Opposition parties in the legislature often criticize the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), calling it a “US pawn.”
Great powers are flexing their muscles, with democracies and resurgent communist states heading toward a collision. Minor countries and powers including Taiwan would have to choose a path for survival. The question is, should Taiwan put its lot in with one camp or the other, or should it attempt to strike out on its own?
If great powers did not have dreams of domination or territorial ambitions over their neighbors, smaller countries could live without fear. Taiwan would not need to accept US domination, or China’s.
If becoming the pawn of a great power is the inescapable destiny of small countries, then Taiwanese should ask themselves: Should we become a US or Chinese pawn?
Becoming a pawn of a great power is a matter of choosing the system of governance or way of life one wants to live under. Should Taiwanese choose democracy, freedom and human rights, or communism, authoritarianism and dictatorship?
Some political parties and figures in Taiwan have long chided and blamed Taiwan for China’s “gray zone” tactics when it sends its military aircraft and vessels around Taiwan, cautioning against “provoking China,” and pushing the narrative that “we are the descendants of the Yan and Yellow emperors,” that “the two sides of the Taiwan Strait are one family,” that “the first battle would be the last” and that “the US would not deploy troops on Taiwan’s behalf.”
Such discourse is part of a messaging attempt to pass off those parties’ interpretation to the international community that Taiwan needs to choose to be a Chinese pawn. The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party feel certain that a democratic US would not intervene on Taiwan’s behalf. They would rather give the US the cold shoulder while accepting tacit orders from Beijing, placing it on a pedestal while ignoring all the actions that would undeniably make the nation China’s pawn.
They would do this while claiming a moral high ground, pretending to keep both great powers at a distance. Yet their track records reveal that doing so is self-deception, and that they are just saying aloud what they wish they could, but lack the gumption to do.
An irony in all this would be to ask which great power these opposition party elites primarily choose for their and their children’s international education. Is it the US or China? When they consider emigrating, do they opt to move to the US and pledge their loyalty to the Stars and Stripes or China’s five yellow stars and crimson field?
These parties, with a self-applied or perhaps passively placed “love China, doubt the US” label, field presidential candidates who are compelled to pay homage to the US prior to elections, with some candidates taking multiple trips to rub shoulders with US officials. None of their candidates seemed willing to do the same with China, perhaps because it would lead to defeat. When they talk about the US, their mouths say “no,” but their heads nod “yes.”
If Taiwan did not need to be a great power pawn, would Taiwanese who cherish democracy, freedom and human rights elect to come under the wing of the leader of democracies? Not much thought has to go in to realize the drawbacks Taiwanese would suffer under an iron-fisted China.
If Taiwan is forced to be a great-power pawn and chose a communist, authoritarian and dictatorial China, would it not be getting what it deserves and sowing its own demise?
Chang Kuo-tsai is a retired National Hsinchu University of Education associate professor.
Translated by Tim Smith
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS