The recent visits to China by Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Lien Chan (
President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) even said that Soong promised to support the passage of this crucial piece of national security legislation on the eve of his China visit. But on Tuesday, the PFP and the KMT once again jointly struck the arms-procurement bill -- along with a number of other bills proposed by the pan-green camp -- from the agenda. It is clear that as long as the pan-blues still enjoy a legislative majority, the chances that the bill will be passed are slim. Since both Lien and Soong see themselves as Chinese, how can they ever agree to allow Taiwan to purchase weapons to defend themselves against China's military aggression?
During last year's presidential election campaign, both Lien and Soong prostrated themselves and kissed the ground in an attempt to prove their love for Taiwan. In retrospect, their acts seem preposterous and hypocritical.
We still remember when in 1979 the late pope John Paul II returned to his homeland of Poland, 10 years after he left it. The pope's first action when he stepped off the plane in Warsaw was to kneel down and kiss the ground. This image has been burned into the minds of people around the world and has become a symbol of separation from one's home country. The pope's love for his country never changed, and commentators believe that the pope played an important part in helping the labor group Solidarity defeat Poland's communist government. There was no conflict between the pope's religious status and his status as a Pole, and he could be both a great pope and an outstanding Pole.
We have seen on TV how Lien and Soong returned to their old country, China. In particular, we saw how the wooden Lien suddenly showed a sense of humor, and how Soong could not hold back tears when paying his respects to his ancestors in Hunan Province. This reveals how much passion is stirred by one's homeland. This is a normal human reaction. The problem is that their status as Chinese is not compatible with their status as leaders of Taiwanese opposition parties. At a time when China is blocking Taiwan's participation in the international community and even threatening our national security, how can we place any trust in political parties that favor China?
This underlines the fundamental choice in Taiwan's electoral politics. When people vote they are not so much choosing between political ideals, but rather choosing between Taiwan and China. There is no better example of this than the attitude being taken by the various political parties to the arms-procurement bill. The parties that identify with Taiwan are all in favor of purchasing advanced weapons to improve the nation's defenses, while those who identify with China take their cue from the other side of the Taiwan Strait.
During their visits, China offered Lien and Soong gifts -- including pandas, better trade terms for Taiwan's fruit and a lifting of restrictions on tourist travel to Taiwan -- in a bid to help the pan-blue camp win votes in the National Assembly elections. Although Beijing did not succeed in "buying" votes with such offers, it successfully won over the two opposition leaders. So, not only is China the home country of both Lien and Soong, even the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has become their political ally.
It is hardly surprising that some pan-green supporters also object to the procurement of advanced weapons, though for different reasons to the pan-blue camp. Their fear is that in the event of a conflict, the pan-blue camp will turn over Taiwan's weapons to the People's Liberation Army (PLA), and join them in turning against the US. This is Taiwan's ultimate nightmare.
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
RSS