In the middle of last month, the Hong Kong-based Chinese-language Trend Magazine (動向) featured an article that questioned whether Taiwan will become an Asian version of Crimea and highlighted the problems China faces.
First, cross-strait relations are problematic because talks about economic issues cannot get started and the two sides do not agree on political issues. China has long-term plans for its national security policy, but it has concerns over setting definite plans for cross-strait relations.
Second, China is not worried that the student movement might lead to a revolution in Taiwan, but it is terrified that the nation’s student and civic movements could spark copycat protests in China, which could cause the sudden collapse of its politically inflexible regime. The political anxiety that comes from guarding against internal implosion has greatly weakened China’s ambitions for unification.
Third, when discussing the Sunflower movement, one group in China feels that the “status quo” of no unification, no independence and no use of force is more beneficial to China than unification, while another feels that this policy means de facto independence for Taiwan. The secretariat of the Chinese National Security Commission has issued an order that neither of these opinions can be shared on the Internet, with authorities assigned to finding those who disseminate them.
Fourth, the number of Chinese who approve of Taiwan’s political system by far exceeds the minority elites and this approval has spread among the lower classes of society, especially businesspeople from the lower and middle classes.
Fifth, the authorities in Beijing have not prepared for any policy interaction with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and “green phobia” is prevalent among the highest strata of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Sixth, while China believes everything is negotiable, it is worried that Taiwan’s ruling and opposition parties will agree to negotiate a unification of the political systems rather than stick with the “one country, two systems” ideal.
Seventh, new light tanks and other fast military vehicles that were to be used in mountainous areas after an attack on Taiwan are now mostly in use for other purposes, having been transferred to Xinjiang or Tibet or secretly deployed on the outskirts of large cities for riot suppression.
Eighth, China’s decision to postpone the declaration of an air defense identification zone in the South China Sea was not caused by strong opposition from the Philippines and other countries, but was rather a direct result of strong anti-China sentiment in Taiwan and problems involving cross-strait relations.
Ninth, the biggest potential problem for the CCP is if Taiwan became an Asian version of Crimea by declaring independence and then choosing an advantageous time to join Japan. This is the most basic reason for the clear hatred the highest authorities of the CCP have for Japan. To address this problem, China has strengthened its military deployment against Taiwan and the S-400 missiles from its recently approved purchase from Russia will be aimed at Taiwan.
Now that the DPP has elected Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) as party chairperson, she should focus her attention on solving domestic issues as well as on new civic movements. Given that China wants to annex Taiwan, it needs the help of Taiwanese compradors, which is why solving internal problems must be a priority.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), on the other hand, continues to behave in an execrable manner by causing all sorts of trouble with his China policy and helping China, as he is desperate for a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平).
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Drew Cameron
During the US-India Strategic Partnership Forum’s third leadership summit on Aug. 31, US Deputy Secretary of State Stephen Biegun said that the US wants to partner with the other members of the Quadrilaterial Security Dialogue — Australia, India and Japan — to establish an organization similar to NATO, to “respond to ... any potential challenge from China.” He said that the US’ purpose is to work with these nations and other countries in the Indo-Pacific region to “create a critical mass around the shared values and interest of those parties,” and possibly attract more countries to establish an alliance comparable to
On August 24, 2020, the US Secretary of Defense, Mark Esper, made an important statement: “The Pentagon is Prepared for China.” Going forward, how might the Department of Defense team up with Taiwan to make itself even more prepared? No American wants to deter the next war by a paper-thin margin, and no one appreciates the value of strategic overmatch more than the war planners at the Pentagon. When the stakes are this high, you can bet they want to be super ready. In recent months, we have witnessed a veritable flood of high-level statements from US government leaders on
China has long sought shortcuts to developing semiconductor technologies and local supply chains by poaching engineers and experts from Taiwan and other nations. It is also suspected of stealing trade secrets from Taiwanese and US firms to fulfill its ambition of becoming a major player in the global semiconductor industry in the next decade. However, it takes more than just money and talent to build a semiconductor supply chain like the one which Taiwan and the US started to cultivate more than 30 years ago. Amid rising trade and technology tensions between the world’s two biggest economies, Beijing has become
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new