Some pan-blue-camp leaders, with the aid of pro-China media in Taiwan, have been trying to pass themselves off as purveyors of peace.
And, by packaging incremental surrender as a "peace process," they are attempting to hand over Taiwan piecemeal to China. Moreover, as part of their reprehensible plan, they've been blocking the passage of the special arms-procurement bill -- again, all under the pretense of peace.
But the consequence of surrender -- or "unification" -- would be the loss of peace.
Because of its strategic location, the US-Japan alliance cannot afford Taiwan falling into unfriendly hands. Combining their aversion to "unification" with the fact that a substantial portion of Taiwanese object to "unification" under any circumstances would almost guarantee a never-ending "non-peaceful" struggle.
In other words, what pan-blue leaders are selling here regarding "unification" is nothing but a faux peace.
The pan-blue leaders' refusal to pass the arms-procurement bill is no less harmful to peace.
One reason is that China's aggression derives its energy mainly from the perceived imbalance in military power across the Taiwan Strait. But with the absence of a credible deterrent capability -- a problem the arms-procurement bill is attempting to address -- the imbalance will only worsen with time. That in turns increases pressure from hawks within China and encourages further aggression.
Worse yet, Taiwan's continuing difficulty or reluctance in forging a consensus to strengthen its defense capabilities could be viewed by Beijing as the first step that would lead to eventual disarmament -- an open invitation for invasion.
It's worth noting that even if the arms bill is eventually passed, some damage will already have been done.
For instance, the success of deterrence depends heavily on the ability to ward off the enemy by means short of violence. Hence, there is a necessary psychological element that might have been lost or at least weakened because of the pan-blue leaders' behavior.
The top priority is always to scare an enemy without engaging in combat. Doing this requires that Taiwan at least demonstrate the resolve to adequately arm itself and fight. Pan-blue-camp leaders have so far shown the opposite.
One remedy might be a grass-roots campaign to educate the public and to raise people's awareness of Taiwan's defense needs. The public must be told that only with adequate deterrence can Taiwan be assured of the continuing commitments of the US-Japan alliance, which in turn will guarantee cross-strait peace in the near and medium term as a more stable and longer-term solution is sought.
Meanwhile, the pan-blue leaders' misrepresentation that anything to do with strengthening defense is tantamount to an arms race or warmongering is an underestimation of the intelligence of the Taiwanese people.
It's not everyday that a group of politicians from a small country can hold the key to the well-being of almost one-third of the world's population. But these pan-blue leaders have elevated themselves into this crucial role solely by mortgaging Taiwan's future.
Their continuing recalcitrance in blocking the arms bill might erode US trust and eventually force the US to re-evaluate its commitment to Taipei, leaving Taiwan with fewer choices.
This might be the design of the pan-blue leaders. But it's hardly that of the Taiwanese people.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.