1. Introduction
1.2 Broader theoretical background
國
立 政 治 大 學
‧
N a tio na
l C h engchi U ni ve rs it y
2
thoughts, the connection across the Taiwan Strait has been examined, but these examples only reached into the sphere and topics of politics and foreign affairs and connections. Economic and military asymmetry has not been studied, at least not thoroughly. It is the lack of this perspective that is to be filled with the proceeding study.
1.2 Broader theoretical background
As noted before, the theoretical background of this current thesis will be the based on asymmetric connections theory. However other concepts and theories have to be listed and summarized, in order to prove and determine that Womack’s thoughts are fitting to fully describe and analyze the connection between Beijing and Taipei.
In one of his articles published, Stephen M. Walt emphasizes the importance of viewing events of the real world through the abstract theories, as these concepts can be guides, helping with understanding the evolving events and assisting in making predictions for future developments. This opinion is also shared by Yu-Shan Wu, who stresses the importance of the guidance that theories can provide. (Walt 1998, Wu 2000)
The connection between China and Taiwan – and additionally the triangular relations of the PRC, the ROC and the US – has also been studied and explained through the viewpoint of the major international relations theories. Neo-realism, which focuses on the distribution and the balance of power and the structure around which the system of the international community is built up, especially the anarchic nature of this system, in which actors can only rely on themselves. According to this theory, Taiwan is somewhat of a problem in the balance of power, as the balance is unstable when there are more than two actors involved in a situation and as the island would need the US’s aid against an attack it receives from the mainland. However this help may not be guaranteed. Another reason behind the ROC’s problematic status is the possibility that it may misinterpret the shifts in the balance of power and so take dangerous actions for the sake of its own protection. This would also work against Taipei’s goals as it may push Washington and Beijing towards a partnership – which fits into the neo-realist thought as a cooperation of great powers to jointly manage the world order. (Acharya 1999)
‧
reason why not this concept was chosen. The aim was to use a theory where Taiwan is seen as an actor of equal importance and with which its connection with the mainland can be studied.The liberalist school of thought mostly focuses on the concepts interdependence – particularly economic one - and democratic peace, which both prevent military conflicts to evolve between actors. The prior – which can also be labeled as complex interdependence - is of high importance when looking at Cross-Strait relations, as the economic interdependence that connects the PRC and the ROC raises the costs of a possible conflict, may damage the existing system and connections to third parties and so contributes to the peaceful nature of the relation. It would blemish economic relations of China, which are important to Beijing and would possibly push other states to take Taiwan’s side, especially the ones that are located in the region and have tightening trade connections with the ROC. The interdependence – besides its role of safeguarding peace – draws Taiwan closer to the mainland, which is viewed as a negative tendency by many. (Acharya 1999, Chiang 20141)
The democratic peace theory states that democratic countries tend not to fight wars against each other. In the case of Cross-Strait relations – as Taiwan is democratic, but China cannot be listed as one – it is other democratic countries support given to the ROC in a possible conflict that can be discussed. As mentioned above, this support cannot be guaranteed because as much as the PRC relies economically on countries, so do they depend on China as well and not just in the area of economy. As economic interdependence, the democratic peace theory also has a negative effect on the relations. With its democratic identity, the government and citizens of Taiwan feel that the gap between the democratic ROC and the non-democratic PRC are more unlike than they were in the past and so unification is rejected even more. According to this point of view, unification could be easier achieved if the mainland had the same form of government. Democracy on Taiwan prevents it to take sudden and harsh steps against China, but it also makes the connection unstable as the policies and actions of the different parties that govern may vary. (Acharya 1999)
1: Information gathered during the interview with Chia-Hsiung Chiang was included in this paragraph.
‧
The liberalist theory, both the interdependence and the democratic peace theory, have often been used to study the connection between Taipei and Beijing. It is for this reason that another, less known and used theoretical background for this current thesis.
One aspect of the liberalist theory that has not been described above – liberal institutionalism – has not been given much attention when it comes to connection between the PRC and the ROC. The reason is quite simple: Taiwan is not a member of a great number of such organizations. This being the case, it cannot interact with China in these platforms, so studying the connection from this point of view would be to no use.
The third major international relations theory, constructivism, sees connections between actors as arrangements or social constructions – the arrangement between China, Taiwan and the US – and explains connections between actors according to their – at times conflicting – identities. It is because of their unlike identities – which they are unwilling to change – that Taiwan and China have their differences. This theory stresses the importance of interactions, where the two sides can express their point of views, so the other party may be aware of them, act and maybe change according to them. It also emphasizes the importance of agents in the relationship who act on behalf of the involved parties and perform “speech acts”. The argument that tries to disprove this concept states that there is communication and interaction across the Taiwan Strait, but that has not brought the parties any closer to each other. Other reasons that can be listed as causes for constructivist way not being successful are the ever growing militaries that make the actor fear each other and the fact that equally high leveled meetings never took place between the PRC and the ROC. (Acharya 1999, Zheng 2001)
Studying the individual interactions would be too vast for a thesis like this and the connections have already been described and discussed by other studies.
Besides the main international relations theories, smaller concepts describe and explain the Cross-Strait relations. Nine minor concepts can be listed, which are divided into three groups: focusing on Cross-Strait interaction dimension, domestic and international system dimension. (Wu 2000) Only concepts under the Cross-Strait interaction dimension will be discussed below. The reason being the theory of asymmetry is listed among them and this way it can be compared against other, similar concepts.
