Don't arm China, for all our sakes
Diminutive Taiwan's best defence against massive mainland China is its vibrant democracy that gives it its telling sense of community. If there were a final showdown, guns would probably not count. What would matter is Taiwan's ability to mount a popular passive resistance to a mainland occupation, including ending all hi-tech investment in the Shanghai region. This would have a devastating impact, as it is the single most important factor in China's current boom.
But that is no excuse for the moves by France and Germany to push the European Union to end its arms embargo to China. This would send the wrong signal. What we need is a reaffirmation of the status quo.
In his latest book, one of America's leading foreign policy academics, Michael Mandelbaum, describes the Taiwan Strait as 'the single most dangerous place on the planet'. The elements for catastrophe are all there. Taiwan could provoke Beijing by reaching for formal independence. Beijing could act on its conviction (which has little basis in historical fact) that Taiwan belongs to China, and try to invade well before the 2008 Olympics. Or the US could decide to overdo its arms aid, thus provoking a nationalist backlash. But if the status quo is maintained, none of this need happen.
It is best for everyone. Although Taiwan suffers by not having the seat it deserves in the United Nations, in nearly every other way, it acts as an independent state. Beijing is stalled in an old imperial ambition, but gains the goodwill of Taiwanese investors with their cutting-edge technology. The US gets the best from both sides, and is happy with the fudge that keeps them calm. Europe and the rest of the world have the promise of more prosperity by trading with a peaceful China and Taiwan.
So why is the European Union considering intruding on this precariously balanced situation? A decision to start selling Beijing state-of-the-art weaponry would directly unsettle things. It is not that the weapons would improve Beijing's ability to invade Taiwan - it already has that capability. Instead, it would strengthen its hand against the US, should matters ever come to a showdown. It is no wonder that Washington is upset, and Europe cleaved down the middle.
The split is at the top. Javier Solana, the European Union's High Representative for Foreign Policy, wants the embargo lifted. But the Commissioner for External Relations, Chris Patten, does not. The European Parliament has voted overwhelmingly against ending the embargo.
French President Jacques Chirac has said: 'The embargo makes no sense today.' But the French have a long record of selling arms to nations who later decide to turn their guns on the west.
For Germany, however, this is a new departure. Given that the Green Party, with its long record of opposing arms sales, has its man at the helm of the Foreign Ministry, it is incomprehensible for Berlin to support the French. Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer says pitifully: 'Sometimes, there are situations where you have to make bitter decisions.'
Right now, China is threatened by nobody. Sino-US relations have never been so good. Bill Clinton hit on a policy that President George W. Bush has continued - regularly drumming on about human rights issues while strengthening trade, commercial and educational links.
Part of the human rights stance has been to maintain the joint US-EU arms embargo, introduced following the massacre of students in Tiananmen Square in 1989.
If Europe is going to destabilise this carefully crafted policy, together with the equally subtle and related one towards Taiwan, then it should come up with a better idea. It surely cannot. The status quo is the best for everyone, and Europe should not work to undermine it.
Jonathan Power is a London-based journalist
