During the second election debate last Saturday, President Chen Shui-bian (
Certainly, Chen made numerous campaign promises during the 2000 election -- including stipends for senior citizens, farmers and fishermen. But Chen has made relatively few campaign promises this time. Being the incumbent, he knows the government's budget constraints and the difficulty of delivering on extravagant promises. Besides, his government's NT$500 billion national construction budget is still blocked by the opposition at the Legislative Yuan.
Lien has made a large number of promises -- an 18 percent preferential interest rate on deposits made by retired workers, a reduction of the military conscription period from the current 20 months to three months and an increase in the proportion of female legislators up to 30 percent, among others. Lien even boasted that Taiwan has the defensive capability to win the initial stage of a cross-strait war. Most of these policies are naive, while others are plain foolishness.
The government in the past granted a preferential 18 percent interest rate for servicemen, civil servants and teachers because these people had relatively low salaries. Over the decades, however, the policy created a heavy financial burden for the government and finally had to be terminated. Now only those who retired before 1995 still enjoy the special interest rate. Now, extending this largesse -- which in the past was only available to a small portion of society -- to retired workers will certainly cause a financial burden far beyond what the government coffers can endure. The policy is also unfair to other sectors of society. Apart from tax hikes, there is no way the government can pay for this perk. It is a typical pork-barrel policy, but the people have not been fooled. According to an opinion poll, 46 percent of respondents oppose the policy and 31 percent support it.
In the eyes of most Taiwanese men, serving in the military is a waste of time. Cutting it down to three months will create a serious national security burden. First of all, the purpose and usefulness of three months of military training needs to be clearly defined. Secondly, the entire strategic deployment, troop structure and personnel allocations need to be readjusted. Thirdly, large numbers of officers in command positions need to be laid off as the armed forces shrink. This will have a huge impact on the military and pose a major challenge for society as well.
China far outnumbers Taiwan in terms of weapons that can be used in pre-emptive strikes -- missiles, fighter jets and submarines. Qualitative superiority is all Taiwan has. Lien said Taiwan can win in the initial fight against China. We wonder what he bases his ideas on. China can, as Mao Zedong (毛澤東) said, sacrifice a tenth of its population. How many lives must Taiwan sacrifice in a first strike? Besides, Taiwan is gradually losing its qualitative superiority due to the opposition's obstruction of arms procurement budgets.
If Lien is truly concerned about Taiwan's security, he should tell his party's legislators to support the arms procurement budgets. He should also vote "yes" for both referendum questions on March 20.
On Sept. 3 in Tiananmen Square, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) rolled out a parade of new weapons in PLA service that threaten Taiwan — some of that Taiwan is addressing with added and new military investments and some of which it cannot, having to rely on the initiative of allies like the United States. The CCP’s goal of replacing US leadership on the global stage was advanced by the military parade, but also by China hosting in Tianjin an August 31-Sept. 1 summit of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), which since 2001 has specialized
In an article published by the Harvard Kennedy School, renowned historian of modern China Rana Mitter used a structured question-and-answer format to deepen the understanding of the relationship between Taiwan and China. Mitter highlights the differences between the repressive and authoritarian People’s Republic of China and the vibrant democracy that exists in Taiwan, saying that Taiwan and China “have had an interconnected relationship that has been both close and contentious at times.” However, his description of the history — before and after 1945 — contains significant flaws. First, he writes that “Taiwan was always broadly regarded by the imperial dynasties of
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will stop at nothing to weaken Taiwan’s sovereignty, going as far as to create complete falsehoods. That the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never ruled Taiwan is an objective fact. To refute this, Beijing has tried to assert “jurisdiction” over Taiwan, pointing to its military exercises around the nation as “proof.” That is an outright lie: If the PRC had jurisdiction over Taiwan, it could simply have issued decrees. Instead, it needs to perform a show of force around the nation to demonstrate its fantasy. Its actions prove the exact opposite of its assertions. A
A large part of the discourse about Taiwan as a sovereign, independent nation has centered on conventions of international law and international agreements between outside powers — such as between the US, UK, Russia, the Republic of China (ROC) and Japan at the end of World War II, and between the US and the People’s Republic of China (PRC) since recognition of the PRC as the sole representative of China at the UN. Internationally, the narrative on the PRC and Taiwan has changed considerably since the days of the first term of former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) of the Democratic
RSS