Some members of the Chinese National People's Congress have reportedly proposed naming March 14 "Protect Taiwan Day" as a way to commemorate the passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law a year ago. It would be most ironic should Beijing adopt this preposterous proposal.
The irony, of course, lies in the diametrically opposite view and interpretation of the Anti-Secession Law by Taiwanese people.
It cannot be disputed that if Taiwan were ever to officially declare independence from China (despite the fact that many people rightfully argue that Taiwan has no need to do so since it has already attained statehood status), it would require the consent of Taiwanese, which would probably be expressed through a referendum. The state of democratic development in Taiwan has reached the point where it would be hard to imagine any elected government or president unilaterally declaring independence or secession and continuing to rule thereafter without public support.
Against whom, exactly, is the Anti-Secession Law supposed to protect Taiwanese? Themselves? Is it supposed to keep them from exercising their right to self-determination? If so, then March 14 should not be called "Protect Taiwan Day" but "Oppress Taiwan Day." It would be a day to scorn.
On the other hand, could Taiwan ever unify with China without Taiwanese consent? Sadly, that is a possibility that cannot be ruled out. The passage of the Anti-Secession Law is a clear declaration of Beijing's violent intentions and preparedness to act on them when the time comes. Other facts point to Beijing's undisputed ambition -- from missiles targeting Taiwan to the refusal to rule out an invasion and repeated warnings by the US on the military threat posed by China.
One shouldn't rule out the possibility that some politicians may trick voters into electing them to office before making a pact with Beijing to accept unification without the endorsement of the popular will. The support of the people would no longer be needed from that point, because once China gained control of Taiwan, its army would rush to crush any dissent.
This year is not only the first anniversary of the passage of the Anti-Secession Law, but also the 10th anniversary of the 1996 missile crisis. Ten years ago, on the eve of Taiwan's first popular presidential election, Beijing conducted military exercises in the Taiwan Strait in an attempt to intimidate voters and influence the election's outcome. The threat against Taiwan was so real and imminent that Washington had to dispatch the USS Independence to keep the peace in the area.
Ten years ago, the Taiwanese -- prompted by a sense of nationalism and pride in their democratic accomplishments -- were more unified than ever in the face of Beijing's threats. This was clearly shown in the high voter turnout and the landslide victory of former president Lee Teng-hui (
But what has happened since then? Taiwan has seemingly become more polarized. Such internal rivalry and hostility are much more dangerous than any Chinese missile.
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