According to the US Department of Defense's annual report to Congress on China's military power, there has been talk in Taiwan about attacking high-value targets in China, such as the Three Gorges Dam, if the nation comes under attack from China. Immediately, some media outlets began to portray this as a suggestion by the US that Taiwan attack, or interpreted it to mean that the nation is actually planning such an attack.
This is of course all very irresponsible and the whole story could not be further from the truth. This is not to mention that the story has created unnecessary anxiety in Taiwan.
It is imperative to point out that Taiwan could not possibly make a first strike against China in any event. If it did, it would lose all international support, in particular that of the US, which is the lifeline onto which it has been hanging in the face of increasing Chinese threats. Even talk of enhancing Taiwan's sovereignty or adopting a new constitution has triggered pressure from the US, which has repeatedly emphasized that the US is obligated under the Taiwan Relations Act only to help Taiwan in its self-defense, not in other situations; so it is not hard to imagine what would happen if Taiwan made a first strike. Under the circumstances, it is completely erroneous to depict Taiwan as planning such an attack or the US as suggesting such a thing.
But it is an entirely different matter to think about what could be done in self-defense if China attacked. Attacking the Three Gorges Dam is merely one among many options that might be discussed against such a backdrop. There is really no need to highlight such a scenario -- doing so would only create a hawkish image of Taiwan, when in reality China is the biggest threat to peace in the Taiwan Strait and in fact the entire Asia-Pacific region.
When pressed by legislators on Wednesday about the nation's ability to attack the Three Gorges Dam, Vice Minister of National Defense Tsai Ming-hsien (
Though Tsai was telling the truth, the strange thing is that such comments probably created anxiety instead of comfort among the public. This reflects the mindset of the people of Taiwan: They do not want any talk of military hostility between the two sides of the Taiwan Strait. Many people can't seem to face the genuine nature of the cross-strait relationship -- that is, that China is a very hostile country waiting eagerly to take over the nation. While the two sides of the Taiwan Strait have been engaging in close economic, social and cultural exchanges, the Chinese government has never altered its hostile attitude.
Tsai also indicated in the Legislative Yuan that China may very well launch a small-scale attack as early as 2006 or 2008. He was of course condemned for encouraging hysteria and paranoia. The truth of the matter is that while giving a precise timetable about an attack is probably unwise, the possibility of an attack is real. The topic is now taboo precisely because the possibility is so real.
The day that the people of Taiwan finally face the truth and adjust their mentality may be the day that the current "national identity" crisis becomes a thing of the past.
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.
As Maldivian President Mohamed Muizzu’s party won by a landslide in Sunday’s parliamentary election, it is a good time to take another look at recent developments in the Maldivian foreign policy. While Muizzu has been promoting his “Maldives First” policy, the agenda seems to have lost sight of a number of factors. Contemporary Maldivian policy serves as a stark illustration of how a blend of missteps in public posturing, populist agendas and inattentive leadership can lead to diplomatic setbacks and damage a country’s long-term foreign policy priorities. Over the past few months, Maldivian foreign policy has entangled itself in playing
A group of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers led by the party’s legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (?) are to visit Beijing for four days this week, but some have questioned the timing and purpose of the visit, which demonstrates the KMT caucus’ increasing arrogance. Fu on Wednesday last week confirmed that following an invitation by Beijing, he would lead a group of lawmakers to China from Thursday to Sunday to discuss tourism and agricultural exports, but he refused to say whether they would meet with Chinese officials. That the visit is taking place during the legislative session and in the aftermath