People's Liberation Army Major General Zhu Chenghu (
Although Zhu's belligerent tone has drawn US condemnation, Beijing has yet to respond except to say that "Zhu was merely expressing his personal views." It is hardly surprising that in an authoritarian nation such as China, soldiers should seek to stand out by their hawkish views. The Chinese leadership is apparently reluctant to condemn Zhu's words because he is simply expressing their own thoughts. It is also hard to imagine that he spoke out without official approval.
It is understandable that both Taiwan and the US were stunned by Zhu's remarks, for democratic societies do not tolerate a military officer exceeding his authority in such a way. The duty of a soldier is to remain neutral and steer clear of politics. If Zhu had been a soldier in a democratic country, he would have been severely criticized and probably would have suffered professionally.
Zhu's comments were typical of the Chinese military, indicating the haughty and bellicose nature of the PLA. The rising jingoism in China in recent years has gone hand-in-hand with its military expansion. This has warned the whole world that China's so-called "peaceful rising" is anything but that.
It is no surprise, therefore, that a Pentagon report published on Tuesday in Washington affirmed the rapid pace of China's military expansion. The report said that China now has between 650 and 730 CSS-6 and CSS-7 short-range missiles targeting Taiwan, and that the number is increasing by around 100 every year. This alone is frightening, quite apart from the expansion in other areas.
This high level of military expansion shows us that Zhu's statement is anything but an isolated incident or the opinion of just one officer. There are probably thousands of people in the PLA whose thinking is identical to Zhu's -- he's just the one who spoke publicly.
The threat that China now poses is an issue that Taiwan and its neighbors need to resolve. In fact, it concerns countries around the world. The EU certainly must take a more responsible attitude in its considerations over whether to lift its arms embargo on China. It should stop focusing on the commercial benefits of lifting the ban and do the responsible thing to help ensure regional peace in Asia and the rest of the world.
As for the pan-blue camp, its members have simply buried their heads in the sand as far as China's military threat is concerned. Although they have long refused to face reality, hopefully pressure from the US and other nations will convince its leaders to greenlight passage of the long-delayed special arms purchase bill.
In the face of China's military threat, Taiwan has no choice but to acquire the means to defend itself effectively. It must not always count so heavily on the aid of its allies.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS