In June, I began the first public discussions of my research on international law as well as my new theory of sovereignty at the Taiwan Foundation for Democracy. Although it would be inappropriate to discuss my work on this blog, it is always good to have 'live' feedback on my work.
I have been truly blessed in that my research has always been innovative, fresh and provocative. Again, growing up in inner-city Detroit has proved useful in that it has taught me to only hold on to conventional thinking to build solid credentials. Once you've built it, be free to trust your instincts and training to develop yourself in not only what you are...but what you can become.
Yes, I am very good at what I do and the scary part is that I'm becoming even better. But the more I learn and grow intellectually and professionally, I’ve learned that it pales in comparison to the importance of spiritual development.
Leaders lack insight and wisdom not due to a lack of knowledge but because they have not developed their spiritual selves. Wouldn’t it be great if we ‘experts’ would remind ourselves from time-to-time that the world does not begin and end with us and that our decisions do affect people? Who then, is to judge us?
Why Taiwan is blowing it!
In America everyone likes the little guy. Perhaps it’s our Judeo-Christian heritage that extols the virtues and courage of David versus Goliath. The American revolution was based on a small, ragtag bunch of colonists taking on a dominant British Empire. The U.S. support for Britain, Israel, Kosovo and other nations in war are based on helping out the 'little guy' who faces overwhelming odds and a superior enemy. Even our sports culture is reflective of this as well in Hollywood films such as the blockbuster movie series Star Wars (again a theme of a few fighting against the mighty) or the classic American film starring Jimmy Stewart in 'Mr. Smith goes to Washington.'
Americans always cheer for the underdog, which is why the New York Yankees have been termed by some as the 'the Evil Empire.' Why? Because the Yankees have more money to spend on quality talent when other teams have to recruit talent through the baseball draft system. You may ask "what does this have to do with Taiwan?" Well, America raced to the Republic of China’s side before, during and after World War II because it was an Asian democratic David [Christian nation] fighting, at various periods throughout its modern history, a Goliath Japanese army, famine, poverty, illiteracy or communism.
China was the little guy, the underdog and America embraced her as her own unequivocally. So the nation now commonly known as Taiwan took advantage of America's embracement and projected the false image of an embracement of western culture, democracy and liberty. In effect, the government of Taiwan as embodied by Chiang Kai-shek used the military, political and monetary generosity of the United States to stockpile personal fortunes and a state machinery to ensure obedience to the [his] government. Now the old leaders of Taiwan and the United States are gone. Gone also is the archaic belief of political alliances based solely on historical religious sentiment.
Taiwan for the past 30 years has now had to form alliances based on shared western values in dealing with the United States and as a beacon of democracy in Far East Asia. In both categories… it has failed miserably. Taiwan is losing ally after alley because it decided to practice dollar diplomacy (e.g., we give a nation money irrespective of its ideology or state practices) at the expense of international norms and behavior. A good example of this would be Taiwan’s whole-hearted and isolated support of apartheid South Africa simply because South Africa recognized Taiwan.
Although this is Taiwan's past history, Taiwan still loses daily support among foreign scholars, students and workers that reside in Taiwan. The Taiwanese government, culture and society are detached from the democratic programs and policies that it promotes abroad and it seems as if it enacts such policies and programs because other nations have similar programs. The ‘keeping up with the nation-state Jones’ attitude shows how rudderless the Taiwanese government is, and how it operates in a vacuum in dealing with other nations and cultures within Taiwan.
It is no wonder that Taiwan loses ally after ally because the students, scholars and workers that reside in Taiwan go back to their home nations and in effect say “Taiwan is not worth the trouble.” As a 'little guy' Taiwan has had golden opportunities to show its foreign guests that Taiwan shares the western values of fairness, democracy and accountability within its social framework. However, many students, scholars and workers who have resided in Taiwan return home becasue of the disparate treatment of the non-Chinese and the hiding behind the bureaucratic shell game [regulations] to avoid accountability or promises made to them. Yes, I was one of those typical Americans who came to Taiwan because of my support for the little guy (Taiwan) and I was determined for her voice to be heard internationally. But it is now also true that I believe that Taiwan has blown it; but now like most Taiwanese even I, at times, don't care. Taiwan has managed to defeat itself without ever having engaged the enemy.
Why would a Black Man live in China?
Often I am asked the question "why would a Black man study in the Chinas?" Well, this is a good question...especially since living in the Chinas is definitely a hardship for a person of color (non-white). Well, there are several reasons but first let me dispense with the notion that I am a Marxist, leftist or that I have a political philosophy that is anti-American.
