St. Augustine wrote in The City of God that "All men desire peace, the problem is that they all want peace on their own terms." Peace can be achieved under various conditions. The ancient Romans achieved peace by slaughtering the Carthaginians, and a peace -- of a sort -- was achieved behind the Iron Curtain. Warmongers always call for peace -- but it is always peace on their own terms.
The special budget for the procurement of submarines, anti-missile batteries and anti-submarine weapons for the Ministry of National Defense has given rise to heated controversy. I believe that at its core, the debate centers on the issue of "peace": on whose terms do we want peace, and what price are we willing to pay in order to achieve the peace that we seek?
China's situation in relation to its neighbors has greatly improved since the Cold War. Russia, once an implacable enemy, is now a major arms supplier, and Beijing is now making friends with both Vietnam and India. But despite these developments, China's military strength has continued to increase by leaps and bounds. Its primary objective, in addition to replacing the US as the dominant military power in the Pacific, is to force Taiwan into accepting "one country, two systems." As a result, in the last few years China has become the world's largest arms importer.
That its armaments program is aimed at Taiwan can be glimpsed from its deployments. The new Sovremenny-class destroyers and Kilo-class submarines have all been deployed with the East China Sea Fleet (東海艦隊) and its Sukhoi-27 and Sukhoi-30 fighter aircraft are deployed at airbases suited for an assault on Taiwan.
The people who oppose the arms procurement budget for the reason that it is likely to lead to an "arms race" are forgetting one important point: Taiwan's deployment of F-16s is a response to China's deployment of Su-27 fighters; that Taiwan seeks to purchase Kidd-class destroyers to counteract China's Sovremenny-class destroyers. Taiwan is reacting to the continuous pressure from China, but in seeking to maintain the military balance in the Taiwan Strait, the Ministry of Defense has acted with great caution, always purchasing a minimum of armaments to counter China's buildup. We do not wish to engage in an arms race with China, but the greatest threat to stability in the Taiwan Strait is the temptation for the People's Liberation Army to act because they perceive that the military balance is tilted in their favor. Our current raft of purchases aims at making such an invasion more costly for China. If you don't lock the door, you're just inviting the thief in.
Obviously, the cross-strait issue is complex and will not be determined by military factors alone. Taiwan is a small country and to meet force with force is not the best policy. The military force of a small country must be reinforced by the determination of the whole people to defend the country. But if we oppose an arms procurement bill that aims at maintaining the minimal force to counter-balance China, how will this be perceived by Taiwan's citizens? How will it be perceived by the international community?
Opposition to war is a universal value, and in comparison, the preservation of peace is a much more difficult task. We can simply take to the streets to oppose war, but in the face of China's ambitions, we must work hard to preserve peace.
To achieve this end, the people must be united, and they may even have to sacrifice some conveniences and benefits. Unless we wish our children and grandchildren to enjoy the peace of "one country, two systems," rather than the peace we currently enjoy, there is a price to be paid.
Tsai Ming-hsien is the vice-minister of national defense.
Translated by Ian Bartholomew
A chip made by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) was found on a Huawei Technologies Co artificial intelligence (AI) processor, indicating a possible breach of US export restrictions that have been in place since 2019 on sensitive tech to the Chinese firm and others. The incident has triggered significant concern in the IT industry, as it appears that proxy buyers are acting on behalf of restricted Chinese companies to bypass the US rules, which are intended to protect its national security. Canada-based research firm TechInsights conducted a die analysis of the Huawei Ascend 910B AI Trainer, releasing its findings on Oct.
Pat Gelsinger took the reins as Intel CEO three years ago with hopes of reviving the US industrial icon. He soon made a big mistake. Intel had a sweet deal going with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), the giant manufacturer of semiconductors for other companies. TSMC would make chips that Intel designed, but could not produce and was offering deep discounts to Intel, four people with knowledge of the agreement said. Instead of nurturing the relationship, Gelsinger — who hoped to restore Intel’s own manufacturing prowess — offended TSMC by calling out Taiwan’s precarious relations with China. “You don’t want all of
In honor of President Jimmy Carter’s 100th birthday, my longtime friend and colleague John Tkacik wrote an excellent op-ed reassessing Carter’s derecognition of Taipei. But I would like to add my own thoughts on this often-misunderstood president. During Carter’s single term as president of the United States from 1977 to 1981, despite numerous foreign policy and domestic challenges, he is widely recognized for brokering the historic 1978 Camp David Accords that ended the state of war between Egypt and Israel after more than three decades of hostilities. It is considered one of the most significant diplomatic achievements of the 20th century.
In a recent essay in Foreign Affairs, titled “The Upside on Uncertainty in Taiwan,” Johns Hopkins University professor James B. Steinberg makes the argument that the concept of strategic ambiguity has kept a tenuous peace across the Taiwan Strait. In his piece, Steinberg is primarily countering the arguments of Tufts University professor Sulmaan Wasif Khan, who in his thought-provoking new book The Struggle for Taiwan does some excellent out-of-the-box thinking looking at US policy toward Taiwan from 1943 on, and doing some fascinating “what if?” exercises. Reading through Steinberg’s comments, and just starting to read Khan’s book, we could already sense that