2 April 2008: Last week was eventful in Chinese “domestic affairs.” The handful of journalists who were finally allowed into Lhasa last Wednesday reported that “the anti-Chinese riot which convulsed Tibet’s ancient capital was far more aggressive, long-running, and inflicted far more damage than any outsiders had previously realized.” This revelation will likely do little to lessen the outrage among those sympathetic to the Tibetan cause in the West, especially in light of accusations that, even with journalists on the ground, Chinese authorities are successfully exaggerating the violence of the riots and concealing the amount of force used to quell them.

Meanwhile, in the midst of this latest spike in anti-Chinese sentiment in Tibet, the people of Taiwan, 98% percent of whom are ethnic Han Chinese, elected Ma Ying-jeou of the KMT in presidential elections on Saturday, March 22. While this is the same KMT that fled to Taiwan to escape the CCP in 1949, Ma rode to victory on a platform that advocated renewed engagement with the mainland. Choosing to “shelve” rather than press the issue of Taiwanese independence, Ma hopes to create closer economic ties by opening up travel across the Strait and making it easier for Taiwanese businesses to invest in China.

Although both regions have long-standing grievances with the PRC, it is understandable that the public sentiment in Lhasa would differ from that in Taipei. The Tibetan position, as articulated by the Dalai Lama, is a desire for greater autonomy, not independence. Additionally, although their land has been officially part of China for over 50 years, Tibetans identify themselves as ethnically distinct from Han Chinese. Reports of human rights abuses perpetrated by the PRC authorities on Tibetans have been rampant, and many monks fear for the destruction of Tibetan culture. In the case of Taiwan the water that separates the island from the mainland has largely prevented the violent expression of long-held resentments. Additionally, Taiwan’s economic success and the support it enjoys from powerful Western nations made it easy to defy the CCP.

But times are changing. If Taiwan wants to keep pace with Hong Kong and Singapore it can no longer afford to forego the Chinese market. And so in nations with developed economies, self-interest trumps historical or ideological disagreements. Note how consistently this theme plays out amongst all parties involved. America has phoned its largest creditor not to deliver condemnations or threats of boycotting the Olympics, but to encourage engagement with the Dalai Lama. This is a decidedly softer approach than that taken by many nations in Europe. But the rapidly expanding EU contains countries that will depend on strong Chinese markets if traditional trading partners continue to flounder. Don’t be surprised if the Olympic boycott never materializes. Meanwhile in Tibet, where development lags, the rioters stand to gain very little by cooperating with Chinese authorities.

As long as China proves to be a market of limitless demand, expect to see more than the usual suspects lining up to supply. If Taiwan, sworn enemy of the PRC, can perform an about-face amidst the crackdown in Tibet and China’s continued military build up, is there anything the CCP could do that would provoke a global economic shunning like we saw after Tiananmen Square?

My prediction: expect more moral outrage from individuals and organizations without geopolitical or economic liabilities and more tepid responses from Washington and anyone else who’s too beholden to China to force their hand. And, oh yeah, book your ticket for Beijing 2008.