With China fever spreading, it is not very surprising to see the opposition's negative stance toward the arms procurement bill. The thinking behind these attitudes, that war must be stopped by peaceful means, could endanger Taiwan's position.
The opposition's ultimate goal behind this thinking is to stop China from launching a military attack on Taiwan. That goal is based on three suppositions. First, that foreign forces centered around the US will intervene in a military conflict in the Taiwan Strait, and that this will prevent China from taking action. Second, it is assumed that China lacks the motivation to launch an attack because it is directing all its strength toward economic development. Third, it is argued that as long as Taiwan keeps the US and China at an equal distance, China will not invade Taiwan.
All three suppositions, however, are now being challenged. The greatest challenge to the first supposition of US support is twofold. On the one hand, the war on terror has caused the US to divide its forces, making it impossible for the US to deal with military conflict in other regions. According to the latest report from the Rand Organization in the US, the permanent US military presence in Iraq and Afghanistan has overstretched US forces, which means that very few troops are ready to respond to crises in other regions. In short, it is questionable whether the US has the power to stop a military conflict in the Taiwan Strait.
The other side of this challenge is a result of the US' strategic miscalculation of the Iraqi invasion, which has led to its neglect of China's growth. This means that the cost of military intervention may erode the US' determination to undertake such action. This is similar to the British strategic miscalculation during the Boer War at the turn of the previous century which led to the rise of Germany.
The challenge to the second supposition that China is preoccupied with its own economic growth is a result of faulty reasoning. Ever since the days of Deng Xiaoping (
Perhaps the most likely catalyst is China's energy needs. According to the US' recent report on China's military power, China relies on imports for 40 percent of its oil needs, and that figure will increase to 80 percent by 2025. This means that continued economic development requires that China guarantee its energy supply.
The oil field issue in the East China Sea is the reason China is now playing tough with Japan. The Taiwan Strait is surrounded by areas involved in sovereignty disputes, including the South China Seas, the East China Sea and the Diaoyutai islands, which are all potentially rich in oil and natural gas. With China playing it tough with Japan, what are the chances that it will be softer on Taiwan?
The third supposition forms the central idea in blue-camp thinking, although history is full of examples disproving this reasoning. During the Peloponnesian War in ancient Greece, Athens requested the help of Milos in its resistance against Sparta. Milos refused the request and was annihilated by Athens.
During World War II, Hitler devised an operation is which he would station 50 divisions along the eastern border of Switzerland in an attempt to annex it. In the end, Switzerland's complex topography, its militia and solid engineering works put an end to the German army's ambitions.
These two examples show us the impact of major states on small nations trying to maintain a neutral foreign policy, and that it is not at all certain that they will succeed.
The weakness of these three suppositions refutes the foundation of the position that war should be averted through peaceful means, but it does not mean that we should stop striving for peace in the Taiwan Strait.
What is important is that we have sufficient military strength to ward off China even if outside powers are unable to intervene and that we are able to deter China from invading. This is the only way to guarantee peace in the Taiwan Strait. The Swiss strategy is a worthy model.
Eugene Yen is a doctoral candidate in the department of political science at National Chengchi University.
Translated by Perry Svensson
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more
RSS