On the eve of the "war of the century" -- Taiwan's presidential election -- I have arrived in Taiwan to monitor the election. Although an observer, I have my own stance and feelings about the matter. They did not take shape by accident, and have undergone decades of transformation.
During my 21 years in China, I witnessed human rights being trampled, and lived a life without dignity. After I moved to Hong Kong in the mid-1970s, although I strongly opposed the Chinese regime, I took it for granted that Taiwan was a part of China. In 1984, I visited Taiwan for the first time. Frequent visits increased my affection for the island.
Taiwan has attracted me not only with its spectacular scenery, delicious snacks and simple customs and people, but also by the fact that I have witnessed its development into a democratic country. But China's oppression of Taiwan's democratic development has made me reconsider the unification issue. My perspective has switched from "pro-unification" to "pro-democracy" -- under which people are their own masters, and their will should be fully respected -- and to the self-awareness of Taiwan, which needs to rectify its own name.
First, China fired ballistic missiles into the Taiwan Strait in 1996 to deter Taiwan's presidential poll. I was in Taiwan at that time, and saw the absurdity of the ticket of former Judicial Yuan president Lin Yang-kang (林洋港) and former premier Hau Pei-tsun (郝柏村). Hau's remarks to a rally in Taichung shocked me, because his words sounded just like a "theory of subjugation." Hau was so afraid of Beijing that he was only anti-independence, not anti-communist. Luckily, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) did not attack Taiwan when he was the chief of the general staff. Otherwise, the country would have been destroyed a long time ago.
When former president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝) proposed the "special state-to-state" model of cross-strait relations in 1998, pro-unification politicians echoed Beijing in opposing the idea. This made me hate their fear of the communists and flattery of Beijing even more.
Second, I had originally wished that China and Taiwan could be unified after China's democratization. But the CCP has always insisted on its dictatorship and refused to countenance any political reforms. Taiwan cannot just sit back and wait for China's democratization, because it might be swallowed up by China before its democratization has been completed.
I have my own ideas about the democratization of China: emptying out the centralized government by local autonomy or independence. Taiwan and Hong Kong are the best examples of local democratization. Taiwanese independence is a good thing. The existence of a democratic Taiwan is actually the best encouragement for China's democratic movement. For those who zealously oppose Taiwan's independence -- where ever they are -- they are helping China to kill its democratic movement and its chances of becoming a democra-tic country, no matter how loudly their various democratic slogans are shouted.
Third, I know that Taiwan does not rule out the possibility of rectifying its name and becoming a real independent state. Due to the post-war cultural separation over the past half century, especially in the development of their political cultures, the gap between Taiwan and China is constantly broadening.
Fourth, some Taiwanese people's national identity is questionable. I am worried for Taiwan if this cannot be solved. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party's opposition to President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration through their legislative majority is an important cause of political trouble. I increasingly agree with those who advocate a change to the country's official name, holding referendums and creating a new constitution.
This time, the election and referendum are related to the future of the entire country, and whether each and every individual can live with dignity. The people of Taiwan have to cast their sacred ballots.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion