The US has already begun its plan to overthrow the regime of Iraq's lifelong President Saddam Hussein by force. Nothing can change this historical reality whether international society supports the US attack or not.
The objections from France and Germany, which are backed by the EU, could not shake US President George W. Bush at all. Even the UN Security Council's debates failed to delay the US from taking military action. What can other countries do?
In particular, Taiwan has no room to speak on the US invasion. More importantly, it's obviously in no position to do so. The US is not only the most significant ally to the island but also the biggest protector of its security and existence. This has been the consensus of all the Taiwanese people. Just take a look at those anti-US and anti-war demonstrations across the world. Hundreds of thousands of protesters gathered at each of those demonstrations abroad while only a few hundred Taiwanese people attended such events. Many of them were pro-unification activists. It's thus evident that neither anti-US nor anti-war sentiment is marketable in Taiwan.
This is called political reality.
Do the Taiwanese people long for peace? Of course, they do. But what's more important is that in reality, each and every country weighs the gains and losses to its interests. It then comes up with its own "choices and decisions" -- as the famous French writer and philosopher Jean Paul Sartre said.
Taiwan's full support for the US' military action is our only choice, because it tallies with our interests. In fact, not only Taiwan's government but also its various civil groups are aware of this fact. Otherwise, why is Taiwan giving a cold shoulder to the anti-US and anti-war campaign while so many in the rest of the world are taking part in this movement?
Therefore, both deputy secretary-general to the President Joseph Wu's (吳釗燮) pro-US article -- published in the Taipei Times on March 20 -- and the controversial remarks of Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) spokesman Richard Shih (石瑞琦), who echoed Bush by urging Saddam to leave Iraq to avert war, in fact reflected mainstream opinion in Taiwan. In terms of what and how exactly top government officials should speak, that is a matter of rhetoric and will not be discussed here.
On the other hand, the anti-US and anti-war opinions of those opposition legislators or the so-called anti-war activists are surprising. Their most laughable opinion is that since Taiwan supports the US military action this time, China is likely to follow this example and attack Taiwan by force in the future. They have made two mistakes by saying so.
First, China never asked for UN approval when it assaulted India and Vietnam by force in the past. Beijing unceasingly threatens to "liberate Taiwan by force." It has even deployed over 400 ballistic missiles along its southeast coast, targeting Taiwan without regard for international society's objections. Therefore, the presumption that China may follow the US example is ill-founded.
Second, the political reality is that the US does not allow China to resolve the Taiwan issue by force, and supporting the US equals supporting Taiwan itself. On the other hand, we may further boost Beijing's arrogance if we go against Washington's move. The pro-unification camp's words and deeds this time serve as examples.
In Wu's pro-US article, he commented that "opposing war and the US should be left to the opposition parties that oppose everything." His words have deep meaning.
Chin Heng-wei is editor-in-chief of Contemporary Monthly magazine.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of