"Uphold peace across the Taiwan Strait" is perhaps the most popular catchphrase that Taiwanese politicians like to chant nowadays. However, upholding "peace" has also become the most plausible excuse to justify their immorality.
Most Taiwanese are doubtless peace-loving and averse to war because human lives are priceless. Respecting and caring about human life is the most precious quality that the Taiwanese possess and the Chinese government lacks. In view of this, Taiwanese people do not want any war in the Strait.
Although war is abhorrent, the ultimate evils are autocracy and aggression, rather than war itself. If we are peace-loving out of our passion and respect for life, then we have to admit that there is only one cause that can justify war: the protection of human freedom.
If anyone or any country attempts to strip the Taiwanese of their freedom and enslave them to a regime, the Taiwanese will also rise up and fight.
However, in Taiwan nowadays there are no politicians from the governing party willing to promise to fight for the life and freedom of the Taiwanese. Rather, they have followed in the footsteps of the opposition parties and jumped on the "peace" bandwagon.
How can peace be ensured? China's aggression is what threatens peace across the Strait. Unless Beijing is willing to renounce its aggression against Taiwan, there is no way that Taiwan's politicians can guarantee peace.
Defined by the communist regime, the status quo across the Taiwan strait is that the two sides remain in a state of civil war. Moreover, Beijing has never considered the status quo peaceful -- it defines the status quo merely as a ceasefire. Unless Taiwan surrenders or the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) disintegrates, Beijing will never be willing to re-define the cross-strait situation. A state of war or at least a ceasefire is the reality of the status quo across the Strait.
The peace-loving Taiwanese do not like this kind of status quo. But they have to understand that there are only two possibilities that can change the status quo: the disintegration of the violence-loving Chinese regime, or the surrender of Taiwan to this autocratic regime. If politicians claiming to be peacemakers fail to strongly demand that Beijing renounce its autocratic rule and practice democracy, they will only lead the Taiwanese to submit themselves to China's authoritarian regime.
The problem is that submission cannot bring lasting peace. Instead, it encourages more aggression and leads to the death of the human spirit. We cannot call the devastation of the soul created by an authoritarian regime a state of peace.
Many Jews who were slaughtered during the Holocaust had put down their guns and submitted to Hitler's aggression. In view of this historical tragedy, former Israeli prime minister Levi Eshkol once pointed out that what is more wicked than violence is to succumb to violence.
Such wickedness is now in vogue in Taiwan. Rather than asking Beijing to pursue democracy, politicians only speak about how they can bring peace. But in doing so they are encouraging Taiwanese people to give in to China's tyrannical regime. Although they may cloak their words in the garment of peace, they are advocating a submission to violence.
Capitulation to violence only feeds further tyranny and aggression. It is a pity that both the governing and opposition parties in Taiwan have decided to adopt this morally bankrupt strategy. Whether or not the Taiwanese can resist the siren call of peace will determine the fate of their hard-won freedom and democracy.
Chang Hsi-mo is an assistant professor of interdisciplinary studies at National Sun Yet-sen University
TRANSLATED BY DANIEL CHENG
As strategic tensions escalate across the vast Indo-Pacific region, Taiwan has emerged as more than a potential flashpoint. It is the fulcrum upon which the credibility of the evolving American-led strategy of integrated deterrence now rests. How the US and regional powers like Japan respond to Taiwan’s defense, and how credible the deterrent against Chinese aggression proves to be, will profoundly shape the Indo-Pacific security architecture for years to come. A successful defense of Taiwan through strengthened deterrence in the Indo-Pacific would enhance the credibility of the US-led alliance system and underpin America’s global preeminence, while a failure of integrated deterrence would
The Executive Yuan recently revised a page of its Web site on ethnic groups in Taiwan, replacing the term “Han” (漢族) with “the rest of the population.” The page, which was updated on March 24, describes the composition of Taiwan’s registered households as indigenous (2.5 percent), foreign origin (1.2 percent) and the rest of the population (96.2 percent). The change was picked up by a social media user and amplified by local media, sparking heated discussion over the weekend. The pan-blue and pro-China camp called it a politically motivated desinicization attempt to obscure the Han Chinese ethnicity of most Taiwanese.
On Wednesday last week, the Rossiyskaya Gazeta published an article by Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) asserting the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) territorial claim over Taiwan effective 1945, predicated upon instruments such as the 1943 Cairo Declaration and the 1945 Potsdam Proclamation. The article further contended that this de jure and de facto status was subsequently reaffirmed by UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 of 1971. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs promptly issued a statement categorically repudiating these assertions. In addition to the reasons put forward by the ministry, I believe that China’s assertions are open to questions in international
The Legislative Yuan passed an amendment on Friday last week to add four national holidays and make Workers’ Day a national holiday for all sectors — a move referred to as “four plus one.” The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), who used their combined legislative majority to push the bill through its third reading, claim the holidays were chosen based on their inherent significance and social relevance. However, in passing the amendment, they have stuck to the traditional mindset of taking a holiday just for the sake of it, failing to make good use of
RSS