When commenting on the potential for conflict in the Taiwan Strait and the likelihood of China annexing Taiwan by force, one of the most frequently invoked mantras in the West is this: "Chinese consider it their sacred duty to `reunite' Taiwan with the motherland."
It is then further inferred that the Chinese would stop at nothing to achieve their goal of unification, and that its commitment to this goal is akin to religious devotion.
In order to lend credence to this line of reasoning, one only has to cite the time when a People's Liberation Army general nonchalantly said that Beijing would be willing to sacrifice the most prosperous half of China, or everything east of Xian, as the price for nuclear attacks on major US cities -- which he thought was the proper response to US intervention in a cross-strait war.
What might have been overlooked is that the word "sacred" is often attached in Chinese politics to an objective which despotic rulers deem to be an impossible dream.
For instance, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regimes of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) told the Taiwanese people for years that reclaiming China was "our sacred mission."
Beijing has also dusted off its litany of complaints regarding historical grievances and humiliations from time to time to camouflage its true designs on Taiwan, which are part of Beijing's plan for global strategic expansion. To give this earthly desire any kind of religious underpinning is preposterous since the Chinese Communists are generally atheist.
Therefore, any Chinese military attack on Taiwan would be a result of rational calculation. That is why US defense officials constantly remind the Chinese not to miscalculate.
As long as the US-Japan-Taiwan coalition maintains transparently adequate military capability in the region to make miscalculation improbable, Beijing will launch an attack only when compelled to forego rational calculation.
Restraint imposed on Taiwan by the US effectively removes the chance that President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration will cross the line. It then follows that there is almost zero chance that Beijing will be left without an alternative except to attack while Chen is Taiwan's leader.
This could all change should KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) become Taiwan's president in 2008.
Events could then unfold along either of the following two different courses, either of which could have disastrous consequences for the Taiwanese people.
First, Ma could acquiesce to all of Beijing's demands, including establishing direct links, unilaterally disarming and criminalizing Taiwan's independence movement. That would touch off an internal uprising with unpredictable ramifications.
Alternatively, Ma could defy Beijing's expectations, either by refusing Beijing's reunification timetable -- a move which would likely be backed by the majority of his pan-blue supporters -- or claiming an inability to outlaw Taiwan's independence movement lest uncontrollable internal strife erupt. Hawks in Beijing would then decide that Ma was not sincere about unification, even though Ma once openly advocated unification as the ultimate goal for the KMT, and that "all hope for peaceful reunification has been exhausted." Beijing's leadership would then be left with no choice but to resort to "nonpeaceful means" in accordance with its "Anti-Secession" Law.
There are a number of other factors that might prove to be even more compelling to Beijing. An important seed was planted through the formation of the Chinese Communist Party-KMT alliance last year, and its agreement to push for "unification."
The domestic expectation in China for Ma to deliver is palpable even now, and would become overwhelming if and when he is actually elected.
But the most ominous development is that the international community's expectation seems to be growing in lockstep with China's internal glee.
After his inauguration, any defiance by Ma on the issue of unification would be construed as a direct affront to Beijing. It would cause Beijing to feel it had lost face in the eyes of the international community, a humiliation which no Beijing regime could survive. That would likely cause it to react decisively, especially with the added domestic pressure caused by the "Anti-Secession" Law.
"Losing face" internationally could emerge as one of the most probable reasons compelling Beijing to act militarily without rational calculation.
Therefore, just like the saying that a girl can't be "a little" pregnant, the pan-blue camp's wishful thinking that Taiwan can be "a little" unified with China is a dangerous exercise that would bring catastrophe to the Taiwanese people.
To say that Ma and the KMT are playing with fire would therefore be quite an understatement.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
On a quiet lane in Taipei’s central Daan District (大安), an otherwise unremarkable high-rise is marked by a police guard and a tawdry A4 printout from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs indicating an “embassy area.” Keen observers would see the emblem of the Holy See, one of Taiwan’s 12 so-called “diplomatic allies.” Unlike Taipei’s other embassies and quasi-consulates, no national flag flies there, nor is there a plaque indicating what country’s embassy this is. Visitors hoping to sign a condolence book for the late Pope Francis would instead have to visit the Italian Trade Office, adjacent to Taipei 101. The death of
By now, most of Taiwan has heard Taipei Mayor Chiang Wan-an’s (蔣萬安) threats to initiate a vote of no confidence against the Cabinet. His rationale is that the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP)-led government’s investigation into alleged signature forgery in the Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) recall campaign constitutes “political persecution.” I sincerely hope he goes through with it. The opposition currently holds a majority in the Legislative Yuan, so the initiation of a no-confidence motion and its passage should be entirely within reach. If Chiang truly believes that the government is overreaching, abusing its power and targeting political opponents — then
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
RSS