In previous parts of this journal, I’ve mentioned Shelley Rigger’s book, Why Taiwan Matters. (Incidentally, here are the previous parts: I, II, III, and IV.) In the photo section, she shows a little doll, or figurine, that Chen Shui-bian’s campaign used during presidential runs. The caption says that Chen was catering to “Taiwanese consumers’ taste for the ‘cute and tiny.’”

All over Taipei, I see cute, tiny things: symbols and logos and such. I say to one Taiwanese woman, “Have you noticed these things?” No, she hasn’t: They are possibly too common, like water or air. But some other Taiwanese say, “Oh, yes: The cute and tiny are part and parcel of our visual culture.”

Would you like to see an image of Chen, posing with his doll (a big version of it)? They are on the cover of Time magazine, no less: here. (Ex-president Chen is now in jail, for corruption.)

‐One young Taiwanese woman says, “I think these cute-and-tiny things come from Japan — from Japanese culture. We were once colonized by them, as you know. The Japanese are even crazier about the cute and tiny than we are!”

‐In Liberty Square, I see a young man with a T-shirt: “Respect All, Fear None.” Hmmm: Works as a generality, I suppose.

‐In Part IV of this journal, I was talking about, and quoting, Chen-Shen Yen, the political scientist. Let’s have some more of that conversation.

He says that Chinese students — students from the PRC — very much enjoy being in Taiwan. For one thing, they can go to any website they want. And once you’ve done that — it’s hard to go back to restrictions.

‐Chinese tourists see something extraordinary in front of Taipei 101, the great skyscraper in this capital, says Yen: Falun Gong practitioners, protesting their persecution by the Beijing regime.

I have a feeling — and it’s just a feeling — that the PRC’s persecution of Falun Gong is hurting the Communists, internationally. Or maybe I just hope so.

Obviously, a small percentage of people care about Falun Gong practitioners and the hell they face: kidnapping, torture, murder (in the Chinese gulag, laogai). Most people want to get along with China and make money. (“Don’t provoke the dragon.”) But some people care — just as some cared about Sakharov, Sharansky, and a million unknown zeks.

Of course, having Solzhenitsyn’s pen helped quite a bit. We could use some more of that, out of China.

‐I say to Yen, “Is it true that the PRC has 1,400 rockets aimed at Taiwan?” He says it could be 1,200, some other number. But it doesn’t matter. “You can overwhelm me with 500, you can overwhelm me with fewer. It doesn’t add to my fear to increase the number.”

In a column earlier this month, I spoke of a Falun Gong practitioner named Wang Xiaodong. Forty state-security officers stormed his apartment, to arrest him, steal his money, cart him off, etc. I wrote, “Don’t you think 39 would have been enough? Even 38?”

‐I ask Yen the big, horrible, not-quite-answerable question: “If China moves on Taiwan, will the United States lift a finger to defend Taiwan?” Yen says it depends: Was the attack provoked or unprovoked?

Well, what does “provoked” mean? Mainly, that Taiwan has gone ahead and declared independence.

Most people in Taiwan favor the status quo. This is an understandable preference: You get everything you want, as Yen says — a free and peaceful life. And if you don’t have a seat at the U.N., there are certainly worse fates.

Okay: What if the Chinese attack is “unprovoked”? Yen speculates — and it is merely speculation — that the U.S. would try to check the Chinese militarily, in some way. And while this checking was going on, the U.S. would try to work out a diplomatic solution. The checking would be an attempt to buy time.

Who knows? (And let’s not find out.)

‐Yen gives us an interesting piece of intel: The more sophisticated Chinese say, “You need to remain outside China for a while, to push China for democratic reform. If you are part of China, like Hong Kong, there is no incentive for the Chinese leadership to democratize.”

‐In Part II, I said just a little bit about Chiang Kai-shek: Was he just a dictator, just a brute, like a thousand others, or can we credit him with something? Yen contributes this: If Taiwan had been overwhelmed by the Communists, the island would never have had a chance to become the democratic nation it is today. Taiwan would have had to endure the PRC’s misery: the Great Leap Forward, the Cultural Revolution, etc., etc.

Chiang Kai-shek held off the Communists, with military strength. (A U.S. policy of containment helped too, needless to say.) In short, we can credit Chiang for that.

I’ll have more to say about this issue later in the journal . . .

‐By the way, can I tell you something fun about Yen? He knows a great deal about American history and politics, subjects he teaches. I ask, “So, who are your favorite presidents?” He first says Polk! A decisive man, who did important things for one term, and left. He also says Madison — not for his presidency, but for the Constitution.

Such an inspired and vital document, for all mankind (I daresay).

‐Another conversation? Meet Shaw-Chang Maa, of the Straits Exchange Foundation. Like Professor Yen, Dr. Maa is a Big Ten man: The former is a Boilermaker, the latter a Buckeye.

Maa knows pretty much everything there is to know about PRC-Taiwan relations. He believes that cooperation is good for everyone: the PRC, Taiwan, the region.

Since 2008, he says, the PRC and Taiwan have signed 16 agreements. These have to do with trade, travel, and so on. Time was, you could not travel from Taipei to, say, Shanghai, direct. You had to go in roundabout ways (via Hong Kong, for example).

‐Maa is one of those who believe that tourism from China will have a positive long-term effect on the Chinese. They see what is possible in a free society: criticism of the government, regular and competitive elections, an independent judiciary. Taiwan has “soft power” in its arsenal, says Maa.

I don’t know about you, but I have become slightly allergic to this phrase, “soft power” — mainly, I think, because I hear it from Obama people, when they want to excuse doing nothing. But soft power is no doubt important in the world.

‐Virtually everyone agrees that Taiwan can set an example — to the world at large, really, but, in particular, to that colossal neighbor. The way Maa puts it is, “We can show them that democracy is possible in Chinese culture. That democratization and economic development can go hand in hand. And that democracy need not mean chaos.”

Are there people in the world who need such lessons? Evidently.

‐Taiwan, as you know, is denied participation in international organizations. They can’t even get “observer” status, of the Vatican type, or PLO type. The Communists see to that. And there is just about zero resistance from Taiwan’s fellow democracies.

Maa points out, “If you can’t participate in these organizations, no one is going to see you, no one can know what contributions you have to make.” Taiwan will have to make it known by other means.

It is my impression that Taiwanese are not invited to World Economic Forum meetings in Davos and elsewhere. Representatives of the worst regimes have taken part in these meetings: representatives of Saddam Hussein, officials from Tehran. The PRC is a big-time player in the World Economic Forum, of course. They are even a host of the WEF. But the good liberal democrats in Taiwan?

‐Eventually, Maa and I discuss the horrible question: What if the Chinese attack? He says, among other things, that Taiwan is of strategic value to the U.S. Sure, we share “political” values, or should: freedom, democracy, capitalism, human rights, and all that jazz. But Taiwan means something to the U.S. strategically too (which is lucky for Taiwan, if so).

‐Maa makes one big, overarching point, which I would like to paraphrase as follows: The ultimate disposition of Taiwan — or of the PRC-ROC relationship — is some distance into the future. Our children or grandchildren will have to handle the endgame. In the meantime, let us do all we can, to achieve harmony across the Strait. Let us keep violence at bay, hang on, and even improve things — until such time as the danger passes, and we can get on with normal life.

I hope you have a wonderful weekend, my friends, and I’ll see you on Monday, for Part VI.

To order Jay Nordlinger’s new book, Peace, They Say: A History of the Nobel Peace Prize, the Most Famous and Controversial Prize in the World, go here. To order his collection Here, There & Everywhere, go here.