Ahead of Chinese President Hu Jintao's (
The paper intends to set the tone on the Taiwan question ahead of Hu's visit, and lay to rest the "China threat" theory.
China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs issued the paper -- nominally to complement commemorations of the 60th anniversary of victory in the Anti-Japanese War -- but in actuality it has been designed as spin for Hu's US visit. The paper addresses and answers questions other nations have asked regarding the expansion and increasing power of China's military, its use of nuclear weapons and its commitment to non-proliferation, among other things. Nevertheless, the content of the paper is contradictory and at odds with China's actions.
The paper stresses that China will never seek hegemony, and that it is following the road of peaceful development. Beijing repeatedly promises not to be the first to use nuclear weapons, vowing to eventually destroy its nuclear weapons to realize the goal of building a non-nuclear world. The paper also says that -- on the premise of ensuring national security and interests -- Beijing has always kept the scale of its armed forces at the minimum level necessary to protect itself, and has repeatedly cut its troop numbers. It also criticizes the development of missile defense systems and Taiwan's inclusion in such a project.
China's military expansion has far exceeded the minimum level necessary to protecting itself, and has made its neighbors uneasy. Beijing believes that its defense budget is not unduly high, even though it has grown at a two-digit rate for 17 consecutive years. Not to mention that the US, Japan, and the EU all suspect that its actual military spending is much greater than that disclosed by Beijing.
During the fourth Shangri-La Dialogue held in Singapore in June, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld asked: "Since no nation threatens China, one must wonder, why this growing investment?"
In fact, the white paper raises more questions than it answers. The joint Sino-Russian military exercise held last month was a source of considerable interest to Taiwan and China's other Asian neighbors. After all, China reportedly agreed to bear the cost of the exercise, and plans to purchase military equipment from Russia. Although the white paper insists that Beijing would not initiate the use of nuclear weapons, Major General Zhu Chenghu's (朱成虎) recent threat that China would consider using nuclear weapons against the US if it intervened militarily in a cross-strait conflict, continues to reverberate. Policies are implemented by people, and the attitude of China's senior military figures undermines the credibility of the peaceful protestations in the white paper.
Taiwan is not a threat to the Chinese Communist Party, but this has not prevented Beijing from targeting over 700 missiles at it. This totally contradicts the white paper's assertion that "China will never seek hegemony or be the first to use nuclear weapons."
Taiwan naturally needs to seek missile defense, as this is a legitimate matter of self-defense. Rather than putting so much effort into obstructing Taiwan's inclusion under a missile defense umbrella, China should simply remove the missiles targeting Taiwan and declare the Taiwan Strait a demilitarized zone. This would be a way of proving that it wants to resolve the cross-strait issue peacefully.
If China seeks a peaceful resolution to the cross-strait issue, all the countries of the world will see that China indeed is not seeking hegemony, and that its rise is indeed peaceful.
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers