Minister of National Defense Tang Yao-ming (
In 1953, during the Korean War, then-US president Dwight D. Eisenhower discussed the possibility of using nuclear weapons against China. In 1988, Beijing successfully tested a neutron bomb and the US military began to study more seriously the possibility of using nuclear weapons against China. Despite the differences in the nuclear policies of successive US presidents, their view of China as a possible target of tactical nuclear weapons did not change. The nuclear contingency plan, reported on last month by the Los Angeles Times, was therefore simply a continuation of past policy.
Soon after taking office, US President George W. Bush vowed to "do whatever it takes to help Taiwan defend itself." During his visit to Japan earlier this year, he described both Japan and Taiwan as friends of the US. Clearly, the US lists Taiwan in the same category as Japan and South Korea -- and puts it under the same nuclear protection umbrella. This defense mechanism is the foundation for security in East Asia. The US policy of strategic ambiguity on the use of nuclear weapons is the key to maintaining its nuclear deterrence.
This newspaper has always advocated making the Taiwan Strait a nuclear-free zone. But Taiwan unilaterally declaring the Strait a non-nuclear zone is not a smart idea. Given that China remains unwilling to renounce the possible use of force against Taiwan, a unilateral declaration would destroy the existing strategic ambiguity, do more harm than good and cause problems for Taiwan's allies. China has more than 300 ballistic missiles deployed against Taiwan. It's hostility toward Taiwan is on the rise as Beijing continues to whip up nationalist fervor for unification as part of its internal power struggles.
The Strait should be a nuclear-free zone, but Taiwan's national security and defense institutions first need to integrate their political and military strategies -- and then seek a consensus with the US on the issue. The next step would be to seek a formal agreement with the US and China through a tripartite-negotiation mechanism. The US position on the Strait is rather passive: it will not take the initiative to intervene. That leaves China as the key factor. Beijing's use of nuclear weapons against Taiwan would draw strong condemnation from the international community, not to mention the fact that it would destroy the very prize it claims to have been seeking for decades. The US might be forced to retaliate with its own nuclear weapons. No one would emerge a winner from such a scenario.
A promise from China for a nuclear-free zone in the Strait would not only reduce Washington and Taipei's concerns about Beijing's threat, but would be a substantial goodwill gesture toward the people of Taiwan. It would also go a long way toward improving Sino-American ties and cross-strait relations -- a winning situation for all three parties.
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS