President Chen Shui-bian (
I would like to suggest that Chen go one step further. He could ask the Chinese people to sponsor the following opinion polls:
First, should Beijing allow referendums in China? China claims that it is against only Chen's referendum. But does China support the democratic procedure of referendums? Premier Hu Jintao (
Second, do the Chinese people want to kill their son or daughter in an attack on Taiwan? The "one child" policy has limited the ability of Chinese families to expand. Do they really want to take the risk of losing their precious offspring in an attack on Taiwan? Let's have a referendum on whether the Chinese people want to die to retake Taiwan.
Third, how about a poll on reunification? There was a report that students at Beijing University wanted to ask their fellow Chinese whether or not they wanted to reunite with Taiwan. This proposal was quickly squashed. But why? Do the Chinese really want to absorb Taiwan into their new empire? How many really care about Taiwan? Let's ask some Tibetans, some Uighurs, some Hmong, some very rich people in Shanghai and Tientsin.
Four, what is the Chinese perception of the value for Taiwan to be united with China? We could ask several questions. Would the quality of life in Taiwan improve if it was part of China? (By the way, we would need to educate the Chinese about the meaning of the term "quality of life.") Would the income of the Taiwanese be improved? Would the Taiwanese have more freedom of speech, voting, religious expression? If nationalism is the only reason to reunify, what would the Chinese be willing to sacrifice for nationalism? Their environment? Their health? Their lives in a war with Taiwan? Last year I traveled on a moped in the hills around Hsinchu. As I puttered through little villages and ate at small restaurants, I tried to visualize how annexation by China would benefit these people's lives. I could think of nothing. Would either the Chinese in China or the Taiwanese really want to create another level of bureaucracy -- ie, Beijing -- to negotiate their happiness, welfare, economic activities, travel, religious rites and legal system? What type of person in Beijing would want to be posted in Taiwan to oversee the lives, livelihoods and living conditions of the Taiwanese?
Five, do people in Fujian want missiles aimed at Taiwan on their shore? Is the entire policy of uniting Taiwan with China nothing more than a prop for the military? Let's take this mobilization of wealth, people, militaristic policies, international threats away from the military. Who would benefit? The possibility of democracy? The daily lives of the Chinese people?
Six, what province would want to have the military building missiles on the their territory? Tibet? Xinjiang? What cities would want such missiles? Shanghai? Nanjing?
It is time, in the words of Mao Zedong (毛澤東), to have the Chinese people stand up. They should be given the opportunity to voice their concerns about China's aggressive and wasteful foreign policy toward Taiwan. They need to be educated about the consequences. They need to be asked their opinion. To use a variation on an old Chinese idiom: A long journey [to enlightenment] begins with a single thought.
Richard C. Kagan is professor of history at Hamline University.
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the