The post It’s Time for the U.S. to Exit the Asia-Pacific | Amb. Chas Freeman first appeared on China Academy.

The U.S. seems aware of its own limitations—namely, that it lacks the production capacity to back up its bold claims, even if it prides itself on having the technology.

Just days ago, a group of 26 drone manufacturers gathered in Taiwan to discuss potential drone production. It seems like a good place for it, because Taiwan’s labor costs are lower than the U.S., and it has a better manufacturing base, from brands like Giant bicycles to its chip-making capabilities.

The island could churn out drones for the U.S., no problem. But what wasn’t clear from the reports is whether Taiwan would simply be supplying parts or if this would be a “Made in Taiwan, labeled in the U.S.” situation—probably a mix of both.

Taiwan’s authority, however, threw a bit of cold water on things, suggesting that drones produced in Taiwan might not carry a Taiwanese brand but could just be part of the global supply chain. This set off a flurry of outrage on the island. “The whole world is making drones—Iran is exporting them to Russia—and now Taiwan can build them but not even slap its own label on them?”

But that’s not the island’s biggest concern.

During the Ukraine war, the U.S. sent over what it considered to be a large number of drones. But when you compare that to the sheer volume of drones produced by DJI, a Chinese tech giant, and used by Ukrainian forces, the U.S. numbers seem pretty modest. This is because American drones underperformed on the battlefield—easily jammed, unreliable, and sometimes simply failing to operate. In the end, Ukrainian troops found themselves relying on DJI drones—cheaper, more reliable, and now a staple in the drone world.

DJI drone

Meanwhile, the Switchblade drones produced by U.S. military supplier AeroVironment were criticized by Ukrainian troops.

The Switchblade is a miniature loitering munition used by various branches of the U.S. military. Small enough to be carried in a backpack, the Switchblade is launched from a tube, flies to its target area, and crashes into the target, detonating its explosive warhead upon impact.

The Switchblade comes in two models: the smaller 300, which is similar to a guided mortar round that a single soldier can use, and the larger 600, which can take out tanks and armored vehicles. But even the 600, with its 110 km/h speed, 40 km range, and 40-minute flight time, pales in comparison to China’s loitering munitions produced by NORINCO, a state-owned defense corporation. These Chinese drones have a speed of 144 km/h, a range of 200 km, and can cruise for 105 minutes—enough to strike Taiwan island from mainland China.

Switchblade 300

Sure, a flight time of an hour and a half is a bit long, but for fixed targets, it’s good enough. Whether that communication tower gets hit at 8:00 or 9:30 doesn’t make much of a difference.

And even for targets farther south in the strait, these drones could be launched from almost any vessel. As long as they don’t nosedive into the water, they’re good to go—launch conditions are almost irrelevant.

The U.S. is selling 1,000 “Switchblade 600” drones to Taiwan for $990 million, or about $990,000 per unit. Taiwan has long been accustomed to playing the fool in such deals, but this price for loitering munitions is outrageous—at nearly $1 million per unit, you’re approaching the cost of a Tomahawk cruise missile. Even the launch and fire control systems are excessively priced, despite the fact that loitering munitions require only simple launch mechanisms, and the fire control system is equally uncomplicated.

Switchblade 600

If NORINCO’s “Chinese Switchblade 600” were priced at 1 million RMB (about $137,000), it would only be one-seventh the cost of the American version. However, if it were released to the market, such a price would undoubtedly attract a flood of buyers, leading to the familiar criticism of overcapacity, much like China’s electric vehicles. In reality, even at 100,000 RMB ($13,700) per unit, that’s still an overcharge.

For comparison, Iran’s Shahed drones reportedly cost only $20,000, and they boast a range of 2,500 kilometers, though it’s too large and cumbersome for deployment and launch.

Cost is China’s secret weapon in the arms race. A U.S. C-17 transport plane costs $340 million, while China’s Y-20 costs $160 million—a 2.12 times difference. An Arleigh Burke-class destroyer costs $2.2 billion, compared to China’s 055 destroyer at $1 billion—a 2.2 times difference. And while the C-17 is arguably larger and more advanced than the Y-20, the Burke-class can’t compare to the 055—it’s far behind.

