On at least 18 separate occasions since President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) took office just two years ago, media or government departments here or abroad have openly called for China to remove the missiles it has pointed at Taiwan. The last occasion was on May 6 during a videoconference hosted by Harvard University’s Fairbank Center for Chinese Studies, when Ma said that unless China removes the missiles targeting Taiwan, he would not take further steps to negotiate a cross-strait peace agreement.
There has been no clear official response from China on this, other than the assertion on Jan. 21 last year by Chinese Ministry of National Defense spokesman Colonel Hu Changming (胡昌明) that the timing of any redeployment was contingent on how the situation develops. China has taken little notice of calls to remove the missiles, and there is no practical significance, from a military point of view, even if it agrees to do so. As former minister of national defense Chen Chao-min (陳肇敏) said on June 2, 2008: “Taking the missiles away may send a political message, but it doesn’t really mean anything in military terms, because the missiles can be redeployed at any time.”
On Wednesday last week, US Senator Dianne Feinstein, chairwoman of the US Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, told a Senate meeting: “In my meeting with some of the leadership, it was mentioned that China had offered to redeploy back. Now I understand the word ‘redeploy’ isn’t ‘remove.’”
Although neither the US nor China has officially confirmed Feinstein’s statement, it does suggest that the situation has changed, albeit in a subtle way.
China has recently offered a range of compromises to facilitate the signing of a proposed economic cooperation framework agreement (ECFA) with Taiwan. Another issue high on Beijing’s agenda is how it can stop the US from selling arms to Taiwan. When US President Barack Obama’s administration gave the green light to a US$6.4 billion arms sales package, Beijing for some reason held back on blaming Taiwan and instead focused its anger on the US. It immediately ceased all military exchanges with the US and this month even rejected a proposed visit by US Secretary of Defense Robert Gates.
Feinstein’s comments imply that Beijing may now be thinking in terms of changing the current military deployment aimed at Taiwan. On the surface, this may seem to be the demonstration of goodwill that Taiwan has been looking for, but one suspects it may be little more than a ploy by China to strengthen its hand. Through this, China could get the US to agree to stop selling arms to Taiwan, with China likely adding another concession that would benefit US national interests. While this approach is unlikely to succeed in getting the US to cancel arms sales outright, it might induce Washington to postpone or suspend the sale.
The issue of arms sales to Taiwan is a sensitive one, and the US knows this. It consider its national interests as a whole, taking into account the current situation in the Asia-Pacific region and other factors that we are not privy to. The question is how to respond to the issue with the Taiwanese government or with Beijing, when it officially brings the subject up — which is very likely to happen after an ECFA is signed. This is sure to be a political minefield, whatever approach the US ends up taking.
Another factor will be the response of Taiwan’s armed forces, and how they could continue to make an impact on the political decision-making process and avoid being sidelined as a result. This is going to be a severe challenge for military command, and a test of both its judgment and vision.
Wang Jyh-perng is an associate research fellow at the Association for Managing Defense and Strategies.
TRANSLATED BY PAUL COOPER
In the event of a war with China, Taiwan has some surprisingly tough defenses that could make it as difficult to tackle as a porcupine: A shoreline dotted with swamps, rocks and concrete barriers; conscription for all adult men; highways and airports that are built to double as hardened combat facilities. This porcupine has a soft underbelly, though, and the war in Iran is exposing it: energy. About 39,000 ships dock at Taiwan’s ports each year, more than the 30,000 that transit the Strait of Hormuz. About one-fifth of their inbound tonnage is coal, oil, refined fuels and liquefied natural gas (LNG),
On Monday, the day before Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) departed on her visit to China, the party released a promotional video titled “Only with peace can we ‘lie flat’” to highlight its desire to have peace across the Taiwan Strait. However, its use of the expression “lie flat” (tang ping, 躺平) drew sarcastic comments, with critics saying it sounded as if the party was “bowing down” to the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). Amid the controversy over the opposition parties blocking proposed defense budgets, Cheng departed for China after receiving an invitation from the CCP, with a meeting with
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) is leading a delegation to China through Sunday. She is expected to meet with Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) in Beijing tomorrow. That date coincides with the anniversary of the signing of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA), which marked a cornerstone of Taiwan-US relations. Staging their meeting on this date makes it clear that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) intends to challenge the US and demonstrate its “authority” over Taiwan. Since the US severed official diplomatic relations with Taiwan in 1979, it has relied on the TRA as a legal basis for all
To counter the CCP’s escalating threats, Taiwan must build a national consensus and demonstrate the capability and the will to fight. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) often leans on a seductive mantra to soften its threats, such as “Chinese do not kill Chinese.” The slogan is designed to frame territorial conquest (annexation) as a domestic family matter. A look at the historical ledger reveals a different truth. For the CCP, being labeled “family” has never been a guarantee of safety; it has been the primary prerequisite for state-sanctioned slaughter. From the forced starvation of 150,000 civilians at the Siege of Changchun
RSS