The world is a dangerous place. With Russia announcing a new generation of “invincible” intercontinental cruise missiles, heightened tensions over North Korea’s nuclear provocations and China’s boisterous behavior in the region, national defense remains a priority everywhere.
Taiwan’s predicament is exacerbated by China’s refusal to concede that the nation has the right to defend itself, or that it is indeed a nation.
Russia continues to push territorial boundaries, stoking concerns in Europe. North Korea has threatened the US, South Korea and Japan. Who would have concerns about Taiwan having expansionist ambitions? Which country fears an attack by Taiwan?
Ministry of National Defense spokesman Chen Chung-ji (陳中吉) on Tuesday reiterated the government’s pledge to increase defense spending every year. Only a country that harbors ill will toward Taiwan would find this cause for concern.
He said that Taiwan would continue to purchase foreign-made weapons and develop domestic weapons to “satisfy the needs of defensive warfare and assure the security of Taiwan.” Which country would argue with that?
He said the objective is “to maintain regional stability and peace.” Why would that be taken as anything more than a noble aspiration?
Chinese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs and National People’s Congress (NPC) spokesman Zhang Yesui (張業遂) took a similar postition on Sunday.
“China proceeds from a defense policy that is defensive in nature. China’s development will not pose a threat to other countries,” he said.
Again, which country could criticize that?
Well, first, few governments believe him. His words betray conceit: China’s defense policy is defensive in nature. The clue is in the name.
There is a reason that Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe is pushing to expand his country’s right to engage in military activities, and why his attempts to remove constraints in Japan’s post-war pacifist constitution are winning increased support at home.
North Korea’s recent missile flyovers served to bolster his resolve, but they did not start it. China’s increased provocations on territorial claims in the region played a large role in spurring Abe in this direction.
Second, for Taiwan the larger problem is in Zhang’s “assurance” that China’s development will not pose a threat “to other countries.”
China does not consider Taiwan to be a country.
Under pressure from Beijing, there are few countries in the world that do not go at least partly along with this delusion, by paying lip service to the “one China” principle. Beijing criticizes any government dealing with Taipei in any official capacity, accusing them of interfering in its domestic affairs.
So let us suspend belief for a second and enter the delusion. Where else in the world would a government promulgate laws legitimizing military offensives against its own people, place missiles directed at an area populated by its own people or routinely hold military drills overtly preparing to attack its own people, and not be met with international condemnation?
In January, the US House of Representatives passed the Taiwan Travel Act, which would allow for visits between high-ranking Taiwanese and US officials. The US Senate passed the bill last week. It still requires US President Donald Trump’s signature to be made law, but the US is to be commended for taking this step.
While perhaps a small concession, the bill is important because it implies recognition of Taiwan’s autonomy and because any progress in international relations for Taiwan is necessarily incremental, given Beijing’s anger at the slightest change.
Zhang can say that China presents no danger to other countries. Like any other nation, China has the right to develop the capability to defend itself.
However, do not for a second believe that “other countries” was meant to include Taiwan.
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