Nothing could be further that the truth in this regard. It's not that I don't like the United States, I love it for all of its goodness and I want to change all that is wrong with it. I also do not have a secret desire to be Chinese and I am not a lonely soul seeking truth in Asia as so many people here seem to be. And no, I am not here to exploit Chinese women or to date them; toys are to be played with...not people. The fact of the matter is that China provides me with the opportunity to see several things that I find attractive.
First, China is a society which makes no attempt to hide its societal contradictions (e.g., extreme poverty side-by-side with obscene wealth). Normally in the Unites States there is a pseudo layer of economic moderation between the two. The other fact is that, unlike the United States, although the Chinese are more racist than western societies, my education and work experience is valued more. That is, I am judged more on my education which then subjects my race as a secondary factor. In the United States my experience has been that race seems to be the primary factor in judging individuals and merit is secondary.
Lastly, China is a challenge. It is a country attempting to find itself in the world community, it's cultural self-esteem and its continual stability as a nation. As such, I have the rare opportunity to witness this nation at its rebirth or at its death knoll. The Chinese always seem to be surprised how nationalistic I am as an African-American...I guess they have an expectation that I would not love my country because of the social struggles that they have read about; struggles that are often outdated and not relevant to the American society that I live in. The Chinese also seem very surprised that as an African-American, how Chinese and African-American cultures are really not that different at all.
Having said all of this, I must admit that the reason that I continue to come to the Chinas, which includes Taiwan, is because America's future, strength and power is based, somewhat, on accurately understanding and assessing Chinese society. I am good at being a sinologist (China expert) because my experience as an African-American born and raised in the United States is tailor made to understand China. That is, as a person living both in a mainstream and minority culture and being able to both understand and function in situations which routinely requires diplomacy, tact, analysis, and understanding in a multicultural but mainstream culturally dominant environment.
Who could ask for better training while having a front seat to history?China is a good place to live because it has helped me understand that America and its people are much greater than I ever imagined and has helped me realize that Americans are a people that welcomes diversity, initative, and individualism. Yes, its seems that our nation’s best days have yet to be seen. Thank you China!
Elections in the United States
I was recently returning from an afternoon run when I ran into a crowd that I estimate at around 30,000 in support of the DPP candidate Frank Hsieh. As the crowd moved around the famous love river here in Kaohsiung, the loud chants of "Yes We Can" filled the air.
This blog is not meant to endorse Frank Hsieh, Ma Jin Ying-jeou or any other presidential candidate in the United States or Taiwan. But it is interesting to note the impact and interest that the U.S. presidential elections are having around the world. Personally, I find it to be an exciting time in the United States. The two democratic presidential candidates, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, as well as the soon-to-be Republican nominee, John McCain, are all very well qualified and excellent candidates. I note that I have voted for all of them (or their spouse), at one time or another during the past few years.
For the record, I voted for John McCain in the Michigan primary when I was a resident of that state in 2000, I voted for Bill Clinton in the 1992 presidential election and I voted for Barack Obama in the 2008 Washington State primary. Whoever wins the 2008 U.S. presidential elections; to me it is clear that the real winners are the American people and the world. Never have I been so proud of the American public and its wisdom in selecting its potential future leader. I grew up in a time in the U.S. when racial segregation was ruled illegal but was a daily and real part of American society (de facto). Even radio stations were segregated (i.e., white stations would not play black music and vice-versa).
Am I talking about Ancient history? Have you ever heard of Michael Jackson? While Michael Jackson was topping every music billboard chart in the 1980s, MTV refused to play his video because he was black. At that time MTV only played white music videos. After a firestorm of protests, his music videos became the first 'black' videos to play on MTV.I am proud of our nation for creating a new future and on finally becoming a country where 'E Pluribus Unum' is more than just a phrase but a daily way of life. America, JIA YOU!!!
Why China won't rule the world
A rising military power, a robust and strong economy, a crucial player within international affairs in Africa and Far East Asia, a vital trading and investment partner to over 2/3 rds of the world's economy, and one of the largest weapons supplier in the world. These are but some of the reasons that many believe China has positioned itself, in the very near future, as a rising superpower. It also doesn't help that the United States is seen by some as a nation in decline. But the question remains, is China on the verge of ruling the world?
