Abstract

Comments on “Taiwan and the Fight for Democracy-A Good Force in the Changing International Order”, paper by Tsai Ing-Wen, published in Foreign Affairs November/December 2021 issue. This is a 'call for help' paper seeking sympathizers. However, the paper contains many contradictory points and false statements. The author feels sad after reading it and urges politicians and political parties to think hard on the question: Who really cares about Taiwan?
 
The publication time of this article, the United News report: "Written at the invitation of Foreign Affairs" and its English and Chinese title, all suggested that this episode was too much like an orchestrated drama co-starred by the United States and Taiwan. The wording used in this article seems to be entirely based on the current script of the United States strategy of forming a world alliance of democracy against non-democracy (US-defined): Indo-Pacific future, Taiwan model (pawn), changing rules, and struggle between good and evil. Tsai Ing-wen is very proud that Taiwan is considered by the United States as a model of democracy. It doesn't matter where the content of the article comes from or who has modified or edited it; she is willing to sign and publish this article. What is important is that when the mainland celebrates the National Day on October 1st and commemorates the 110th anniversary of Sun Yat-Sen’s successful Xin-Hai Revolution of 1911 on October 9th, the United States and Taiwan must also appear in the media. Thus, the article scheduled to be published on the November/December bimonthly FA periodical quickly appeared on October 5th on the network. However, Xi Jinping’s speech on the 110th anniversary of the Xin Hai Revolution had clearly attracted more attention from Chinese and Westerners worldwide. Xi mentioned the Taiwan issue. The language was short but powerful. The Taiwan issue must be resolved along with national rejuvenation. Cross-strait reunification is the common will of all Chinese people. And he declares that one country - two systems is the basic framework for the common development of the motherland, emphasizing peaceful development, complete reunification, opposing secession, and claiming that Taiwan’s independence movement is a serious crime. Those who engages in splitting the country will not end well and they will be spurned and judged by the country and its people.
 
The author received Tsai Ing-Wen’s manuscript after October 10th. After reading it, he felt sad and not excited as he was after hearing Xi’s speech. Tsai’s article read like a long-winded call for help. On the one hand, it is saying that Taiwan is the model of democracy: on the other hand, it is saying that in the world the democratic system is falling to an disadvantageous position comparing to an authoritarian system. The article says Taiwan is being suppressed by the international community and is looking for unusual channels to connect with the world, but the article also says that Taiwan is a powerhouse that can maintain the world supply chain and help develop the regional economy. Any person who cares about international affairs and has the ability to judge and analyze really cannot offer any positive comment on Tsai’s article other than saying that the purpose of her article is to call for help. But due to the contradictory and false statements in its content, people cannot respond to its call for help with sympathy. Some people on the Internet say that Tsai is like a desperate dog jumping over a wall (狗急跳牆）, compelled to write the desperate article. This author would like to suggest another analogy. It is like a domestic cat who lands on the top edge of a high wall and doesn't know how to get off. If it jumps down, it will be seriously injured. This circular high wall has no end. This cat has everything to eat and drink in a castle, living comfortably, but it foolishly jumps out of the window. Fortunately, it lands on the edge of the high wall escaping a death fall. Is it useful to call for help now? I'm afraid it must wait for the owner to rescue it! The author uses this metaphor to describe the author's feeling, and this feeling comes with a reason. Please continue to read the following.
____________________________________________________________________________________
 
