Having deceived the world about its nuclear capabilities while preparing for an arms race, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is now using its increasing nuclear forces for virtual nuclear coercion. This new threat will continue until the United States, Japan, and Taiwan can restore the CCP’s sense of fear. This dynamic is a familiar one for Taiwan. As the CCP’s People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) capabilities have grown, its inhibitions about conducting larger and more frequent coercive military demonstrations have shrunk. The PLA now more openly practices for the destruction of Taiwan’s democracy and the murder of its citizens. In the nuclear realm, the CCP for decades abjured nuclear transparency and nuclear arms control for its weapons, while it carefully cultivated an image of nuclear restraint. This nuclear deception was summed up in China’s 2019 Defence White Paper: “China does not engage in any nuclear arms race with any other country and keeps its nuclear capabilities at the minimum level required for national security.” The era of a “minimum” Chinese nuclear force is over; China has spent the last three decades preparing for a nuclear arms race. Such conclusions flow from recent revelations that the People’s Liberation Army Rocket Force (PLARF) is now building at least 136 new silos at two locations, most likely for a new version of its latest 6 to 10-warhead-capable DF-41 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM). Starting with open-source estimates of a PLA nuclear warhead count of about 350, this means a possible 816 to 1,360 warheads if all silos are filled with DF-41s. The Pentagon warns that additional DF-41 units could also be based on railroads, with notably more warheads there. A new JL-3 submarine-launched ballistic missile may carry up to 6 warheads, so yet more warheads. Informal Chinese sources also mention an even larger silo-based ICBM, sometimes called the DF-45. All of
I am a little embarrassed to say that it has been a long time since I had anything good to say about President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文), and now that I do have something good to say, I can hardly make any “retrospective adjustments.” However, regarding the issue of the “dress code” of Amanda Liu (劉宥彤), chief executive officer of the Hon Hai Precision Industry Co-affiliated Yonglin Foundation, I must give Tsai the thumbs-up for supporting natural, comfortable attire, and for her tolerant attitude. On June 18, Tsai hosted an urgent meeting with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co chairman Mark Liu (劉德音), Hon Hai founder Terry Gou (郭台銘) and Amanda Liu to discuss their COVID-19 vaccine procurement bids. After the meeting, writer Ellen Huang (黃越綏) questioned why Amanda Liu had chosen to wear a polo shirt and jeans to a meeting with the president, saying that people would find it “unacceptable.” Amanda Liu, for her part, responded straightforwardly by accepting the criticism, apologizing to Tsai and saying that she would reflect on what she had done. Frankly speaking, compared with obtaining vaccines, what people wear is a less serious issue at this critical point in time. As Presidential Office spokesperson Xavier Chang (張惇涵) said: “We are aware of various people’s comments regarding the way CEO Liu was dressed on that day, but as far as the president is concerned, people are free to dress as they please. She does not feel disrespected and does not think that anyone needs to apologize.” Indeed, the most important thing for the government and the public is to work in unison to fight the COVID-19 pandemic. It was nice to see such a down-to-earth and people-friendly exchange. On the one hand, Amanda Liu made a prompt and sincere apology, while on the other, instead of scolding her in an
Opinion is divided over whether this year’s Taiwan International Balloon Festival should proceed, given a COVID-19 outbreak. Taitung County Commissioner Yao Ching-ling (饒慶鈴) said that she would follow guidance issued by the Central Epidemic Command Center (CECC) and not hold the event “just for the sake of it,” while the Taitung County Council has voted to postpone the festival until a level 3 COVID-19 alert is lowered to level 2. Meanwhile, some Taitung residents wrote a letter to the Liberty Times (sister paper of the Taipei Times) to call on the county government to propose a post-pandemic, long-term growth strategy. Whether to focus on the economy or continue to prohibit large gatherings has become an after-dinner talking point among Taitung residents. The festival has been regularly held over the past decade and attracts nearly 1 million visitors, injecting an astounding NT$200 million (US$7.14 million) into the economy. During the summer holiday, Taitung hotels and guesthouses are fully booked, and businesses do a roaring trade. The spillover effect stimulates the local tourism industry and the economy. However, there is no hiding the fact that the large crowds and increased traffic influence the safety and quality of local life; some grumble and complain about it. It has become fashionable for Taiwanese to make a pilgrimage to the festival, located on picturesque mountainside grassland in the county’s Luye Township (鹿野). There is plenty of space for visitors to sit or recline on the grassy slopes and take in the majestic panorama of hot air balloons set against nature’s canvas. It is an incredibly relaxing experience that lifts the spirits. However, while most visitors are static observers, taking a ride in one of the balloons is highly recommended. I once visited a famous hot air balloon tourist area in Turkey’s Cappadocia region. Visitors head there specifically to ride in
EDITORIAL CARTOON
The Uighur inmates sat in uniform rows with their legs crossed in lotus position and their backs ramrod straight, numbered and tagged, gazing at a television playing grainy black-and-white images of Chinese Communist Party history. This is one of an estimated 240 cells in just one section of Urumqi No. 3 Detention Center in Dabancheng, seen by Associated Press (AP) journalists granted extraordinary access during a state-led tour to China’s far west Xinjiang region. The detention center is the largest in the country and possibly the world, with a complex that sprawls over 89 hectares — making it twice as large as the Vatican City. A sign at the front identified it as a kanshousuo (看守所), a pre-trial detention facility. Chinese officials declined to say how many inmates were there, saying the number varied. However, the AP estimated the center could hold roughly 10,000 people and many more if crowded, based on satellite imagery and the cells and benches seen during the tour. While the BBC and Reuters have in the past reported from the outside, the AP was the first Western media organization allowed in. This site suggests that China still holds and plans to hold vast numbers of Uighurs and other mostly Muslim minorities in detention. Satellite imagery shows that new buildings stretching almost 1.6km long were added to the Dabancheng detention facility in 2019. China has described its sweeping lockup of a million or more minorities over the past four years as a “war against terror,” after a series of knifings and bombings by a small number of extremist Uighurs native to Xinjiang. Among its most controversial aspects were the so-called vocational “training centers” — described by former detainees as brutal internment camps surrounded by barbed wire and armed guards. China at first denied their existence, and then, under heavy international criticism,
On May 25 last year, a 17-year-old girl filmed a disturbing video, which subsequently went viral, of a white police officer in Minneapolis, Minnesota, kneeling on the neck of a black man, handcuffed and lying facedown on the pavement, for nine minutes and 29 seconds. The man, George Floyd, died that day. For millions of people worldwide, Floyd’s death was a wake-up call regarding the pervasiveness of systemic racism and police violence. The Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement capitalized on this growing awareness, organizing protests on the streets of cities across the US, which inspired demonstrations from France to Colombia to South Africa. In a testament to the power of organization, the protests effected real change. The police officer who killed Floyd, Derek Chauvin, has now been convicted of murder and sentenced to more than 22 years in prison. However, the BLM protests achieved something more consequential: the creation of an international commission, on which I served, to examine police racism in the US. We found that the persistent systemic racism against African Americans in the US constitutes a crime against humanity and merits an investigation by the International Criminal Court. This is the power and essence of civil society. As the world attempts to “build back better” from the COVID-19 pandemic, it must be harnessed to make progress on a broad array of pressing issues, from economic inequality and educational inequities to racial justice and climate change. To those who were not paying attention to systemic racism or police violence before Floyd’s death, it might seem that BLM had an impact relatively quickly, but the fight has been long and difficult – and it is far from over. The same is true for other civil rights movements, which often demand a deep and enduring resilience from their participants. Consider the women’s movement in my
The government’s stingy treatment of national team athletes heading to the Tokyo Olympics has exposed its so-called “sports reform” as mere sloganeering. The Olympics finally opened on Friday despite the challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. However, the departure of Taiwanese athletes was overshadowed by a controversy surrounding their flight arrangements. The furor was ignited by an Instagram post by badminton player Tai Tzu-ying (戴資穎) on Monday, in which she that said she missed flying in EVA Air’s business class. This led to the discovery that some team officials flew in business class while Tai and other athletes were relegated to economy class. President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and Premier Su Tseng-chang (蘇貞昌) apologized later that day, while Sports Administration Director-General Chang Shao-hsi (張少熙) offered his resignation on Tuesday. Other photos shared by Tai showing the condition of her hotel room added fuel to the fire, as many social media users said the room was too meager to accommodate a celebrated athlete. While some said Tai was unkind for complaining about flight seating, more people seem to have sympathy for her, mainly because the arrangement contradicted Tsai’s promises five years ago. When sending off a national team to the 2016 Summer Olympics in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Tsai made several promises, saying that all athletes and their coaches should be able to fly in business class so they could get more rest before the Games, starting with the Rio Olympics. She also said the Executive Yuan had established a sports development association to raise the level of decisionmaking and improve the environment for active and retired athletes. After the athletes’ return from Rio de Janeiro, Tsai promised that the government would reform sports associations by improving transparency in organization, operations and finance, while tasking the Sports Administration and the Ministry of the Interior with the mission. Government
The local outbreak of COVID-19 infections, which began in May, has been successfully brought under control, with daily new cases in the past week registering in the low 20s. Starting on Tuesday, many areas of the country will begin to lift some of the pandemic restrictions. This is an outstanding achievement, but there is cause for circumspection. The “vaccine chaos” instigated by China and its proxies has sown an undercurrent of unrest that could have an impact on Taiwan’s political stability and social fabric. Some have attributed the receding of the COVID-19 outbreak to the arrival and administration of a large quantity of vaccines, but the vaccination program could not have possibly had such a quick result. The fact is that Taiwan has relied on tried and tested methods applied globally since the pandemic began: widespread wearing of masks, hand hygiene, extensive disinfection, social distancing, home isolation or quarantine for confirmed or suspected cases, meticulous epidemiological investigations, and mass screening. This has resulted in a second Taiwanese “epidemiological miracle.” Additionally, Taiwan faced a vaccine shortage only two months ago. Thankfully, the US and Japan came to our aid, donating large quantities of vaccines. At about the same time, shipments of COVID-19 vaccines purchased from abroad began to arrive, allowing the vaccination program to pick up speed and for 20 percent of the population to be inoculated. The government’s vaccine purchases — combined with assistance from friendly nations, private companies completing contracts, and purchases by the Buddhist Compassion Relief Tzu Chi Foundation — mean that Taiwan has enough doses to provide its population with two shots. Thus, acquiring more vaccines is not the most pressing issue the nation faces. Despite this, Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Johnny Chiang (江啟臣) continues to instruct KMT-controlled local governments to submit applications to the central government for the purchase of
The unequal distribution of COVID-19 vaccines has left 80 percent of global vaccine stocks in the hands of just 10 countries. This situation was exacerbated by the administration of former US president Donald Trump, which last year attempted to withdraw from the WHO. This opened a political vacuum that China immediately filled, allowing Beijing to engage in “vaccine diplomacy,” enhance its soft power and promote Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) vision of a Chinese “community of shared human destiny.” Beijing used its vaccine diplomacy to project China as an ethical force for good, as opposed to “selfish” Western nations, which stockpiled vaccines for themselves. The Chinese Communist Party sought to build a narrative that China was working to provide every country access to COVID-19 vaccines, as a public commodity. Using this message, Beijing was able to shift attention toward production capacity and distribution, and away from the efficacy of the vaccines in inoculating people against the disease. Is China really more benevolent than Western nations? According to US research, China only donated a small quantity of vaccines to specific markets or nations for trial purposes. Most Chinese vaccines were sold, not donated, to foreign nations. A research paper published by Springer Nature titled “Vaccine diplomacy: nation branding and China’s COVID-19 soft power play” shows that of the 656 million doses of COVID-19 vaccine Chinese pharmaceutical companies exported to foreign nations at the time of the study, only 8.6 million, or 1.31 percent, were donated; the rest were sold. Moreover, most sales have been concentrated in Latin American, Southeast Asian and African nations. Since most of these countries lack robust cold chain storage technology, China’s inactivated virus vaccines were more attractive than Western messenger ribonucleic acid — known as mRNA — vaccines, since inactivated virus vaccines are easier to store, requiring only conventional refrigeration. Sinovac’s CoronaVac vaccine
