The US, in its "global war on terror," has apparently overlooked one of the hubs of international terrorism: Taiwan.
At least, so says China's state media.
Last week, various Chinese Communist Party mouthpieces published editorials attacking the "independence terrorists" in Taiwan.
These pieces were written in response to a single line in the US Department of Defense's Fiscal Year 2004 Report to Congress on the People's Republic of China's Military Power.
In the Pentagon's analysis of Taiwan's military capabilities, it noted that, "Since Taipei cannot match Beijing's ability to field offensive systems, proponents of strikes against the mainland apparently hope that merely presenting credible threats to China's urban population or high-value targets, such as the Three Gorges Dam, will deter Chinese military coercion."
The Pentagon was clearly not suggesting that Taiwan attack the Three Gorges Dam. It was simply reporting that some people, who might accurately be described as "China hawks," were advocating such actions to prevent an invasion of Taiwan.
It is absurd to claim that the Pentagon was advocating a first strike against China -- but absurdity did not prevent dozens of commentators from saying that it had.
The ensuing debate on the feasibility of a Taiwan attack on the Three Gorges Dam quickly entered the realm of nonsense. On June 16, People's Liberation Army (PLA) Lieutenant General Liu Yuan (劉源) wrote in the China Youth Daily that the PLA would be on the lookout for "Taiwan independence terrorists."
He then promised to "blot out the sky and cover up the earth" if Taiwan ever attacked the dam. In any case, he noted, the dam "cannot be destroyed."
Next, the China Daily joined the chorus of raucous voices on June 18. The paper ran an opinion piece by "a Beijing-based military expert" entitled "Terrorism part of Taiwan separatist agenda."
In this piece, the author said the Pentagon's report indicated that "pro-independence forces in Taiwan are turning to terrorist measures to help pursue their political goals."
If these polemics weren't so disturbing, they'd be laughable.
After all, no mainstream political party or figure in Taiwan has advocated terror tactics against China.
But several PLA officers and Chinese military experts have advocated terror tactics -- as part of Beijing's strategy to forcefully unify with Taiwan.
For example, in the book Unrestricted Warfare, two PLA senior colonels, Qiao Liang (喬良) and Wang Xiangsui (王湘穗), championed the adoption and employment of various types of asymmetric and non-traditional warfare -- including terror attacks and the use of nuclear weapons -- to compensate for the intrinsic weaknesses of the PLA.
Notably, Qiao claimed in an interview that "the first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, nothing forbidden."
Since Beijing finds the threat of terror and first-strike tactics so distasteful, it should ban its own use of such tactics. It could start by dismantling the short- and medium-range ballistic missiles it has aimed at Taiwan.
After all, these weapons have been deployed with the sole purpose of being used in a saturation attack, which would result in thousands of civilian casualties.
There are any number of definitions of terrorism, but China shouldn't be misled into thinking that the international community -- whatever that may be -- is likely to accept China's claim that it is being targeted by "Taiwan independence terrorists" at face value.
Indeed, if anyone can claim to be in danger of state-sponsored terror, it is the people of Taiwan.
Mac William Bishop is an editor at the Taipei Times.
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS