For Taiwan, the threat of a conflict with China is a major issue in the run-up to the Jan. 13 elections. Over the past few years, Beijing has stirred up tensions, made threatening military moves and has continued increasingly offensive incursions with fighter jets and ships across the median line of the Taiwan Strait and into Taiwan’s air defense identification zone.
The threatening posture was made clear when on Tuesday, during a speech to commemorate the 130th anniversary of Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) birth, Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) said he would “resolutely prevent anyone from splitting Taiwan from China in any way,” and that “the motherland must be reunified, and inevitably will be reunified.”
Xi forgets to mention that Mao earlier in life had advocated for Taiwan’s independence. In Red Star Over China, US writer Edgar Snow quoted Mao in 1937 as saying: “We will extend them [the Koreans] our enthusiastic help in their struggle for independence. The same thing applies for Taiwan.”
Xi also seems to forget that Taiwan has not been a part of China for more than a century and prior to that, China’s claim was dubious at best. While the ancestors of most of Taiwan’s current inhabitants came from coastal provinces of China, they intermarried with indigenous inhabitants and gradually developed their own identity.
Most importantly, Taiwanese have worked hard to achieve their democracy and are not willing to let that be taken away. Through their words and actions, they must make clear to Xi that Taiwan’s future is to be decided by Taiwanese alone, based on principles of self-determination, as enshrined in the UN Charter.
So, what choices could and should Taiwanese make to avoid a conflict and work toward peaceful coexistence with China?
History shows that appeasing repressive regimes never works: It only grows the tyrant’s appetite for more concessions.
On the contrary, it is essential to maintain a steady course, remain firm on principles of democracy and human rights, and build alliances with like-minded countries.
President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) has kept a cool head, built up Taiwan’s own deterrence by developing defensive capabilities and significantly strengthened Taiwan’s ties with the US, Japan, South Korea, Australia and European countries.
Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) presidential candidate, Vice President William Lai (賴清德), together with former representative to the US, Hsiao Bikhim (蕭美琴), can be expected to continue this policy. Their presidential ticket represents the best guarantee of stability. Xi might not like it and might make waves, but putting up with elevated tension in the short term might be necessary to ensure long-term peace.
On another aspect: Many young Taiwanese do not seem to care much for the “ideological” debates between the DPP and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT). They would prefer it if more attention were given to daily life issues such as adequate wages and affordable housing.
Those issues can and should be resolved under a democratic system of governance.
However, if China gains irreversible control of the political system, those issues become moot — as we have seen in Hong Kong, where Beijing is now in full control via local proxies.
The best way to avoid war is for Taiwan not to be intimidated by Xi, and deepen and strengthen relations with other like-minded countries, so it could be accepted as a full and equal member in the international community.
Gerrit van der Wees is a former Dutch diplomat who teaches Taiwan history and US relations with East Asia at George Mason University, and previously taught at the George Washington University Elliott School for International Affairs in Washington.
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