Threat of force has its place
While I think it’s admirable, indeed imperative, that people of all political persuasions in Taiwan work toward a common consensus with regard to Taiwan-China relations, strict neutrality is not the way forward (“Neutrality is Taiwan’s best option,” Oct. 6, page 8).
Far from perfect is the situation that Taiwan finds itself in when we talk about the “status quo” in cross-strait relations. The status quo, unfortunately, is the best that Taiwan has at this juncture. It’s the security dynamic between China, Taiwan and the US that has fostered Taiwan’s de facto independence over the years. This fluid relationship is also, for the moment, the best way to maintain it. Changing Taiwan’s Constitution to renounce the use of force would fundamentally change this dynamic and could lead to further regional instability.
China has in excess of 1,000 ballistic missiles aimed at Taiwan. This statement isn’t meant to stir pro-independence fervor, but rather to state facts as they stand. Without a concrete agreement in which China also renounces the use of force against its smaller neighbor, a constitutional change would be reckless regardless of Taiwan’s progress toward self-determination.
In effect, Taiwan would be inviting China to press its strategic advantage while at the same time bringing into question — at least from a US perspective — whether Taiwan is serious in defending its sovereignty.
Add to all this a global reconfiguration that is quietly but inexorably playing itself out as we speak. The US is still the world’s largest economy, with all the political and military clout that accompanies this. But Washington is paying the price for a largely unregulated financial system, bad debt and military over-reach.
At the same time, China and Russia are finding themselves increasingly able to assert pressure internationally. Does anyone really believe that, as things stand, the US is in a good position to guarantee Taiwan’s security? Recent events in Georgia, where the US seemed absolutely powerless to intervene, were instructive.
The weakening of the US already has the potential to upset the status quo in the region. A unilateral renouncing of force without a concomitant and binding response from China invites further destabilization. Whatever the way forward is for Taiwan, the answer does not lie in blindly putting faith in China’s goodwill and its opaque plans for Taiwan.
In an article in the Weekly Standard on Thursday, defense analyst Thomas Skypek reported that the US government was finally waking up to the threat posed by China’s “full court press to establish influence and connections in Africa and Latin America.” Here, yet again, is another unintended consequence of the US State Department’s failed policy of pursuing “good relations” with China at any cost. Will the State Department ever learn from its mistakes?
If the US had been more supportive of Taiwan in the eight years before President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office, it is almost certain that fewer allies of Taiwan in Latin America and Africa would have recognized China. That would mean a balance of influence in these parts of the world.
One thing is certain: Any ally of Taiwan would not be in the pocket of China.
But what would result if the US began encouraging Latin American or African countries to recognize Taiwan?
First, China would cut ties, therefore losing influence with those countries.
Second, the countries would cease falling prey to China’s colonial exploitation and receive help from Taiwan that would see genuine improvements in quality of life — medical, agricultural or industrial. Such help would not have the gargantuan chains attached that China’s has.
Third, China’s corrupting and election-subverting authoritarian influences on these nations would be minimized.
Fourth, Taiwan’s democracy would become their model for the path to the future. Fifth, the US would not have to be directly involved in any of these allies’ affairs.
Of course, the US itself should recognize Taiwan. Then it could have a peace-loving, democracy-spreading partner, and this would be for the good of the world community.
The wagging tail
President Ma Ying-jeou was called “great President Ma” in sign language at a gathering to promote the 2009 Deaflympics in Taipei, and he enjoyed it. A Taipei City Government official called him “very great President Ma” as he opened the main gate of Taipei’s Confucius Temple to welcome the president like an emperor.
Ma has also been described as stupid on several occasions. A female senior high school student quoted a popular new saying — “A bad president is gone, here comes a stupid president” — and wondered what Taiwan would become by the time she graduates from college, according to the Liberty Times.
If Ma is so great, why is his approval rating so low? If Ma is so great, why is his administration so often called mediocre? If Ma is so great, how could he agree to abandon his presidential title — which more than 7 million voters presented to him — when a Chinese official visits Taiwan later this year?
People in Taiwan expect Ma to be as wise as any other Harvard graduate.
Sadly, to date, Ma has acted like a tail wagging for China: He has asked the Taiwanese media not to criticize China; he has enjoyed the fruits of democracy but worships dictatorship instead; he claimed to be Taiwanese during the election campaign but has been destroying Taiwanese identity ever since; he has done more for China’s leaders than for the Taiwanese people; and he even wants to serve for another term!
What will Taiwan become, indeed.
In Chinese author Lu Xun’s (魯迅) novella The True Story of Ah Q (阿Q正傳) — one of the earliest works of modern Chinese fiction, first serialized in 1921 — the story’s hapless protagonist, Ah Q (阿Q), is a poor itinerant worker from China’s peasant class, living during the part-feudal, part-colonial dying embers of the Qing Dynasty. Ah Q is a feeble and psychologically flawed individual who bullies the meek and cowers before the powerful. Despised and regularly mocked by villagers, after every episode of public ridicule and failure, Ah Q consoles himself that he has won a “spiritual victory.” Utterly
Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) chairman Mark Liu (劉德音) said in an interview with CNN on Sunday that a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would render the company’s plants inoperable, and that such a war would produce “no winners.” Not only would Taiwan’s economy be destroyed in a cross-strait conflict, but the impact “would go well beyond semiconductors, and would bring about the destruction of the world’s rules-based order and totally change the geopolitical landscape,” Liu said in the interview, according to the Central News Agency. Bloomberg columnist Hal Brands wrote on June 24: “A major war over Taiwan could create global economic
Washington’s official position on US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s visit to Taiwan is that nothing has changed: The US government says it is maintaining its “one China” policy, that Pelosi is free to arrange international trips with congressional delegations independent of the government and that she is not the first US official to visit Taiwan even this year. Yet there is no denying that the fact and the optics of the second-in-line to the US presidency speaking with lawmakers at the Legislative Yuan about inter-parliamentary discussions and learning from each other as equals are hugely significant, as were
Amid a fervor in the global media, US House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi and her congressional delegation made a high-profile visit to Taipei. President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) awarded a state honor to her at the Presidential Office. Evidently, the occasion took on the aspect of an inter-state relationship between the US and the Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan, despite no mutual state recognition between the two. Beijing furiously condemned Pelosi’s visit in advance, with military drills in the waters surrounding coastal China to check the move. Pelosi is a well-known China hawk, and second in the line of succession to