The US, in its "global war on terror," has apparently overlooked one of the hubs of international terrorism: Taiwan.
At least, so says China's state media.
Last week, various Chinese Communist Party mouthpieces published editorials attacking the "independence terrorists" in Taiwan.
These pieces were written in response to a single line in the US Department of Defense's Fiscal Year 2004 Report to Congress on the People's Republic of China's Military Power.
In the Pentagon's analysis of Taiwan's military capabilities, it noted that, "Since Taipei cannot match Beijing's ability to field offensive systems, proponents of strikes against the mainland apparently hope that merely presenting credible threats to China's urban population or high-value targets, such as the Three Gorges Dam, will deter Chinese military coercion."
The Pentagon was clearly not suggesting that Taiwan attack the Three Gorges Dam. It was simply reporting that some people, who might accurately be described as "China hawks," were advocating such actions to prevent an invasion of Taiwan.
It is absurd to claim that the Pentagon was advocating a first strike against China -- but absurdity did not prevent dozens of commentators from saying that it had.
The ensuing debate on the feasibility of a Taiwan attack on the Three Gorges Dam quickly entered the realm of nonsense. On June 16, People's Liberation Army (PLA) Lieutenant General Liu Yuan (劉源) wrote in the China Youth Daily that the PLA would be on the lookout for "Taiwan independence terrorists."
He then promised to "blot out the sky and cover up the earth" if Taiwan ever attacked the dam. In any case, he noted, the dam "cannot be destroyed."
Next, the China Daily joined the chorus of raucous voices on June 18. The paper ran an opinion piece by "a Beijing-based military expert" entitled "Terrorism part of Taiwan separatist agenda."
In this piece, the author said the Pentagon's report indicated that "pro-independence forces in Taiwan are turning to terrorist measures to help pursue their political goals."
If these polemics weren't so disturbing, they'd be laughable.
After all, no mainstream political party or figure in Taiwan has advocated terror tactics against China.
But several PLA officers and Chinese military experts have advocated terror tactics -- as part of Beijing's strategy to forcefully unify with Taiwan.
For example, in the book Unrestricted Warfare, two PLA senior colonels, Qiao Liang (喬良) and Wang Xiangsui (王湘穗), championed the adoption and employment of various types of asymmetric and non-traditional warfare -- including terror attacks and the use of nuclear weapons -- to compensate for the intrinsic weaknesses of the PLA.
Notably, Qiao claimed in an interview that "the first rule of unrestricted warfare is that there are no rules, nothing forbidden."
Since Beijing finds the threat of terror and first-strike tactics so distasteful, it should ban its own use of such tactics. It could start by dismantling the short- and medium-range ballistic missiles it has aimed at Taiwan.
After all, these weapons have been deployed with the sole purpose of being used in a saturation attack, which would result in thousands of civilian casualties.
There are any number of definitions of terrorism, but China shouldn't be misled into thinking that the international community -- whatever that may be -- is likely to accept China's claim that it is being targeted by "Taiwan independence terrorists" at face value.
Indeed, if anyone can claim to be in danger of state-sponsored terror, it is the people of Taiwan.
Mac William Bishop is an editor at the Taipei Times.
Could Asia be on the verge of a new wave of nuclear proliferation? A look back at the early history of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), which recently celebrated its 75th anniversary, illuminates some reasons for concern in the Indo-Pacific today. US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin recently described NATO as “the most powerful and successful alliance in history,” but the organization’s early years were not without challenges. At its inception, the signing of the North Atlantic Treaty marked a sea change in American strategic thinking. The United States had been intent on withdrawing from Europe in the years following
My wife and I spent the week in the interior of Taiwan where Shuyuan spent her childhood. In that town there is a street that functions as an open farmer’s market. Walk along that street, as Shuyuan did yesterday, and it is next to impossible to come home empty-handed. Some mangoes that looked vaguely like others we had seen around here ended up on our table. Shuyuan told how she had bought them from a little old farmer woman from the countryside who said the mangoes were from a very old tree she had on her property. The big surprise
The issue of China’s overcapacity has drawn greater global attention recently, with US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen urging Beijing to address its excess production in key industries during her visit to China last week. Meanwhile in Brussels, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen last week said that Europe must have a tough talk with China on its perceived overcapacity and unfair trade practices. The remarks by Yellen and Von der Leyen come as China’s economy is undergoing a painful transition. Beijing is trying to steer the world’s second-largest economy out of a COVID-19 slump, the property crisis and
As former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) wrapped up his visit to the People’s Republic of China, he received his share of attention. Certainly, the trip must be seen within the full context of Ma’s life, that is, his eight-year presidency, the Sunflower movement and his failed Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement, as well as his eight years as Taipei mayor with its posturing, accusations of money laundering, and ups and downs. Through all that, basic questions stand out: “What drives Ma? What is his end game?” Having observed and commented on Ma for decades, it is all ironically reminiscent of former US president Harry