China on Thursday last week launched military exercises titled “Joint Sword-2024A” around Taiwan, which it said were to “punish” Taiwan in response to President William Lai’s (賴清德) inaugural address. While these drills showcased Beijing’s advanced military capabilities, they were also born of its weakness and demonstrated once again its total inability, or unwillingness, to understand and respect the preferences of Taiwanese.
For all its “great rejuvenation,” Beijing cannot influence Taiwanese politics the way it would like. It is no closer to achieving “unification” on its own terms than when former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping (鄧小平) issued his “message to Taiwanese patriots” in 1979.
Taiwanese have consistently shown that they believe that only they have the right to determine their future, and that this is a conversation Beijing has no right to be a part of. Unable to influence by persuasion, China resorts to violence instead.
Joseph Nye defined “soft power” as the “ability to obtain preferred outcomes by attraction rather than coercion or payment.” To its fury, Beijing has no soft power to bring Taiwan into its fold. Its military exercises are a reflection of its weakness rather than its strength.
On Taiwan, Beijing showcases what the historian and military strategist Edward Luttwak has termed “great state autism” — the collective lack of situational awareness on behalf of national leaders to understand the reality of the world beyond their borders.
Taiwanese want to determine their future in peace and free from external interference. They are especially protective of their hard-won democracy.
As Lai said in his speech: “I hope that China will face the reality of the Republic of China’s existence, respect the choices of the people of Taiwan.”
Beijing’s latest exercises demonstrate once again its unwillingness to come to terms with Taiwan as it is.
Beijing’s great state autism manifests itself in military exercises. It seems unable to grasp that the more coercion it applies, the more it installs in Taiwanese the determination to resist.
Coercive diplomacy — the use of threats or limited force to get your opponent to moderate or change their behavior — can be a useful tool in international relations. Beijing had little success with this policy tool during the 1995 to 1996 Third Taiwan Strait Crisis when it also deployed unprecedented large-scale military exercises attempting to influence the decisionmaking of then-president Lee Teng-hui (李登輝).
Coercion to prevent independence is now superfluous.
The content of Lai’s speech which so infuriated Beijing — that the Republic of China (ROC) and People’s Republic of China (PRC) are not subordinate to each other, and the Republic of China Taiwan is already a sovereign, independent country — is an agreed upon consensus in democratic Taiwan.
Beijing has reached a dead end with “coercive diplomacy.” Now all that is left is naked punishment — lashing out because you cannot get your way. This is the behavior of a schoolyard bully.
During the presidency of Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Beijing had thought it could co-opt pro-China forces to bring Taiwan into its fold. However, as Lev Nachman and Jonathan Sullivan wrote in their book Taiwan: A Contested Democracy Under Threat, despite Ma’s friendly overtures across the Taiwan Strait, his presidency illustrated that “no ROC president will be able to deliver what the PRC wants, i.e. a political resolution resulting in unification on the PRC’s terms.”
Rather than come to terms with the reality of Taiwan’s democracy, China lashes out with violence to punish Taiwan. For there ever to be regional peace and stability, Beijing must come to terms with the reality of Taiwan’s democracy.
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
To The Honorable Legislative Speaker Han Kuo-yu (韓國瑜): We would like to extend our sincerest regards to you for representing Taiwan at the inauguration of US President Donald Trump on Monday. The Taiwanese-American community was delighted to see that Taiwan’s Legislative Yuan speaker not only received an invitation to attend the event, but successfully made the trip to the US. We sincerely hope that you took this rare opportunity to share Taiwan’s achievements in freedom, democracy and economic development with delegations from other countries. In recent years, Taiwan’s economic growth and world-leading technology industry have been a source of pride for Taiwanese-Americans.
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS