It is unfortunate that Taiwan has a neighbor across the Taiwan Strait that wants to annex it, but, even more frustrating, Taiwanese also have to put up with people who echo China’s rhetoric and intended to intimidate Taiwanese into obedience.
On Friday, while attending a book launch by former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Culture and Communications Committee director-general Lee Chien-jung’s (李建榮), former Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起) said that the number of young Taiwanese who identify with Taiwanese independence ideals would “reduce sharply to 20 percent from the perceived 70 or 80 percent” if the US factor were removed and if China were to invade.
Saying that Taiwan’s safety is a prerequisite to independence, Su said “this kind of Taiwanese independence is not a courageous independence, but one built on a foundation of false security.”
At a time when China is stepping up efforts to intimidate Taiwan, such as the passage of the Chinese aircraft carrier the Liaoning through the Taiwan Strait on Wednesday last week and the People’s Liberation Army Air Force training missions that circled Taiwan’s airspace over the past few months, it is incomprehensible that a former Taiwanese official would promote China’s power and prestige, distorting and neglecting mainstream public opinion.
However, Su’s claim to fame is making up the term “1992 consensus,” so it many may not be that surprising.
As numerous polls in recent years have indicated, the latest of which was released last month by the Taiwan Thinktank, there is a growing number of people who refer to themselves as “Taiwanese,” with the increase especially notable among younger people.
Su has incorrectly interpreted that such people’s identity would crumble if the US factor were removed and China invaded.
As New Power Party Legislator Hsu Yung-ming (徐永明) said, Su’s argument stems from “old world thinking” that regards Taiwanese independence as hinging on US ability and support, not to mention that Taiwanese are not as easily scared as Su implies.
Su and Beijing should be reminded of the 1996 incident when China fired missiles off the coast of Taiwan in an obvious attempt to scare Taiwanese into not voting for Lee Teng-hui (李登輝), a presidential candidate Beijing did not favor. The election result made Taiwanese proud: Not only did Lee win, but he did so in a landslide and became Taiwan’s first democratically elected president. Taiwanese showed their wisdom and courage by rejecting Chinese bullying with their votes.
KMT Chairwoman Hung Hsiu-chu (洪秀柱), KMT Vice Chairman Hau Lung-bin (郝龍斌) and former vice president Wu Den-yih (吳敦義) all recently announced they would run for the position of KMT chairperson. All have said they are disciples of former president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國), but they do not abide by Chiang’s “three noes” policy — no contact, no negotiation and no compromise — when it comes to dealing with the Chinese Communist Party (CCP).
Su’s latest remarks were tantamount to being a mouthpiece for China. If he dared to make such a statement during the Martial Law era under Chiang’s rule, he would have been condemned for spreading CCP propaganda.
It is no secret that Beijing wishes to aggravate Taiwanese anxiety and it is a shame that there are people in Taiwan who — intentionally or unintentionally — play China’s game.
If anything, the real peril facing Taiwan is not China’s threats or its saber-rattling, but Taiwanese’s own lack of self-confidence.
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS