St. Augustine wrote in The City of God that "All men desire peace, the problem is that they all want peace on their own terms." Peace can be achieved under various conditions. The ancient Romans achieved peace by slaughtering the Carthaginians, and a peace -- of a sort -- was achieved behind the Iron Curtain. Warmongers always call for peace -- but it is always peace on their own terms.
The special budget for the procurement of submarines, anti-missile batteries and anti-submarine weapons for the Ministry of National Defense has given rise to heated controversy. I believe that at its core, the debate centers on the issue of "peace": on whose terms do we want peace, and what price are we willing to pay in order to achieve the peace that we seek?
China's situation in relation to its neighbors has greatly improved since the Cold War. Russia, once an implacable enemy, is now a major arms supplier, and Beijing is now making friends with both Vietnam and India. But despite these developments, China's military strength has continued to increase by leaps and bounds. Its primary objective, in addition to replacing the US as the dominant military power in the Pacific, is to force Taiwan into accepting "one country, two systems." As a result, in the last few years China has become the world's largest arms importer.
That its armaments program is aimed at Taiwan can be glimpsed from its deployments. The new Sovremenny-class destroyers and Kilo-class submarines have all been deployed with the East China Sea Fleet (東海艦隊) and its Sukhoi-27 and Sukhoi-30 fighter aircraft are deployed at airbases suited for an assault on Taiwan.
The people who oppose the arms procurement budget for the reason that it is likely to lead to an "arms race" are forgetting one important point: Taiwan's deployment of F-16s is a response to China's deployment of Su-27 fighters; that Taiwan seeks to purchase Kidd-class destroyers to counteract China's Sovremenny-class destroyers. Taiwan is reacting to the continuous pressure from China, but in seeking to maintain the military balance in the Taiwan Strait, the Ministry of Defense has acted with great caution, always purchasing a minimum of armaments to counter China's buildup. We do not wish to engage in an arms race with China, but the greatest threat to stability in the Taiwan Strait is the temptation for the People's Liberation Army to act because they perceive that the military balance is tilted in their favor. Our current raft of purchases aims at making such an invasion more costly for China. If you don't lock the door, you're just inviting the thief in.
Obviously, the cross-strait issue is complex and will not be determined by military factors alone. Taiwan is a small country and to meet force with force is not the best policy. The military force of a small country must be reinforced by the determination of the whole people to defend the country. But if we oppose an arms procurement bill that aims at maintaining the minimal force to counter-balance China, how will this be perceived by Taiwan's citizens? How will it be perceived by the international community?
Opposition to war is a universal value, and in comparison, the preservation of peace is a much more difficult task. We can simply take to the streets to oppose war, but in the face of China's ambitions, we must work hard to preserve peace.
To achieve this end, the people must be united, and they may even have to sacrifice some conveniences and benefits. Unless we wish our children and grandchildren to enjoy the peace of "one country, two systems," rather than the peace we currently enjoy, there is a price to be paid.
Tsai Ming-hsien is the vice-minister of national defense.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
The gutting of Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) by US President Donald Trump’s administration poses a serious threat to the global voice of freedom, particularly for those living under authoritarian regimes such as China. The US — hailed as the model of liberal democracy — has the moral responsibility to uphold the values it champions. In undermining these institutions, the US risks diminishing its “soft power,” a pivotal pillar of its global influence. VOA Tibetan and RFA Tibetan played an enormous role in promoting the strong image of the US in and outside Tibet. On VOA Tibetan,
Former minister of culture Lung Ying-tai (龍應台) has long wielded influence through the power of words. Her articles once served as a moral compass for a society in transition. However, as her April 1 guest article in the New York Times, “The Clock Is Ticking for Taiwan,” makes all too clear, even celebrated prose can mislead when romanticism clouds political judgement. Lung crafts a narrative that is less an analysis of Taiwan’s geopolitical reality than an exercise in wistful nostalgia. As political scientists and international relations academics, we believe it is crucial to correct the misconceptions embedded in her article,
Sung Chien-liang (宋建樑), the leader of the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) efforts to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Legislator Lee Kun-cheng (李坤城), caused a national outrage and drew diplomatic condemnation on Tuesday after he arrived at the New Taipei City District Prosecutors’ Office dressed in a Nazi uniform. Sung performed a Nazi salute and carried a copy of Adolf Hitler’s Mein Kampf as he arrived to be questioned over allegations of signature forgery in the recall petition. The KMT’s response to the incident has shown a striking lack of contrition and decency. Rather than apologizing and distancing itself from Sung’s actions,
US President Trump weighed into the state of America’s semiconductor manufacturing when he declared, “They [Taiwan] stole it from us. They took it from us, and I don’t blame them. I give them credit.” At a prior White House event President Trump hosted TSMC chairman C.C. Wei (魏哲家), head of the world’s largest and most advanced chip manufacturer, to announce a commitment to invest US$100 billion in America. The president then shifted his previously critical rhetoric on Taiwan and put off tariffs on its chips. Now we learn that the Trump Administration is conducting a “trade investigation” on semiconductors which