An article published on July 4 in Hong Kong’s South China Morning Post, titled “Changing Taiwan ocean conditions could affect PLA’s [Chinese People’s Liberation Army] submarines,” cited a report that says increasing volcanic activity on the ocean floor near Japan’s Okinawa Islands has changed the water temperature off the east coast of Taiwan. The temperature changes have, in turn, had an effect on the Kuroshio Current. The changes could affect submarine operations conducted in the area by the Chinese People’s Liberation Army Navy (PLAN). From Taiwan’s perspective, defensive operations on its east coast could end up fending off attacks from two directions. Due to the sheer size of the Pacific Ocean off Taiwan’s east coast, if the navy were able to draw its main fighting force into these waters before fighting broke out, and augment the force with a number of indigenous submarines currently under construction, naval commanders would be able to retain influence over dozens of the navy’s surface ships and many of its submarines. Ships on the east coast could then be used as a standby maritime force that is able to launch a counterattack and, if needed, used to harass and impede PLAN assets in the Pacific Ocean. A naval force amassed on the east coast could also deny access to a PLAN aircraft carrier group and prevent it from attacking Taiwan’s east coast. Chiashan Air Base (佳山基地) in Hualien County and Chihhang Air Base (志航基地) in Taitung County feature hardened underground facilities carved into a mountainside. If war with China breaks out, a large number of fighter aircraft at air bases on the west coast would be transferred to bases on the east coast in accordance with the military’s “force preservation” strategy. The remaining aircraft stationed at bases on the west coast and in the south would be tasked
EDITORIAL CARTOON
For a century, the Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) was a little-known government body quietly studying illnesses in New Delhi, but during the COVID-19 pandemic, it has taken on a role akin to the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, headed by Anthony Fauci — a powerful agency that has become the controversial face of India’s struggle with the disease. As the ICMR has acted as a key medical adviser to Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the Indian Ministry of Health and Family Welfare, it has increasingly drawn criticism from the nation’s doctors and independent scientists, who have questioned its drug recommendations, as well as its lack of transparency on data related to SARS-CoV-2 variants that were first identified in India and are now spreading globally. India struggled to curb the world’s fastest COVID-19 surge this summer, and public health experts are warning that the country is ill prepared to face a possible third wave of infections. Some of the ICMR’s decisions during the pandemic reflect the broad chaos that has dogged India’s overwhelmed government apparatus, and have ended up benefiting the pharmaceutical industry rather than the public, critics say. In April last year, S. P. Kalantri, director of the Mahatma Gandhi Institute of Medical Sciences, a 1,000-bed hospital in the village of Sevagram, wrote to international scientific journal The Lancet, strongly criticizing the ICMR for signing off on the health ministry’s decision to recommend the malaria drug hydroxychloroquine as a COVID-19 therapy. The medicine remained on India’s virus guidelines for almost a year after the drug, last year embraced by then-US president Donald Trump, was discarded as a treatment for COVID-19 in the US. Kalantri’s hospital, named after the Indian independence leader who had his last residence in the village, refused to prescribe that and other unproven treatments. However,
Hong Kong democracy advocate Chan Kin-man (陳健民) has accepted a teaching position at National Chengchi University (NCCU) for one year starting in September, a university department head said on Monday. Chan’s invitation to serve as a visiting professor represents an important opportunity not just for Hong Kong academics, but for all Hong Kongers. As Beijing continues to crack down on dissidence in Hong Kong, its residents are facing imposed censorship or are self-censoring. Beijing is attempting to bury Hong Kong’s unique culture and way of life, and has already taken away academic freedom. Taiwan can offer a safe haven for the voices of Hong Kongers — a place where they can express themselves freely, and pass on their stories without fear of reprisal. Chan said that during his time in Taiwan, he will work on a book he has been writing. One of Beijing’s first targets in Hong Kong was literary expression when it arrested book publishers in 2015. That is why it is imperative for Taiwan to protect Hong Kong authors and publishers. Future generations of Hong Kongers — including those in the global diaspora — will be able to access uncensored Hong Kong literature if it is published and preserved in Taiwan. It is clear that the government is aware of the importance of this task given that it permitted Lam Wing-kei (林榮基), a former manager of Hong Kong’s Causeway Bay Books, to immigrate. Lam has said that Taiwan is particularly aware of the value of literary freedom, as it underwent censorship under the former Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) government. The importance of giving shelter to critical thinkers from Hong Kong was made even more urgent last week when Google, Facebook and other companies said they might pull out of the territory. The move would be necessary to protect
As the incursions by China into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone intensify, the international community’s anxiety has risen over the question of whether the US military would become directly involved in the case of an attack on Taiwan. Washington’s long-held policy of “strategic ambiguity” does little to ease the trepidation. The rationale universally espoused on “strategic ambiguity” is that an announced commitment from Washington to directly defend Taiwan would encourage Taiwanese independence and consequently bring forth a Chinese military attack and a possible nuclear confrontation between two superpowers. However, this line of argument could soon lose steam if the subject is viewed from a different angle. Let us suppose a different question: “What are the odds that the US military would not become directly involved in the case of China attacking Taiwan?” The answer is a definitive “zero” because no US administration could survive the risk of “losing Taiwan without a fight.” In fact, this reality has already started to unfold. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of the US Pacific Fleet, on June 29 said: “At Pacific Fleet and Indo-Pacific Command, we have a duty to be ready to respond to threats to US security.” He further clarified the “duty” as including readying a fleet “capable of thwarting any effort on the part of the Chinese ... to include the unification by force of Taiwan to the People’s Republic of China.” It is apparent that the US military views “strategic clarity” as an asset of deterrence and a means to discourage Beijing’s miscalculations. There is no secret that Taiwanese covet Washington’s formal recognition of Taiwan as a sovereign nation. However, the realization of that is impossible until Washington deems the decision necessary and beneficial from a US national security point of view. That opportunity would arrive the moment Beijing launches a military assault on Taiwan that unavoidably draws in the US. The
Tuesday marked a significant, although not particularly glorious, first-decade milestone for the Agency Against Corruption (AAC). At the insistence of then-president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), the AAC was created as part of the Ministry of Justice on July 20, 2011, modeled after Hong Kong’s Independent Commission Against Corruption (ICAC). The government at the time made a serious mistake by taking a short-sighted approach, focusing more on setting up the commission than on setting it up properly, making it a third-tier agency of the ministry. Although the law gave some of its officers the status of judicial police and created Taiwan’s first resident prosecutor system, the power to appoint the director and deputy director was vested in the justice minister, a position that can still be influenced by others in the hierarchy. Further restraints were added by the Legislative Yuan, which limited the budget and statutory staffing from the proposed 800 to 222. As a result, the AAC has from its inception had to face questions from both domestic and foreign experts about its lack of independence, and its capacity to handle cases. According to the Organic Act of the Agency Against Corruption (法務部廉政署組織法), the three statutory responsibilities of the AAC are to “enforce anti-corruption measures, prevent corruption and eradicate corruption.” The AAC has a strong track record in all three areas, which are addressed yearly in its annual report, and can be found on its Web site. However, in addition to objective indicators of government performance, the key subjective indicator is what the public thinks about it. For many years, I have taught a university course on global governance, and every semester I ask the class an important question: “If you encounter corruption in Taiwan, where would you report it?” Fewer than 20 percent answer “the AAC.” Most would report corruption to the police
