Reporting on the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) 18th National Congress by the Taiwanese media mostly focused on who was winning factional struggles and whether China’s strategy toward Taiwan had hardened or softened. This focus on details has meant that the bigger picture was missed.
China’s Taiwan strategy has always been subordinated to its grand global strategy. In the 1970s, Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) grand strategy was to work together with the US to contain the Soviet Union. When it came to Taiwan, Mao agreed to Washington maintaining diplomatic ties with Taipei while also establishing a liaison office in Beijing — in other words, dual recognition.
On Oct. 21, 1975, Mao told then-US secretary of state Henry Kissinger that it would be better if Taiwan remained in the US sphere of influence, and that he did not want it even if the US were to give it to him. He also said: “I am going to heaven soon, and when I see God, I’ll tell him that it’s better that Taiwan is under the care of the US.”
After Mao died, former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) changed Mao’s grand strategy and began working to contain Taiwan. He forced then-US president Jimmy Carter to sever ties with Taiwan, withdraw US troops stationed here and abolish mutual treaties. Deng wrongly thought that strong US pressure would force then-Republic of China president Chiang Ching-kuo (蔣經國) to the negotiating table to discuss “peaceful unification.”
In addition, China attempted to lure Taiwan with then-National People’s Congress chairman Ye Jianying’s (葉劍英) “nine points” in 1981 and Deng’s “six points” in 1983. Beijing even set a timetable for unification in the 1980s.
Chiang’s grand strategy was to shift the focus from re-conquering the Chinese mainland to developing Taiwan, as he launched the Ten Major Construction Projects and returned power to the public. Chiao Jen-ho (焦仁和), Chiang’s chief secretary during his latter years, told the following two stories:
When Chiang sought advice from his national policy adviser Tao Pai-chuan (陶百川), Tao suggested democratic reform. Chiang agreed with him, saying that power in Taiwan should lie with its people.
According to the second story, when the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) was established in 1986, there were strong calls within the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) to suppress the new party. When the Presidential Office secretary-general at the time, Shen Chang-huan (沈昌煥), warned Chiang that the KMT might lose power if the ban was lifted, his response was that no ruling party can stay in power forever.
With his policy of no contact, no negotiation and no compromise with China, Chiang defeated Deng’s timetable for unification by promoting his grand strategy of promoting economic development, democratic reform and national vitality and creativity. In a meeting with former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev on May 16, 1989, Deng said that the “Taiwan issue” was the only unfinished business in his life, and that he might not live to see the issue resolved.
Did the CCP change its tactics on Taiwan at its latest party congress? No, because it continues to uphold Deng’s policies of peaceful unification and “one country, two systems.” Still, there is a strategic difference between former Chinese president Jiang Zemin (江澤民) and his successor, Hu Jintao (胡錦濤). After Jiang’s attempts to intimidate Taiwan by word and by sword failed, Hu focused on a strategy of peaceful development. The key component of his strategy was “one China, and joint opposition to independence,” based on an innovative approach suggested by the Association for Relations Across the Taiwan Straits’ then chairman Wang Daohan (汪道涵), who said that Taiwan should be made to take the bait voluntarily, to make the whole exercise look better. Over the past 12 years, many Taiwanese have willingly taken Beijing’s bait.
In the face of the current global situation, things do not look too good for China. Before the CCP’s National Congress, US President Barack Obama was re-elected, and he promptly visited Thailand, Myanmar and Cambodia. He has also proposed a grand strategy of rebalancing the US toward Asia, the so-called “Asian pivot,” and supporting and cooperating with Asian democracies in an effort to contain China’s military expansion. Under these circumstances, the overall situation is much more favorable to Taiwan now than it was under Chiang Ching-kuo.
Not long ago, Obama gave Burmese opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi a hug and kiss during his visit to the country, while Philippine President Benigno Aquino III criticized Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) at an international meeting in Cambodia. The Philippines is aware of the strength of unity between Asian democracies. Meanwhile, Japan is eager for talks over its entry to the Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership.
Astonishingly, Taiwan seems oblivious to the ongoing changes. No wonder Associated Press reported on Nov. 20 that Taiwan has been “left out in the cold.”
I agree with DPP Chairman Su Tseng-chang’s (蘇貞昌) and his predecessor, Tsai Ing-wen’s (蔡英文), call for a national affairs conference. Such a conference would help remedy problems such as the underfinanced national pension system and year-end bonuses for retired government employees, as well as discuss and propose a grand Taiwanese strategy to deal with the changing global situation. Taiwan’s economic development and democratic politics could gain new vigor which could help realize a happy, fair and just society, terminating the loss of national vitality and creativity so Taiwan would be able to stand together with the world’s advanced countries.
Ruan Ming is an academic specializing in cross-strait issues. He was an assistant to former Chinese Communist Party general-secretary Hu Yaobang.
Translated by Eddy Chang
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
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
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS