The public have forgotten about Chang Hsien-yi (張憲義), who was the deputy director of the First Institute of the National Chungshan Institute of Science and Technology (CSIST) — now the Institute of Nuclear Energy Research (INER) — and who defected to the US in 1988.
However, when Taiwan Oral History Society chairman Chen Yi-shen (陳儀深) traveled to the US to interview Chang recently, it made headlines.
Most, but not all, that Chang said in the interview is the historical truth.
He said that he left “as he accepted the CIA’s demands and arrangements, and did not betray the interests of Taiwan or Taiwanese, and at most betrayed my commanding officer, Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村).”
He also said that he “respected [then-president] Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) instructions that we should have the ability to develop nuclear weapons, but would never produce any.”
Chiang did say that, and if Chang had been an outsider, he would surely have believed it. The problem is that he was an insider and clearly understood that Chiang’s statement was intended for those who were not.
Hau has not had a very high opinion of Taiwan’s presidents during the democratic era, but he was meek as a lamb when it came to the Chiang family.
How could it be possible that Chiang would not agree to the development of nuclear weapons, and let Hau develop them in secret?
The scale of the development was quite significant. INER, whose former parent agency, the CSIST, falls under the Ministry of National Defense, was not the only CSIST research institute involved in the development of nuclear weapons — at the time, the Third Institute was also involved.
The bottleneck was obtaining nuclear material. There are plutonium and uranium bombs. The isotope used in plutonium bombs, plutonium-239, must be extracted from spent nuclear reactor fuel, while the latter uses uranium-235, which is extracted from natural uranium, which contains uranium-235 and uranium-238. The chemical properties of the two isotopes are identical, and are difficult to separate.
At the time, the Third Institute planned to use lasers to extract uranium-235.
It has been said that Taiwan was very close to having nuclear weapons, but in fact it is a long way off. The truth was that Taiwan really wanted nuclear weapons, but did not have the R&D capability.
It was clearly not a case of, as Chiang claimed, having the ability to do so, but not actually building any nuclear arms.
The US is a nuclear superpower, but it will not allow other countries to develop their own nuclear arms. Any country that the US has in a stranglehold will listen, but those that are not dependent on the US do not care.
China and India have ignored the US and developed their own nuclear weapons. Taiwan is too dependent on the US in many ways, even on keeping nuclear power stations up and running. Uranium in its natural state contains only 0.7 percent uranium-235 and to be used in weaponry it must be enriched to 1 percent.
Taiwan Power Co has commissioned enrichment to the US, so if the US did not want to assist Taiwan, the existence of Taiwan’s nuclear power stations would be in danger.
In 1977, the US pressured Taiwan to close its nuclear energy research facilities, and following Chang’s defection in 1988, it forced Taiwan to remove the facility from the ministry and place it under the Atomic Energy Council, thus finally putting an end to Chiang’s nuclear arms dream.
Chen Mao-hsiung is a retired National Sun Yat-sen University professor and a member of the Northern Taiwan Society.
Translated by Perry Svensson
French firm DCI-DESCO in April won a bid to upgrade Taiwan’s Lafayette frigates, which has strained ties between China and France. In 1991, France sold Taiwan six Lafayette frigates and in 1992 sold it 60 Mirage 2000 fighter jets. To prevent arms sales between the nations, China negotiated an agreement with France and in 1994 in a joint statement, France promised that there would be no future arms sales to Taiwan. From China’s point of view, the DCI-DESCO deal constitutes a breach of the agreement, but the French stance is that it is not selling Taiwan new weapons, but instead providing a
Chung Yuan ChristiaN University is clearly in bed with the People’s Republic of China. This can be the only explanation why the school’s authorities have done their utmost to shield a student, who lodged a complaint against an associate professor, and then used thuggish tactics to compel the teacher to issue two separate apologies to China. The original complaint, filed by an unnamed Chinese student, was for remarks by associate professor Chao Ming-wei (招名威) during a class on the origin of COVID-19. A second complaint was filed by the same student after Chao, during an apology, stated that he was a
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in her inaugural address on May 20 firmly said: “We will not accept the Beijing authorities’ use of ‘one country, two systems’ to downgrade Taiwan and undermine the cross-strait status quo.” The Chinese government was not too happy, and later that day, an opinion piece on the Web site of China’s state broadcaster China Central Television said: “While Tsai’s first inaugural address four years ago was read by Beijing as an ‘unfinished answer sheet,’ the one she presented this time was even more below-par.” Speaking to the China Review News Agency, Shanghai Institutes for International Studies vice president
During my twenty-two years in the US Senate, I became a student of Taiwan and its history. I was chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Subcommittee on East Asia, the Pacific and International Cybersecurity Policy, and have made at least 25 trips to Taiwan and have been invited as an observer to two of the nation’s presidential elections. Taiwan’s continuous economic miracle has seen the nation transition from a mixed agricultural-industrial society at the end of Japan’s 50 years of jurisdiction to today’s economic powerhouse, unmatched by most nations of the world. Just as outstanding has been Taiwan’s decades of resistance and