Ma: The de-Taiwanifier
British playwright George Bernard Shaw was once purportedly told by a beautiful lady: “Sir, imagine if we two got married — our children would get my looks and your brains.” To which, Shaw replied: “Yes, but what if they got my looks and your brains?”
That appears to be what Taiwan is getting from its president: the worst of both worlds.
A Taiwanese president by definition is expected to resolutely defend the nation’s sovereignty. He must also be deliberate yet tentative as if stepping on thin ice when it comes to rapprochement with China.
Instead President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is giving Taiwan little more than trivialization of its sovereignty and outright de-Taiwanification — both in terms of its name and strength.
Only the presence of clandestine arrangements with China could rationally explain why Ma would make only a half-hearted attempt at “bringing the 23 million Taiwanese” to participate in the UN’s peripheral organizations and then characterize Beijing’s brush-off of the attempt as an “unintentional slip.”
Meanwhile, the Ma administration was forced to deny reports of comments American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt allegedly made to him during his visit to the US. Burghardt is reported to have told Ma to not hint that China holds sovereignty over Taiwan and instead insist that China not be allowed to determine whether Taiwan can participate in international activities. The rebuttal was similar to his previous denial that he asked Washington to postpone arms procurement processing.
Ma appears to be trying to convince Beijing that Taiwan will be part of China eventually and that, in the current domestic and international atmosphere, he is doing all he can. One example is his recent description of Taiwan as a “region” instead of a nation, a proclamation that, if allowed to stand, could quickly lead the discourse on the status of Taiwan down a steep and slippery slope.
But Washington is reminding Ma that the significant contribution the US has made to Taiwan’s ability to maintain its sovereignty has in no measure diminished even if Ma, the presumptive symbol of Taiwan’s sovereignty, has shirked his responsibility to uphold it.
Going far beyond what’s necessary for mollifying international fear of cross-strait conflicts, Ma’s string of unabashed pro-China policies is causing fresh unease in both Washington and Tokyo.
Beijing hasn’t forgotten that the only path for China to annex Taiwan is through war.
Ma’s political capital can only carry him so far toward unification. All Ma can manage now is de facto unification via Taiwan’s open border for Chinese, but he can’t formally deliver Taiwan to Beijing without a nod from the US. That nod couldn’t possibly be forthcoming considering the potential adverse strategic impact on Japan.
Taiwan’s deterrence capability is declining rapidly and its psychological defense is nearly non-existent following the truce between the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). These only serve to stoke Beijing’s adventurous instincts. A severe economic downturn or political turmoil in China could still mark the launch of China’s military invasion of Taiwan.
Ma, if left unchecked to pursue his unification dream, could cost Taiwanese their sovereignty, democracy and prosperity and cast them into the jaws of war — the worst of both worlds indeed.
HUANG JEI-HSUAN
Los Angeles, California
In the US’ National Security Strategy (NSS) report released last month, US President Donald Trump offered his interpretation of the Monroe Doctrine. The “Trump Corollary,” presented on page 15, is a distinctly aggressive rebranding of the more than 200-year-old foreign policy position. Beyond reasserting the sovereignty of the western hemisphere against foreign intervention, the document centers on energy and strategic assets, and attempts to redraw the map of the geopolitical landscape more broadly. It is clear that Trump no longer sees the western hemisphere as a peaceful backyard, but rather as the frontier of a new Cold War. In particular,
As the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) races toward its 2027 modernization goals, most analysts fixate on ship counts, missile ranges and artificial intelligence. Those metrics matter — but they obscure a deeper vulnerability. The true future of the PLA, and by extension Taiwan’s security, might hinge less on hardware than on whether the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) can preserve ideological loyalty inside its own armed forces. Iran’s 1979 revolution demonstrated how even a technologically advanced military can collapse when the social environment surrounding it shifts. That lesson has renewed relevance as fresh unrest shakes Iran today — and it should
The last foreign delegation Nicolas Maduro met before he went to bed Friday night (January 2) was led by China’s top Latin America diplomat. “I had a pleasant meeting with Qiu Xiaoqi (邱小琪), Special Envoy of President Xi Jinping (習近平),” Venezuela’s soon-to-be ex-president tweeted on Telegram, “and we reaffirmed our commitment to the strategic relationship that is progressing and strengthening in various areas for building a multipolar world of development and peace.” Judging by how minutely the Central Intelligence Agency was monitoring Maduro’s every move on Friday, President Trump himself was certainly aware of Maduro’s felicitations to his Chinese guest. Just
On today’s page, Masahiro Matsumura, a professor of international politics and national security at St Andrew’s University in Osaka, questions the viability and advisability of the government’s proposed “T-Dome” missile defense system. Matsumura writes that Taiwan’s military budget would be better allocated elsewhere, and cautions against the temptation to allow politics to trump strategic sense. What he does not do is question whether Taiwan needs to increase its defense capabilities. “Given the accelerating pace of Beijing’s military buildup and political coercion ... [Taiwan] cannot afford inaction,” he writes. A rational, robust debate over the specifics, not the scale or the necessity,
RSS