Following then-US secretary of state Mike Pompeo’s statement on Nov. 14 last year that “Taiwan has not been a part of China,” it was surprising to hear US National Security Council Coordinator for the Indo-Pacific Kurt Campbell say on July 6 that the US does not support Taiwanese independence. How do these views hang together? Furthermore, what is the relationship between these views and bills to protect Taiwan — which come close to establishing Taiwan-US diplomatic relations — that the administration of US president Joe Biden is introducing in Congress? To understand the issue, it is necessary to go back to the 1951 San Francisco Peace Treaty. Specifically, the treaty did not specify who had sovereignty over Taiwan and Penghu after Japan’s renunciation following its defeat in World War II. However, after 70 years of peace in the western Pacific, the rise of China has rapidly increased pressure to define that sovereignty. A look at Pompeo’s and Campbell’s statements in the context of the 1951 document being a legal framework shows that rather than being antagonistic, both statements uphold the original status of the treaty. First, as the treaty does not state to whom Taiwan and Penghu belong, saying that Taiwan is not part of China is factual. Second, whether Taiwan should be independent, unified with China or otherwise are all options for the territorial status of Taiwan and Penghu, and a matter of what one advocates “ought” to be. The White House, on behalf of Allied forces from the war, maintains an impartial regulatory role: It should support neither independence nor unification. Third, the US bills that protect Taiwan reflect the US’ treaty obligations. Faced with Beijing’s repeated declarations of its willingness to resolve the Taiwan Strait issue with the use of force, the White House has not only emphasized its position, but has also used frequent military exercises with
EDITORIAL CARTOON
Defeating COVID-19 in the US is mired in a partisan information war, a fight that US President Joe Biden and Democrats in the US Congress are ill-equipped to win. Biden’s struggle to control the disease and vaccine misinformation online was evident in his broadside on Friday last week that companies like Facebook were “killing people.” He begged social media platforms to change and pleaded with Americans not to believe everything they read. Google on Monday said that YouTube would start labeling health videos with information on how authoritative the source is. Twitter has said that it is working with public health authorities and would “continue to take enforcement action on content that violates our COVID-19 misleading information policy.” Late on Monday, Twitter banned US Representative Marjorie Taylor Greene for 12 hours over misinformation. In a Facebook video, the first-term Republican slammed the move as social media overreach. “They have been censoring conservatives for far too long. Our voices are the voices that they want to cancel, and we are experiencing being canceled every single day,” Greene said. Meanwhile, Facebook went on the counterattack in response to Biden — accusing the White House of “finger-pointing” for failing to meet its COVID-19 vaccination target — indicating that the company is already doing everything it is willing to do. Biden’s comments came after months of meetings with social media companies to address misinformation on their platforms, a White House official said. Discussions with Facebook in the past few months grew increasingly unproductive, and the Biden administration was unsatisfied with the company’s responses to requests for more details about its response to inaccuracies and unscientific speculation, the official said. Still, there was not much the White House could do but complain. On Monday, Biden walked back his earlier comments slightly, saying that online misinformation is the culprit, not the companies themselves.
“I’ve seen grown men cry,” said Tejinder Singh, a captain who has not set foot on dry land in more than seven months and is not sure when he will go home. “We are forgotten and taken for granted,” he said of the plight facing tens of thousands of seafarers like him, stranded at sea as the Delta variant of SARS-CoV-2 wreaks havoc on shore. “People don’t know how their supermarkets are stocked up.” Singh and most of his 20-strong crew have crisscrossed the globe on an exhausting odyssey: From India to the US and then on to China, where they were stuck off the congested coast for weeks waiting to unload cargo. Singh was speaking to Reuters from the Pacific Ocean as his ship now heads to Australia. They are among about 100,000 seafarers stranded at sea beyond their regular stints of typically three to nine months, International Chamber of Shipping (ICS) data showed. Many of them have been without even a day on land. Another 100,000 are stuck on shore, unable to board the ships they need to earn a living on. The Delta variant devastating parts of Asia — home to many of the world’s 1.7 million commercial seafarers — has prompted many nations to cut off land access to visiting crews, in some cases even for medical treatment. Just 2.5 percent of seafarers — one in every 40 — have been vaccinated against COVID-19, the ICS estimated. The UN described the situation as a humanitarian crisis at sea and said that governments should class seafarers as essential workers. As ships transport about 90 percent of the world’s trade, the deepening crisis also poses a major threat to the supply chains economies rely on for everything from oil and iron to food and electronics. Singh, a bulk carrier master from northern India, is not
RSS