On Wednesday, Zhang Mingqing (
It is generally observed that China has managed to maintain "unprecedented calm" -- in comparison to its typical behavior -- in the face of the March election and the controversies surrounding the referendum legislation (which all agree will have a decisive impact on the outcome of the election).
Perhaps China has finally realized after multiple experiments that whomever it has lashed out against has ended up winning brownie points from Taiwanese voters. However, with the popular support of President Chen Shui-bian (
Last Tuesday, Wang Daohan (
These two officials seemingly read from the same script.
Wang Daohan, who is typically considered more dovish when it comes to Taiwan, played the "good cop," while Wang Zaixi, perhaps due to his military background, played the "bad cop."
Wang Daohan first indicated respect for the democratic spirit underlying enactment of a national referendum law, but accused Taiwan of pushing for independence through the passage of the referendum bill, which would give a legal basis to a declaration of "Taiwan independence," pushing Taiwan toward a "dangerous edge."
Wang Zaixi spoke in a highly coercive tone, indicating that if Taiwan openly declared independence, then China's line would be crossed and the "use of force is inevitable."
They did not say if China considers a referendum law equivalent to "Taiwan independence." But Zhang Mingqing's statement on Wednesday offers the answer to this question. According to Zhang, if a referendum law is enacted "without any restrictions" on the issues of the national flag, name and territory, China will "react strongly." As for what kind of "strong reactions" he was referring to, Zhang said "[we'll] know in a few days."
However, he also commented that there was no basis to the rumor that former president Jiang Zemin (
Based on Zhang's talk, it is obvious that China equates changing the national flag, name and territory through national referendums as "Taiwan independence," and as actions that would cross its line.
But because a referendum law by itself does not rise to that standard, and because China realizes that passage of a referendum law is inevitable, it had to attempt to more clearly delineate its so-called "line."
This attempt was of course laughable, because self-determination is a universally accepted human right, and China has no right to interfere with the rights of Taiwanese people.
A gap appears to be emerging between Washington’s foreign policy elites and the broader American public on how the United States should respond to China’s rise. From my vantage working at a think tank in Washington, DC, and through regular travel around the United States, I increasingly experience two distinct discussions. This divergence — between America’s elite hawkishness and public caution — may become one of the least appreciated and most consequential external factors influencing Taiwan’s security environment in the years ahead. Within the American policy community, the dominant view of China has grown unmistakably tough. Many members of Congress, as
The Hong Kong government on Monday gazetted sweeping amendments to the implementation rules of Article 43 of its National Security Law. There was no legislative debate, no public consultation and no transition period. By the time the ink dried on the gazette, the new powers were already in force. This move effectively bypassed Hong Kong’s Legislative Council. The rules were enacted by the Hong Kong chief executive, in conjunction with the Committee for Safeguarding National Security — a body shielded from judicial review and accountable only to Beijing. What is presented as “procedural refinement” is, in substance, a shift away from
Taiwan no longer wants to merely manufacture the chips that power artificial intelligence (AI). It aims to build the software, platforms and services that run on them. Ten major AI infrastructure projects, a national cloud computing center in Tainan, the sovereign language model Trustworthy AI Dialogue Engine, five targeted industry verticals — from precision medicine to smart agriculture — and the goal of ranking among the world’s top five in computing power by 2040: The roadmap from “Silicon Island” to “Smart Island” is drawn. The question is whether the western plains, where population, industry and farmland are concentrated, have the water and
The shifting geopolitical tectonic plates of this year have placed Beijing in a profound strategic dilemma. As Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) prepares for a high-stakes summit with US President Donald Trump, the traditional power dynamics of the China-Japan-US triangle have been destabilized by the diplomatic success of Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi in Washington. For the Chinese leadership, the anxiety is two-fold: There is a visceral fear of being encircled by a hardened security alliance, and a secondary risk of being left in a vulnerable position by a transactional deal between Washington and Tokyo that might inadvertently empower Japan
RSS