In an interview with international media earlier this month, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) poured cold water on direct-link advocates by emphasizing that "Taiwan cannot have direct links for the sake of direct links." Chen said that if China insists on Tai-wan's unilateral acceptance of the "one China" principle as the prerequisite for the opening of direct links, "then we don't want direct links."
Chen's statement was a timely reminder to whose who have put individual or economic interests above national interests by asking the government to speed up the opening of the direct links.
What Chen emphasized in the interview was the need to educate the public about how deceitful China is about the cross-strait relationship. While using economic incentives to try to get the business community to pressure the Chen administration about economic opening, Beijing has also accelerated its deployment of missiles aimed directly at Taiwan.
According to media reports, the US Department of Defense is going to release its annual defense report on the People Liberation Army (PLA). The lastest report notes that China now has about 450 CSS-7 and CSS-6 missiles across the Taiwan Strait from Taiwan. The figure represents an increase of 50missiles over the 400 mentioned in last year's report.
The report also says that China recently conducted two test flights of its new short-range missile, known as the CSS-7. The CSS-7 is one of two short-range missiles being deployed in large numbers within striking distance of Taiwan, in a buildup that the Pentagon has called destabilizing. Therefore, China's military build-up cannot be overlooked.
The Chinese leadership has also tried to sabotage Chen's leadership by allying itself with the pro-unification forces. By taking advantage of the lack of domestic consensus in this country regarding cross-strait policy, Beijing could easily portray Chen as a troublemaker who abuses economic leverage and regional prosperity for the sake of politics.
Since most people overlook the potential danger embedded in China's growing military capability, using economic openness to cover its own military ambition represents the core of Beijing's policy toward Taiwan. How could outsiders expect Taiwan to make unilateral concessions to a country that has not renounced the use of force against it? Shouldn't national security be considered a key element when it comes to the question of opening direct links?
For Chen to be credited with the opening of cross-strait direct links would be a huge boost to the DPP government's electoral momentum, and so it is clearly not in Beijing's interest. Hence, Beijing's strategy is primarily aimed at downgrading Chen's popularity and blaming all the faults for cross-strait deadlock on his government.
But Chen has naysayed the possibility of opening direct links by the end of his first term largely because China's passive response to Taipei's moderate efforts to pursue cross-strait normalization and its continued threat to Tai-wan's security. This is a smart move in terms of shouldering domestic pressure and refraining from making excessive concession to his counterparts. It also provides a clearer picture of the status quo of the cross-strait standoff.
When Chen reiterated that he would never accept Beijing's insistence that he embrace its "one China" principle in order to realize direct flights, he pointed out the reason behind the current cross-strait stalemate. That is, Beijing should bear all the res-ponsibility for hurting the feelings of 23 million people on Taiwan through military force. Most importantly, Taiwan should never sacrifice its own national interests by opening direct links with China simply for the sake of opening direct links.
Liu Kuan-teh is political commentator based in Taipei.
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
RSS