During the last meeting of the legislature's Procedure Committee, the legislative caucuses of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) again forcefully blocked the placement of the arms procurement budget and nominations of Control Yuan members on the deliberation and review agenda. As a result, these two bills, the focus of much public attention in Taiwan, were again kept from being included on the list of topics to be deliberated on the legislative floor, causing the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) to withdraw from the meeting in protest.
The balance between the military powers on the two sides of the Taiwan Strait is rapidly tipping toward China, as that country increases its missile deployment against Taiwan. The need for Taiwan to strengthen its self-defense capabilities can wait no longer. However, the budget for the arms procurement was blocked again for the 24th time by the pan-blue camp and therefore deprived of even the opportunity to be reviewed and deliberated in the Legislative Yuan.
Obviously, some reasons cited by the pan-blues for blocking the bill are superficial at most. The real problem more than likely rests with the divided national identification and the pan-blue camp's resentment of President Chen Shui-bian (
After the election of the National Assembly members, the DPP had an internal debate over the party's direction. The concept of "reconciliation for co-existence" proposed by Premier Frank Hsieh (
Frankly speaking, under normal circumstances, the idea of reconciliation not only should not become the target of scrutiny and critique, but in fact should be positively recognized. However, politics are a highly realistic art. Roles and scripts staged in the political forum reflect the highly complicated characteristics of human nature and conflicts between ideals and reality. Therefore, the implementation of reconciliation in Taiwan's political forum requires consideration about the practical difficulties.
In other words, the differences between the pan-blue and pan-green camps over national identification must be recognized. From the pan-blues' viewpoint, this difference is no longer an internal contradiction within a country but a clash between enemies. Therefore, on topics that touch upon national identification and ideologies, they would rather sing in chorus with China from this side of the Taiwan Strait than resolve their differences and shake hands to make peace with the Chen government.
If anyone within the ruling party continues to hold a shred of illusion about reconciliation, it is about time to wake up and smell the coffee over what had again transpired in the Legislative Yuan's procedure committee.
It is no exaggeration to say that the pan-blue camp sees the rivalry with the pan-greens as confrontations with the enemy. The fact that the budget for arms procurement has been blocked repeatedly is pretty much self-explanatory.
First, while reports appraising the military strengths of the two sides of the Strait may otherwise differ in substantive content or underlying standpoints, one conclusion has been uniformly reached -- that is, if Taiwan does not strengthen its military capabilities, such as by acquiring arms included in the arms-procurement plan in question, then Taiwan's advantage in military strength will be gone within a few years. In contrast with the annual decrease in the percentage of GNP dedicated to Taiwan's military defense budget, the Chinese national defense budget has been increasing by two-digit percentage points each year, strengthening its ability to strike at Taiwan by the year.
After China enacted the "Anti-Secession" Law, making explicit its intention to deal with Taiwan in a non-peaceful manner, Japan and the EU began to feel alarmed by the rising threats posed by China to peace and order throughout the Asia-Pacific region.
However, it is puzzling why, at a time when the international community is seriously worrying about Taiwan's safety, when the US and Japan are strengthening their military alliance and now include the security of the Taiwan Strait in their common strategic goals, and when the majority of EU countries strongly oppose the lifting of the union's arms embargo against China, the pan-blue camp continues to block reviewing of the budget for arms procurement.
What a total disregard of the security of the 23 million people in Taiwan. The absurdity is this -- the pan-blue camp claims that what it opposes is "wasteful spending," paying for the purchase through a special budget as well as certain items to be purchased, rather than arms purchases per se. KMT spokesperson Chang Jung-kung (
However, it is precisely because of the divergent views between the ruling and opposition camps that there is a real need to submit the budget for legislative review and deliberation, so that the opinions and viewpoints of all the parties and groups can be fully communicated and expressed.
In particular, the three major items of arms to be purchased were proposed during the era of the KMT's reign. At the time, KMT Chairman Lien Chan (
Lien and PFP Chairman James Soong (宋楚瑜) paid a visit to China, respectively, helping China to create the illusion of peace. Their behavior has not only helped China relieve mounting international pressure but also deluded the international community. After Lien and Soong dined and wined with Chinese President Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and returned to Taiwan, they continued to block the arms-purchase budget. Is it because the pan blues are naive enough to believe that their visits to China were enough to ensure peace? Or perhaps that there is something going on between the other side of the Taiwan Strait and the pan-blue camp that cannot be made public? This is indeed worth pondering.
Actually, in the communiques issued and talks held between Hu and the two chairmen, there may seem to be a lot of so-called "consensuses" as well as "flowery talk" all over the place. However, China went on to oppose Taiwan's observer status in the World Health Assembly. Everything tells us that the so-called agreements reached between the pan-blues and China are nothing but lies and empty talk.
The people of Taiwan most definitely should not underestimate the situation or do any wishful thinking about the unification propaganda wielded by Beijing to cosy up to the opposition leaders of Taiwan. The only way to ensure national security is through strengthening defense capabilities and being prepared for war. The pan-blues should seriously think about the safety of the 23 million people in Taiwan. Do not block the purchase of these arms any longer!
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS