National Day Address Failed to Provide Solution for Cross-Strait Peace
China Times Editorial, October 10,2020
Faced with the increasingly chaotic situation in East Asia and the verge of military conflict in the Taiwan Strait, President Tsai Ing-wen’s National Day speech continued the main theme of the past four years. President Tsai stated that the top priority for both sides of the strait should be mutual respect, understanding, and dialogue on peaceful co-existence. Her remarks go along with the international community’s hope to reduce the possibility of warfare. However, it is still a serious challenge to reduce the long-standing hostility between the two sides of the strait to create conditions for meaningful dialogue. So, how to prevent hostility from rising remain the top priority.
The theme of President Tsai’s speech at the National Day Convention was "Uniting Taiwan and Moving Forward with Confidence.” Like previous years, it consistently expressed goodwill towards the cross-strait relations. President Tsai pointed out that so long as Beijing has the intention to resolve opposition and improve cross-strait relations, under the principal of dignity and equal footing, Taiwan is willing to jointly promote meaningful dialogue. This is the proposition of the Taiwanese people and the consensus among the ruling and opposition parties in Taiwan.
President Tsai used the National Day to convey to the people of Taiwan and the international community the achievements of Taiwan’s epidemic prevention, Taiwan’s economic strategy under new global circumstances, security through consolidated national defense, and active participation in regional cooperation and other positive actions, may have had the effect of inspiring people. However, the challenges and difficulties faced by Taiwan regarding cross-strait and external relations cannot be ignored. Excessive deviation from reality will only bring about the effect of grand domestic propaganda and echo chamber.
The relationship among the United States, mainland China and Taiwan, closely linked to the global context, is in an even more complicated and contradictory situation. Neither the United States nor China intends on starting a war. The United States and Taiwan do not believe that China will attack Taiwan by military force. However, the three parties involved all have their own interests, goals, and calculations. Coupled with domestic political and electoral pressure, the United States and China are not hesitating to adopt a high-risk "marginal policy". With military confrontation continues to increase, and no one willing to give in, it creates a "dangerous uncertainty." This is why Henry Kissinger is warning that the leaders of the United States and China must have a discussion and come to a resolution that does not threaten each other’s boundaries. He even warned that if this cannot be resolved, America may fall into a situation similar to World War I."
Since the beginning of this year, China’s 1,710 times of military aircraft and 1,029 times of warships have harassed Taiwan’s air defense identification zone (ADIZ), of which 217 times was in the southwest air defense identification zone, and 49 times of military aircrafts have surpassed the median line of the Taiwan Strait. In addition to placing huge pressure on Taiwan’s defense system, frequent military operations elevated the chances of misfire and misjudgment. The Taiwan Strait seemed to have become a pressure cooker in the Asia-Pacific region and a hotspot for potential military conflicts.
President Tsai issued a firm and positive message to the mainland, but cross-strait relations have been in a regressive state since the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) came to power in 2016 and has sharply deteriorated since the beginning of that year. The main reason is that the DPP administration in Taiwan and the Chinse Communist Party have failed to establish a consensus, and the effect of the U.S.-China relations further accelerating the deterioration. With no official channels of communication, deep hostility, increasing military confrontation, and U.S.-Taiwan joint resistance against China, it is yet a mature timing for meaningful dialogue between the two sides.
But we must point out frankly that the United States hopes to combine Japan, India, and Australia to form a "four-party security dialogue" and become an "institutionalized" "security framework." President Tsai hopes that Taiwan will have the opportunity to join and become an expanded four-party security dialogue or a so-called "Asian NATO," but Japan and India both hope to maintain ambiguity based on economic interests and geopolitical balance considerations. At the recent four-party foreign ministers meeting in Japan, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo only achieved symbolic results despite big proclamations. The institutionalization and security structure were not mentioned at all. Taiwan should not expect too much of the collective East Asian security mechanism.
In terms of bilateral relations between Taiwan and the United States, the past six months have been regarded as better than ever before. The United States has frequently demonstrated its support for Taiwan with high-profile diplomatic actions and huge arms sales, however, they still maintain strategic ambiguity. Bilateral relations cannot be deepened or improved in the direction of normalization. Taiwan still has not received genuine security guarantees.
Pompeo’s response to reporters is solely that if China invades Taiwan, "the United States will not just watch and not do anything" and "as long as the tension in the region can be eased, the United States will try to do it." The National Security Advisor O'Brien warned China in an open speech to not try to seize Taiwan by force, and said that amphibious landing will be extremely difficult. As to how the United States will react remains enormously ambiguous.
The Taiwan Strait is at a critical moment of possible warfare. The two prominent anti-China figures in the United States still adhere to their consistent strategic ambiguity. This also confirms the general understanding of the academic community, including Harvard University’s China expert Steven Goldstein, that strategic ambiguity means "double deterrence." In addition to deterring the mainland from invading Taiwan by force, it is also to prevent Taiwan from moving towards independence. While the DPP administration will open up Taiwan to imports of U.S. pork and beef, free trade agreement negotiations to further deepen relations have failed to move forward. On the contrary, it has further confirmed that the "one China" red line is unbreakable.
The DPP administration’s trilateral relationship between the United States, China and Taiwan is in deadlock. The mainland is trying to expand the scope of activities in the Taiwan Strait in a progressive manner, and the United States has its limitations in supporting Taiwan. If Democratic presidential candidate Joe Biden is elected, will the relationship between the United States and Taiwan continue and be maintained? How to break away from the fierce fight between America and China? How can the two sides of the Taiwan Strait show goodwill to each other and ease the tension? Although President Tsai’s National Day speech demonstrated the desire to maintain peace across the Taiwan Strait, she did not propose an effective solution to the harsh situation at hand.
From: https://www.chinatimes.com/opinion/20201010003168-262101?chdtv