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
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS