Last week the US National Security Council released a 49-page document entitled The National Security Strategy of the United States of America, outlining US President George W. Bush's strategy for defense and foreign policy for the remainder of his second term. At the same time, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice also expressed Washington's growing concerns about China's military build-up.
Washington's statements regarding its dissatisfaction with Beijing's military expansion were conceivably a response to recent comments made by Guo Boxiong (
Stressing Beijing's objections to the efforts of "Taiwanese independence secessionist forces," Guo announced that China's military budget would increase by 14.7 percent this year to 283.8 billion yuan (US$35.3 billion).
The budget increase could be interpreted as a strong reaction to President Chen Shui-bian's (
Washington's grave concerns are caused not only by the military budget increases themselves, but also by the lack of transparency behind them.
Washington faces something of a dilemma: While the Taiwanese government continues to pursue democratization, the US is often hamstrung by its own policy of calling on both sides of the Taiwan Strait to maintain the "status quo."
Bush has repeated his call for a peaceful resolution to cross-strait tensions, warning China that it should not use coercive measures against Taiwan, and cautioning both sides against unilateral actions that change the "status quo."
Nevertheless, when it comes to the question of which side is actively seeking to change the "status quo," we need look only at the military imbalance across the Taiwan Strait for the answer.
Could it be more clear who is rocking the boat and altering the "status quo" through military means? Should the Taiwanese people be considered troublemakers for embracing democracy?
Since the US report called on China to "follow the path of East Asia's many modern democracies, including Taiwan," the current US policy of "encouraging both sides of the Taiwan Strait to engage in dialogue and solve mutual disputes in a peaceful manner" should further incorporate the idea of promoting democratic principles. This would fit with Bush's grand strategy of spreading democracy throughout the world and maintaining regional and international security.
Politicians of all parties in Taiwan should read the US report carefully -- its findings are a timely wake-up call for those who have painted a fanciful picture of unification between Taiwan and China.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
Most importantly, China must recognize the fact that any attempts to intimidate or belittle Taiwan will only have a negative effect.
Liu Kuan-teh is a Taipei-based political commentator.
Yesterday’s recall and referendum votes garnered mixed results for the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). All seven of the KMT lawmakers up for a recall survived the vote, and by a convincing margin of, on average, 35 percent agreeing versus 65 percent disagreeing. However, the referendum sponsored by the KMT and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) on restarting the operation of the Ma-anshan Nuclear Power Plant in Pingtung County failed. Despite three times more “yes” votes than “no,” voter turnout fell short of the threshold. The nation needs energy stability, especially with the complex international security situation and significant challenges regarding
Most countries are commemorating the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II with condemnations of militarism and imperialism, and commemoration of the global catastrophe wrought by the war. On the other hand, China is to hold a military parade. According to China’s state-run Xinhua news agency, Beijing is conducting the military parade in Tiananmen Square on Sept. 3 to “mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War II and the victory of the Chinese People’s War of Resistance Against Japanese Aggression.” However, during World War II, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) had not yet been established. It
A recent critique of former British prime minister Boris Johnson’s speech in Taiwan (“Invite ‘will-bes,’ not has-beens,” by Sasha B. Chhabra, Aug. 12, page 8) seriously misinterpreted his remarks, twisting them to fit a preconceived narrative. As a Taiwanese who witnessed his political rise and fall firsthand while living in the UK and was present for his speech in Taipei, I have a unique vantage point from which to say I think the critiques of his visit deliberately misinterpreted his words. By dwelling on his personal controversies, they obscured the real substance of his message. A clarification is needed to
There is an old saying that if there is blood in the water, the sharks will come. In Taiwan’s case, that shark is China, circling, waiting for any sign of weakness to strike. Many thought the failed recall effort was that blood in the water, a signal for Beijing to press harder, but Taiwan’s democracy has just proven that China is mistaken. The recent recall campaign against 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) legislators, many with openly pro-Beijing leanings, failed at the ballot box. While the challenge targeted opposition lawmakers rather than President William Lai (賴清德) himself, it became an indirect
RSS