On March 9, a private first class soldier serving in the army’s Kinmen Defense Command was reported missing from his unit on Erdan Island (二膽島), which is near China’s Fujian Province.
The soldier could have been indicted under legal military procedures for short-term unauthorized absence or long-term desertion.
On Monday last week, Mainland Affairs Council Minister Chiu Tai-san (邱太三) said that the missing soldier was definitely in China. This has since been confirmed.
From a legal perspective, the case has escalated and is now subject to Article 10 of the Criminal Code of the Armed Forces (陸海空軍刑法), which states that “the word ‘enemy’ in the Code denotes any country or organization that engages in or whose force confronts with the Republic of China.”
The first task should be to ascertain the facts of the case, but how can this be done when the soldier is within enemy territory?
Some might expect the Ministry of National Defense to be responsible for asking China to investigate the case.
Although Article 137, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution says that “the national defense of the Republic of China shall have as its objective the safeguarding of national security and the preservation of world peace,” close examination of the structure of Taiwan’s armed forces reveals that they have no department dedicated to external liaisons or for communicating with the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA).
The Mainland Affairs Council asked the Straits Exchange Foundation to communicate with China, but using a non-governmental body to respond to the situation is just a short-term fix.
Especially in the current atmosphere of confrontation across the Taiwan Strait, the only long-term solution for handling such sensitive issues would be to establish an institutional mechanism between formal counterparts on each side.
During the Cold War, the US and Soviet Union used a hotline to keep communications open. It was first used during the 1967 Six-Day War between Israel and a coalition of Arab states. At the time, the US Sixth Fleet and the Soviet Union’s Black Sea Fleet were sailing close to one another in the Mediterranean Sea, so they needed a hotline to avoid misunderstandings about one another’s maneuvers.
Now there is a situation where the Taiwan Strait is gradually approaching the brink of war. The Economist even chose “The struggle for Taiwan” as the cover story of its March 11 edition.
The Ministry of National Defense says it does not fear war, but its fearlessness does not preclude establishing a hotline with the PLA to clarify one another’s military activities to reduce the possibility of any unnecessary clashes or misjudgements.
The case of a runaway soldier is as good a moment as any to set up such a hotline.
Shih Ya-hsuan is an associate professor in National Kaohsiung Normal University’s Department of Geography.
Translated by Julian Clegg
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
RSS