Now that both China and Taiwan intend to take a pragmatic approach to "direct air links," avoiding the question of whether such links are international or domestic in nature, the next problem Taiwan faces is how to address the impact that direct links will have on national security.
Recently, Vice Minister of National Defense Kang Ning-hsiang (
Kang also said that they should initially be handled through Kaohsiung's Hsiaokang International Airport, only flying to and from Taoyuan's CKS International Airport at some later date. He formally ruled out the use of Taipei's Sungshan Airport for direct air links.
Because Sungshan Airport is situated in the heart of Taipei City, the nation's political, economic, and military center, the government's organs of national security view using Sungshan Airport for direct air links as equivalent to opening up the airspace over the capital city to a hostile China.
This would represent an "insurmountable challenge" to the security of the capital. That's why the Ministry of National Defense resolutely opposes using Sungshan Airport for the links.
Assuming the continuation of the status quo across the Taiwan Strait, "net assessment" (a methodology used by US national security policymakers) can be used to analyze the viability of using Sungshan Airport. The following national security issues that must be confronted.
First, China's intentions, methods, and capabilities: Under the premise that China has not abandoned the threat of force against Taiwan, even if taking advantage of direct links is not China's only means to attack or threaten Taiwan, this possibility cannot be ruled out.
Moreover, given that China's military has proposed the theory of "unlimited warfare," it is certainly capable of adopting such a strategy. Its potential methods would be multifaceted, however.
Second, factors outside the control of either side may arise in a crisis: Based on past experience, when tensions arise between China and Taiwan, they often give rise to hostile actions which are outside the control of either government.
Moreover, since the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks in the US, potential terrorists have witnessed demonstrations of the effectiveness of international terrorist attacks. In the future, even if China does not order such actions, preventing nationalist extremists or other radicals from taking advantage of direct links to carry out their own special operations will be a serious problem to be confronted by both sides for the sake of their national security.
Third, crisis prevention and handling: The military can deal with the threat of a "Trojan Horse" by strengthening airport security measures and putting large numbers of troops in place. It would still be very difficult, however, to respond to all the possible scenarios that could unfold in the air.
Fourth, the extent of our capacity to withstand damage: Even if the military can respond to a threat immediately, whether to shoot down a hijacked plane that is out of control may pose a particularly grave problem because today's passenger aircraft are enormous and generally carry large reserves of fuel.
If such an aircraft is shot down over a densely populated, highly developed urban center, it will cause large-scale damage and widespread casualties in the air and on the ground. We have not yet evaluated whether this sort of risk is bearable. Nor have we determined how to limit damage, how to respond to emergency situations or how much to spend on such work.
Chang Pai-ta is a research fellow on the DPP's Policy Committee.
Translated by Ethan Harkness
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