China’s Taiwan Affairs Office Minister Zhang Zhijun (張志軍) revealed China’s innermost fear in his New Year message, saying that “we will never tolerate separatist actions leading to de jure Taiwanese independence, nor will we sit idly by as gradual Taiwanese independence erodes the foundation of peaceful unification.”
De jure independence is the ultimate goal and gradual independence is how it is achieved.
Gradual independence is the opposite of rushed independence. China’s military, economy and diplomatic relationships are more powerful than Taiwan’s. Therefore, a gradual approach is needed to build a consensus behind Taiwanese independence that is broad enough to counter China’s “united front” strategy and threat of a military invasion.
When I voted for Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in the 2016 presidential election, I did not expect her to realize Taiwanese independence or establish a sovereign state during her first term, and she never said she would. To deal with the old party-state power, Tsai must first clear the domestic political battlefield.
Internationally, only the US is powerful enough to support Taiwan’s independence efforts, but only when most Americans regard war against China as necessary to maintain their national security will they support Taiwan’s efforts.
Rushing things could damage Taiwan-US relations, as exemplified by then-US president George W. Bush’s rebuke of then-Taiwanese president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) during his 2003 meeting with then-Chinese premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶). However, even with a gradual approach, concrete progress must be made.
The Tsai administration has made progress by enhancing the nation’s military capability, eliminating Chinese influence as the implementation of transitional justice removes their brokers, and strengthening the economy and the Forward-looking Infrastructure Development Program. It has also blocked China from undermining Taiwan’s high-tech industry and implemented the New Southbound Policy.
Were it not for these accomplishments, Zhang would not be shooting his mouth off. Nevertheless, the government could be more assertive.
For instance, the names of state-owned enterprises containing the word zhonghua (中華) and “China” (中國) could be changed. The General Association of Chinese Culture (中華文化總會) should be first, especially as its deputy secretary-general Chang Tieh-chih (張鐵志) was denied entry to Hong Kong last month.
There is also a lot of confusion in Taiwan because longtime Chinese cultural indoctrination has not been eliminated. The Awkward phrases in the national anthem, such as “our party” and “three principles of the people,” should be changed.
Some young people are being incited to oppose local Taiwanese political power, perhaps as a result of China’s “one generation and one stratum” (一代一線) — the younger generation and the grassrootsstratum — policy, which is part of its “united front” strategy.
As young talent and students are being headhunted by China, the National Youth Commission, integrated into the Ministry of Education’s Youth Development Administration by former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), should be reinstated. Minister of Culture Cheng Li-chiun (鄭麗君) made significant contributions during her term as chairwoman of the commission, but she does not seem to put the same effort into her current job.
The Democratic Progressive Party’s Department of Youth Development should also be more self-aware and guard against becoming bureaucratized to avoid having the generation that thinks of Taiwan as being independent be the generation that brings about unification.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
Translated by Chang Ho-ming
Because much of what former US president Donald Trump says is unhinged and histrionic, it is tempting to dismiss all of it as bunk. Yet the potential future president has a populist knack for sounding alarums that resonate with the zeitgeist — for example, with growing anxiety about World War III and nuclear Armageddon. “We’re a failing nation,” Trump ranted during his US presidential debate against US Vice President Kamala Harris in one particularly meandering answer (the one that also recycled urban myths about immigrants eating cats). “And what, what’s going on here, you’re going to end up in World War
Earlier this month in Newsweek, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged the People’s Republic of China (PRC) to retake the territories lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. He stated: “If it is for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t [the PRC] take back the lands occupied by Russia that were signed over in the treaty of Aigun?” This was a brilliant political move to finally state openly what many Chinese in both China and Taiwan have long been thinking about the lost territories in the Russian far east: The Russian far east should be “theirs.” Granted, Lai issued
On Tuesday, President William Lai (賴清德) met with a delegation from the Hoover Institution, a think tank based at Stanford University in California, to discuss strengthening US-Taiwan relations and enhancing peace and stability in the region. The delegation was led by James Ellis Jr, co-chair of the institution’s Taiwan in the Indo-Pacific Region project and former commander of the US Strategic Command. It also included former Australian minister for foreign affairs Marise Payne, influential US academics and other former policymakers. Think tank diplomacy is an important component of Taiwan’s efforts to maintain high-level dialogue with other nations with which it does
On Sept. 2, Elbridge Colby, former deputy assistant secretary of defense for strategy and force development, wrote an article for the Wall Street Journal called “The US and Taiwan Must Change Course” that defends his position that the US and Taiwan are not doing enough to deter the People’s Republic of China (PRC) from taking Taiwan. Colby is correct, of course: the US and Taiwan need to do a lot more or the PRC will invade Taiwan like Russia did against Ukraine. The US and Taiwan have failed to prepare properly to deter war. The blame must fall on politicians and policymakers