The National Policy Foundation, sponsored by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), recently held a forum called “The Effect on Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) Foreign Policy Toward Taiwan Following the Two Sessions.”
Chao Chun-shan (趙春山), a member of former president Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) braintrust on cross-strait relations, used the forum to repeat KMT policy like a broken record, claiming that if put into office, the KMT would start “a new dialogue” with China.
He is naive to believe that reopening dialogue across the Taiwan Strait would revive the congenial relationship seen during Ma’s administration.
It would certainly not put an end to China’s air force incursions into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone. Unless Chao is suffering from serious memory loss, he is deceiving the public, because Chinese warplanes have been conducting long distance training exercises since 2013.
Chao is aware that the US would continue suppressing China, a change in international relations direction from Ma’s presidency. At this critical juncture, if Taiwan becomes ambiguous in its attitude toward China, it risks becoming the thorn in the side of democratic allies. Those who lack realistic views of international politics think that dialogue is the answer to every problem.
If that is the case, then there would have been no wars throughout history. The most famous dialogue in history is nothing but the Melian Dialogue, a dramatization of the negotiations between the Athenians and the Melians before the siege. The two parties failed to reach a consensus after the dialogue, and the Athenians wiped out the Melians.
In East Asian history, the last ruler of the Southern Tang Dynasty, Li Yu (李煜), thought that if he could appease the Song forces, then there would be peace for his country. As the Song armies prepared to invade, Li immediately asked to talk. Zhao Kuangyin (趙匡胤), who later became the founder of the Song dynasty, replied: “No more of this talk. As there is only one kingdom, I could not allow another to share it with me.”
The same example can be seen in modern history. Former British prime minister Neville Chamberlain thought that he could achieve “peace for our time” by talking to Adolf Hitler. Despite receiving a rowdy homecoming from the crowd after signing the Munich Agreement, Chamberlain’s talk failed to keep Hitler from invading Poland the following year, which led to World War II.
Former US president Bill Clinton also thought that the US could achieve peace with North Korea through dialogue. Unfortunately, this opened a can of worms for the US, for North Korea has learned that the US would capitulate whenever it throws a tantrum, providing further chances to extort aid from Washington.
The KMT should know this better than anyone since the it has fallen for CCP schemes after multiple negotiations and peace talks. Former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) blamed the US for the loss of the “mainland” because Washington forced him to negotiate with the CCP. He would turn in his grave if he knew that droves of KMT members were now in favor of holding peace talks.
KMT icon and Republic of China (ROC) founder Sun Yat-sen (孫逸仙) once discussed the futility of talk.
“To rely on benevolence alone to influence the Europeans in Asia to relinquish the privileges they have acquired in China would be an impossible dream,” he said.
Ironically, after the end of World War II, Europe relinquished many privileges acquired through treaties, including the handover of Hong Kong. Recent crackdowns and changes have proved that it was China that renounced its “50 years unchanged” pledge.
While history has shown that the US and Europe have been reliable, it is downright impossible and naive to negotiate with an autocratic country with a record of breaking promises.
Prior to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the US and Europe were making no progress with Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron thought that he could dissuade Russian President Vladimir Putin with his silver tongue. The joke was on Macron when Putin turned on him and ordered the invasion.
While Macron only suffered a bruised ego, Taiwan could easily lose its sovereignty and people.
In response to Chao’s preposterous stance, and to Ma — a former president who possesses the nation’s highest secrets and is about to visit China — Taiwanese should slam them for their quasi-treason and refrain from being deceived by these “pro-dialogue” advocates.
Tommy Lin is director of Wu Fu Eye Clinic and president of the Formosa Republican Association.
Translated by Rita Wang
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