Progressive (?) Foreign Policy on China

I'll continue to be monitoring the Chen disaster here, but other things are happening in the world besides Chen's total betrayal of his people and his party.

Speaking of bad news, the Center for American Progress, the progressive policy center, is out with its new policy document on China, including Taiwan (download full report in PDF). I've long complained about progressives and Taiwan policy here, so I read the report with great interest. In case you were thinking we'd get a policy statement that was progressive in nature, disabuse thy delusional self: it's pure Establishment. This is is clear from their summary on the home page:

Taiwan is the most sensitive issue in the U.S.-China relationship. Despite recent improvements in tone and tenor of relations between Taipei and Beijing, Taiwan still remains an issue that could trigger greater tension and perhaps open armed confrontation between China and the United States. To Beijing, the island of Taiwan is the last piece of Chinese territory not reintegrated back into the nation after more than a century of struggle. But to the United States a thriving democratic Taiwan is linked to U.S. regional credibility and our democratic values.

Yes, it regurgitates Chinese propaganda as the key to understanding how Beijing views Taiwan. In fact, the document refers to China's goal as "reunification" and as "a matter left over from the Chinese civil war" though Taiwan was never part of any Chinese state, and did not participate in the civil war. It lauds the election of President Ma. Ugh. Its recommendations on Taiwan are the same ones we've all seen: vague happy noises about Taiwan participating in international organizations, support for weapons sales, warm feelings for its democracy.

The piece contains numerous recommendations on how to approach the six areas it views as key in US-China relations (Climate change and energy security, Balanced and sustainable global growth, Enhanced security in the Asia-Pacific region, China’s military modernization, Stability in the Taiwan Strait, Governance and individual rights) but no recommendations for what to do when China refuses to play along -- which it most certainly will. Indeed, there appears to be no recognition in the document that this policy could fail. Their main policy goal is

"Peacefully integrating China into the international order will embed this rising power in the web of norms and responsibilities that come with being an active participant in the world stage."

The idea of integrating China into the US dominated world order is 100% US Establishment; nothing progressive about it at all. And we all know what "peacefully integrating China into the international order" will mean: Taiwan must be sacrificed.

On the plus side, it does call for closing Guantanamo and the restoration of US moral authority in the world. It will take a miracle worker to do that after the incompetence and venality of the Bush Administration, however. It calls for support of voices that speak out in dissent in China and for voicing support for human rights, but stops short of calling for democratization as a formal political goal. In that sense it is totally Establishment in nature. A key test of this policy of engagement on human rights, however, is whether it will recognize the desire for independence in Taiwan (nowhere recognized in the document) as an act of dissent worthy of support.

[Taiwan]