President William Lai (賴清德) on Wednesday last week announced a plan to invest an additional NT$1.25 trillion (US$39.8 billion) in military spending to procure advanced defense systems over the next eight years, and outlined two major plans and concrete steps to defend democratic Taiwan in the face of China’s intensifying threat.
While Lai’s plans for boosting the country’s national security have been praised by many US lawmakers, former defense officials, academics and the American Institute in Taiwan, the US’ de facto embassy in Taiwan, they were not equally welcomed by all Taiwanese, particularly among the opposition parties.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairwoman Cheng Li-wun (鄭麗文) on the same day said Lai was “playing with fire” by pledging to increase Taiwan’s defense budget, and that his plans are “an investment in war” that would transform Taiwan into an arms factory, as she urged him to refrain from becoming a “troublemaker.”
Cheng’s “playing with fire” rhetoric echoed a phrase Beijing frequently uses to criticize foreign policies it deems to be provocative to China, and most often on Lai, who it has labeled a “separatist” pushing for “Taiwan independence.”
The KMT said that the proposed special defense spending, alongside other special budgets, would exceed the nation’s debt ceiling, leaving a huge debt to future generations, and that it would crowd out spending on social welfare, education and infrastructure.
The Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), which has sided with the KMT on almost all policies and bills since lawmakers took office in February last year and vowed to collaborate in future elections, was a bit softer in its criticism, saying that it would strictly review defense spending.
The KMT and the TPP blasted Lai for what they called “instilling fear” in the civilian population by saying that Beijing has a goal of reaching the military capability to take Taiwan by 2027.
They demanded that Lai explain how he received intelligence about Beijing’s plans for 2027 and expressed their speculations that Lai’s remark was just meant to trigger a “sense of national subjugation” among the public for the ruling Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) political gain, especially in the upcoming elections.
When the Ministry of National Defense published and distributed a printed version of its updated crisis response guidebook titled In Case of Crisis: Taiwan’s National Public Safety Guide early last month, the KMT criticized the government as “wasting taxpayers’ money” and “inciting panic” among the people.
It is disturbing to see how the KMT, the largest opposition party, seems to be deliberately trying to close the public off from understanding geopolitical reality.
Global military expenditure last year increased by 9.4 percent from 2023, the steepest year-on-year rise since the end of the Cold War, data from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute showed. Military spending in Europe rose by 17 percent, and several countries in Central and Western Europe saw unprecedented rises as they implemented new spending pledges and large-scale procurement plans, prompted by the war in Ukraine.
In East Asia, in response to China’s three decades of military expenditure growth, which doubled in the past decade, with an average annual growth rate of about 7.5 percent, and intensified gray zone activities, its neighboring countries, including Japan and India, accelerated their military build-up as they feel a threat to their national security.
Moreover, the KMT at times even seems to be trying to “deceive” the public by ignoring and refusing to condemn China’s widespread and systemic violations of human rights, its provocative actions that threaten stability in the Indo-Pacific region, not just against Taiwan, and its help in sustaining Russia’s war in Ukraine.
The KMT fundamentally rejects the idea of communicating evidence-based information of what Taiwan is facing with the public, and refuses to discuss the nation’s practical preparedness (such as critical infrastructure protection, stockpiling emergency supplies and evacuation training) to enhance societal resilience for worst-case scenarios, which are not limited to war, but include earthquakes or climate disasters as well.
There is no doubt that nobody wants a war, nor does anyone want to see a global arms race with trade-offs across various sectors, but “wishful thinking” and “absolute pacifism” could be dangerous. Not building up a nation’s self-defense capabilities and merely calling for “peace” does not guarantee aggressors would leave it alone, especially when facing a country that has repeatedly said it “absolutely will not” rule out using force to bring Taiwan under its control.
The image was oddly quiet. No speeches, no flags, no dramatic announcements — just a Chinese cargo ship cutting through arctic ice and arriving in Britain in October. The Istanbul Bridge completed a journey that once existed only in theory, shaving weeks off traditional shipping routes. On paper, it was a story about efficiency. In strategic terms, it was about timing. Much like politics, arriving early matters. Especially when the route, the rules and the traffic are still undefined. For years, global politics has trained us to watch the loud moments: warships in the Taiwan Strait, sanctions announced at news conferences, leaders trading
Eighty-seven percent of Taiwan’s energy supply this year came from burning fossil fuels, with more than 47 percent of that from gas-fired power generation. The figures attracted international attention since they were in October published in a Reuters report, which highlighted the fragility and structural challenges of Taiwan’s energy sector, accumulated through long-standing policy choices. The nation’s overreliance on natural gas is proving unstable and inadequate. The rising use of natural gas does not project an image of a Taiwan committed to a green energy transition; rather, it seems that Taiwan is attempting to patch up structural gaps in lieu of
The saga of Sarah Dzafce, the disgraced former Miss Finland, is far more significant than a mere beauty pageant controversy. It serves as a potent and painful contemporary lesson in global cultural ethics and the absolute necessity of racial respect. Her public career was instantly pulverized not by a lapse in judgement, but by a deliberate act of racial hostility, the flames of which swiftly encircled the globe. The offensive action was simple, yet profoundly provocative: a 15-second video in which Dzafce performed the infamous “slanted eyes” gesture — a crude, historically loaded caricature of East Asian features used in Western
The Executive Yuan and the Presidential Office on Monday announced that they would not countersign or promulgate the amendments to the Act Governing the Allocation of Government Revenues and Expenditures (財政收支劃分法) passed by the Legislative Yuan — a first in the nation’s history and the ultimate measure the central government could take to counter what it called an unconstitutional legislation. Since taking office last year, the legislature — dominated by the opposition alliance of the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party — has passed or proposed a slew of legislation that has stirred controversy and debate, such as extending
RSS