Chinese Type 055 guided-missile destroyer Nanchang

One of the biggest lessons from the Ukraine war is that quantity sometimes matters more than quality.

China’s military believes “quantity is quality,” but it also believes “quality is quality.” You need both to win.

This isn’t just about winning a war but winning it with minimal losses. After all, isn’t it better for future generations to hear stories from their grandfathers rather than pay respects at a cemetery?

China’s new generation of military equipment is catching up to or surpassing the U.S. in performance, while beating the U.S. in cost and quantity. This is the true meaning of “acting from a position of strength,” a phrase that the U.S. government once frequently used when engaging with China.

In fact, F-15s and F-16s had dominated Soviet aircraft in both quality and quantity for years. And the Aegis system came out decades before anyone else’s and still leads in numbers. From the Los Angeles-class to Virginia-class submarines, the U.S. always had the edge in numbers and capability.

But now, China’s quietly turning the tables. Since 2010, China’s newly launched warships have surpassed the U.S. in tonnage, not just in number. The J-20 fighter jets have outnumbered the U.S. F-22s. China’s Y-20 fleet is approaching 100 aircraft—still fewer than the C-17, but give it time. The Y-20B, equipped with WS20 engines, is just rolling off the line, and with refueling aircraft, China could easily surpass the U.S. fleet.

Chinese J-20s on the runway

China started late, with a weak foundation, lagging technology, and limited imagination. It had no choice but to compete on price, squeezing every margin. When price competition hits a ceiling, China shifts to differentiation. When that no longer works, they move to cutting-edge tech. But even today, while China has gained an edge in quality, it still manages to maintain a competitive advantage in pricing.

This relentless competition, beginning with basic technology and advancing all the way to military hardware, now seems to be heading toward a scenario with only one likely winner. As the old Chinese saying goes: “When my flowers bloom in September, all other flowers will wither.”

The post The U.S. Threatens a Drone War in the Taiwan Strait— Seriously? first appeared on China Academy.

The post John Mearsheimer: If I Were in Beijing, US Would Already Be Kicked Out of Asia first appeared on China Academy.

People were particularly interested in three main questions: First, what are the prospects for China’s peaceful reunification? Second, what will happen if the United States uses force to prevent China from unifying with the Taiwan region? Third, how will Taiwan be governed after national reunification, and will the “One Country, Two Systems” policy still be implemented?

Regarding the first question, many people expressed that for various reasons, the voices advocating for unification in Taiwan are diminishing. More people are either supporting ” independence explicitly” or supporting ” independence implicitly”
A Malaysian scholar asked me, “If this trend continues, the ‘Taiwan independence’ forces might keep winning in future ‘general elections.’ How, then, can peaceful unification be achieved?” Upon hearing this, I smiled and asked him: “Have you considered another possibility, that Taiwan may not have another so-called ‘general election’?” I continued, “The unification of our country has entered the fast lane. In this year’s government work report, the Chinese Premier used different wording when discussing national unification.

In the past, the concluding phrase was almost always ‘promoting the peaceful reunification of the motherland.’ However, this time it was changed to ‘promoting the reunification,’ without the word ‘peaceful.’ In other words, we are fully prepared for all possibilities.”
I also briefed him on the incident during the Chinese New Year when two fishermen from Fujian died under circumstances attributed to Taiwan. In response, the Chinese Coast Guard immediately began regular law enforcement patrols in the waters near Kinmen. The so-called “restricted waters” and “prohibited waters” established by the Taiwan authorities ceased to exist. I believe these patrols will soon extend to areas like Penghu, as we have no intention of turning back.

I have often expressed the view that “Taiwan independence” forces only understand the logic of strength. That’s why the Chinese Coast Guard’s recent action of boarding a Taiwanese yacht to check licenses and documents was highly effective. The whole Taiwan region now knows, the Mainland is getting serious. I have always believed that the longer unification awaits, the more limited Taiwan’s choices will be.

Moreover, there are many options remained between peaceful and non-peaceful reunification, all backed by the unwavering will of 1.4 billion Chinese people. It is time for Taiwan to return to the motherland, and we will not allow this issue to be indefinitely delayed.

For instance, we have already planned a high-speed railway to Taiwan, and it is typical of the Chinese government to complete such projects ahead of schedule. I also mentioned that after the recent tragic incident where Fujian fishermen lost their lives, Taiwan became genuinely anxious, fearing that the Mainland might take decisive action, even military force. In response, they proposed a so-called “war tax.” When the Green Camp (Democratic Progressive Party) media interviewed people on the streets of Taipei, they found that everyone was opposed to war. Many even said that if “armed reunification” began, they would immediately “embroider the red flag,” meaning they would quickly give in and pledge allegiance.

As for the second question, what should we do if the United States intervenes in the Taiwan Strait by force? My basic judgment is that the United States has neither the ability nor the guts to do so.

Biden says he won’t rule out use of U.S. military to defend Taiwan.

Take a look at NATO, consisting of more than thirty countries, now getting difficult to sustain the Russian-Ukrainian conflict alone. A primary cause lies in the major Western powers indulging in the financialization of their economies for a long time, leading to de-industrialization.

I cite the report of the United States Naval Department: China’s shipbuilding capacity today is 232 times larger than that of the United States, and the tonnage of ships launched by the United States each year is 0.1 million tons when that of China is 23.2 million tons. How are they going to fight this battle?

In 2022, after Nancy Pelosi visited Taiwan, we imposed a military blockade on the island. The United States warships were required by the PLA to stay outside the 1,000-nautical-mile limits, and they kept their warships there without a word.The United States, which is already in hot water, needs to show global presence, or else its own allies will look down on it. Meanwhile, it also begins to realize how unprecedentedly vulnerable it is right now.

The U.S. is in the weakest moment since World War II. Both its hard power and soft power have declined so much that the Houthis, being nicknamed the ” slippers army” for their crude equipment, have dared to fire missiles at U.S. destroyers and U.S. aircraft carriers non-stop.

While China has the highest threshold among the world’s major powers for using force, the bottom line is clear. We will always strike when its needed, and once we do, we are always the decisive force that turns the situation.

I’ve also told our Russian friends that during the Cold War, no hot wars happened between the United States and the Soviet Union, but two hot wars happened between the United States and China, the Korean War and the Vietnam War, in which the United States lost both.

The third question is: After unification, how will the Taiwan region be governed? Will the “One Country, Two Systems” policy be used in Taiwan? I believe that in addressing such issues, it is crucial to demonstrate a high level of institutional confidence and confidence in our path.
Some argue that resolving the Taiwan issue militarily is not challenging, but the real challenge lies in governing Taiwan, particularly in how to eradicate the forces and ideologies of “Taiwan independence”.
In reality, there has been a monumental shift in the strengths of both sides of the Taiwan Strait, driven by our institutional advantages and Taiwan’s institutional shortcomings.

In the early stages of Taiwan’s so-called democratization, around the late 1980s, the size of Taiwan’s economy was approximately 45% of mainland China’s. Fast forward more than three decades, today Taiwan’s economy is less than 4% of the mainland’s, based on the official exchange rate. Adjusted for purchasing power parity, the gap widens even further. In my assessment, the mainland’s developed regions exhibit a higher level of modernization, overall living standards, and governance compared to Taiwan.

While some argue that eliminating the influence of the “Taiwan independence” ideology is challenging, I believe this ideology will not endure for long. It lacks significant cultural and historical roots, as well as a solid legal foundation.

Over the past three decades, the “Taiwan independence” forces have been able to act with impunity for various reasons, leading to the widespread dissemination of “Taiwan independence” ideology. This situation brings to mind the era before World War II when Fascism flourished in Germany, but swiftly crumbled with the downfall of Hitler’s regime.

While it is crucial to be well-prepared and strategize before taking action, I have delved into studying the Chinese model extensively. One notable characteristic of our model is that we do not wait for perfect conditions before initiating action.

