The declaration by China that it is imposing an air defense identification zone (ADIZ) just north of Taiwan has far-reaching consequences and implications for peace and stability in the region, as well as for Taiwan’s sovereignty.
Peace and stability are threatened because this is yet another unilateral step by China in its strategy to impose its dictates on surrounding countries.
The area affected is a heavily traveled air route linking Japan, South Korea and Taiwan with the rest of the Asian continent and is therefore a lifeline for these nations and those that lie further south.
China’s move would give the country pseudo-legal grounds to inhibit air traffic over international waters and make life difficult for other countries.
This is highly undesirable, and the affected nations would do well to make it clear that these new rules are unacceptable.
The new ADIZ claim also appears to be a move to impose China’s ways on Japan in relation to the Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台) — known as the Senkakus in Japan — which are under Tokyo’s control.
Over the past few years, Beijing has asserted with increasing insistence that the island chain is Chinese territory, although it has not been able to bring any convincing evidence to the table to show they were ever under Chinese control.
By abruptly changing the “status quo” China has given the impression that it has a distinct disregard for international norms and values, and that it is not very interested in a peaceful resolution of differences.
Indeed, Beijing seems intent to bully its way through at the expense of China’s neighbors.
The situation is serious for Taiwan, as the ADIZ overlaps the nation’s exclusive economic zone and includes the Diaoyutais, which Taipei also claims as part of its territory.
China’s move seems to be part of a calculated strategy of Beijing to bolster its sovereignty claims by incrementally expanding Chinese air and maritime control of areas in the East and South China Seas.
Should Taiwan put its head in the sand and pretend that its sovereignty is not affected?
It most certainly is, and the question is what will Taiwan’s next move be? Will Taiwan give a clear indication to China that it does have significant problems with this unilateral move, and that relations between the two countries would be affected if the declaration is not rescinded?
Taiwan would also do well to closely coordinate with other democratic nations with strategic interests in the region, such as the US, Japan and South Korea.
The US has strongly protested the ADIZ through statements by US Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel and US Secretary of State John Kerry.
In order to show its strong opposition, the US also sent a flight of unarmed B-52 bombers through the zone on Monday.
If Taiwan wants to retain its status as a de facto free and democratic nation, it needs to make it clear that it is on the side of nations that oppose the new rules, and it should disregard the unilateral and unreasonable dictates imposed by the repressive and undemocratic regime in Beijing.
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 to 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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