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
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS