The Democratic Action Alliance was one of the principle organizers of Saturday's "peace rally" held to protest the government's US$18.25 billion arms procurement deal with the US. The purchase will strengthen Taiwan's military defenses with eight diesel-electric submarines, six PAC-3 anti-missile systems and 12 P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft. The interest group is borrowing vocal opposition to the procurement plan from academics to advance its agenda.
Let's debunk the actions and words of the Democratic Action Alliance and its supporters, shall we?
First, promoting the protest as a "peace rally" is misleading. As a concerned citizen, I think the proponents of the arms purchase are pro-peace because they understand the heightened national security threat that comes not only from Taiwan's aggressive neighbor, but also from a weak and outdated military. China has always been a threat, and will only become a greater threat in the future.
The Chen administration has, on several occasions, offered an olive branch to Beijing, but only got insults and disappointment in return. And if there can be no peaceful dialogue between Taipei and Beijing, then one has to assume aggression is forthcoming. A sound defense is therefore critical to protect the nation.
Second, National Taiwan University's professor Huang Kuang-kuo (
Third, the alliance whines that the arms deal violates the "spirit of democracy." Democracy is defined as "government by the people, either directly or through elected representatives," and Taiwan's government (as well as most other world democracies) is clearly the latter. Our elected representatives in the Legislature voice our concerns regarding bills and statues. That's what you do when you cast the ballot. Perhaps the alliance can elaborate on how it defines democracy?
Fourth, opponents always argue about arms procurement at the expense of social welfare. A strong military can only be sustained if there's a strong economy and vice versa, as we have witnessed during the Cold War; when the US outlasted the Soviet Union economically, later bringing about the collapse of the Communist government. Where will you work or where will your family get medical care when a Chinese invasion completely destroys Taiwan? We should aim to grow a strong army, navy, and air force, then we will deal with the rest, as we are a freedom-loving and hard-working people.
People like me are labeled "hawks" or "war mongers," but the threat of an invasion of Taiwan is very real. Beijing continues to actively deploy coastal missiles and modernize its military, and any reasonable person can understand why. Domestic social issues are crucial indeed, but they mean nothing if future generations cannot live freely.
Eugene Liu
Atlanta
The conflict in the Middle East has been disrupting financial markets, raising concerns about rising inflationary pressures and global economic growth. One market that some investors are particularly worried about has not been heavily covered in the news: the private credit market. Even before the joint US-Israeli attacks on Iran on Feb. 28, global capital markets had faced growing structural pressure — the deteriorating funding conditions in the private credit market. The private credit market is where companies borrow funds directly from nonbank financial institutions such as asset management companies, insurance companies and private lending platforms. Its popularity has risen since
The Donald Trump administration’s approach to China broadly, and to cross-Strait relations in particular, remains a conundrum. The 2025 US National Security Strategy prioritized the defense of Taiwan in a way that surprised some observers of the Trump administration: “Deterring a conflict over Taiwan, ideally by preserving military overmatch, is a priority.” Two months later, Taiwan went entirely unmentioned in the US National Defense Strategy, as did military overmatch vis-a-vis China, giving renewed cause for concern. How to interpret these varying statements remains an open question. In both documents, the Indo-Pacific is listed as a second priority behind homeland defense and
In an op-ed published in Foreign Affairs on Tuesday, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) said that Taiwan should not have to choose between aligning with Beijing or Washington, and advocated for cooperation with Beijing under the so-called “1992 consensus” as a form of “strategic ambiguity.” However, Cheng has either misunderstood the geopolitical reality and chosen appeasement, or is trying to fool an international audience with her doublespeak; nonetheless, it risks sending the wrong message to Taiwan’s democratic allies and partners. Cheng stressed that “Taiwan does not have to choose,” as while Beijing and Washington compete, Taiwan is strongest when
US Secretary of the Treasury Scott Bessent and Chinese Vice Premier He Lifeng (何立峰) are expected to meet this month in Paris to prepare for a meeting between US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平). According to media reports, the two sides would discuss issues such as the potential purchase of Boeing aircraft by China, increasing imports of US soybeans and the latest impacts of Trump’s reciprocal tariffs. However, recent US military action against Iran has added uncertainty to the Trump-Xi summit. Chinese Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi (王毅) called the joint US-Israeli airstrikes and the
RSS