China Museum for Fujian-Taiwan kinship. Photo courtesy jonjanego/flickr.com

How is China reacting to the financial crisis in terms of collaboration with the West?

The official view of the Chinese Communist Party regime is that taking care of the needs of China’s 1.4 billion people is contribution enough to the world economy. Beijing still seems apprehensive about joining in groups dominated by Europe, Japan, the USA, Brazil, and India. Joining such groups is seen as subjecting itself to the will of democracies who do not wish well to the authoritarian system. This system provides a monopoly of arbitrary power for CCP rulers, whose top priority is to hold on to power and to maintain the system that keeps them in power.

What are specific opportunities for the Western liberal democracies to engage with China?

The US has tried to deeply engage China in a broad range of areas. Indeed, it has gone beyond engagement, even promoting accommodation such as offering China seats at the table of the rule makers as long as China carries more of the Burden. The Chinese Communist Party regime has not responded positively. In fact, I would go as far as to say that the US has gone beyond engagement and accommodation to a policy of appeasement. It has tried to meet China's desires on policy toward Taiwan and has weakened its backing for the autonomous democratic island of Taiwan, a nation of 23 million to accommodate the President of China.. This has not been enough for the CCP regime. For example, in response to a cut-back military package to Taiwan, meant to appease China, the Communist Party instead, cut engagement with the US military. In another instance, it responded to European support for ending the repression by the CCP regime of Tibetan Lama Buddhism by breaking off talks with the EU. Beijing is not committed to a principled policy of mutual engagement by the democracies. The Chinese Communist Party regime fears that the real goal of engagement is to undermine the Chinese Communist Party regime.

Should the United States call for democratization in China?

America cannot compel China to democratize. The US should, however, insist that China live up to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights to which China is a signatory, but there is no point in the US trying to promote democracy in China since it is an impossible task for outsiders to achieve.

How should the United States engage with Taiwan?

The robust democracy of Taiwan is part of the friendly world of Asian states. These states cooperate with each other in the interest of maintaining a maximum amount of maneuver for all. They collaborate to resist hegemonic domination by the Chinese Communist Party regime, while benefiting from economic interactions with China. US interests and Taiwanese interests are congruent. The United States government should be a strong supporter of the democratic government in Taipei against whom China has positioned a formidable offensive military force. It is in everyone's interest that Beijing-Taipei talks move ahead toward a peaceful accommodation since peace ultimately rests on China abandoning its expansionist goals.

With China reaching out to so-called rogue states, such as Sudan, do we see a different "camp" of human rights practice or standard emerging?

Since 1993 Beijing has been trying to undermine the international regime of human rights. It has been succeeding. China acts against its own people with impunity and backs the enemies of democracy all around the world, Pyongyang, Burma, Uzbekistan, Iran, Sudan, Zimbabwe, etc. The CCP claims to support human rights and actually signs international human rights covenants because those are internationally-agreed-upon norms. China is also a signatory of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Its constitution embraces them. CCP leaders are well aware that their repression of Lama Buddhist priests and nuns and their execution of so many people and their support of some of the most brutal regimes on earth give China a bad name. They care about China's good name. They want to be respected for things like wiping out poverty or helping in UN peace-keeping. It is worth reminding the CCP leadership that for China to be treated with full dignity in the international community it should be on the side of observing internationally recognized human rights.

What does this mean in terms of the function of international organizations?

China does its best to paralyze the human rights work of international organizations.

What does this mean in terms of general economic development for other countries? Will China’s seeming success encourage other countries to adopt a blend of authoritarianism and capitalism?

Other authoritarian regimes do see China as a model of authoritarian capitalism. But there is no model of successful institutions and policies for these other regimes to copy. There is not much to the notion of a model of authoritarian capitalism.

Do you have any specific policy suggestions for the Obama Administration?

The Obama administration should seriously acknowledge the long-term challenge of the rise of China as an authoritarian superpower opposed to the global project of democracy and human rights. But the most important policy is to get America right again. Then it should do right for friends and allies while getting on normally with China. There is no need for any particular policy aimed at China. In China, any such policy would be seen by Chinese Communist Party leaders as an anti-China plot. Bush administration policies have made democratization seem a cover for military intervention and de-stabilization. Torture policies have made American support for human rights seems hypocritical. The key thing is to make America a better place that begins to live up to its values.