People's Liberation Army Major General Zhu Chenghu's (
It is a standard tactic in both China and Taiwan to have someone make a statement about some controversial policy in a way that it remains plausibly deniable for the government yet gets the information into the public domain.
Yet it is difficult to imagine exactly why the Chinese government might want to confront the US in such a way at this moment. The "Anti-Secession" Law, with its explicit threat against an independent Taiwan, has already given impetus to a rethink of US defense policy regarding China, and has done much to resolve the murky ambiguity surrounding US reaction to China's military buildup toward strategic clarity. When US Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld asks just why and for what purpose China is beefing up its armed forces when it faces no external threat, we can see that the days when China was viewed through Clintonian rose-colored spectacles have clearly passed.
Taiwan apart, one of the main causes of tension between the US and China is the question of energy security. US hopes of keeping oil plentiful and cheap have not only been frustrated by the Iraq debacle but also by the soaring demand for oil in China's economy. This is why the bid for US-owned Unocal by China's CNOOC is so controversial. After Zhu's remarks, it's hard to see the US being relaxed enough to let the takeover go ahead. Add to that the fact that a major US defense review is being conducted in which China is likely to figure large, and now even larger, and there are a number or reasons why Beijing might have preferred that Zhu kept his mouth shut.
And yet whatever denials Beijing utters should be taken with a grain of salt. It is important to remember that Zhu is the dean of China's National Defense University. Beijing might say that his remarks do not represent official policy, but they certainly represent thinking at the highest levels of the People's Liberation Army. This is very worrying, because it backs up what other sources have been saying for a while about the PLA: That it is the preserve of gung-ho fantasists who think they can take on the US and win.
Readers might look askance at Zhu's remarks about "losing all cities east of Xian," which sounds more like Doctor Strangelove's General Ripper than sober strategic analysis. Let us not even speculate how people in those cities might feel about being expendable, since the views of the Chinese people are unimportant in Beijing's calculations. Let us just note that this kind of irresponsibility at this level is exactly the attitude that will lead to war. It is simply another part of the primitive psychopathology of the Chinese; they have yet to enter the modern world. Like medieval princelings, they think war is glorious, and to hell with the consequences for ordinary people.
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