There are several things (and I could easily mention a half dozen) that would prevent Mainland China from dominating the world; I will begin with the question of culture.During the middle 1500's, there was an internal struggle in China's imperial palace on how to interact and deal with the outside barbarian world. That is, should China strengthen and improve itself by contacts with the outside world or should China isolate itself and protect itself from foreign cultural contaminants. China, as we all know, chose the latter...and it was a decision that it still has not yet fully recovered from.
When I use the term 'culture' I am referring to a reference point, a shared history, norms, behavior patters and values. Culture also means the socialization of a people, a programming of the mind so to speak. We all have it to one degree or another. What I find interesting about Chinese culture is that the term 'culture' is also a license to disassociate or excuse one from accountability.One of the things about culture in Chinese society is that it says "you can't tell me I'm wrong although we both know that I am wrong. If you do then I will lose face (diu lian)." This conscious failure to hold oneself accountable for his or her acts does not exactly put Chinese society in the driver's seat for world domination.
Culture prevented the Ming dynasty from making the tough choices it had to make as a leading nation of that period; it appears tht the China of this era has not learned her history well and is repeating the mistake being a culture centric nation at the expense of all else.If the economy is bad, it's because of the Americans. If our environment is devastating our country and killing Chinese people, it's because Americans modernized too (although the government doesn't mention we're talking almost 150 years ago). If people are asking for democratic change, it's because of foreign outside influences that justify us keeping a closed society. China in many ways reminds me of a small child, never admitting her responsibility and blaming it on someone else, or never mature enough as a nation to get beyond it's perpetual adolescence mentality of what happened in its ancient history.
China continually says as a culture, no matter what we do...it's never our fault!Leadership in the world community at the political, economic and military levels require, foremost, accountability. In the simplist terms, accountablity is the assumption and responsibility for one's actions, decisions and policies. The world is looking for leadership but I don't believe that anyone in their right mind can see China and its culture of 'do as I say and not as I do,' as fitting the bill.
Why change the 'One China policy?'
Since the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China respectively declared their independence in 1949, the world has changed dramatically. During this period, the world has seen the end of the Cold War, the rise and fall of Third Worldism, the demise of colonialism, the Soviet Union and a host of other significant events that has greatly affected relations between the United States, the Republic of China and the People’s Republic of China.
The world that we now confront has challenges that were both unforeseen and unthinkable in 1949: the rise of religious fundamentalism as a political force, the threat of terror by non-traditional political actors and the emergence of an unchallenged and singular political and military empire (the United States), to name a few.
The question of the current United State’s ‘One China Policy’ and Taiwan’s rightful place in the international community remains a constant question that will shape the future of relations between the United States, Taiwan and Mainland China. The question of Taiwan and its existence in the world community, in the last thirty years has been made clearer in the minds of many western China scholars, politicians and academics by Mainland China’s opening up of its economy and, to a limited degree, its society to the western world.
The Taiwanese people’s right of self-determination has been brushed aside due to the large shadow of Beijing’s economic and political might. American and western political leaders have failed to realize that the nation of Taiwan represents a perfect model of how conflict between nations who are at opposite ideological poles in a democratic and free world will be solved in this new century. Taiwan symbolizes a defiant but democratic nation making a courageous last stand against a mighty totalitarian nation that the western world fears not because of its military strength, but because of its economic muscle.Taiwan’s plight is not unlike those of the Black African majority under the oppressive apartheid policies of the former minority white government in South Africa.
In this case, Taiwan is now a part of the majority international democratic group of nations, but it is denied equal rights within the international community by the Mainland Chinese government who’s closed and repressive methods in maintaining control of its own population has been continuously rejected by the international community. Like the past regime nation of the minority white government in South Africa toward its black majority, Mainland China is allowed to continue the repress the desires of Taiwanese self-determination because of China’s economic payoffs for international corporations and investors. Eventually like South Africa, the international community has to make a decision on the Taiwan question based on morality or money.
For those western Sinologists who are under the illusion that increased economy contact and relations with Mainland China will initiate internal mechanisms toward democracy, the recent history of the Special Administrative Region (SAR) of Hong Kong should shatter those illusions.In turn Taiwan, too, has some hard political and economic choices to make. First, Taiwan must come to the realization that the political leadership in the United States, no matter how good its intentions are, will not be willing to risk war with Mainland China over 23 million Taiwanese. Thus, Taiwan must continue to take the necessary steps to show that it is willing to defend itself by procuring armaments to defend itself against a future attacks by Mainland China.
Secondly, Taiwan must diversify its economy by establishing more extensive trade with its Asian and Southeast Asian neighbors. Currently Taiwan’s economy is too dependent on trade with Mainland China and at its current rate; Mainland China could effectively stifle future Taiwanese independence discussions by waging an economic war with this island nation. Finally, Taiwan must liberalize its immigration policies so those individuals who possess valuable and specialized skills and knowledge can immigrate to Taiwan.
The liberalization of Taiwan’s immigration policy will not only help to expand Taiwan’s economy, but will also have the long-term political effect of having citizens of other nations having a vested interest in seeing a continuing vibrate democracy in their new adopted country.
Why aren't there more African-Americans Sinologist working in the United States, China and Taiwan?
1. Johnson, M. Dujon. "Taiwanese and recognition: a legal perspective" Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Midwest Political Science Association 67th Annual National Conference, The Palmer House Hilton, Chicago, IL, Apr 02, 2009 Online . 2010-01-25
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper discusses the traditional concepts of recognition and sovereignty under the laws of the United States as well as the political or popular notions of recognition and sovereignty as it relates to the ‘Taiwan’ issue. This abbreviated paper examines the myths of recognition and the erroneous role that most believe that international law plays regarding recognition and sovereignty <
I've spent the last decade, actually the last 18 years, preparing myself to have a career in the field of Sinology (a Sinologist is a person who studies China or things related to China). I’ve gone to the best schools in the United States, Canada, Mainland China and Taiwan for formal educational training in the hopes of one day representing my country or U.S. business interests in Mainland China, the United States or Taiwan.
This formal educational training includes a Bachelor of Arts, Master of Arts, Juris Doctor and in 2010, a Doctorate of Philosophy all related to China or Far East Asia. I also have extensive work experience in this field as well but I often wonder: why aren't there more African-American Sinologist’s working in the United States, China and Taiwan?African-Americans are underrepresented not only within Sinology, but they are also absent in the departments, offices and branches of the U.S. government concerning China, Taiwan and with private U.S. businesses in China.
The exclusion of African-Americans from U.S. government operations and private U.S. businesses in Asia are distrubing. But is this ‘exclusion’ of African-Americans really deliberate or is it due to the fact that this is not an attractive field for African-Americans to enter?Unfortunately, this appears to be a deliberate choice by employers in both the public and private sectors within the United States. I don’t know how many times I have been told by both U.S. and Chinese citizens “...that with your background why aren’t you working for the U.S. government?”
The answer is simple, American is still a country that has not overcome the issues of race in its hiring practices and it has increasingly become a nation where merit has little, or nothing to do with procuring a job of minimal influence in the public and private sectors. Yes, the ‘glass ceiling’ is alive and well in the United States and pointing to one or two prominent African-Americans within the U.S. government is not diversity nor does it break this 'symbolic' glass ceiling.
I have known well-qualified African-American Sinologist who were just starting their careers. I knew some well and some not too well, who abandoned their profession because they could not get employment in the United States because employers refused to hire them as it related to China or Taiwan. I have also been personally told, as well as have heard, employers (white and Chinese) saying that they “...would never hire a Black person.”
Even when there are no overt signs of racial discrimination in hiring, hiring someone who looks like you, attended the same boarding school or someone you can ‘relate to’ has had created an on-going racially disparate pattern in U.S. government agencies such as the U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of State in the areas of China. This is particularly troubling when highly qualified and patriotic African-Americans do not have the opportunity to serve their country only because of their skin pigmentation. I’ve resigned myself to the fact that no matter how qualified I become, no matter how many businesses that I have successfully navigated and helped succeed in China in the past, no matter how many degrees that I have...that I will never be given the opportunity as whites do to work for the U.S. government or private business regarding China related matters in the U.S., Mainland China or Taiwan.
There’re no use crying about it or becoming angry or blaming a particular people; while it is sinful...that’s just the way it is. So I can move on or stay still and pout, rant and banter. I choose to move on.
Publication Type: Conference Paper/Unpublished Manuscript
Review Method: Peer Reviewed
Abstract: This paper discusses the traditional concepts of recognition and sovereignty under the laws of the United States as well as the political or popular notions of recognition and sovereignty as it relates to the ‘Taiwan’ issue. This abbreviated paper examines the myths of recognition and the erroneous role that most believe that international law plays regarding recognition and sovereignty
I've spent the last decade, actually the last 18 years, preparing myself to have a career in the field of Sinology (a Sinologist is a person who studies China or things related to China). I’ve gone to the best schools in the United States, Canada, Mainland China and Taiwan for formal educational training in the hopes of one day representing my country or U.S. business interests in Mainland China, the United States or Taiwan.
This formal educational training includes a Bachelor of Arts, Master of Arts, Juris Doctor and in 2010, a Doctorate of Philosophy all related to China or Far East Asia. I also have extensive work experience in this field as well but I often wonder: why aren't there more African-American Sinologist’s working in the United States, China and Taiwan?African-Americans are underrepresented not only within Sinology, but they are also absent in the departments, offices and branches of the U.S. government concerning China, Taiwan and with private U.S. businesses in China.
The exclusion of African-Americans from U.S. government operations and private U.S. businesses in Asia are distrubing. But is this ‘exclusion’ of African-Americans really deliberate or is it due to the fact that this is not an attractive field for African-Americans to enter?Unfortunately, this appears to be a deliberate choice by employers in both the public and private sectors within the United States. I don’t know how many times I have been told by both U.S. and Chinese citizens “...that with your background why aren’t you working for the U.S. government?”
The answer is simple, American is still a country that has not overcome the issues of race in its hiring practices and it has increasingly become a nation where merit has little, or nothing to do with procuring a job of minimal influence in the public and private sectors. Yes, the ‘glass ceiling’ is alive and well in the United States and pointing to one or two prominent African-Americans within the U.S. government is not diversity nor does it break this 'symbolic' glass ceiling.
I have known well-qualified African-American Sinologist who were just starting their careers. I knew some well and some not too well, who abandoned their profession because they could not get employment in the United States because employers refused to hire them as it related to China or Taiwan. I have also been personally told, as well as have heard, employers (white and Chinese) saying that they “...would never hire a Black person.”
Even when there are no overt signs of racial discrimination in hiring, hiring someone who looks like you, attended the same boarding school or someone you can ‘relate to’ has had created an on-going racially disparate pattern in U.S. government agencies such as the U.S. Department of Commerce and U.S. Department of State in the areas of China. This is particularly troubling when highly qualified and patriotic African-Americans do not have the opportunity to serve their country only because of their skin pigmentation. I’ve resigned myself to the fact that no matter how qualified I become, no matter how many businesses that I have successfully navigated and helped succeed in China in the past, no matter how many degrees that I have...that I will never be given the opportunity as whites do to work for the U.S. government or private business regarding China related matters in the U.S., Mainland China or Taiwan.
There’re no use crying about it or becoming angry or blaming a particular people; while it is sinful...that’s just the way it is. So I can move on or stay still and pout, rant and banter. I choose to move on.
American Idol
I must admit that I am always amazed at how U.S. policymakers and China experts never seem to make ‘connecting the dots’ regarding recent events in the Middle East and that of Mainland China and Taiwanese relations. As Sinologists, it is our job to know all things concerning China but is so focused on this region that we cannot see the implications of U.S. policies of other regions in the world. Since China’s economic reform began in the late 1970s, China’s military policy has undergone at least two distinct stages and may now be posturing on a third: defensive, procurement and aggressive acquisition of strategic territories (ASST).
Prior to the first Gulf War, Mainland China always hinged a possible conflict with the U.S. in defense of Taiwan (or other reasons) as a war of defense and attrition based on the U.S. - Vietnam Conflict. The theory here was simple, the United States and the American people would grow tired of any military conflict that would grind out and cost American lives. The first Gulf War shocked the military leaders by the advanced technology that the United States showcased and how war could be fought effectively in such a sterile and distant manner. Since the first Gulf War, China has continually sought technological hardware in any manner that it can which is the second (procurement) state.
Having abandoned its first stage of military strategy (defensive), and firmly and steadfastly going through its second stage (procure); the third stage may see China attempting to aggressively acquire strategic territories (e.g., Taiwan).
The model for this third stage is not only the first and second Iraqi wars, but also the recent invasion of Georgia by Russia. Here, China has learned first from the United States that the violation of sovereignty will be tolerated, even in violation of international law, if the violator can show that its strategic economic interests (and preferably those of others) are at stake. What Russia shows us in Georgia is that we do not need economic or military interests as a precursor to violate sovereignty, only brute strength.
Sadly the United States and Russia have taught China that might does indeed make right and the international community is completely impotent in acting in the face of such might. Taiwan and others on the Asian continent…beware!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)