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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS