Foreign media have reported that during a meeting in April last year Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) told European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen that the US is attempting to provoke China to invade Taiwan.
He said that China would not rise to the bait, according to the reports.
These ideas of US provocation or using Taiwan as a means to destroy China have been broached in the past by Chinese academics and retired generals.
In Taiwan, pro-China elements have also been pushing the idea that Washington is exploiting Taipei and extending this to a series of “US skeptic” theories to undermine relations between the US and Taiwan, and inculcate among the public a sense of antipathy toward the government’s purchase of US weapons. Some avidly deep-blue supporters even believe that the US is fleecing Taiwan by selling overpriced, outdated and useless weapons, or that Taiwan can only secure peace by giving up its weapons altogether.
Whatever form this US skepticism takes, it is all rooted in China’s insistence that all problems are the responsibility of other countries and reflect an inability for instropection. China always passes the buck to others, blaming external forces, “Taiwan separatists” and the Democratic Progressive Party. It believes that if it says something loud enough, it can continuously reverse right and wrong, call a deer a horse and sow division, setting members of the public at each other’s throats and benefiting from it.
Xi said China would not act as the US wishes. This does not mean China would not attack Taiwan by force; he is instead casting around for an excuse to initiate an invasion of Taiwan and make China look like the aggrieved party.
Beijing did the same thing a few years ago when it said that COVID-19 originated in the US. It is also possible that Xi is trying to drive a wedge between the EU and the US by saying this.
Nonetheless, Xi’s artifice would not succeed, because most Western countries have already seen through the nature of China, and would not treat it as just any other country. Beijing has repeatedly shown it never practices what it preaches, just as it signed the Peace Treaty with Tibet and the Sino-British Joint Declaration with Hong Kong, but refuses to comply with either.
China had promised not to militarize disputed islands in the South China Sea, but it has not only brought military forces into those islands, but also refused to accept the Permanent Court of Arbitration’s South China Sea ruling in 2016, bullying neighbors such as the Philippines and infringing upon other countries’ rights.
Beijing rationalized its action by blaming the US military’s high-intensity activities and saying that its military deployment is purely for national defense.
From territorial disputes in the South China Sea, it is clear that China always says one thing and does another, not to mention that it refuses to say it would not use force against Taiwan, with military drills around the nation every day increasing the risk of war.
China has intensified its invasion of Taiwan through cognitive warfare, trade tensions, diplomatic isolation, forced declarations and “united front” work in the realm of culture, because it refuses to accept the objective fact that Taiwan is not part of China and sticks to its “reunification” agenda just as it did to exert total control over Hong Kong regardless of the consequences.
Xi’s statements mean nothing until China stops oppressing Taiwan.
Hong Tsun-ming is a specialist in the Taiwan Statebuilding Party’s international section.
Translated by Chien Yan-ru
Taiwan aims to elevate its strategic position in supply chains by becoming an artificial intelligence (AI) hub for Nvidia Corp, providing everything from advanced chips and components to servers, in an attempt to edge out its closest rival in the region, South Korea. Taiwan’s importance in the AI ecosystem was clearly reflected in three major announcements Nvidia made during this year’s Computex trade show in Taipei. First, the US company’s number of partners in Taiwan would surge to 122 this year, from 34 last year, according to a slide shown during CEO Jensen Huang’s (黃仁勳) keynote speech on Monday last week.
When China passed its “Anti-Secession” Law in 2005, much of the democratic world saw it as yet another sign of Beijing’s authoritarianism, its contempt for international law and its aggressive posture toward Taiwan. Rightly so — on the surface. However, this move, often dismissed as a uniquely Chinese form of legal intimidation, echoes a legal and historical precedent rooted not in authoritarian tradition, but in US constitutional history. The Chinese “Anti-Secession” Law, a domestic statute threatening the use of force should Taiwan formally declare independence, is widely interpreted as an emblem of the Chinese Communist Party’s disregard for international norms. Critics
Birth, aging, illness and death are inevitable parts of the human experience. Yet, living well does not necessarily mean dying well. For those who have a chronic illness or cancer, or are bedridden due to significant injuries or disabilities, the remainder of life can be a torment for themselves and a hardship for their caregivers. Even if they wish to end their life with dignity, they are not allowed to do so. Bih Liu-ing (畢柳鶯), former superintendent of Chung Shan Medical University Hospital, introduced the practice of Voluntary Stopping of Eating and Drinking as an alternative to assisted dying, which remains
President William Lai (賴清德) has rightly identified the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) as a hostile force; and yet, Taiwan’s response to domestic figures amplifying CCP propaganda remains largely insufficient. The Mainland Affairs Council (MAC) recently confirmed that more than 20 Taiwanese entertainers, including high-profile figures such as Ouyang Nana (歐陽娜娜), are under investigation for reposting comments and images supporting People’s Liberation Army (PLA) drills and parroting Beijing’s unification messaging. If found in contravention of the law, they may be fined between NT$100,000 and NT$500,000. That is not a deterrent. It is a symbolic tax on betrayal — perhaps even a way for
RSS