President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) renamed the "defensive referendum" the "peace referendum" in the hope that Taiwan and China will establish a peaceful and stable interactive framework. Similarly, Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤), during his visit to France, said his country is developing "peaceful diplomacy." When Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) visited the US last year, he even described China's rise as a "peaceful ascendancy."
Leaders from both sides are using the word "peace[ful]." But we have not seen China's "peaceful ascendancy" bring any peaceful prospect to the relationship across the Taiwan Strait.
Beijing's leaders chose the term "peaceful ascendancy" in response to the shift in US strategy. Since US President George W. Bush took office, the superpower has made efforts to realize its "imperial strategy." Through this strategy, generally called "unilateralism," the US has constantly used its military advantage to interfere around the world, establishing its global leadership and hegemonic system.
Out of fear of the US' imperial strategy and to avoid being pushed by international society to the front line vying for global leadership with the US, China has gradually adopted the concept of "peaceful ascendancy" after Hu took power, replacing the "great-power diplomacy" traditionally used during the Jiang Zemin (江澤民) era. Without the "great power" label, China can avoid the embarrassment brought by direct conflict with the US' power. Mean-while, it can maintain strategic dialogue with the US.
However, what practical strategic moves should be expected during China's "peaceful ascendancy?" Chinese academic Sun Zhe (孫哲) points out three feasible directions. First, adopt an effective approach to interaction with other nations and promote the different values and national interests of China and other nations. Second, establish early warning systems to avoid differences in assessment and to adjust the diplomatic process. And third, recapitulate experiences and continuously expand successful diplomatic cooperation in a bid to expand and deepen the foundation for interaction with other nations.
The concepts of interaction, early warning and cooperation are the basic meaning of Beijing's "peaceful ascendancy" when building diplomatic relationships.
Deplorably, although China has these diplomatic ideas, it still adopts unfriendly measures to deal with Taiwan. In addition to its traditional tactics of targeting Taiwan with missiles, refusing to relinquish the use of military force and intimidating Taiwan to accept the "one China" principle, it has been applying pressure through the international community and publicizing the discourse that "opposing referendums is opposing Taiwanese independence."
This has misled the international community into believing that Chen attempts to change the status quo and has made the Taiwanese people feel China's ascent. But this is nothing more than an "ascendancy of hege-mony." We can hardly see any "peaceful ascendancy."
During a hearing on Capitol Hill, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Randall Schriver pointed out that now only 6 percent of Taiwanese people accept unification with China and 20 percent support independence. Although a majority of people tend to prefer maintaining the status quo, aren't the increase and decrease in supporters for independence and unification caused by China's missile intimidation? If Beijing really believes this is a "peaceful ascendancy," how can they create so many supporters for Taiwanese independence?
Similarly, because China does not give up the use of military attacks against Taiwan, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense Richard Lawless had to reiterate that the US is obliged to support Taiwan to maintain deterrent forces and to cooperate with allies to help it maintain sufficient defense capabilities. In the event of war, Taiwan would be capable of swiftly defeating China.
As long as China does not remove the missiles aimed at Taiwan and relinquish the use of military force against Taiwan, it cannot cover the fundamental of its "hegemonic ascendancy," no matter how hard it attempts to maintain a facade of "peace" in the international community.
Wang Kun-yi is an associate professor at the Graduate Institute of International Affairs and Strategic Studies of Tamkang University.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and