3. March 1, 2023

I am woman. Hear me roar: meow.

Preface

I wasn’t planning on writing until next week because I thought the two first dates I chose to post, 2-27 and 2-28, were perfect for launching a newsletter about peace and Taiwan. But then Ted (my husband) pointed out that today, March 1st, is the start of women’s history month, another significant date that ties into the story of Taiwan, all of my work and my life. I am a woman after all (and one who examines what it means to be a woman in the world today). In addition, my friend Liya Yu, author of the brilliant new book, “Vulnerable Minds: The Neuropolitics of Divided Societies,” pointed out that whatever my feelings about Trump, and what’s in Shawna Yang Ryan’s LitHub article, I should address how the people of Taiwan viewed his policies and why. She is right. 

I am grateful for constructive feedback and dialogue which I think is the only way to engage and improve work and I enjoy it. In fact, the reason I offered so many book references in the second post was because friends asked me to go into more depth. I’m happy to contribute what knowledge I have to answer questions of people reading this newsletter. I’m also looking forward to learning from you.

At the same time, and also in no small part because I am a woman, I am honestly deeply afraid of non-constructive feedback such as the insults and death threats hurled at Shawna or the silence imposed when posting on social media about the Trump call or other sensitive subjects, like Taiwan. If people are curious about why I am only sharing my writing now when it’s something that, if you know me, you know I do every day, that is the answer. 

I am braving my fears that I am as likely to be misunderstood as heard and respected in order to show solidarity with Taiwan and those willing to speak truth to the powers that so frighteningly attack it and or try to keep it down, silenced, small and afraid whether in the U.S. and China, or anywhere in the world.

Most importantly, I do not want to leave Shawna Yang Ryan hanging, but to give her my full solidarity—Taiwan and women’s history month style. First, the elephant in the room:

1. The view from Taiwan of the (heavily made-up) man who took the power of the presidency of the United States into his (small minded) hands and nearly destroyed our democracy

Rather than speaking to the innumerable crimes, immeasurable damage and gaping, painful wounds Trump inflicted on the people of the United States and the rest of the world, I will say that I do not think he was an aberration. Instead, he was like the apotheosis of all the absolute worst tendencies of decades of right wing, conservative, authoritarian backlash that has plagued American democracy since Nixon. 

They say that seeking revenge is like drinking poison and expecting the other person to die. Another way to say it would be that seeking revenge is like shooting yourself in the foot and expecting the other person to feel it. 

If I were to personify the U.S. and China as characters in a screenplay, one would be shooting themselves in the foot and the other drinking poison without dying. Both would have the aim of taking the other down and becoming or remaining absolutely preeminent in a world that is suffering horrifically, terrifyingly doomed and on the brink of total destruction precisely because of their certifiably insane and blinding male rivalry. 

It is at times a tragic comedy, but you’re lucky if and when you find a moment of levity and humor. In reality, it is straight up tragedy.

But wait, we’re missing a character, the woman. Who could that be? Why, her name in this story is Taiwan. She is literally physically, geographically stuck in the middle between these two. She has no choice but to depend on both, like most countries in the world. And she would prefer not to be harmed by either, as is, again the case with most countries in the world. 

The feminization and masculinization of countries is real. It is not an accident, not new. And I didn’t just make it up because I’m a creative filmmaker type — though I have written a first draft of the screenplay.

Richard McGregor, journalist, most famously author of “The Party: The Secret World of China’s Communist Rulers,” (who’s in my first documentary about the US-China relationship), in his book, “Asia’s Reckoning: China, Japan, and the Fate of U.S. Power in the Pacific Century” captures well this personification of countries that happens in international relations. Here he describes President Nixon and Dr. Kissinger’s February 21-28, 1972 “Week that Changed the World,” otherwise known as the Nixon “shock” in Japan, from Japan’s perspective:

“Like the State Department, neither Nixon nor Kissinger underestimated latent Chinese hostility to Japan, however much Mao had dismissed the necessity of penitence for the war. Nor were they unaware of multiple Japanese resentments against the United States, from their defeat in the war to the shock of the surprise China trip. From the White House’s perspective, the benefits to Beijing in balancing a hostile Soviet Union through closer ties with Washington were self-evident. It was also clear to Kissinger from his talks in Tokyo how much Japan still depended on the United States, not just for its security but also for the diplomacy underlying it. 

(Prime Minister Kakuei) Tanaka, like (Foreign Minister Takeo) Fukuda, made clear to Kissinger that the most difficult diplomatic issue facing Tokyo in bridging relations with Beijing was how to handle Taiwan. “This is an extremely sensitive problem,” Tanaka told him and reminded him how deep the divisions on two rival Chinas ran through the political system in Japan. “After all, we had two thousand years of interchange between Japan and China; culturally, we are heavily indebted to China,” he explained. “China was our enemy in two wars, and World War II started in China.” Finally, Tanaka offered a comparison that he hoped made the dilemma clearer for Kissinger. “China to us,” Tanaka warned Kissinger, “is not so simple as Cuba is to you.” 

Tanaka went far further than Fukuda in describing the sensitivity of China and the Taiwan issue. He bluntly suggested it would be best for the United States to solve the problem on Japan’s behalf: “It would be more logical and rational to have the US involved in the solution rather than to have Japan act independently. As in the case of a man and his wife having a fight, sometimes a family friend can come in and solve the problem,” Tanaka continued. 

“Who is the man and his wife, and who is the friend?” Kissinger replied. 

“For sure, the good friend is the US. Historically speaking, the man and his wife are Japan and China, but for the past three-quarters of a century, Japan and Taiwan are the couple.” 

Kissinger and Tanaka quickly concurred they needed a unified approach to China and Taiwan, in private and in public. “How will our conversation be reported?” Kissinger asked. 

“I will have to have a press conference,” replied Tanaka. “But I will never reveal what we said about Taiwan.” 

…Nixon and Kissinger having come and gone, China and Japan finally had an opening to talk to each other. Tanaka, who had become prime minister in July 1972, had quickly decided on coming to office he would go to Beijing to meet Mao. Japan’s crushing defeat, America’s enduring victory, China’s abject humiliation and now putative reemergence, and the residue of Washington’s ruthless diplomacy—all of the big themes of nineteenth- and twentieth-century politics in East Asia would sit on the table in front of them.”

And action! Don’t you want to be in the room with Mao and Tanaka? I can’t offer you that and besides it would lead us astray from our topic at hand. I can however, in a future post, put you in the room with Mao, Zhou, Nixon and Kissinger on February 21st, 1972 when they were getting chummy before the deal they eventually made on Taiwan in the Shanghai Communiqué. 

Here’s another short gem from Richard McGregor’s book that puts the US into this love/hate triangle between China - Japan and Taiwan. 

“Like many national security hawks, Nixon had always considered Japanese security policy schizophrenic. Japan eagerly sought U.S. security protection while at the same time parading itself on moral grounds as a pacifist nation. Dean Rusk, who helped negotiate the U.S.-Japan security treaty in 1951, said Japan was like “the man who wanted to sleep with a woman one night without having to say hello to her in public the next day.””

So here Dean Rusk is calling the U.S. Japan’s mistress. He’s entitled to his interpretation (which may be more a projection of his relationships with women). But he seems a little confused because mistresses are not people who provide military protection or are the most powerful people on the planet. Mistresses can rarely defend themselves, and are prone to exploitation and abuse.

However, Kissinger’s experience in listening to Tanaka was of hearing Japan call Taiwan its mistress and China its wife with Kissinger being the man, representing the U.S., who had just stolen both Japan’s wife, China, and Japan’s mistress, Taiwan and who was arguably planning to treat both, if not just China, at least a little better.

I’m keeping the analysis of these personified country relationships light and humorous for the moment, but of course, there are serious implications, real consequences, like wars past and present, and domestic violence, to all of them. 

The point is that since the Shanghai Communiqué, the U.S. changed the nature of the diplomatic relationships in East Asia. The U.S. likes to take credit for this and for establishing, and maintaining with its military presence, the “Asian Peace” that has lasted since 1979 once full normalization of relations between the US and China was established (and they both stopped fighting and prolonging the war in Vietnam as they had done earlier in Korea).

For Taiwan, the U.S. changed the relationships in East Asia in ways that are increasingly dangerous today. Getting close with China and encouraging Taiwan and other countries to do the same so that all, including the U.S., could make money without anticipating or examining carefully enough the consequences of how the U.S. and China were building each other up to become the world’s economic hegemon (China) and the world’s military hegemon (the U.S.) while competing with each other for global primacy, treating Taiwan like the mistress and locking it into a battlefield it never wanted to be on.

For the U.S., treating Taiwan as a mistress, means treating her like the woman they want to sleep with one night without having to say hello to in public the next day. On the bright side, they will leave her alone to be who she wants to be, maybe inspire her with democratic ideals they themselves fail regularly and remain willing to defend her. But for China, Taiwan being their mistress means being the woman they want to own, control, dominate, and use to project their power and money, to coerce into submission through whatever means necessary, economic, political, social or otherwise, and call family while verbally threatening violent attack and invasion.

The basic truth about being a mistress is that the reality of your existence and need to be treated with equality and respect is denied, and that denial and pain are covered up in shame and through secrecy. China denies the reality of Taiwan’s existence and has overpowered or bought off countries to support them in maintaining their lies for fear of their wrath and retribution. America denies the reality of Taiwan’s existence because it has been trying to please China since Kissinger first fell in love with Mao and Zhou and lost site of Taiwan as a country with human beings living on it. But maybe Kissinger doesn’t see most countries that way, as full of human beings whose lives should be treated as equally valuable as American lives. 

I was shocked to discover this moving article in Foreign Affairs magazine, the preeminent foreign policy journal published by the Council on Foreign Relations (where I worked in the late 1990s) that Kissinger writes for regularly because it means that Kissinger and others in the U.S. foreign policy establishment could so easily have read it and known the view from Taiwan as early as 1958!

The China Impasse, A Formosan View By  Lí Thian-hok, April 1958

How then to understand Taiwan’s perspective on the policies of the Trump administration? In terms of policy that came out of Trump’s mouth, (which, for many, like me, is upsetting to remember let alone picture) was his avowed love for Xi Jinping, his “good friend.” Trump was a would be dictator worshipping other dictators including Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin when he wasn’t competing with them to destroy America’s democracy.

The policies of the Trump administration were appreciated in Taiwan regardless of party affiliation because those policies took into consideration the seriousness of China’s military, economic and political threat to Taiwan. Because Trump was such a vile tyrant, it is hard for people to distinguish him from his administration and his policies. America’s long and ugly history of supporting tyrants and dictators at home and abroad and destroying democracy at home and abroad when it suits the interests of a few in power, also makes it hard to believe that people in the US government take democracy seriously.

I am here to report that there are people in the U.S. government, Republicans and Democrats, who take democracy seriously, some I have even met and interviewed. A few are in the film. Still the US is not a functioning democracy and that matters.

2. “Don’t let the bastards grind you down”

Did you know that this phrase originated early in WW2 in British army intelligence and was then adopted by U.S. Army General “Vinegar” Joe Stilwell as his motto? General Stilwell was chief of staff to Generalissimo Chiang Kai-shek who came up with the “Vinegar” nickname for Stilwell who called Chiang “Peanut.” Apparently, they really didn’t like each other.

I think the best adaptation of this phrase, “Don’t Let the Bastards Grind You Down,” is by Margaret Atwood in her 1985 novel, “The Handmaid’s Tale” where NOLITE TE BASTARDES CARBORUNDUM is depicted as graffiti representing a “silent revolt” by a “slave woman in a futuristic totalitarian regime.”

To honor Shawna Yang Ryan, the experience of being a woman, of focusing on empathy and relationship rather than shame and one-upmanship, to imagine achieving a future peace for Taiwan with China, the US and other countries of the world that is based in truth and reconciliation, justice and equality, not coercion and domination, I’m going to end this post with some creative expression and music.

The song, “Nina Cried Power,”

may be a little cheesy, (it’s Hozier), but it’s uplifting, like gospel, and the lyrics are great, especially, the end, around 2:40 featuring Mavis Staples. (Note: because the sound loses quality in embedding the song, especially because I couldn’t simply upload it, it’s best not to have the volume all the way up.) It came from my best friend, Arie Thompson, who played Nina Simone in a play recently and shared the song to give me hope and keep me going. That’s the spirit in which I’m sharing it with you.

3. Defining personhood, statehood, international status

I am at once attached through relationship to those more powerful than me and I am on my own. I’m not the one you think of first, unless unconsciously in cases of blame. I am the physically smaller and weaker one. I can produce life and for that I am most valued, my body wanted for possession and control of the future. I can produce pleasure so I am associated with shame and punished for the vulnerability inherent in desiring me. I am not given a voice in venues of the greatest power over the economic and political decisions of the world. I am not part of the major international organizations making global decisions about the future of the planet. I have not yet managed to lead a global revolution. I work harder and smarter to achieve more and better long and short term results in a range of fields for a greater number of people including minorities of all kinds, willing and able to contribute to progress around the world without expectation of recognition and fair compensation which has yet to come. I have historically been divided, conquered, marginalized, isolated, diminished, manipulated, exploited and unable to find and unite with my people around the world. I have felt so hopeless and confused by this that I have been divided against myself, beaten myself up, blinded myself, shut myself up, internalized all of the world’s misplaced anger and pain and almost given up again and again.

Yet, when I find a way to see clearly what is going on, why it’s happening, the roots of the problems and their solutions, the fear and grief behind the anger and pain of my attackers, I pick myself back up. I keep on keeping on even though I have to struggle against a world that does not want to treat me equally or allow me to determine my own future and get credit for it. My name, what I am allowed to call myself to fit in society and the world, will never be all mine or fully reflect who I am. My story, my truth, my experience is one that some actively suppress, others want me to repress, and those who want or even demand that I express, too often for proof that I deserve to exist, rarely intend to hear or absorb in order to honor my existence. Rather they seek to take my story, my truth, my experience from me, to twist and degrade it and use it against me, to extinguish me.

In order to survive, I have studied my oppressors and I have learned their stories well, far better than they know me or mine. 

To all the oppressors, liars, betrayers, con artists, those who deceive themselves, live in denial, in the past, denying and blocking others, those who cannot face reality, who cannot keep up with changing times, who seek to set the clock back, keep their foot on my neck, threaten me with violence, force me, coerce me, influence me, to take me down or out, to selfishly and greedily hold onto or accumulate all the money, land and power for themselves, know that I am not alone and you will never conquer, corrupt, or turn me and my people into the cruel, vengeful, aggressive, violent, bitter and resentful tyrants you are. I know a peace, a security and dignity you will never know. And yet you (and not I) are the one trusted by the world, historically and to this day, with making the peace that has never existed between us. I persevere because I can never go back to the past. When my body is the very weapon of my oppression, it must be through the art of self-determination and representation that I create my freedom. But when will it come? With every step forward, no matter how long the road, or how many obstacles I face, I find more of my people and we pave a way together. It’s not the waking. It’s the rising.