Taiwan is a part of China and China is the master. Most of the people of Taiwan are connected by blood from the descendants of Yan Huang (炎黃子孫）. Taiwan’s exports to the mainland account for 40% of its total exports. Mainland, with more people, makes greater progress as expected. Even in the semiconductor area, Taiwan is no match. Otherwise, would the mainland be able to go to the Moon and Mars? TSMC is just an OEM company which requires a lot of capital. Does the mainland have no money? The U.S. still owes her trillions of dollars! The US democratic system has progressed over 250 years still engaging in endless bipartisan fights deterring nation building. Taiwan has only been engaged in 30 years of democracy with more vicious party fights. Can Taiwan be considered as a model of democracy? The third world countries do not believe that nor will the developed European democracies. Lithuania may want to pretend to be a fairy tale country to take Taiwan to a joy ride back to eighteenth century, but Taiwan must be realistic. This is Tsai Ing-Wen’s first contradictory point. Being unyielding under pressure but taking no adventurous step even with help is another contradictory point. In Tsai’s content, she states that authoritarian governments function more efficiently in dealing with the pandemic, which promotes a contrast of ideologies. The article also implies that Taiwan is able to control the epidemic disease properly and help other regions, but she does not provide any specific data to prove it. Tsai directly compares the threat of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) proportional to the value of Taiwan. She also believes that Taiwan can contribute to maintaining the stability of the region. This is so contradictory to the purpose of this article, calling for help. On the one hand, Tsai is praising Taiwan's value by citing technology (artificial intelligence, biochemical technology, and semiconductor industries) to emphasize its strength. On the other hand, it admits an asymmetric situation, including military strength, obscured international relations (relying on special diplomatic channels), and need to invest in a mysterious asymmetric defense capability. This is also a contradictory point. Should Taiwan fail, would the whole region really be finished as she implied? Let’s ask who really cares most about Taiwan? The answer should be mainland China!
 
In addition to Many contradictions, Tsai has also made many false or untrue statements. Tsai believes that his government represents the entire people of Taiwan and that the people trust the elected officials, a great relationship. However, we know that Taiwan’s impeachment activities are more flaring than that in the U.S. Presidential candidate, Han Guo Yu, supported by millions of people, can be easily removed by a manipulated impeachment by the DPP. Now the KMT will also use the same tactics to depose or recall DPP officials, Taiwan was able to experiment with a democratic system because the CCP adhered to its belief in peaceful reunification and proposed a one country - two systems policy, which has given Taiwan decades of peace. However, Taiwan’s political parties (and politicians) only strive for political power by fooling voters, engaging in ethnic divisions, and completely disregarding the long-term safety and prosperity of the people. Doesn’t anti-China mean abandoning peace? Isn’t it true that there can be no democracy if no peace? Tsai not only failed to report the truth, but instead clung to the thighs of the U.S. defaming Mainland China with no conscience. She also used the strategy of the Democratic Alliance to oppose Mainland China. Comparing Tsai’s paper with the US White Paper on China, you can see the similarities in the text, and especially the tone, so much like the American version (Example, "We have to invest considerable resources to deepen our understanding of the Beijing regime". Isn’t this what the Americans often say?). What’s more ridiculous is that Tsai learned from the American National Endowment for Democracy (NED funding regime change worldwide) to set up a Taiwan Democracy Foundation funding organizations advocating democracy and human rights. The article also said that Taiwan would fight negative information because Taiwan had considerable experience in this regard. Judging from Taiwan’s cyber army (網軍performing fake news and personal attack) and organized fraud gangs (詐騙集團committing global crimes), Taiwan is indeed very experienced. Isn't Tsai's admission like a Kingsley gaffe?!
 
Tsai’s call for help is to find sympathizers (and the U.S. is looking for anti-China allies) and beg for cooperation, exchanges, and trades. Taiwan uses the trade money it earns from the Mainland (hundreds of billions of surplus) to buy US used weapons and supply resources for other small countries to take an anti-China stand. Should this work, ethically? Can it go far with no repercussion? Whether the U.S. can organize an anti-China Democratic League is yet unknown, and who will make a profit in the end in the competition between the U.S. and China is uncertain. What is certain, however, is that in this competition game between the U.S. and China, other relevant countries are all pawns, including Japan, South Korea, Australia, etc. etc., Taiwan is just a little pawn, not something that an article can change its status. For the sake of the future of the people in Taiwan, Taiwan’s political parties and politicians should learn from this call for help, not to be a cat who jumps onto the edge of a tall wall or a child who runs away from home in defiance of the parents. Think about where your home is, who really cares about you and hurry up and find your way home!

​ 
An article published on the Guardian on October 5, 2021, entitled, The US Must Avoid War with China over Taiwan at All Cost, was authored by Daniel L. Davis who is a senior fellow for defense priorities and a former lieutenant colonel in the US army, deployed into combat zones four times. He is also the author of The Eleventh Hour in 2020 America. His opinion is certainly based on his military knowledge. His main points are as follows: 

1. “American policymakers must face the cold, hard reality that fighting China over Taiwan risks an almost-certain military defeat – and gambles we won’t stumble into a nuclear war.”
2. “There would be no palatable choice for Washington if China finally makes good on its decades-long threat to take Taiwan by force. Either choose a bad, bitter-tasting outcome or a self-destructive one in which our existence is put at risk.”
3. “The deputy secretary of defense, Kathleen Hicks, said that if Beijing invades Taiwan, “we have a significant amount of capability forward in the region to tamp down any such potential. Either Hicks is unaware of how little wartime capacity we actually have forward deployed in the Indo-Pacific or she’s unaware of how significant China’s capacity is off its shores, but whichever the case, we are in no way guaranteed to “tamp down” a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.”
4. “Earlier this year, Senator Rick Scott and Representative Guy Reschenthaler introduced the Taiwan Invasion Prevention Act which, Representative Reschenthaler said, would authorize “the president to use military force to defend Taiwan against a direct attack”. In the event of an actual attack, there would be enormous pressure to fast-track such a bill to authorize Biden to act. We must resist this temptation.”
5. “The best that could be hoped for would be a pyrrhic victory in which we are saddled with becoming the permanent defense force for Taiwan (costing us hundreds of billions a year and the equally permanent requirement to be ready for the inevitable Chinese counter-attack).”
6. “The most likely outcome would be a conventional defeat of our forces in which China ultimately succeeds, despite our intervention – at the cost of large numbers of our jets being shot down, ships being sunk, and thousands of our service personnel killed. But the worst case is a conventional war spirals out of control and escalates into a nuclear exchange.”

 
There were quite a number of comments posted by readers. Many just like I agree with Davis' military assessment. However, many readers do not seem to support his not-to-war position. The ones that disagreeing with Colonel Davis can be represented by the words, obligation and duty, hence willing to war, for example, “We have a duty to protect Taiwan, it’s been etched in stone for decades. If the US falter in this commitment, it will be open season for all the world’s adversaries to do as they please.” The ones agreeing with Davis further pointed out the dependency of the West on China's manufacturing. As for strategy, Davis' suggestion is as follows: “The most effective course of action for Washington would be to condemn China in the strongest possible terms, lead a global movement that will enact crippling sanctions against Beijing, and make them an international pariah. China’s pain wouldn’t be limited to economics, however.” This is more or less Biden's Administration is doing or hope to achieve, but so far the progress is not prominent.
 
The Taiwan issue has been discussed in the US-China Forum for nearly a decade, but our views seem to fall on deaf ears. We have discussed the history behind the Taiwan issue – it was a result of a Chinese internal war following the ending of WW II. The split of China across the Taiwan strait happened while the world was polarized between a capitalist liberal democratic West led by the U.S. and a communist authoritarian system controlled by the Soviet Union. China had two political parties fighting for power but they had a common goal to unite China and make China strong again despite of the external influence from the Soviet Union and the U.S. The Chinese would have been united if there were no interference from the U.S. and the Soviet. There was no obligation for the U.S. or any other nation to fight in or for a Chinese internal war. The U.S. has no reason to get involved with any political party in Taiwan for its struggle for power. It is none of the U.S. business.
 
The U.S. has been a superpower since the end of WW II and she became The Superpower when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1989-1991. However, being a superpower does have obligation in maintaining world peace and promoting world prosperity, but it has no obligation nor right to interfere with other nation's internal affairs. China is a perfect example that she has five thousand years of history and far richer culture and literacy than any nation on Earth. If China is progressing to find the perfect system for governing China who in this world has the right or obligation to dictate or interfere with China's own political evolution? Other nations especially the U.S. should try to understand what a political system with Chinese characteristics mean.
 
The present Taiwan government is ruled by a small political party. Even the present party chose to be a poppy of the U.S., we should be wise enough to stay neutral. The fact that China has risen so fast and advanced in numerous domains making the U.S. uneasy, the U.S. must reflect on itself why we are falling behind? No, no country can steal another country's success. China rose peacefully. She did not wage war or conquer any other country to make her growing strong. From Col. Davis' article, we should ponder what are the differences that have made China to be a world power in a few decades? Only through a humble reflection we may grow strong again. If the U.S. interferes with the Taiwan issue, the outcome will be what Davis predicts. Any hegemony strategy or Thucydides theory is obsolete in a nuclear power world. We must learn how to compete and accept reality.
​
Ifay Chang. Ph.D., Inventor, Author, TV Game Show Host and Columnist (www.us-chinaforum.org) as well as serving as Trustee, Somers Central School District.