‧
Taiwan Strait was placed into this concept, several factors were noticed that make it questionable if the relation between Taipei and Beijing fit into this theory. One of these was the fact that the PRC and the ROC were not separated by foreign forces or events, as was or is the case in several other divided nations’ history, but a domestic event, the civil war between the Kuomintang and the Chinese Communist Party.Beside this, other differences are the lack of recognition and equality, which could be found in other examples. Also the desire to unify is not given on both sides. (Wu 2000)
In integration theory, it is the common culture and economic interests that bring states closer together. The European integration is a perfect example to demonstrate the concepts of this theory. Later on, as in the case of the European integration, and part of the spill over effect, the integration also takes root in the political sector. It is this spill over effect that many fear in the case of Taipei-Beijing connections, as political integration may follow the close economic ties. The integration theory stresses the positive effects that the economic connection between Taiwan and China has and the ones that a possible political integration would have. It also emphasizes that the spill over to the political sphere may never happen or if it does, it would not necessarily form close political ties. However the integration theory does acknowledge that the integration may not always be in the smaller party’s interest. (Wu 2000)
It is important to mention that difference between integration and unification. If unification is to happen, Taiwan would like it to be done through a gradual approach, meaning that the ROC is to integrate first and then be unified with the PRC. Beijing – especially with the “one country, two systems” concept - rather pushes a holistic approach, where integration would follow unification. (Wu 2000)
As the final theory under the Cross-Strait dimension category, Wu discusses the power asymmetry – or simple asymmetry – theory. As the concept will be thoroughly described below, only thoughts additional to that will be discussed here. Wu studies the concepts of bandwagoning and balancing, which describe the attitude of a smaller state to a larger one, just as the theory of asymmetry, in a situation where the weaker state cannot be the greater’s equal. The concept of power asymmetry and the
‧
realist theory. (Chiang 20142, Wu 2000)Under bandwagoning, the steps and actions taken by the weaker party are correlated to the wishes and needs of the greater state and are mostly in the stronger state’s interest. The sovereignty of the smaller state is not absolute, as the greater party is able to influence the weaker’s decisions. However this form of relations guarantees a peaceful connection. The stronger state will not start a conflict with a state that acts according to its interest. Bandwagoning has a long past in the history of international relations. For this reason, scholars tend to think that taking a bandwagoning route is more likely behavior than balancing – and additionally, as the weaker an actor is, it is more likely to bandwagon than to balance -, not that there are not countless examples for the latter one as well. Bandwagoning, if the ally or allies may be unquestionably trusted, may eventually turn into the smaller state free-riding, as it will rely on its allies to come its aid if necessary. (Walt 1987, Wu 2000)
Balancing refers to the willingness of the weaker state to defy the grater state by strengthening its army or by allying with a third state, which can and will take the smaller’s side if necessary. According to Walt, the main principle of balancing is the latter one, as most alliances are formed to balance the power of a great state. The reasons for balancing against a stronger power lie in the state’s determination to protect themselves from a greater, even if they have to take the risk of trusting other actors. For this reason, states tend to ally with other parties who are not strong enough or not likely to dominate them. It can be concluded that the hostility between the states is high and additionally, the weaker party has to rely on an ally. Nevertheless, the sovereignty of the smaller is assured and its decision making is not subordinated to the greater state’s wishes. However the decision to take part in a balancing process may also hurt the weaker’s aims, as it may be influenced by other, somewhat stronger allies.
(Walt 1987, Wu 2000)
Walt notes that besides power, the amount of the threat and the particular principles that cause a state to fear another one are factors that play important roles when a state is to decide if it was to balance or bandwagon. Different circumstances, especially peace or wartime, will also influence the steps that parties will take. Balancing is likely to make the international system more peaceful, as stronger states will probably
2: Information gathered during the interview with Chia-Hsiung Chiang was included in this paragraph.
‧
bandwagoning, greater actors will try to seem more powerful and threatening. For this reason, the level of hostility and the willingness to use force will also be higher. States also have to be careful when choosing to follow either, above listed path. Making the wrong choice may severely damage the actor and will also have a major effect on the international system. The number of available allies may also influence this decision.It is no use balancing if there are simply no available allies. Besides, making allies also depends on the state’s system of connections and ability to make new connections and strengthen existing ones. (Walt 1987)
Three conclusions to the Cross-Strait relations can be drawn from the description above. As the connection can be labeled as either a balancing or a bandwagoning one, it is clear that equal relations between Taipei and Beijing are ruled out. The ROC is building a balancing connection, as the difference between the two parties’ economic position is great. The US’s support, which it gives to Taiwan, is another reason that the Taipei-Beijing relations are a balancing one. (Wu 2000, Yuan 20143)
Other scholars are in different point of view when the question of whether Taiwan is balancing or bandwagoning is asked. They state that Taiwan is bandwagoning with both China and the US and is not looking to balance with the prior one. (Chiang 20144) Yet other state that the connection can be labeled as both balancing and bandwagoning, with more emphasis on the previous one. (Yuan 20145) The difference between the opinions can be caused by several factors, including different point of views. Yet another explanation may be the different time and situation of Taiwan at the time this question was discussed. As mentioned above, international factors and the difference of times can also influence the decision of an actor to balance or to bandwagon. These also have an effect on the Taiwanese government’s decisions, steps and actions.