To protect their national interests, it is necessary for heads of state to keep as many options open as possible and avoid making hard and fast comments. The US cannot make any concrete comments about whether it would dispatch military forces to defend Taiwan, should the need arise, nor can Taiwan make definitive comments about not asking the US for such assistance.
However, in a recent interview with CNN, President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), being the genius “chief executive” of the “Taiwan region” that he is, of his own accord said he would never ask the US to go to war for Taiwan. He later said that this was his way of emphasizing to the US Taiwan’s resolve to defend itself as well as his confidence that there will not be a war in the Taiwan Strait during his time in office. What this really shows is that Ma is moving increasingly closer to China.
From the time that dictator Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and his son Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) fled to Taiwan until the end of former president Chen Shui-bian’s (陳水扁) time in office, the US never questioned Taiwan’s determination to protect itself. The US wants to maintain the “status quo” in the Taiwan Strait and has no desire to get involved in a war here. This is why the US stopped the Chiangs’ ambitions of “reconquering the mainland” and restricted the pro-independence administrations of former presidents Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) and Chen from moving too close to achieving de jure independence.
Ma’s recent moves toward “eventual unification” and his willingness to change the “status quo” and accept a Chinese takeover has certain US academics worried about Taiwan’s determination to defend itself and whether it is worth risking conflict with China over Taiwan.
If Ma wants to express his determination to give Taiwan the capabilities to protect itself, he could make a strong case based both on Taiwan’s interests and on the common interests of Taiwan and the US. Ma has, however, chosen to say that Taiwan is not worth the risk and that Taiwan is a domestic Chinese political issue.
If China wants to annex Taiwan, it can do so either by military force or by peaceful means. At the same time, Taiwan can use military force or peaceful means to defend itself. If China resorted to force, it would have to consider US intervention as the price it would have to pay, as well as the serious ramifications of this. For the past 60 years, US deterrence has provided the biggest guarantee for maintaining the cross-strait “status quo.”
Ma’s going on about self-defense is irresponsible. When it comes to military self-defense, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has blocked the procurement of arms in the past, and in terms of diplomatic defense, Ma has bowed down before the “one China” principle. He has also allowed flights between Taiwan and China to be carried out as though they are domestic flights and accepted observer status for Taiwan at the World Health Assembly under the name of “Chinese Taipei.” Ma has completely given up on defending Taiwan’s sovereignty. So what use is his talk about self-defense?
If China can use “peaceful” means to annex Taiwan, why would it have to resort to military force? And if China does not need to resort to military force, why would Ma need Taiwan to protect itself? If Ma is not even willing to protect Taiwan in the face of China’s “peaceful” attack, how can we expect him to defend Taiwan militarily? Everything Ma is doing is leading Taiwan into the tiger’s den, and he is becoming the “chief executive.”
James Wang is a media commentator.
TRANSLATED BY DREW CAMERON
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
Birth, aging, illness and death are inevitable parts of the human experience. Yet, living well does not necessarily mean dying well. For those who have a chronic illness or cancer, or are bedridden due to significant injuries or disabilities, the remainder of life can be a torment for themselves and a hardship for their caregivers. Even if they wish to end their life with dignity, they are not allowed to do so. Bih Liu-ing (畢柳鶯), former superintendent of Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, introduced the practice of Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking as an alternative to assisted dying, which remains
President William Lai (賴清德) has rightly identified the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as a hostile force; and yet, Taiwan’s response to domestic figures amplifying CCP propaganda remains largely insufficient. The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) recently confirmed that more than 20 Taiwanese entertainers, including high-profile figures such as Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜), are under investigation for reposting comments and images supporting People’s Liberation Army (PLA) drills and parroting Beijing’s unification messaging. If found in contravention of the law, they may be fined between NT$100,000 and NT$500,000. That is not a deterrent. It is a symbolic tax on betrayal — perhaps even a way for
RSS