Over the past 15 years, as China has made rapid strides in economic, military, scientific and technological areas and gradually become a world leader, it began to interact from a position of strength with traditional world powers, including the US.
On Taiwan, it has changed its stance from passively opposing independence to actively promoting unification by explicitly bringing a timetable into the discussion, thus retiring “indefinitely delaying unification” as a viable option.
As a result, under the dual geopolitical pressures of the Thucydides trap caused by Sino-US hegemony and the urge for unification as ignited by the dream of rejuvenating the Chinese nation, in the next 10 years Taiwan will inevitably come into conflict with China in the form of a political and/or military struggle, with the stakes being the existing democratic way of life that its people currently enjoy.
As for what strategy is best to handle this prospective struggle, there are currently three prevailing propositions in Taiwan. The first, adopted by the ruling Democratic Progressive Party, asserts that Taiwan is a nation independent of China and would go all-out to defend this sovereignty, while leveraging the military might of the US as much as possible to deter or contain China’s aggression.
The second, as advocated by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party, recognizes Taiwan as a part of China and is willing to conduct political negotiations with China to achieve peaceful unification while maintaining Taiwan’s existing democratic way of life. However, if China forces unification upon Taiwan without offering credible guarantees on the latter’s democratic way of life, Taiwan should rise and fight against China’s aggression.
The third comes from local pacifists, who insist that under no conditions should Taiwan turn into a battlefield. This proposition differs from the second proposition in that even if China cannot satisfactorily guarantee Taiwan’s existing democratic system after unification, Taiwan should still not confront China militarily. “Peace, even the most groveling kind, is still peace” is their motto.
In terms of the highest political priority, it is national sovereignty for the first proposition, Taiwan’s existing democratic way of life for the second proposition, and human life and property for the third proposition. As for implementation measure, the first and second propositions require a war readiness plan for military confrontation against China, while the second and third propositions require a separate action plan for unification negotiations so that Taiwan could secure the strongest assurances from China.
Although different political parties might choose different strategic propositions to deal with China’s aggression when they rise to power, as a whole the best way to defend Taiwan is to devise a comprehensive readiness plan that covers both military confrontation and political negotiations.
Judging from newspaper reports and official government publications, Taiwan’s current war readiness plan is entirely geared toward military conflict, and is largely blank with respect to the potential political war of unification negotiations.
Political parties and the public are embroiled in debating the strengths, weaknesses, and pros and cons of these strategic propositions, rather than focusing on the development of concrete measures, detailed mechanisms and the creative thoughts required for a peaceful unification agreement that meets real-world political constraints and is practically realizable to both sides of the Taiwan Strait.
Given the time pressure for an imminent showdown with China is so high, it is precarious and unwise for Taiwan to be so one-sided in its preparations for the upcoming war, military or political.
“Only being well-prepared for war can you prevent war” is a consensus shared by both the ruling and opposition parties, and wider society, but Taiwan has to be both militarily and politically prepared, because the significant imbalance between Taiwan’s and China’s military strengths suggests that political negotiations at some point are all but inevitable, as evidenced by the evolution of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.
To prepare itself for unification negotiations that could potentially impact Taiwan for the next 100 years, first Taiwan should gather together first-rate legal, political, economic, diplomatic and business experts from home and abroad, analyze the lessons of Hong Kong’s fall and the EU’s formation, pervasively survey concerns, opinions and ideas from all walks of life within Taiwan, and, through war game-like simulations of a great multitude of likely evolutions of global political and economic scenarios, devise and identify all possible peaceful unification arrangements that both guarantee Taiwan’s democratic way of life and are politically acceptable to China.
However, perhaps the most important and challenging preparation that Taiwan needs but is yet to have is for all its major political parties to reach, in advance, a consensus on the when, what and how of unification engagement with China.
That is, regardless of whether a political party agrees with the peaceful unification policy, it must be willing to participate in and help complete the development of Taiwan’s own peaceful unification proposal, so that should the time come to negotiate with China, Taiwan can present a unified front and speak with one voice, with the aim of maximizing post-unification security guarantees for Taiwan.
Chiueh Tzi-cker is a professor in the Institute of Information Security at National Tsing Hua University.
In an article published in Newsweek on Monday last week, President William Lai (賴清德) challenged China to retake territories it lost to Russia in the 19th century rather than invade Taiwan. “If it is really for the sake of territorial integrity, why doesn’t China take back Russia?” Lai asked, referring to territories lost in 1858 and 1860. The territories once made up the two flanks of northern Manchuria. Once ceded to Russia, they became part of the Russian far east. Claims since then have been made that China and Russia settled the disputes in the 1990s through the 2000s and that “China
China has successfully held its Forum on China-Africa Cooperation, with 53 of 55 countries from the African Union (AU) participating. The two countries that did not participate were Eswatini and the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic, which have no diplomatic relations with China. Twenty-four leaders were reported to have participated. Despite African countries complaining about summit fatigue, with recent summits held with Russia, Italy, South Korea, the US and Indonesia, as well as Japan next month, they still turned up in large numbers in Beijing. China’s ability to attract most of the African leaders to a summit demonstrates that it is still being
Trips to the Kenting Peninsula in Pingtung County have dredged up a lot of public debate and furor, with many complaints about how expensive and unreasonable lodging is. Some people even call it a tourist “butchering ground.” Many local business owners stake claims to beach areas by setting up parasols and driving away people who do not rent them. The managing authority for the area — Kenting National Park — has long ignored the issue. Ultimately, this has affected the willingness of domestic travelers to go there, causing tourist numbers to plummet. In 2008, Taiwan opened the door to Chinese tourists and in
Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲) on Thursday was handcuffed and escorted by police to the Taipei Detention Center, after the Taipei District Court ordered that he be detained and held incommunicado for suspected corruption during his tenure as Taipei mayor. The ruling reversed an earlier decision by the same court on Monday last week that ordered Ko’s release without bail. That decision was appealed by prosecutors on Wednesday, leading the High Court to conclude that Ko had been “actively involved” in the alleged corruption and it ordered the district court to hold a second detention hearing. Video clips
RSS