Taiwanese are to elect their next president next month.
The Chinese Nationalist Party’s (KMT) candidate, New Taipei City Mayor Hou You-yi (侯友宜), says that he is the only candidate who can ensure the security of Taiwan.
However, his security policies are misleading at best and naively fall into a trap set by China. They endanger Taiwan at worst.
Hou’s major arguments are based on the so-called 3Ds strategy — “Deterrence, Dialogue and De-escalation,” which appeared in an article titled “Taiwan’s path between extremes” published on the Web site of Foreign Affairs magazine.
“Taiwan’s most important priority should be to strengthen its national defense and deter the use of force by mainland China. To do so, I am to build a strong military, enhance cooperation with partners and allies, and increase our deterrence capabilities to better safeguard Taiwan, and the island groups of Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu,” Hou wrote in the article. “I have no unrealistic expectations about Beijing’s intentions of seeking unification, if necessary, by force.”
Hou fully recognized that China is Taiwan’s biggest security concern and would like to boost Taiwan’s defense capabilities and strengthen ties with like-minded allies, especially the US, to deter a Chinese attack.
In this respect, Hou, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) and the Democratic Progressive Party’s (DPP) presidential candidate, Vice President William Lai (賴清德), are on the same page. What makes a big difference is Hou’s appalling naivety in seeking peace with China.
“Dialogue between Taipei and Beijing is also a crucial way to defuse crises and ensure peace and stability,” Hou wrote. “I support the 1992 consensus, the approach to cross-strait dialogue agreed to by Taiwanese officials and counterparts from the mainland, consistent with the Constitution.”
Admittedly, Taiwan and China have no formal communication channel right now, which China says was caused by the Tsai administration’s refusal to accept the so-called “1992 consensus.”
However, the “consensus” is a myth cooked up by the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), but the CCP’s version is totally different from the KMT’s.
First, the KMT unilaterally claims that the “1992 consensus” means “one China with respective interpretations.” It says that the People’s Republic of China (PRC) and the Republic of China (ROC) agree that there is “one China,” but disagree on whether “China” is represented by the PRC or the ROC.
However, in China’s version, the “1992 consensus” only means “one China.”
China asserts that the PRC is the only representative of China and there is no room for interpreting what “one China” means, far from what the KMT claims.
Moreover, rather than a real consensus, the “1992 consensus” is an “alternative fact” of the KMT. It was invented by a staunch pro-China KMT member, then-Mainland Affairs Council chairman Su Chi (蘇起). In 2000, Su admitted that he coined the term to replace “one China” to connect the ideas of the KMT and the CCP, although he understood perfectly that both parties never had a consensus on “one China.”
The fabricated “1992 consensus” has haunted Taiwan ever since.
Unfortunately, having been promoted by the KMT and the CCP, it has misled many people domestically and internationally.
It is naive of Hou to believe that resurrecting the “1992 consensus” would reopen dialogue with China, and could ensure peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait — a mantra he has repeated during his presidential campaign rallies.
However, his wishful thinking might crash in the face of grim reality.
Beijing has made it manifestly clear that Taiwan is a province of China and peace can only be achieved through unification under “one country, two systems.”
In China’s view, whether Taiwan is de facto independent or maintains the “status quo” makes no difference, because both resist unification and are therefore unacceptable.
“Continued interactions between the two sides on functional matters will help de-escalate future risks,” Hou wrote in the article.
For most countries, bilateral engagement is beneficial and improves ties, but this has been proved wrong or even dangerous when engaging with China, especially in trade.
In the past seven years, the authoritarian regime has constantly weaponized trade to coerce Taiwan.
Many countries have experienced China’s economic coercion firsthand. They have been implementing a derisking strategy by decreasing business relations with and shifting supply chains from China, as well as preventing critical technologies from flowing to the nation.
Responding to China’s hostility, US Secretary of Commerce Gina Raimondo warned that Beijing is “the biggest threat we’ve ever had,” and stressed that “China is not our friend.”
Ominously, an increasingly assertive and aggressive China is doubling down its military posturing, constantly threatening neighboring countries, but this revisionist power shamelessly claims it is protecting its “developing interests.”
Moreover, CCP Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) has an even bigger ambition — to change the rules-based international order and replace it with authoritarianism in the name of national rejuvenation.
Without doubt, under the communist authoritarian order, the world would no longer be liberal as we know it.
However, before Xi achieves his ultimate goal, unification with Taiwan is his top priority.
When Xi met with US President Joe Biden last month in San Francisco, regarding Taiwan, he said: “Look, peace is all well and good, but at some point we need to move toward resolution more generally.”
This quote alarmed some current and former US officials, who regarded it as evidence that Xi is getting increasingly impatient.
Among major elections in the world next year, Taiwan’s presidential and legislative elections are the most consequential in Asia. The results will affect Taiwan, the Indo-Pacific region and beyond.
To protect Taiwan’s freedom, security and democratic values, Hou’s 3Ds strategy is dangerous and impractical.
Tu Ho-ting is a senior journalist and international affairs analyst based in Taiwan.
There is much evidence that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) is sending soldiers from the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to support Russia’s invasion of Ukraine — and is learning lessons for a future war against Taiwan. Until now, the CCP has claimed that they have not sent PLA personnel to support Russian aggression. On 18 April, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelinskiy announced that the CCP is supplying war supplies such as gunpowder, artillery, and weapons subcomponents to Russia. When Zelinskiy announced on 9 April that the Ukrainian Army had captured two Chinese nationals fighting with Russians on the front line with details
Within Taiwan’s education system exists a long-standing and deep-rooted culture of falsification. In the past month, a large number of “ghost signatures” — signatures using the names of deceased people — appeared on recall petitions submitted by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) against Democratic Progressive Party legislators Rosalia Wu (吳思瑤) and Wu Pei-yi (吳沛憶). An investigation revealed a high degree of overlap between the deceased signatories and the KMT’s membership roster. It also showed that documents had been forged. However, that culture of cheating and fabrication did not just appear out of thin air — it is linked to the
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), joined by the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), held a protest on Saturday on Ketagalan Boulevard in Taipei. They were essentially standing for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which is anxious about the mass recall campaign against KMT legislators. President William Lai (賴清德) said that if the opposition parties truly wanted to fight dictatorship, they should do so in Tiananmen Square — and at the very least, refrain from groveling to Chinese officials during their visits to China, alluding to meetings between KMT members and Chinese authorities. Now that China has been defined as a foreign hostile force,
On April 19, former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) gave a public speech, his first in about 17 years. During the address at the Ketagalan Institute in Taipei, Chen’s words were vague and his tone was sour. He said that democracy should not be used as an echo chamber for a single politician, that people must be tolerant of other views, that the president should not act as a dictator and that the judiciary should not get involved in politics. He then went on to say that others with different opinions should not be criticized as “XX fellow travelers,” in reference to
RSS