New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) presidential candidate, has vowed that if elected, he would return compulsory military service to four months, while his political party has a track record of blocking arms deals with the US.
In an English-language article titled “Taiwan’s path between extremes: the Kuomintang presidential candidate lays out a plan to avert war with China” published in Foreign Affairs magazine, Hou wrote: “When it comes to relations across the Taiwan Strait, I have always believed both in maintaining peace while increasing dialogue and in maintaining peace through strength ... Taiwan’s most important priority should be to strengthen its national defense and deter the use of force by mainland China. To do so, I aim to build a strong military, enhance cooperation with partners and allies and increase our deterrence capabilities to better safeguard Taiwan and the island groups of Penghu, Kinmen, and Matsu.”
When Hou was visiting think tanks in the US, he said Taiwan needed to increase its military strength not only to ensure cross-strait stability and Taiwan’s security, but also to mitigate concerns held by the rest of the world regarding the Taiwan Strait. Hou said that Taiwan should maintain dialogue with China to lower the risk of conflict and increase mutual understanding, adding that Taipei did not hold unrealistic expectations of Beijing.
It would seem that Hou is being disingenuous: When facing the Taiwanese public, he wants to cut military spending and reduce compulsory military service, whereas in the presence of US think tanks, he vowed to bolster national defense. Does Hou not know he is playing a double part, in the same fashion as the bat in Aesop’s fable of the battle of birds and beasts?
Even though Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) has made it clear that the “1992 consensus,” means China’s “one China principle, no different interpretations” or “one China, two systems,” Hou, in vowing to “resolve any crises through cross-strait dialogue,” is the one still mumbling about the “1992 consensus,” the “Republic of China” and opposition to “one country, two systems” behind China’s back. Perhaps Hou considers mumbling his way through to be “dialogue.”
So far, the three opposition presidential candidates, Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) Chairman Ko Wen-je (柯文哲), independent presidential candidate Hon Hai Precision Industry Co founder Terry Gou (郭台銘) and Hou, have all visited the US.
Hou, who campaigned hard to prohibit the import of US pork and pork products containing ractopamine, has recently traveled all the way to the US. Gou, who once remarked that “democracy doesn’t put food on the table,” has twice visited the leader of the Democratic Party in his US-Taiwan flag patch embroidered cap. Ko, who said that Taiwan should maintain “equidistant” relations with China and the US, might now make a second trip.
It is all the more ironic that all three candidates, who have condemned the US or democratic values in the past, have now unanimously avoided China like the plague. Hou, who has maintained that exchange is better than antagonism, seems not to harbor any plans to visit China and conduct “exchange” activities. Gou, who has heavily invested in China, seems to not show any interest in wearing a Taiwan-China flag patch embroidered cap and pay the autocratic country a visit. Ko, who has already graced the US and Japan with his presence, has not made a “homecoming” visit to the country that he considers “one family.” In the eyes of Beijing, does Ko’s behavior fit so-called “equidistant” relations or is it more akin to one family all shunning an unwelcome relative?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Rita Wang
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
More than seven months into the armed conflict in Gaza, the International Court of Justice ordered Israel to take “immediate and effective measures” to protect Palestinians in Gaza from the risk of genocide following a case brought by South Africa regarding Israel’s breaches of the 1948 Genocide Convention. The international community, including Amnesty International, called for an immediate ceasefire by all parties to prevent further loss of civilian lives and to ensure access to life-saving aid. Several protests have been organized around the world, including at the University of California Los Angeles (UCLA) and many other universities in the US.
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past