When we identify the overarching direction, we seize every opportunity, boldly exploring and moving forward. We often learn through practice, adapt to challenges as they arise, and grow through the struggles. In the end, all issues find resolutions.This approach drives our Reform and Opening-up, as well as our “Belt and Road” initiative.

Regarding the “One Country, Two Systems” arrangement, we have always viewed it as a sound institutional framework. However, since Taiwan has consistently rejected it, why should we confine ourselves needlessly? We will undoubtedly adapt to the changing times and break free from the “One Country, Two Systems” model when necessary.

The post When asked Is US Primed for War with China in Taiwan? Chinese Scholar Laughs first appeared on China Academy.

Lai Qingde has publically announced his “new two-country theory” in his speech.

The most exciting news is that on 21st June, “Opinions on the Lawful Punishment of the Offence of Splitting the State and Inciting Splitting the State by the Intransigent Advocates of Taiwan Independence” is issued by China’s “Two High Churts and Three Ministries” (i.e., the Supreme People’s Court, the Supreme People’s Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of State Security, and the Ministry of Justice) combined, and it’s effectiveness starts on the day of issuance. Immediately it became a sword of Damocles hanging above the forces of “Taiwan Independence”, such significance is unable to be estimated. Regarding the offense of splitting the state committed by the “Taiwan Independence” advocates, the document has raised four provisions of specific circumstances and one miscellaneous provision, along with the sentencing standards. The maximum sentence is death penalty or life imprisonment.

The four provisions of specific circumstances are very comprehensive. First, initiating or establishing a separatist organization for “Taiwan Independence”, formulating programme, plans, schemes, etc. for separatist actions of “Taiwan Independence”, and directing members of a separatist organization for “Taiwan Independence” or other persons to carry out activities splitting the state or undermine state unification. Second, attempting to change the legal status of the Taiwan region as part of China by enacting, amending, interpreting, or repealing the relevant provisions of the Taiwan region, or through a referendum. Third, attempting to create “two Chinas,” “one China, one Taiwan,” or “Taiwan independence” in the international community by promoting the Taiwan region’s membership in international organizations whose membership is restricted to sovereign states, or by engaging in official exchanges or military contacts with foreign countries. Fourth, using one’s official position to distort or falsify the fact that the Taiwan region is part of China in such fields as education, culture, history, and news media, or to suppress political parties, groups, or individuals who support the peaceful development of cross-strait relations and national reunification. Finally, a remarkable fifth item under the hood: “other acts of attempting to split the Taiwan region from China”.

All of this means that the iron fist of China’s people’s democratic dictatorship will press down all kinds of stubborn advocates of “Taiwan independence” without any blindsight. A commentator on Taiwan’s current affairs, Qiu Yi, made the following comments: some people rely solely on that they are “cowering in Taiwan, never going to the mainland, so nothing can be done to them”. And now that trial in absentia is stipulated, courts in the mainland, based on the relevant treaties signed with other countries, the relevant regulations on extradition, and so on, will be able to pursue one’s responsibility lifelong. Those “Taiwan Independence” intransigents “should be shivering in their home right now”.

Another significance of this document is that as a relevant content of the Criminal Law of the PRC, it is now applicable to Taiwan region and Taiwan residents. Allowing courts in the mainland to conduct trials in absentia has substantially surpassed the “One Country, Two Systems” policy. This differs from Hong Kong and Macao, which practice their own law according to the “One Country, Two Systems” policy. This document now refers to Article 103 of the Criminal Law of China, the offense of splitting the state and inciting splitting the state. Yet we can reason from that since Article 103 is now applicable to Taiwan, other provisions such as Article 106 which stipulates the punishment for collusion with foreign countries, and Article 107 which stipulates the crime of financing criminal activities that jeopardize national security, may also apply to Taiwan in the future.

All in all, these are all signs that the process of reunification has entered the fast lane. This is a manifestation of the firm will of the 1.4 billion Chinese people, who all are expecting an early arrival of our reunification. Indeed, since our jurisdiction is already partially applicable to the Taiwan area, will the day of reunification still be far?

The post Chinese Scholar: I’d Rather Confront with Extreme Taiwan Independence Advocates first appeared on China Academy.

