The US has already begun its plan to overthrow the regime of Iraq's lifelong President Saddam Hussein by force. Nothing can change this historical reality whether international society supports the US attack or not.
The objections from France and Germany, which are backed by the EU, could not shake US President George W. Bush at all. Even the UN Security Council's debates failed to delay the US from taking military action. What can other countries do?
In particular, Taiwan has no room to speak on the US invasion. More importantly, it's obviously in no position to do so. The US is not only the most significant ally to the island but also the biggest protector of its security and existence. This has been the consensus of all the Taiwanese people. Just take a look at those anti-US and anti-war demonstrations across the world. Hundreds of thousands of protesters gathered at each of those demonstrations abroad while only a few hundred Taiwanese people attended such events. Many of them were pro-unification activists. It's thus evident that neither anti-US nor anti-war sentiment is marketable in Taiwan.
This is called political reality.
Do the Taiwanese people long for peace? Of course, they do. But what's more important is that in reality, each and every country weighs the gains and losses to its interests. It then comes up with its own "choices and decisions" -- as the famous French writer and philosopher Jean Paul Sartre said.
Taiwan's full support for the US' military action is our only choice, because it tallies with our interests. In fact, not only Taiwan's government but also its various civil groups are aware of this fact. Otherwise, why is Taiwan giving a cold shoulder to the anti-US and anti-war campaign while so many in the rest of the world are taking part in this movement?
Therefore, both deputy secretary-general to the President Joseph Wu's (吳釗燮) pro-US article -- published in the Taipei Times on March 20 -- and the controversial remarks of Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) spokesman Richard Shih (石瑞琦), who echoed Bush by urging Saddam to leave Iraq to avert war, in fact reflected mainstream opinion in Taiwan. In terms of what and how exactly top government officials should speak, that is a matter of rhetoric and will not be discussed here.
On the other hand, the anti-US and anti-war opinions of those opposition legislators or the so-called anti-war activists are surprising. Their most laughable opinion is that since Taiwan supports the US military action this time, China is likely to follow this example and attack Taiwan by force in the future. They have made two mistakes by saying so.
First, China never asked for UN approval when it assaulted India and Vietnam by force in the past. Beijing unceasingly threatens to "liberate Taiwan by force." It has even deployed over 400 ballistic missiles along its southeast coast, targeting Taiwan without regard for international society's objections. Therefore, the presumption that China may follow the US example is ill-founded.
Second, the political reality is that the US does not allow China to resolve the Taiwan issue by force, and supporting the US equals supporting Taiwan itself. On the other hand, we may further boost Beijing's arrogance if we go against Washington's move. The pro-unification camp's words and deeds this time serve as examples.
In Wu's pro-US article, he commented that "opposing war and the US should be left to the opposition parties that oppose everything." His words have deep meaning.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
A failure by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) to respond to Israel’s brilliant 12-day (June 12-23) bombing and special operations war against Iran, topped by US President Donald Trump’s ordering the June 21 bombing of Iranian deep underground nuclear weapons fuel processing sites, has been noted by some as demonstrating a profound lack of resolve, even “impotence,” by China. However, this would be a dangerous underestimation of CCP ambitions and its broader and more profound military response to the Trump Administration — a challenge that includes an acceleration of its strategies to assist nuclear proxy states, and developing a wide array
Twenty-four Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers are facing recall votes on Saturday, prompting nearly all KMT officials and lawmakers to rally their supporters over the past weekend, urging them to vote “no” in a bid to retain their seats and preserve the KMT’s majority in the Legislative Yuan. The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which had largely kept its distance from the civic recall campaigns, earlier this month instructed its officials and staff to support the recall groups in a final push to protect the nation. The justification for the recalls has increasingly been framed as a “resistance” movement against China and
Jaw Shaw-kong (趙少康), former chairman of Broadcasting Corp of China and leader of the “blue fighters,” recently announced that he had canned his trip to east Africa, and he would stay in Taiwan for the recall vote on Saturday. He added that he hoped “his friends in the blue camp would follow his lead.” His statement is quite interesting for a few reasons. Jaw had been criticized following media reports that he would be traveling in east Africa during the recall vote. While he decided to stay in Taiwan after drawing a lot of flak, his hesitation says it all: If
Saturday is the day of the first batch of recall votes primarily targeting lawmakers of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). The scale of the recall drive far outstrips the expectations from when the idea was mooted in January by Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘). The mass recall effort is reminiscent of the Sunflower movement protests against the then-KMT government’s non-transparent attempts to push through a controversial cross-strait service trade agreement in 2014. That movement, initiated by students, civic groups and non-governmental organizations, included student-led protesters occupying the main legislative chamber for three weeks. The two movements are linked