Under the National Defense Law (
Overall defense is defensive in nature, under which the state will only take action if attacked. Tai-wan possesses retaliatory military power, which is a bargaining chip in in its defense. The concept of "offshore full-scale engagement" (決戰境外), intended to keep military conflict away from Taiwan, highlights the government's re-solve to conduct a defensive defense. The quality of national defense strategies and of advanced weaponry systems, however, is less important than psychological defense.
Singapore's senior minister Lee Kuan Yew (
Psychological defense is closely related to such concepts as gemeinschaft -- a society or group characterized chiefly by a strong sense of common identity -- as well as identity, belonging, unity and cohesion within ethnic groups. When a nation becomes a gemeinschaft, it has attained the best condition for psychological defense.
Since Taiwan's political transition, local businesses have in-creased their investments in China; lawmakers and retired officials have gone on numerous visits to Beijing; retired military personnel have been keen on military exchanges; retired intelligence staff have damaged the national interest for their personal ends, and the number of people in favor of the "one country, two systems" model appears to be increasing daily. These developments highlight the vulnerability of Taiwan's psychological defense line, which gives Beijing the opportunity to divide and weaken Taiwan.
In early May, a visiting delegation from the US National War College discovered that some of Taiwan's generals are dissatisfied with the government. The delegation also doubted the capacity of Taiwan's society to withstand a cross-strait military conflict. Questions that arise from their findings include: for what and for whom do the armed forces fight? Does the military cooperate with or secretly oppose the government on national defense strategies? Is Taiwan a pawn or a player between the US and China? Is Taiwan acquiring weapons in order to launch an arms race with China, or to pursue a military balance to attain peace? Will acceptance of the one coun-try, two systems model maintain or destroy the status quo? Will the ROC disappear as a result?
These questions cannot be resolved by acquisition of the most advanced weapons. But if they are not settled, sophisticated weapons may become useless. Beijing doesn't need to attack cities when it can attack people's minds, let Taiwan divide itself and wear down the will to resist.
The one country, two systems model destroys, not maintains, the status quo. The model will make Beijing the central government and Taipei the government of a special administrative region without control over diplomacy and defense. The ROC will become "Taiwan, China."
The model is oppressive and transitional. Hong Kong was pro-mised that its status quo would remain intact for only 50 years. As a colony, Hong Kong had no power to say "no" to the one country, two systems model that Britain agreed to with Beijing. That some people in Taiwan are willing to accept the model has perplexed the people of Hong Kong and Beijing officials in charge of Taiwan affairs.
In mid June, the results of opinion polls on the one country, two systems model conducted by three major media institutions differed substantially from a sur-vey on the same issue by National Chengchi University's Election Research Center. One would have to examine the questions asked and compare the answers given in order to find out which one, if any, to believe. That Taiwan is finding it difficult to oppose the one country, two systems or "one country, three systems" models, and that some people in Taiwan are harboring fantasies about those proposals, however, shows that psychological defense faces a tough challenge.
Lin Cheng-yi is director of the Institute of European and American Studies of the Academia Sinica.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations