The recent focus on the "middle line" of the Taiwan Strait reveals a few things very important to the people of Taiwan -- the delicate and volatile nature of the relationship between the two sides of the Strait, and the potential threat that China poses to Taiwan. Unfortunately, way too many people in this country do not seem to realize the true nature of Taiwan's relationship with China and continue to harbor unrealistic expectations and fantasies about a "Chinese motherland."
What caused the sudden interest in the middle line was a news story published on Monday by a newspaper in Hong Kong, theWen Wei Po, alleging that Chinese fighter jets had successfully fended off a group of Taiwanese fighter jets that tried to cross the middle line. The newspaper then went on to quote a high-ranking Chinese military official as saying that Taiwanese naval aircraft would be "crushed" if they dare any provocation.
In view of the highly sensitive, if not strenuous, relationship between China, the US and Taiwan over the past months, and the compromising attitude demonstrated in President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) inaugural speech with respect to major issues of concern to both countries, it is virtually impossible to believe that there can be any deliberate provocation on the part of Taiwan. In fact, the Ministry of National Defense has already denied the story -- that there had been any crossing of the middle line, whether deliberate or inadvertent, by any of its aircraft.
However, all the recent discussions about the middle line has revealed that, although it did not happen this time, an inadvertent crossing of the line by either side is a possibility that cannot be ruled out. The middle line is an imaginary line drawn by the US in the middle of the Strait in 1951. While Taiwan's government knows about its location, pilots of fighter jets typically have to rely on instructions from the control tower to avoid crossing the line inadvertently. As for whether the Chinese government knows about it, upon inquiry by lawmakers in the Legislative Yuan, Minister of National Defense Lee Jye (李傑) answered "I don't know." However, he went on to explain that, judging from the consistent flight patterns of Chinese fighter jets, the other side "ought to" know about it.
In other words, although the US in all likelihood had communicated to Beijing the location of the middle line, the two sides of the Strait had been relying on "tactful understanding" about where this critical line is, in the absence of any direct confirmation from the other side. In view of China's hostility toward this country -- as evident from the large number of Chinese missiles targeting Taiwan and the threats by the Taiwan Affairs Office in recent days -- one cannot help but wonder whether peace in the Strait is hanging by a very thin thread.
If China intends to start a war in the Strait, one cannot rule out the possibility that it may do so by claiming provocative crossings of the middle line by Taiwanese fighters or by attacking such jets in alleged self-defense. In particular, since Wen Wei Po is known as a mouthpiece of Beijing, the coercive undertone of the news story in question cannot be overlooked.
What the incident should reveal to the people of Taiwan is that, in reality, China is an enemy state that could barely be kept behind a middle line, the location of which most people did not even know about until Lee made it public this week. Yet, under the circumstances, many people continue to feel a confused sense of national identity. The middle line of the Strait goes a long way in revealing the genuine nature of the cross-strait relationship. The problem is some people just don't want to face the reality.
Jan. 1 marks a decade since China repealed its one-child policy. Just 10 days before, Peng Peiyun (彭珮雲), who long oversaw the often-brutal enforcement of China’s family-planning rules, died at the age of 96, having never been held accountable for her actions. Obituaries praised Peng for being “reform-minded,” even though, in practice, she only perpetuated an utterly inhumane policy, whose consequences have barely begun to materialize. It was Vice Premier Chen Muhua (陳慕華) who first proposed the one-child policy in 1979, with the endorsement of China’s then-top leaders, Chen Yun (陳雲) and Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平), as a means of avoiding the
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
A recent piece of international news has drawn surprisingly little attention, yet it deserves far closer scrutiny. German industrial heavyweight Siemens Mobility has reportedly outmaneuvered long-entrenched Chinese competitors in Southeast Asian infrastructure to secure a strategic partnership with Vietnam’s largest private conglomerate, Vingroup. The agreement positions Siemens to participate in the construction of a high-speed rail link between Hanoi and Ha Long Bay. German media were blunt in their assessment: This was not merely a commercial win, but has symbolic significance in “reshaping geopolitical influence.” At first glance, this might look like a routine outcome of corporate bidding. However, placed in
China often describes itself as the natural leader of the global south: a power that respects sovereignty, rejects coercion and offers developing countries an alternative to Western pressure. For years, Venezuela was held up — implicitly and sometimes explicitly — as proof that this model worked. Today, Venezuela is exposing the limits of that claim. Beijing’s response to the latest crisis in Venezuela has been striking not only for its content, but for its tone. Chinese officials have abandoned their usual restrained diplomatic phrasing and adopted language that is unusually direct by Beijing’s standards. The Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs described the