organs prefer to stoke its more lurid elements: will this bring the US and China closer to war? Will China invade Taiwan? How will this affect relations between the two states? In what ways will China revenge itself for its own self generated loss of ace? and the like. All very interesting, but beside the point.  Here one encounters the The Führerprinzip of international relations better considered through three different lenses--detachment, self-reflexive alliance and refinement of ideological difference as the boundaries of empire.

1. Detachment. One would have to be substantially clueless not to consider the core implications of this little blow up. It follows a long term trend that merely accelerated after 2013-2016 and the broadened during the pandemic.  It isn't that these empires are isolating--rather they are no longer looking to converge. That now shows up in a number of different ways--trade wars and economic disagreement as a cover for reshaping supply chains and building dual circulation economies; networks of support with territorial annexation at the peripheries of empire (the Russo-Ukrainian war an important marker); and the sharpening if ideological difference then manifested in all aspects of social, political, and cultural life.   An important element of this the contest over peripheral territories that are claimed by distinctive ideologies of sovereignty. That is Taiwan. For China the Hong Kong solution is the only one on the table; for the international community functionally differentiated sovereignty is the only way to reconcile the territorial claims of China and the ideological claims of the global systems of law-norms.

Pix credit here

2. Self-Reflexive Alliance. It follows that one must read Taiwan, and this visit, in the shadow of the larger context of the Russo-Ukrainian War. In one sense it serves as an interesting disruptive projection of countermove designed to destabilize the Asian front of that war. In another, it helps set the stage for a potential "bargain" with the Russians to avoid formal partition but deliver effective control to Russia under an internationally supervised mandate. Or it is just the reconstitution of the East Asian Co-Prosperity Sphere in its liberal democratic model and a means of raising the risk-price of Chinese actions to fulfill territorial ambitions in Taiwan and within the 9-Dash line. Mrs. Pelosi's visit, then, may serve as an interesting move on the Asian front of the Russo-Ukrainian War. It underlines a counter thrust to the years of efforts by the Chinese to reduce or eliminate Taiwan's presence on the international stage by reducing the number of states that recognize Taiwan and by ensuring that it is permitted only a peripheral presence in international organizations. It and the Chinese response may be as important for its internal politics as for the drama of its international relations effects. The visit merely symbolizes what has already been occurring on the American side with legislation that is meant to detach American supply chains and markets from product or investment sources in ideologically sensitive areas in China, even as China effectively attempts something similar through its control of its internal markets and its borders as against disfavored states, their goods, and individuals.

3. Refinement of ideological difference. The borders of pre-globalization empire was territory; post global empire marks its borders by ideology. That is what is on offer--the Chinese "prosperity and stability model against the liberal democratic rights model of the US. Both Mrs. Pelosi's remarks and the response of the Chinese Foreign Ministry are redolent with the aromas of these ideological divisions.  As Mrs. Pelosi concluded in her remarks: "But our visit was about human rights, was about unfair trade practices, and it was about security issues of technology, dangerous technologies being transferred to rogue countries to countries of concern.  So our – over the years, it's always been about security, economy and governance." To which the Chinese Foreign Ministry must respond: "The United States, for its part, has been attempting to use Taiwan to contain China. It constantly distorts, obscures and hollows out the one-China principle, steps up its official exchanges with Taiwan, and emboldens "Taiwan independence" separatist activities. These moves, like playing with fire, are extremely dangerous. Those who play with fire will perish by it." A position for which reunification along traditional lines is the only solution. 

Pix Credit here

 It is, of course, too late for compromise. It is also far too late to  hope for the return to an era of convergence.  It is as well long past when one could pretend that globalization has not been transforming into the mechanism for the construction of new empires of mutual dependence and solidarity. What remains to be sorted are the peripheries--and the means by which the core of empire will be tempted to use its dependencies to weaken its rivals (the Russian situation) or to institutionalize a more rational system for inter-imperial relations suitable to the times. Of course, Chinese military drills might also embolden the Quad to more energetically navigate within the 9 Dash Line area and to more aggressively patrol territories held by Japan and claimed by China.

The Chinese talk about playing with fire (玩火必自焚 (When you play with fire you will get burned). They are right. But fire has no ideology and it does not favor either party.  The US may be playing with fire in Taiwan, but China lit that conflagration with its adventurism (arguably in a tenuous relation with its own basic political line) in its role in the Russo-Ukrainian war. What this is not about is either Mrs. Pelosi and her team of visitors or the Chinese core of leadership--the avatars through which these actions are manifested. Indeed, whether to not China invades Taiwan will not change but perhaps accelerate and sharpen the three trends identified here. It is not clear that the advantage, at the moment, is worth the cost especially as measured in the lives of those who will serve as payment for the decisions of those who face no similar danger.

