The Pentagon's annual report to the US Congress on China's military power this year has stimulated much discussion in Taiwan. I believe two major problems are important to address -- the significance behind the release of the report and whether or not after reading the report Taiwan is awake to the perilous state of its security.
Pursuant to the National Defense Authorization Act, the Department of Defense assessed the security problems in the Tai-wan Strait, including China's military power and the cross-strait security situation. Its report assumes that Taiwan lacks foreign aid and has to counter China's invasion on its own; that Taiwan's weaponry will soon be offset by the quality and quantity of the People's Liberation Army; that China's cruise missiles will pose an even greater threat to Taiwan and that these arms will overwhelm the anti-missile systems Taiwan has by 2005.
This year's report differs from its predecessors in the doubts it casts on China's sincerity in seeking to peacefully resolve the Taiwan issue and the emphasis it puts on the imbalance in the forces on either side of the Strait. What's worth noting is that although only factual statements and analyses are given in the report, they might reveal the latest offensive taken by the pro-Taiwan "blue team" in Washington.
For instance, the report reiter-ates the growing threat posed by China's ballistic missiles and the defensive incompetence of Tai-wan's missiles. The discussion about China's menacing anti-ship missiles suggests that Taiwan's naval forces desperately require the ability -- using systems such as AEGIS-equipped destroyers -- to counter saturation-bombing attacks. It is widely known that the Pentagon has been supportive of Taiwan and most of the blue team members work in the department.
On Taiwan's part, the report states that China will adopt strong strategies to force Taiwan to quickly surrender. Some law-makers, including myself and those on the National Defense Committee, have long pointed out that Beijing's attempts to narrow Taiwan's space for decision making by means of a "brink of war" policy. But the people of Taiwan have failed to notice this point.
A laissez-faire policy simply encourages invaders to run the risk of undertaking military operations. The reason is very simple -- when invaders sense that the political atmosphere, or the strategic environment, is inclined toward non-resistance, they choose to launch military attacks because the risks or war are smaller and they can profit from a war.
Speeches by US President George W. Bush and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld have shared identical keynotes with the Pentagon report. I hope that people of Taiwan will show some concern over military security issues for more than just a few minutes. Simply following the US' steps can't establish the defense most suitable for Taiwan. Only long-term attention to national defense can help build a viable defense. Only when Taiwan becomes another Israel will the support of its potential allies be reciprocal and reliable.
Lee Wen-chung is a legislator from the DPP.
Translated by Jackie Lin
Elbridge Colby, America’s Under Secretary of Defense for Policy, is the most influential voice on defense strategy in the Second Trump Administration. For insight into his thinking, one could do no better than read his thoughts on the defense of Taiwan which he gathered in a book he wrote in 2021. The Strategy of Denial, is his contemplation of China’s rising hegemony in Asia and on how to deter China from invading Taiwan. Allowing China to absorb Taiwan, he wrote, would open the entire Indo-Pacific region to Chinese preeminence and result in a power transition that would place America’s prosperity
When Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) caucus whip Ker Chien-ming (柯建銘) first suggested a mass recall of Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, the Taipei Times called the idea “not only absurd, but also deeply undemocratic” (“Lai’s speech and legislative chaos,” Jan. 6, page 8). In a subsequent editorial (“Recall chaos plays into KMT hands,” Jan. 9, page 8), the paper wrote that his suggestion was not a solution, and that if it failed, it would exacerbate the enmity between the parties and lead to a cascade of revenge recalls. The danger came from having the DPP orchestrate a mass recall. As it transpired,
All 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and suspended Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安), formerly of the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), survived recall elections against them on Saturday, in a massive loss to the unprecedented mass recall movement, as well as to the ruling Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) that backed it. The outcome has surprised many, as most analysts expected that at least a few legislators would be ousted. Over the past few months, dedicated and passionate civic groups gathered more than 1 million signatures to recall KMT lawmakers, an extraordinary achievement that many believed would be enough to remove at
A few weeks ago in Kaohsiung, tech mogul turned political pundit Robert Tsao (曹興誠) joined Western Washington University professor Chen Shih-fen (陳時奮) for a public forum in support of Taiwan’s recall campaign. Kaohsiung, already the most Taiwanese independence-minded city in Taiwan, was not in need of a recall. So Chen took a different approach: He made the case that unification with China would be too expensive to work. The argument was unusual. Most of the time, we hear that Taiwan should remain free out of respect for democracy and self-determination, but cost? That is not part of the usual script, and
RSS