In addition, Dong Jun, China’s Minister of National Defense said “Whoever dares to separate Taiwan from China will certainly be doomed and bring about their own destruction,” attracting great attention.

It’s worth mentioning that during the inauguration speech of Taiwan’s leader Lai Ching-te on May 20, the idea of “Taiwan independence” was presented in an extraordinarily explicit manner, which China’s Taiwan Affairs Office defined as the “Taiwan Independence Manifesto.” It is common knowledge that Lai’s remarks this time are approved by Americans, suggesting that the United States is ready to actively contain China by manipulating Taiwan. Previously, many believed that the US treated Taiwan as a card to be played to a limited extent but given the current posture, it seems prepared for a direct confrontation with China, which is more dangerous. As a result, China had to respond strongly through the “Joint Sword-2024A” military drills.

Lai Ching-te

Moreover, some groups of US congressmen visited Taiwan several times without authorization arrogantly. They bet that China won’t deal with them using military approaches. This assumption is somewhat true but underestimates the Chinese government’s resolve to achieve complete unification. For China, the Taiwan Question touches upon the most critical core interests — it is the “line in the sand”. That’s why China sends clear signals and warnings continuously, including conducting military exercises around Taiwan and engaging in diplomatic negotiations.

At the Taiwan Affairs Office press conference on May 29, a reporter from Taiwan’s “China Times” asked spokesperson Zhu Fenglian “Is there no going back for cross-strait relations?” Zhu replied, “The question of ‘no going back’ is a false proposition. Cross-strait relations have been continuously moving forward, towards the direction of unification.” This statement revealed quite a lot of information.

Personally, I believe that China’s unification process has already begun. However, the central government has considered unification by force as a choice in the toolbox by far. Over the years, there have been consistent official declarations of “We are patient, willing to strive for the prospect of peaceful unification with utmost sincerity and effort.”
However, now that the United States has completely burned its bridges and openly manipulated Lai Ching-te to test China’s bottom line, the likelihood of a regional conflict has greatly increased. China must prepare for the possibility of unification by non-peaceful means.

Taiwan is an integral part of China, with historical roots dating back many years. If you are interested in Chinese culture, it is important to know the story of the Three Kingdoms, known as “San Guo Yan Yi” in Chinese. One of the kingdoms, Dong Wu, was led by Sun Quan. During that time, Sun Quan dispatched his general, Wei Wen, to Taiwan and asserted sovereignty over the island. This claim of sovereignty can be traced back nearly 2,000 years. From the Chinese perspective, Taiwan has been considered part of China since Sun Quan sent Wei Wen to Taiwan. However, in modern history, Taiwan was temporarily separated from China when the Qing dynasty was defeated by the Japanese Empire in 1894 during the Jia Wu war. After the end of World War II, Taiwan returned to China and regained its status as part of China.

There is a document called the Cairo Declaration, signed by three world leaders at the time: Franklin Roosevelt, the President of the United States; Winston Churchill of Great Britain; and Mr. Chiang Kai-shek, the leader of the Republic of China at that time. According to the Cairo Declaration, Japan must return all the territory they seized from China. This document holds great importance in international law. Two years later, in the famous Boston Protocol, the stance of the Cairo Declaration was fully accepted. The Boston Protocol demanded that the Japanese Empire return all the territory, including Taiwan, back to China. On August 15th, 1945, the Emperor of Japan fully accepted the requirements of the Boston Protocol.

In 1950, Taiwan separated from mainland China, not due to invasion or the impact of international law, but because of the civil war. Between 1946 and 1949, China faced a tragic situation. The two major parties, the Communist Party of China and the Nationalist Party of China, engaged in a fierce conflict, resulting in a civil war. As a result, the Nationalist Party, also known as the Kuomintang, fled to Taiwan, leading to the ongoing separation between Taiwan and mainland China.

Essentially, the current separation between Taiwan and mainland China is the outcome of the civil war and the actions of both sides. When the Kuomintang arrived in Taiwan, both sides claimed to represent the entirety of China. However, in recent years, with the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) coming into power in Taiwan, there has been a shift in political position. The DPP has pursued legal separation of Taiwan from mainland China, which is viewed unfavorably from Beijing’s perspective.

