Earth to Beijing: Get a life! The boys in Beijing just don't get it. During many discussions relating to Taiwan and China, I have heard Chinese insist that it is only natural for a mother to want to have a child return to her bosom. This homely image is usually shattered whenever it is suggested that the wayward child would prefer to remain outside the fold. Despite their professed love for their brothers in Taiwan, they show a remarkable willingness to bomb them into oblivion if they do not reciprocate.
This pairing of mother's love with "nuke-'em-til-they-glow" threats is twisted, to say the least. It recalls the logic (?) expressed by the US military during the Vietnam conflict that it might be necessary to destroy a village to save it. As it is, China has at least 500 missiles armed and aimed at Taiwan. If tensions are rising on both sides of the Taiwan Strait, it is not hard to see where the source lies. Chinese leaders continue to make substantial increases in military spending while confirming that reunification is their top priority and the core issue for their relations with the US. For its part, the People's Liberation Army (PLA) is actively improving its capabilities for a full military invasion of Taiwan. The aim of its training is to perfect a multi-pronged blitzkrieg to secure a foothold to pre-empt US reaction.
To this end, the PLA conducts massive joint-force exercises that simulate an invasion of Taiwan from China's southeastern coast.
As in other independent countries, threats from a bellicose and bullying neighbor encourage the threatened people to rally around those they believe will protect their interests. It is hard for Beijing to make the case that bombing Taiwan into submission serves the best interest of Taiwan's inhabitants.
Threats of aggression have reinforced the development of a distinctive Taiwanese identity. A recent response to China's saber rattling was the largest demonstration in Taiwan's history when over a million people joined hands to create a human chain traversing the entire length of the country.
Public-opinion surveys indicate that Taiwanese identity has grown over the past decade with over 40 percent of inhabitants viewing themselves as Taiwanese only. Meanwhile, a slightly larger percentage sees their identity as both Taiwanese and Chinese. In all events, Beijing depends upon fabricated logic and imaginary historical claims to support its efforts to exclude Taiwan from various international organizations. Never mind the nationalistic assertions, historical facts offer little support for Beijing's claims for its suzerainty over Taiwan. Looking back into the distant past of the island of Formosa, it is well known that it was originally inhabited by Aboriginal peoples.
Eventually Portuguese sailors arrived in and around the country before significant Chinese settlements appeared there.
Then, in 1624, the Dutch arrived and were soon followed by the Spanish.
China's political influence on Taiwan began in 1661 after officials linked to the Ming dynasty displaced the Dutch. In 1683, the Qing took over Taiwan but ceded it to Japan in 1895. After spending nearly 50 years under Japanese control, Taiwan became the refuge of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Chiang Kai-shek (
It is chimerical that a country founded upon a Marxist-Leninist ideology would be willing to depend upon sovereignty claims based upon imperial conquest and unequal treaties.
After all, demands for assumption of political control over Hong Kong and Macau were based upon repudiating just these conditions.
Forget about the rhetoric. It is clear that the leadership in Beijing cares nothing about multi-party, pluralistic democracy, nor is it sensitive to the aspirations of a free people. This is evident in dismissive remarks about the lack of "patriotism" among Hong Kong's democrats. They are dismissed as incompetent because they insist upon self-determination for Hong Kong residents instead of promoting the interests of a distant autocratic regime.
Recently, the Chinese Communist Party issued histrionic complaints that a referendum for a new constitution for Taiwan would violate international law. Concerning proposed changes in Taiwan's Constitution, it can only be an improvement.
The existing document was formulated in Nanjing in 1947 by Chiang's KMT to secure a one-party dictatorship.
Revisions are needed to support the vibrant, multiparty democracy that now operates in Taiwan.
Either as an act of arrogance and hypocrisy or willful deception, lectures on legal niceties from dictatorial single-party regimes hardly merit consideration.
If Beijing is so concerned about due process, it should welcome a referendum to determine whether people in Taiwan wish to reunite with China under the current regime.
As it is, there is no explicit universal acceptance of China's sovereignty over Taiwan. China's threat to use force against Taiwan has no more basis in international law than would military aggression against Japan or India.
Christopher Lingle is professor of economics at Georgetown University.
Taiwan stands at the epicenter of a seismic shift that will determine the Indo-Pacific’s future security architecture. Whether deterrence prevails or collapses will reverberate far beyond the Taiwan Strait, fundamentally reshaping global power dynamics. The stakes could not be higher. Today, Taipei confronts an unprecedented convergence of threats from an increasingly muscular China that has intensified its multidimensional pressure campaign. Beijing’s strategy is comprehensive: military intimidation, diplomatic isolation, economic coercion, and sophisticated influence operations designed to fracture Taiwan’s democratic society from within. This challenge is magnified by Taiwan’s internal political divisions, which extend to fundamental questions about the island’s identity and future
The narrative surrounding Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s attendance at last week’s Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) summit — where he held hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin and chatted amiably with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) — was widely framed as a signal of Modi distancing himself from the US and edging closer to regional autocrats. It was depicted as Modi reacting to the levying of high US tariffs, burying the hatchet over border disputes with China, and heralding less engagement with the Quadrilateral Security dialogue (Quad) composed of the US, India, Japan and Australia. With Modi in China for the
The Jamestown Foundation last week published an article exposing Beijing’s oil rigs and other potential dual-use platforms in waters near Pratas Island (Dongsha Island, 東沙島). China’s activities there resembled what they did in the East China Sea, inside the exclusive economic zones of Japan and South Korea, as well as with other South China Sea claimants. However, the most surprising element of the report was that the authors’ government contacts and Jamestown’s own evinced little awareness of China’s activities. That Beijing’s testing of Taiwanese (and its allies) situational awareness seemingly went unnoticed strongly suggests the need for more intelligence. Taiwan’s naval
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has postponed its chairperson candidate registration for two weeks, and so far, nine people have announced their intention to run for chairperson, the most on record, with more expected to announce their campaign in the final days. On the evening of Aug. 23, shortly after seven KMT lawmakers survived recall votes, KMT Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) announced he would step down and urged Taichung Mayor Lu Shiow-yen (盧秀燕) to step in and lead the party back to power. Lu immediately ruled herself out the following day, leaving the subject in question. In the days that followed, several
RSS