As China engages in a military, economic and diplomatic total war against Taiwan, the international community has not stayed on the sidelines, but has paid close attention to the spillover effects of the Chinese threat.
In connection to the upcoming World Health Assembly (WHA), the US, Japan, Germany and the EU have expressed their support for Taiwan’s participation in the WHO. It is reported that even if Taiwan is not invited to the WHA this year, bilateral talks between the US and Taiwanese health ministers are still to take place on the event’s sidelines.
For China, which claims that “Taiwan’s exclusion from the WHA will not create a loophole in global epidemic prevention,” the international community’s increasing attention to and support for Taiwan must be unexpected. It is also a reflection of the growing distance between the two nations.
China’s attack on the diplomatic battlefield is also enough for the international community to clearly see who the troublemaker is that is causing tension in the Taiwan Strait and pushing the “status quo” toward conflict.
Since US President Donald Trump took office, his “America first” policy has reframed geopolitics and begun to impede China’s ascendancy. This change to the bigger picture is naturally reflected in the so-called “cross-strait” relationship.
Taiwan is bearing the brunt of China’s rising hegemony and Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) removal of presidential term limits. Whether things are going well for Xi or not, Taiwan could at any moment become a target as China vents its nationalism.
On the other hand, Taiwan is becoming an indispensable democratic role player in the containment of China and the formation of the free and open Indo-Pacific strategy.
Since Trump took office, several bills and actions have been aimed at strengthening Taiwan-US relations. This is by no means random. With China’s rising hegemony and the democratic containment strategy against Beijing, Taiwan is being pushed to the forefront of geopolitics.
At the same time, the changes in Taiwan’s domestic situation have coincided with the external changes. Public support for maintaining independence is growing stronger as the pro-unification regime has been replaced by a Taiwan-centered government.
Whether this is because of mainstream opinion or the government, China continues to pressure Taiwan and the illusion of a peaceful cross-strait situation has been destroyed by Beijing.
Despite Beijing’s intimidation and the China-friendly noises within Taiwan, public opinion still favors maintaining the independence “status quo.”
The US has never exerted influence on Taiwan to submit to Beijing’s “one China” principle.
In the past few months, Beijing has conducted stress tests against Taiwanese independence in the form of live-fire exercises, sending military aircraft to encircle the nation and the “united front” tactic of using 31 incentives to attract Taiwanese to China.
The strategic conflict and trade friction between the super powers bring both risk and opportunity for Taiwan.
At first, China’s attempt to take over Taiwan was because of the civil war and Beijing wanting to avoid a counterattack by Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石). After that, it was to meet the need to expand beyond the first island chain and gain influence over the western Pacific.
Today, there is the added necessity of “Made in China 2025,” China’s strategic plan to comprehensively upgrade Chinese industry, and there are economic benefits to taking over Taiwan’s technology industry and occupying Taiwan.
However, this also makes Taiwan a contestable place for the US, Japan and the free and open Indo-Pacific strategy.
China’s rise is mainly due to economic, rather than military or diplomatic reasons. Therefore, in addition to maintaining the necessary military and diplomatic balance, containing China and dealing with its sharp power means focusing on the economy.
The US aimed straight at the core when it moved against China’s ZTE and Huawei, because of its understanding that China’s sharp power and its weakest link are two sides of the same coin.
This strategic attack is extremely enlightening for Taiwan: To ensure that Taiwan’s scientific and technological industry secrets are not stolen by China, they must be treated as tools of war.
Taiwanese cannot throw around empty phrases, saying that the economy is for the economy’s sake, lest Taiwan be seen by Trump as a nation where technology secrets are leaked, which would be particularly disadvantageous.
The economy is the most difficult issue for Taiwan when addressing the threat of China, which uses its various “incentive” policies to steal sensitive patents through mergers and acquisitions, and by poaching talent.
Taiwan’s past policies, whether it was the active opening up policy or the policy to link economically with China, all made the mistake of detaching the economic policy from the macro strategy, which resulted in troubles for Taiwan, with the younger generation suffering.
The policy of maintaining the “status quo” and pragmatically pursuing Taiwanese independence must be quickly changed to maintain the nation’s technological superiority — the lifeblood of its economy — so that Taiwan is not reduced to helping China increase its sharp power while becoming its victim.
“Sensitive technology protection” is not a slogan, and it is not only a political issue — it also includes aspects like democracy, the rule of law and guarding Taiwan by adopting strict laws.
If Taiwan continues to leave industry, universities, research institutions and even military research institutions to their own devices, they will become havens of secrets for China to steal and Taiwan will surrender its core economic power.
If that happens, all other nations’ military and diplomatic efforts will be in vain.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
George Santayana wrote: “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This article will help readers avoid repeating mistakes by examining four examples from the civil war between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) forces and the Republic of China (ROC) forces that involved two city sieges and two island invasions. The city sieges compared are Changchun (May to October 1948) and Beiping (November 1948 to January 1949, renamed Beijing after its capture), and attempts to invade Kinmen (October 1949) and Hainan (April 1950). Comparing and contrasting these examples, we can learn how Taiwan may prevent a war with
A recent trio of opinion articles in this newspaper reflects the growing anxiety surrounding Washington’s reported request for Taiwan to shift up to 50 percent of its semiconductor production abroad — a process likely to take 10 years, even under the most serious and coordinated effort. Simon H. Tang (湯先鈍) issued a sharp warning (“US trade threatens silicon shield,” Oct. 4, page 8), calling the move a threat to Taiwan’s “silicon shield,” which he argues deters aggression by making Taiwan indispensable. On the same day, Hsiao Hsi-huei (蕭錫惠) (“Responding to US semiconductor policy shift,” Oct. 4, page 8) focused on
Taiwan is rapidly accelerating toward becoming a “super-aged society” — moving at one of the fastest rates globally — with the proportion of elderly people in the population sharply rising. While the demographic shift of “fewer births than deaths” is no longer an anomaly, the nation’s legal framework and social customs appear stuck in the last century. Without adjustments, incidents like last month’s viral kicking incident on the Taipei MRT involving a 73-year-old woman would continue to proliferate, sowing seeds of generational distrust and conflict. The Senior Citizens Welfare Act (老人福利法), originally enacted in 1980 and revised multiple times, positions older
Nvidia Corp’s plan to build its new headquarters at the Beitou Shilin Science Park’s T17 and T18 plots has stalled over a land rights dispute, prompting the Taipei City Government to propose the T12 plot as an alternative. The city government has also increased pressure on Shin Kong Life Insurance Co, which holds the development rights for the T17 and T18 plots. The proposal is the latest by the city government over the past few months — and part of an ongoing negotiation strategy between the two sides. Whether Shin Kong Life Insurance backs down might be the key factor
RSS