Ma: The de-Taiwanifier
British playwright George Bernard Shaw was once purportedly told by a beautiful lady: “Sir, imagine if we two got married — our children would get my looks and your brains.” To which, Shaw replied: “Yes, but what if they got my looks and your brains?”
That appears to be what Taiwan is getting from its president: the worst of both worlds.
A Taiwanese president by definition is expected to resolutely defend the nation’s sovereignty. He must also be deliberate yet tentative as if stepping on thin ice when it comes to rapprochement with China.
Instead President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) is giving Taiwan little more than trivialization of its sovereignty and outright de-Taiwanification — both in terms of its name and strength.
Only the presence of clandestine arrangements with China could rationally explain why Ma would make only a half-hearted attempt at “bringing the 23 million Taiwanese” to participate in the UN’s peripheral organizations and then characterize Beijing’s brush-off of the attempt as an “unintentional slip.”
Meanwhile, the Ma administration was forced to deny reports of comments American Institute in Taiwan Chairman Raymond Burghardt allegedly made to him during his visit to the US. Burghardt is reported to have told Ma to not hint that China holds sovereignty over Taiwan and instead insist that China not be allowed to determine whether Taiwan can participate in international activities. The rebuttal was similar to his previous denial that he asked Washington to postpone arms procurement processing.
Ma appears to be trying to convince Beijing that Taiwan will be part of China eventually and that, in the current domestic and international atmosphere, he is doing all he can. One example is his recent description of Taiwan as a “region” instead of a nation, a proclamation that, if allowed to stand, could quickly lead the discourse on the status of Taiwan down a steep and slippery slope.
But Washington is reminding Ma that the significant contribution the US has made to Taiwan’s ability to maintain its sovereignty has in no measure diminished even if Ma, the presumptive symbol of Taiwan’s sovereignty, has shirked his responsibility to uphold it.
Going far beyond what’s necessary for mollifying international fear of cross-strait conflicts, Ma’s string of unabashed pro-China policies is causing fresh unease in both Washington and Tokyo.
Beijing hasn’t forgotten that the only path for China to annex Taiwan is through war.
Ma’s political capital can only carry him so far toward unification. All Ma can manage now is de facto unification via Taiwan’s open border for Chinese, but he can’t formally deliver Taiwan to Beijing without a nod from the US. That nod couldn’t possibly be forthcoming considering the potential adverse strategic impact on Japan.
Taiwan’s deterrence capability is declining rapidly and its psychological defense is nearly non-existent following the truce between the Chinese Communist Party and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). These only serve to stoke Beijing’s adventurous instincts. A severe economic downturn or political turmoil in China could still mark the launch of China’s military invasion of Taiwan.
Ma, if left unchecked to pursue his unification dream, could cost Taiwanese their sovereignty, democracy and prosperity and cast them into the jaws of war — the worst of both worlds indeed.
HUANG JEI-HSUAN
Los Angeles, California
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS