China likely to engage

The View Point article China unlikely to engage in military confrontation by Gwynne Dyer on March 12 was astutely written with good attention to logic and conventional thinking.

As much as he feels that Peter Goss' analysis is "misleading and self-serving", which is partly true, and that the U.S. defense review "makes no sense", Dyer continues to enumerate and detail the reasons, vis a vis, increased defense budget, high- tech military improvements, nuclear armament and the "almost never" Chinese expansionism. The last reason, Beijing's obsession with economic stability and fear of political and social upheaval, should be conclusive.

But Dyer's tendency to lean toward idealistic socialism, as he is wont to do, has not allowed the next step into the true reality of the situation. What is completely omitted is that which has not been be accounted for but must be reckoned with.

This is the job of philosophy and sociology think tanks. It is, first, the Asian ethic of "loss of face" combined with China's long tradition of culture, civilization and sense of superiority. Second, is the recondite/unfathomable and rapacious demands of the communist mind-set of total domination and autocracy.

These two extraordinary purposes of being explain the irrational and immutable concept that Taiwan, also read Tibet, is a sacred and inseparable segment of China. To use the thinking of the "western" mind is to make the typical fatal error of misjudging just how serious the situation is actually. Taiwan's separation from the rest of China is a monument to all the humiliations suffered by the Chinese throughout their long history.

Reunification is a central imperative of the Beijing regime. Only then will the insult to the Chinese psyche be abrogated. " ...the Chinese people will crush their (Taiwan) schemes firmly and thoroughly at any cost." Beijing statement -- Thursday, May 20, 2004.

BRIEN DOYLE, Jakarta