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.
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
There is an old saying that if there is blood in the water, the sharks will come. In Taiwan’s case, that shark is China, circling, waiting for any sign of weakness to strike. Many thought the failed recall effort was that blood in the water, a signal for Beijing to press harder, but Taiwan’s democracy has just proven that China is mistaken. The recent recall campaign against 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, many with openly pro-Beijing leanings, failed at the ballot box. While the challenge targeted opposition lawmakers rather than President William Lai (賴清德) himself, it became an indirect
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to
RSS