 Decide for yourselves. The Transcript of Speaker Nancy Pelosi Opening Remarks at Bilateral Meeting with Vice President of the Legislative Yuan of Taiwan Tsai Chi-chang and the Statement by China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Pelosi's visit to Taiwan follow.

 

Transcript of Pelosi Opening Remarks at Bilateral Meeting with Vice President of the Legislative Yuan of Taiwan Tsai Chi-chang

August 2, 2022

Press Release

Taipei, Taiwan – Speaker Nancy Pelosi and the Congressional delegation joined Vice President of the Legislative Yuan of Taiwan Tsai Chi-chang and members of the Legislative Yuan for a bilateral meeting.  Below are the Speaker’s opening remarks:
 
Speaker Pelosi.  Thank you very much, Vice President Tsai, for your very warm words of welcome, for your message from the President – who I'm sorry that he has COVID.  Please send him our best regards.  We will be talking with him virtually later.  But thank you for initiating this meeting.  And thank you for your warm, warm welcome. 

It's an honor to join you, Mr. Vice President, as well as your distinguished Members of your Leadership here.  Thank you so much for your presence and your kind welcome.  I accept all the kind words that you said about me on behalf of the Congress of the United States, because all of that was done in a very strong, bipartisan way in support of Taiwan.  When you say that I'm a good friend of Taiwan, I take that as a great compliment – but I receive it on behalf of my colleagues.  You acknowledged some, you mentioned them at the beginning, but I'm very proud of the distinguished party that has come with us.  

On our visits, on Congressional delegations, we have three purposes.  One is security: security for our people, global security.  Two is economics: to spread as much prosperity as possible.  And three is governance.

Mr. Vice President, so many of the legislation and other initiatives that you mentioned were possible because of my Members of this delegation.  The Chairman of the Foreign Relations – Foreign Affairs Committee in the House, Gregory Meeks, has been an ardent leader in terms of these human rights initiatives across the world, but in particular, the ones that you mentioned.  So again, we – our purpose, or the three purposes I said – but in doing so, we want to increase interparliamentary cooperation and dialogue.  

And we do so at a time when our President has put forth an Asian Pacific initiative, which we support.  And we want to be specific in terms of how we work with Taiwan in that regard. 

And acknowledging Chairman Meeks’ leadership in regard to so many of the initiatives you mentioned.  I'm sure we'll have some discussion about that, and you'll hear directly from him.  

We come in friendship to Taiwan.  We come in peace for the region, and our Vice Chair – our Chair of the Veterans Affairs Committee, Mr. Takano, representing our veterans, understanding the value of peace and the avoidance of conflict.  I'm sure that he will speak to us about that, but I want to salute him for his protection of our veterans – not just our veterans, but the veterans of all countries engaged in war.  

We talked about the economy.  Thank you for bringing up the CHIPS bill.  All of these Members were instrumental in passing that important legislation, which we think offers great – greater opportunity for U.S.-Taiwan economic cooperation.  Here with us in that regard is the Vice Chair of the Ways and Means Committee – was very instrumental in the passage of that.  And she can share some thoughts about – that perhaps she was with Microsoft, she is private-sector-oriented and visited Taiwan on many occasions, which I'm sure she'll share with us.  Congresswoman Suzan DelBene, Vice Chair of the Ways and Means Committee. 

Where security and economy come together: our distinguished Member from Illinois, Mr. Krishnamoorthi, is a Member of the Intelligence Committee.  And he saw the connection between CHIPS and national security, as well as other aspects of our cooperation, security-wise.  We’ll hear from Mr. Krishnamoorthi.  Thank you, Mr. Krishnamoorthi. 

In terms of all of the connection of this, whether it's security or foreign affairs and the rest and economy, Mr. – Congressman Andy Kim of New Jersey is a Member of the Armed Services Committee, the Foreign Affairs Committee and other committees of jurisdiction in this regard.  He also have is a former member of the State Department.  He's a diplomat, and so he's teaching us to speak more diplomatically. 

In terms of – as you see, our delegation has what we call ‘heft.’  They, they have a view of economy and security and governance.  They have knowledge of the issues, they think in a strategic way about how to work together.  They came here – we all did – to listen, to learn from you as to how we can go forward together. 

And in terms of governance: we commend Taiwan for being one of the freest societies in the world, for your success in addressing the COVID issue, which is a health issue, a security issue an economic issue and a governance issue.  We congratulate you for that.  And as we continue to work together, we want you to know how proud we are of Sandra [Oudkirk] – she told me just to address her as Sandra, our Director.  She has our confidence, and we're very proud of her leadership. 

So now we look forward to our conversation about how we can work together, learning from you and sharing some thoughts ourselves on how to protect the planet from the climate crisis.  How to accelerate and learn from you – how you address the COVID crisis, how we advance respect for all of the people in our countries as we go forward.  And again, we come in friendship.  We thank you for your leadership.  We want the world to recognize that. 

And with that, again, I thank you, Vice President Tsai, for your hospitality, for your kind words.  I just go back to Tiananmen Square for a moment.  That was bipartisan.  It was over 30 years ago.  It was bipartisan when we were on Tiananmen Square, and we were there specifically making the statement on human rights.  But our visit was about human rights, was about unfair trade practices, and it was about security issues of technology, dangerous technologies being transferred to rogue countries to countries of concern.  So our – over the years, it's always been about security, economy and governance.

So we look forward to our conversation, and I think we're right on time.

__________

Statement by China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Pelosi's visit to Taiwan

Xinhua

Published: 22 hours ago

BEIJING, Aug. 2 (Xinhua) -- China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs on Tuesday issued a statement on Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi's visit to China's Taiwan region. Following is the full text of the statement:

On 2 August, in disregard of China's strong opposition and serious representations, Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives Nancy Pelosi visited China's Taiwan region. This is a serious violation of the one-China principle and the provisions of the three China-U.S. joint communiqués. It has a severe impact on the political foundation of China-U.S. relations, and seriously infringes upon China's sovereignty and territorial integrity. It gravely undermines peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait, and sends a seriously wrong signal to the separatist forces for "Taiwan independence". China firmly opposes and sternly condemns this, and has made serious démarche and strong protest to the United States.

There is but one China in the world, Taiwan is an inalienable part of China's territory, and the Government of the People's Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole of China. This has been clearly recognized by United Nations General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. Since the founding of the People's Republic of China in 1949, 181 countries have established diplomatic relations with China on the basis of the one-China principle. The one-China principle is a universal consensus of the international community and a basic norm in international relations.

In 1979, the United States made a clear commitment in the China-U.S. Joint Communiqué on the Establishment of Diplomatic Relations -- "The United States of America recognizes the Government of the People's Republic of China as the sole legal Government of China. Within this context, the people of the United States will maintain cultural, commercial, and other unofficial relations with the people of Taiwan." Congress, as a part of the U.S. Government, is inherently obliged to strictly observe the one-China policy of the U.S. Government and refrain from having any official exchanges with China's Taiwan region. China is all along opposed to the visit to Taiwan by U.S. congressional members, and the U.S. executive branch has the responsibility to stop such visit. Since Speaker Pelosi is the incumbent leader of the U.S. Congress, her visit to and activities in Taiwan, in whatever form and for whatever reason, is a major political provocation to upgrade U.S. official exchanges with Taiwan. China absolutely does not accept this, and the Chinese people absolutely reject this.

The Taiwan question is the most important and most sensitive issue at the very heart of China-U.S. relations. The Taiwan Strait is facing a new round of tensions and severe challenges, and the fundamental cause is the repeated moves by the Taiwan authorities and the United States to change the status quo. The Taiwan authorities have kept seeking U.S. support for their independence agenda. They refuse to recognize the 1992 Consensus, go all out to push forward "de-sinicization", and promote "incremental independence". The United States, for its part, has been attempting to use Taiwan to contain China. It constantly distorts, obscures and hollows out the one-China principle, steps up its official exchanges with Taiwan, and emboldens "Taiwan independence" separatist activities. These moves, like playing with fire, are extremely dangerous. Those who play with fire will perish by it.

The position of the Chinese Government and people on the Taiwan question has been consistent. It is the firm commitment of the more than 1.4 billion Chinese people to resolutely safeguard state sovereignty and territorial integrity. It is the common aspiration and sacred responsibility of all Chinese sons and daughters to realize the complete reunification of the motherland. The will of the people is not to be defied, and the trend of the times cannot be reversed. No country, no forces and no individual should ever misestimate the firm resolve, strong will and great capability of the Chinese Government and people to defend state sovereignty and territorial integrity and to achieve national reunification and rejuvenation. China will definitely take all necessary measures to resolutely safeguard its sovereignty and territorial integrity in response to the U.S. Speaker's visit. All the consequences arising therefrom must be borne by the U.S. side and the "Taiwan independence" separatist forces.

China and the United States are two major countries. The right way for them to deal with each other lies only in mutual respect, peaceful coexistence, no-confrontation and win-win cooperation. The Taiwan question is purely an internal affair of China, and no other country is entitled to act as a judge on the Taiwan question. China strongly urges the United States to stop playing the "Taiwan card" and using Taiwan to contain China. It should stop meddling on Taiwan and interfering in China's internal affairs. It should stop supporting and conniving at "Taiwan independence" separatist forces in any form. It should stop its acts of saying one thing but doing the opposite on the Taiwan question. It should stop distorting, obscuring and hollowing out the one-China principle. It must take credible actions to observe strictly the one-China principle and the provisions of the three China-U.S. joint communiqués, deliver on the "five noes" commitment made by the U.S. leadership (i.e. not seek a "new Cold War"; not seek to change China's system; the revitalization of its alliances is not against China; not support "Taiwan independence"; not look for conflict with China), and not go further down the wrong and dangerous path.