When commenting on the potential for conflict in the Taiwan Strait and the likelihood of China annexing Taiwan by force, one of the most frequently invoked mantras in the West is this: "Chinese consider it their sacred duty to `reunite' Taiwan with the motherland."
It is then further inferred that the Chinese would stop at nothing to achieve their goal of unification, and that its commitment to this goal is akin to religious devotion.
In order to lend credence to this line of reasoning, one only has to cite the time when a People's Liberation Army general nonchalantly said that Beijing would be willing to sacrifice the most prosperous half of China, or everything east of Xian, as the price for nuclear attacks on major US cities -- which he thought was the proper response to US intervention in a cross-strait war.
What might have been overlooked is that the word "sacred" is often attached in Chinese politics to an objective which despotic rulers deem to be an impossible dream.
For instance, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) regimes of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) and Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) told the Taiwanese people for years that reclaiming China was "our sacred mission."
Beijing has also dusted off its litany of complaints regarding historical grievances and humiliations from time to time to camouflage its true designs on Taiwan, which are part of Beijing's plan for global strategic expansion. To give this earthly desire any kind of religious underpinning is preposterous since the Chinese Communists are generally atheist.
Therefore, any Chinese military attack on Taiwan would be a result of rational calculation. That is why US defense officials constantly remind the Chinese not to miscalculate.
As long as the US-Japan-Taiwan coalition maintains transparently adequate military capability in the region to make miscalculation improbable, Beijing will launch an attack only when compelled to forego rational calculation.
Restraint imposed on Taiwan by the US effectively removes the chance that President Chen Shui-bian's (陳水扁) administration will cross the line. It then follows that there is almost zero chance that Beijing will be left without an alternative except to attack while Chen is Taiwan's leader.
This could all change should KMT chairman Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) become Taiwan's president in 2008.
Events could then unfold along either of the following two different courses, either of which could have disastrous consequences for the Taiwanese people.
First, Ma could acquiesce to all of Beijing's demands, including establishing direct links, unilaterally disarming and criminalizing Taiwan's independence movement. That would touch off an internal uprising with unpredictable ramifications.
Alternatively, Ma could defy Beijing's expectations, either by refusing Beijing's reunification timetable -- a move which would likely be backed by the majority of his pan-blue supporters -- or claiming an inability to outlaw Taiwan's independence movement lest uncontrollable internal strife erupt. Hawks in Beijing would then decide that Ma was not sincere about unification, even though Ma once openly advocated unification as the ultimate goal for the KMT, and that "all hope for peaceful reunification has been exhausted." Beijing's leadership would then be left with no choice but to resort to "nonpeaceful means" in accordance with its "Anti-Secession" Law.
There are a number of other factors that might prove to be even more compelling to Beijing. An important seed was planted through the formation of the Chinese Communist Party-KMT alliance last year, and its agreement to push for "unification."
The domestic expectation in China for Ma to deliver is palpable even now, and would become overwhelming if and when he is actually elected.
But the most ominous development is that the international community's expectation seems to be growing in lockstep with China's internal glee.
After his inauguration, any defiance by Ma on the issue of unification would be construed as a direct affront to Beijing. It would cause Beijing to feel it had lost face in the eyes of the international community, a humiliation which no Beijing regime could survive. That would likely cause it to react decisively, especially with the added domestic pressure caused by the "Anti-Secession" Law.
"Losing face" internationally could emerge as one of the most probable reasons compelling Beijing to act militarily without rational calculation.
Therefore, just like the saying that a girl can't be "a little" pregnant, the pan-blue camp's wishful thinking that Taiwan can be "a little" unified with China is a dangerous exercise that would bring catastrophe to the Taiwanese people.
To say that Ma and the KMT are playing with fire would therefore be quite an understatement.
Huang Jei-hsuan
California
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
This month’s news that Taiwan ranks as Asia’s happiest place according to this year’s World Happiness Report deserves both celebration and reflection. Moving up from 31st to 27th globally and surpassing Singapore as Asia’s happiness leader is gratifying, but the true significance lies deeper than these statistics. As a society at the crossroads of Eastern tradition and Western influence, Taiwan embodies a distinctive approach to happiness worth examining more closely. The report highlights Taiwan’s exceptional habit of sharing meals — 10.1 shared meals out of 14 weekly opportunities, ranking eighth globally. This practice is not merely about food, but represents something more
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
RSS