In an interview with Bloomberg published on Oct. 23, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Ma Ying-jeou (
In reality, trading Taiwanese independence for a Chinese promise not to use force would not only fail to protect the status quo, but would also deal a crushing blow to Taiwan's democracy because it casts aside the right of the Taiwanese people to use democratic means to decide their own future.
In the face of China's threat of force, there are no shortcuts -- to be a responsible stakeholder, Taiwan has no choice but to strengthen its national defense, pass the arms procurement bill and deepen security cooperation with the US and Japan in order to truly make the balance of military power across the Taiwan Strait more even.
First, Taiwan's mainstream opinion supports the principle that Taiwan's future should be decided by the Taiwanese people through democratic means. Excluding the independence option could be described as digging up the foundation of democratic self-determination and would leave Taiwan no choice but unification with China.
Ma's position would turn Taiwan's right to democratic self-determination into a bargaining chip when dealing with China. This is a question of democratic principles and is unrelated to the dispute about Taiwan's unification or independence.
Second, swapping Taiwanese independence for a Chinese promise not to use force places the two fundamentally unrelated topics of Taiwan's political behavior and China's threat of force against Taiwan on two ends of the same scale.
The actual result would be that no matter what sort of pressure China applied on Taiwan's international space, no matter how openly they declare that Taiwan is a part of China, as long as China did not actually militarily attack Taiwan, China would not be changing the status quo, and the international community would change tack and ask Taiwan to limit its political actions.
Next would come a debate over what sort of political actions constitute a move toward independence. At that time, the degree of freedom of and space for Taiwanese political reform would drastically shrink, as all actions would have to avoid angering China or provoking them to change the status quo. Naturally, this weakens Taiwan's democracy.
To put it another way, swapping Taiwanese independence for a Chinese pledge not to use military force would effectively close the curtain on Taiwan's political actions and retard Taiwan's democratic development without China ever having to lift a finger.
The key to correcting the faulty logic of Ma and pro-China forces in the international arena lies in making sure things of the same character are placed on the scales. In response to China's military threat, Taiwan should strengthen its ability to protect itself and actively deepen security cooperation with the US-Japanese alliance.
Regarding the political demand that Taiwan not declare independence, it should be pointed out that Taiwan's declarations to defend its sovereignty are responses to Beijing's attacks on Taiwan's participation in the international community and China's declarations that Taiwan is a part of China.
If Beijing stopped saying that Taiwan is a part of China, and stopped trying to extinguish Taiwan's international space, then the Taiwanese people would naturally stop believing that declaring independence was necessary for their self-protection.
Political conflict should be solved through political means, and military threats should be dealt with through strengthening defense capabilities.
In the past 10 years, Taiwan has not declared independence, but China has increased the number of missiles facing Taiwan 20-fold, and the Pentagon has said that the military balance in the Taiwan Strait is already tilting China's way. This is because Taiwan has failed to pass the arms procurement bill and strengthen its defense in order to maintain the present situation in the Taiwan Strait.
As long as Ma continues to beg for Beijing's goodwill by irresponsibly blocking political reform and the arms procurement bill, Taiwan's inability to provide for its own security needs will turn it into an uncertain factor in the Taiwan Strait, and it will forever be unable to become a "responsible stakeholder."
Lai I-chung is the head of the Democratic Progressive Party's department of China affairs.
Translated by Jason Cox
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