The trajectory of history is not merely determined by objective, material conditions. It is the subjective perception and will of action takers that often determine how crucial judgments are made. In an open, free and democratic system, the power of decision-making is distributed between different government departments, while civil society also plays a certain role. The decision-making process is lengthier. However, as information is more sufficient and a greater diversity of viewpoints is allowed, misjudgment that widely deviates from objective facts is unlikely, thus preventing an overly extreme decision from being made. In a totalitarian, dictatorial system, the individuals who make decisions wield too much power. When a handful of dictators’ perceptions are misguided and the institutions cannot get things back on track, wrong judgments often ensue. These misjudgments can be so critical that they can lead to a reversal of results.

A dictator might wield paramount power at a certain point in time, but he cannot be omnipotent. There are always occasions on which his perception is wrong. The Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor in World War II led to a turn of the tide in American society, which then became fully supportive of US military engagement, which sealed Japan’s ultimate defeat. That was the biggest misjudgment of the Japanese about the US. In the 1980s, the Soviet Union misjudged the actions and intentions of the US. It dragged itself into an arms race, causing its own demise ultimately. Emperor Huizong of the Northern Song dynasty was set on joining the Greater Jin to destroy the Liao Empire. As he deliberately suppressed his advisors’ views and ignored the threats posed by Jin, he failed to receive accurate intelligence about Jin’s movements of armies. He misjudged Jin. Ultimately, he and Emperor Qinzong were captured, and the Northern Song dynasty came to an end. There are many examples of the collapse of a nation caused by the subjective misjudgment of a decision-maker. What these examples have in common is that they all occurred in a closed decision-making system of a totalitarian, dictatorial political system.

With the lessons of history still fresh, China, which is itching for the next move, is highly likely to be another example of collapse brought about by the misjudgment of a dictator.

As far as the objective situation of the world is concerned, there is a consensus that democratic and free nations are exercising heightened vigilance against China. As the US has lifted itself out of the controversy over the presidential election and the transfer of power, the foreign policy of the Biden administration is gaining clarity gradually. Before Secretary of State Antony Blinken and Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin embarked on a visit of the US’s Indo-Pacific allies, they wrote to the media, setting the tone for the trip, “This visit is to revive our partnerships, maintain the freedom, democracy and peace of the Indo-Pacific, and push back against China’s aggression and threats”. They called out China, since “it abuses human rights in Xinjiang and Tibet, systematically erodes autonomy in Hong Kong, undercuts democracy in Taiwan or asserts maritime claims in the South China Sea that violate international law”. They emphasized that the US must act decisively and lead and unite its allies to hold China to account. In the joint statement issued after the US-Japan 2+2 talks, the two sides emphasized that China’s actions endangering regional stability would be countered. The tone set by Blinken before the trip and the joint statement made during the trip show that opposition to and resistance against China are not only a fundamental national policy of the US, but also a strategy for the US to marshall a coalition of allies. Meanwhile, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson is scheduled to visit India next month, the first major diplomatic visit after Brexit that also demonstrates the importance attached by the UK to the Indo-Pacific in its strategic direction.

What is China’s response? When Blinken announced his trip to Japan and South Korea, he also announced that he would meet Chinese representatives Wang Yi and Yang Jiechi in Alaska, the US, on his way back. As soon as the news came out, China’s state media immediately declared the meeting would be a “high-level strategic dialogue between China and the US”. However, the US State Department immediately responded by saying that it would just be “a one-off meeting”. In fact, the Secretary of State did not choose to visit China on his Asian trip, nor is he meeting Wang and Yang in Washington. His choice of Alaska as the meeting place carries some different diplomatic overtones. In spite of this, China’s state media has tried to play up the intention of the US. No wonder the State Department has had to give China a slap in the face. As for the joint statement issued after the US-Japan 2+2 talks, China has responded by saying that “the talks should not harm the interests of a third party” in a consistently tough gesture. It is obvious that China has no intention of easing the confrontation.

Judging by the international situation, the US and its allies can no longer afford to abandon Taiwan today. Abandoning Taiwan might have been plausible more than a decade ago. However, if the key technological manufacturing technologies that Taiwan possesses today fall into Chinese hands, Xi Jinping’s aspiration for China to become “the greatest scientific and technological country” will no longer remain a pipe dream. At least until the US is confident that it can fully control the necessary resources for advanced technological industries, abandoning Taiwan will directly and seriously hurt the national interests of itself and its allies. If China gets tougher on Taiwan, it will be pushing the US and its allies to adopt even more confrontational strategies.

To put it simply, the US and its allies have no inherent intention of confronting China. However, if China’s actions, including its invasion of Taiwan, have any bearing on the core interests of the US, the US will have no room for concession. Does the small circle of decision-makers that have Xi Jinping at their core have such an understanding?

The myth of nationalism has been told for so long that even the dictator himself subscribes to it. Since he was a young man, Xi has been immersed in the Maoist world view that “the Chinese people must rise”. Perhaps Xi is not satisfied with being Mao’s protégé but wholeheartedly and fanatically espouses the “great rejuvenation of the Chinese nation”. “Everything is the conspiracy of US imperialism” may not only be CCP propaganda, but also be the “truth” that Xi Jinping truly believes. Under Xi Jinping’s totalitarian “organizational transformation”, the previous process of the Communist Army’s collection of foreign intelligence and judgment formation was changed (the PLA Foreign Affairs Office, which had been originally under the General Staff Department, for example, became under the Central Military Commission. As a result, information coordination by the General Staff Department is missing in the process), which will also lessen the dictator’s ability to gather accurate information. The peculiar words and deeds of Chinese diplomats and the People’s Liberation Army that have befuddled many countries, such as their provocations against India, the South China Sea and Japan as well as the suppression of Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Tibet are probably attributable to the misjudgment that “the US is eager to sabotage China, and China must resist”.

The misjudgment of a dictator has accelerated China’s becoming an enemy of the global alliance of democratic and free nations. Xi’s nationalist fantasies are not only the greatest threat to the peace and prosperity of the Indo-Pacific region but also the greatest destabilizing factor in the survival of the CCP. How “a dictator’s misjudgment” should be overcome will be the biggest issue for the CCP.

(Miao Poya is a Taipei City Councilor.)

Click here for Chinese version

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play