At a recent press conference, American Institute in Taiwan Director Stephen Young stated that the Legislative Yuan should promptly pass the arms procurement bill and strengthen Taiwan's defensive capabilities. His comments came under attack from the pan-blue camp, and some have even called for Young to be sent home.
An editorial in the Chinese-language United Daily News stated that "the Legislative Yuan should not pass the arms procurement bill this session." The People First Party (PFP) even declared that if a bill on direct flights between Taiwan and China was not passed, they would not consider passing the arms bill.
Everybody is aware that there is a marked military imbalance across the Taiwan Strait. China's annual military budget exceeds US$90 billion (NT$2.89 trillion) making it the third-largest in the world. China not only has 800 missiles deployed and trained on Taiwan, it also plans to have three aircraft carriers within 10 years.
In the face of this nearby enemy, Taiwan should naturally strengthen its national defense by passing the arms budget. It should also call a spade a spade and view China as an enemy, as well as strengthen cooperation with the US military. This is especially true because as China's economy takes off, many countries are scared to offend Beijing because of their business interests. In a situation where only the US dares to sell Taipei weapons, the ruling and opposition parties ought to focus on bilateral military relations with Washington.
Instead, even though the US president authorized the orginal weapons package five years ago, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and PFP have blocked the bill in the legislature 61 times. What other legislature in the world is willing to put national security at this sort of risk?
Young's comments caused those pan-blue lawmakers who care nothing about China's threat to national security to shout about "defending the sovereignty of the Republic of China [ROC]." They seem to have forgotten that on Double Ten National Day, they had made a tremendous ruckus in front of Young and other foreign dignitaries, showing no respect whatsoever for the country.
Now they righteously play up respect for the nation and its sovereignty, but do they really care about either? When President Chen Shui-bian's (
When the planes carrying then-KMT chairman Lien Chan (
These people not only fail to speak sensibly, they fit the classical definition of cowards. As the old Chinese saying goes, they "behave like a hooligan in front of a gentleman, and when faced with a bully act like his grandson."
Seeing the pan-blue's unconcealed display of anti-US and pro-China sentiment leaves the onlooker baffled. Dictator Chiang Kai-shek (
Is it not the KMT and PFP who, unhappy that Taiwanese people are in power, have unhesitatingly embraced the CCP, gambled with the ROC's security, turned their backs on the anti-communism of the two Chiangs and forgotten their own roots?
Cao Changqing is a freelance journalist and Chinese dissident traveling in the US.
Translated by Jason Cox
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
With a new White House document in May — the “Strategic Approach to the People’s Republic of China” — the administration of US President Donald Trump has firmly set its hyper-competitive line to tackle geoeconomic and geostrategic rivalry, followed by several reinforcing speeches by Trump and other Cabinet-level officials. By identifying China as a near-equal rival, the strategy resonates well with the bipartisan consensus on China in today’s severely divided US. In the face of China’s rapidly growing aggression, the move is long overdue, yet relevant for the maintenance of the international “status quo.” The strategy seems to herald a new
To say that this year has been eventful for China and the rest of the world would be something of an understatement. First, the US-China trade dispute, already simmering for two years, reached a boiling point as Washington tightened the noose around China’s economy. Second, China unleashed the COVID-19 pandemic on the world, wreaking havoc on an unimaginable scale and turning the People’s Republic of China into a common target of international scorn. Faced with a mounting crisis at home, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) rashly decided to ratchet up military tensions with neighboring countries in a misguided attempt to divert the
Toward the end of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) final term in office, there was much talk about his legacy. Ma himself would likely prefer history books to enshrine his achievements in reducing cross-strait tensions. He might see his meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Singapore in 2015 as the high point. However, given his statements in the past few months, he might be remembered more for contributing to the breakup of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). We are still talking about Ma and his legacy because it is inextricably tied to the so-called “1992 consensus” as the bedrock of his