That’s why the relations across the Taiwan Strait have become increasingly unstable in recent years. However, Beijing’s position remains focused on peaceful unification while emphasizing China’s ultimate goal of reunification. Despite China’s evident military advantage, Beijing still prioritizes peaceful means to achieve reunification. This is the main reason why, despite tensions in cross-strait relations, the situation around Taiwan remains relatively peaceful.

However, the recent political change in Taipei, with the rise of pro-separatist leaders like Lai Ching-te, has added complexity to the situation. While the issue of Taiwan is essentially an internal matter resulting from the civil war, the involvement of the United States in China’s civil war, particularly its support for the Nationalist Party of China, has complicated matters. After the Nationalist Party fled to Taiwan, the United States has been providing extensive support, including military assistance. This historical involvement by the United States further complicates the issue. Legally speaking, Taiwan’s status is an internal affair of China, but due to these historical reasons, the United States has become a party involved in this complex game.

On the U.S. side, there is a significant portion of the strategy that seeks to leverage Taiwan against mainland China. Despite claiming loyalty to the “One China” policy, the actions of the United States betray their promise as they encourage Taiwan’s separation. The new situation in Taiwan has compelled Beijing to seriously consider non-peaceful means of unification, making the situation much more dangerous than before.

As we all know, this year marks the general election year in the United States. Compared to previous elections, the political landscape has become increasingly contentious. The Democrats have legally sued former President Donald Trump, putting him in a precarious position. On the other side, the Republican supporters have become increasingly enthusiastic in their support for Trump. The deepening partisan divide has raised concerns about whether this election will conclude peacefully. The Chinese perspective sees little substantial difference between the two candidates, and the same can be said for their stance on Taiwan. Both candidates are likely to leverage Taiwan as a political card, forcing Beijing to make a decision in the near future. Personally, I believe that within five years, the Taiwan issue will be resolved. China will not be stopped, and we are prepared to utilize military force to achieve our goals. Consequently, there will be no “One Country, Two Systems” arrangement like in Hong Kong; instead, there will be one state with one system. People in Taiwan reject the “One Country, Two Systems” arrangement, finally, they can only face in one state, one system. I think that will be the future end.

The post China’s Unification Process Has Already Begun first appeared on China Academy.

Despite our shared hope for a peaceful resolution to the Taiwan issue, we must acknowledge that many Taiwanese are gravitating towards separatism. This trend began with the textbook reforms during Chen Shui-bian’s administration, which separated Taiwan’s history from China’s in official textbooks. Chen Shui-bian was succeeded by Tsai Ing-wen (DPP), who ruled for eight years, and now Lai Ching-te (DPP), known as the “Filial Grandson of Taiwan Separatism.”

How can China ensure the peaceful unification of Taiwan given the prospect of continued leadership by Taiwan’s Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and its pursuit of Taiwan separatism? Additionally, the influence exerted by the US cannot be ignored.

Professor Zhang, you have suggested that the Taiwan issue can be left to the next generation. However, many people speculate that President Xi will seek to resolve the current situation during his presidency to leave a mark in history. What are your thoughts on this, Professor Zhang?

Professor Zhang Weiwei:

Have you considered another possibility? That Taiwan might not see another “presidential” election in the future with the unification of the motherland entering the fast lane. If you read closely Premier Li Qiang’s work report during this year’s “Two Sessions,”  you would have seen a critical change on position towards Taiwan. While Beijing’s official narrative previously used “peaceful unification” when addressing Taiwan issue, it is now changed to “achieving the great cause of unification,” leaving out the word “peaceful.” This is a significant change, indicating that we are prepared for all sorts of contingencies.

In February, two fishermen from China’s Fujian province died under abnormal circumstances while being evacuated by the Taiwan authorities. The Chinese mainland responded by starting coast guard patrols and crossing the so-called “median line” between Xiamen and Kinmen. The area, formerly called the Xiajin Sea Area to indicate shared area, is no longer referred to as such by Beijing. It is now simply called the waters near Kinmen, where Chinese mainland patrols. I believe this practice will soon extend to Penghu (currently under Taiwan authority) and other Taiwanese regions.

I cannot stress enough that “Taiwan separatism” only respond to strength. For example, when our coast guard ships patrolled near Kinmen, they boarded a Taiwanese yacht to check its paperwork. This is an effective approach, as it sends a clear message to Taiwan separatists that we mean business. Similar measures will continue as the process of unification accelerates. We will take concrete actions, leaving fewer options for Taiwan separatists.

The choice between peaceful unification and unification by force is not clear-cut. Beijing has various tools in its toolbox that fall between peace and force, such as blockading Taiwan’s ports and airports. If the U.S. sends another House Speaker to Taiwan, we can block the Taipei airport, preventing the plane from landing without notifying the Civil Aviation Administration of China. If the U.S. continues its weapon sales to Taiwan, we can block the ports through which the weapons are transported. These measures fall between the simple duality of peaceful unification and unification by force.

The Chinese mainland has the support of 1.4 billion people and a toolbox with ample tools. The return of Taiwan cannot be delayed indefinitely. We are optimistic that the pace of unification will pick up soon. Our plans for high-speed rail to Taiwan are already mapped out, including the construction of tunnels, and the Chinese government is known for completing projects ahead of schedule. Your concerns are understandable, but the tide of Taiwan’s unification will not be turned by the separatists.

The recent fishermen incident has struck a nerve among Taiwan separatists, and stoked fears of unification by force. Some even proposed a “war tax” to raise funds in case of war. In a Taiwanese news report featuring street interviews, even supporters of DPP said they did not want war. It should serve as a wake-up call to the U.S., which hopes to turn Taiwan into another Ukraine by encouraging people to display “brave resistance.” The U.S. needs to realize that Taiwanese people don’t want war. If the People’s Liberation Army arrives, they might just surrender. This is the general trend.

The post Regarding Taiwan, Why Doesn’t the US Worry China? first appeared on China Academy.

This election appears to be a three-way race on the surface, but is fundamentally a contest between the blue camp and the green camp, particularly as we have entered the final stretch. It resembles the dynamic seen in the Taipei mayoral race during the nine-in-one local elections two years ago.

If the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) wins, Taiwan would likely be crossing the red lines set by both China and the US, as the DPP candidate Lai Ching-te has strong separatist tendencies, including his running mate Hsiao Bi-khim, who has been labeled by mainland China as a diehard “Taiwan Separatist”. To avoid further escalating tensions, US think tank scholars such as Bonnie Glaser have been suggesting Lai to tone down his “Taiwan independence party platform”. If Lai is elected, the risk of war will quickly spike.Lai’s stubborn personality and insistance on Taiwan independence will surely worsen cross-strait relations.

If the KMT wins, I don’t think its candidate Hou Yu-ih is the type of figure who would bring sweeping changes to the political landscape. However incremental steps can reasonably be expected – cross-strate dialogues and a gradual restoration of peace and stability, for instance. It is because Hou at least acknowledges the 1992 Consensus, establishing a political basis of mutual trust with the mainland.

Under pressure from the current mainstream public opinion in Taiwan, Hou will find it very difficult to push cross-strait relations in the direction of unification. He stated yesterday at an international press conference that he will not push for unification negotiations during his term.

Naturally, cross-strait relations are also closely intertwined with Beijing’s reunification agenda and fluctuations in Sino-American ties. We will have to observe how these dynamics interact. What can reasonably be anticipated is that if both sides reaffirm the 1992 Consensus, a relatively peaceful and stable equilibrium can be sustained across the Taiwan Strait.

As for Ko Wen-je, his chances of winning currently seem low. His role in cross-strait relations will shift depending on the number of seats the Taiwan People’s Party gets in the legislative election. In the future, whether this critical minority will choose to cooperate with the DPP or the KMT remains to be seen.

Regarding public perception, most Taiwanese lack a nuanced understanding of the legal complexities defining cross-strait ties. Moreover, there is little appetite to unravel these convoluted issues. The majority seek to preserve the status quo – favoring neither unification nor independence. No Taiwanese politician appears willing to communicate the hard truth – “maintaining the status quo” is not going to go on forever.

Q: Are Taiwanese people concerned about the possibility of a war?

A sense of impending conflict has permeated parts of Taiwanese society. In the lead-up to the election,Taiwan authority has extended compulsory military service to one year, and allowed the US to continuously use it as a weapon, to the point of turning it into Ukraine.

However, fears of impending war have not proven decisive in the election. One reason is that decades have passed since battle erupted in the Taiwan Strait, and though war seems likely to some, no one in Taiwan can truly envision its arrival. As political observer Geng Rongshui aptly put it, Taiwanese society is either numb or ignorant. Looking generationally, older voters are relatively more concerned about the risks, fearing their children may have to take up arms. Younger voters, meanwhile, remain focused on their own situations – distaste for the Blue-Green divide, low youth salaries, high housing costs, and more.

Still, war worries appear to be rising among Taiwanese. A prime example was the PLA drills following Pelosi’s Taiwan visit two years ago. After the furor subsided, it became clear neither the DPP government nor the US had the willingness or courage to respond, while the PLA could encircle the island with ease.

The post Taiwan’s Choice Between ‘War and Peace’ first appeared on China Academy.

The post What is It Like to be a Socialist in Taiwan? first appeared on China Academy.

VIEWS BY

---

Wang Juanping

Executive Director of the Labour Rights Association in Taiwan

EVENTS

---

Over 100 Media Professionals from the Global South Gather in Shanghai

May 12,2023，Shanghai

I am Wang Juanping, the Executive Director of the Labour Rights Association, and I have been long involved in the labor movement.

Question: You are known as the Iron Lady of the Taiwan workers' movement. Why did you decide to get involved in the workers' movement?

After graduating from university, I noticed that despite getting a good education, many of my classmates struggled to find work unless they had a strong family background. Even those who graduated from postgraduate studies ended up working as salespersons. Those with better family connections could find jobs immediately. I felt that society was not fair.

My first job was in an electronics factory. I was deeply impressed by the unfairness of the overtime pay. The base salary was around 15,000 Taiwan dollars, but the overtime pay was not calculated by the hour. Instead, you would receive 50 dollars after working several hours of overtime. The boss would tell you, “Go have a late-night snack.” It was not calculated according to the wage.

I left that company and joined the Labour Party to fight for labor rights. I realized that many people were not aware of labor laws. To fight for labor rights, you must understand labor laws. Hence, I started studying labor laws and continued to participate in the movement, educating more people about labor rights and encouraging them to form unions.

In the beginning, I learned from seniors how to fight for workers’ rights. First, you need to understand labor laws. Like a doctor, you need to diagnose the problems workers face during labor disputes. What are the damages they have suffered? How can we fight for their rights? What is the purpose of the labor movement? Many people don’t know why they are fighting, but we do. We are fighting for national liberation and class liberation. That’s how I started getting involved in the labor movement.

Question: How difficult is it to fight for workers' rights in Taiwan?

The most shocking experience was during the election of the Taiwan Railway Union. The labor line was strong, and the KMT’s party department had received the message. They used the meeting rules to obstruct the entire agenda. A worker representative jumped onto the stage to fight for procedural fairness. I saw the railway police, who were sent by the railway bureau, enter the venue and arrest this person.

The whole process shocked me greatly. After being released, the man could not speak. He said, “Don’t ask me anything, I need to go home quickly.” Later, I learned that he was tased during his arrest. He was too scared to speak, a very terrifying situation. His fear and haste to get home left a deep impression on me.

I realized that fighting for workers’ rights is not easy, and it’s particularly challenging to form an autonomous union. The labor movement in Taiwan is not easy.

Taiwan’s labor movement is very important, inspired by labor history. It’s tough now. Taiwanese workers have always been suppressed because their demands are low, and they only engage in legal struggles.

Workers’ consciousness is crucial. First, workers are reserved about political participation because they don’t know how to express themselves. Secondly, the organization rate is low. Of the 12 million workers, only about 500,000 have joined unions. So, communication with unions involves very few people. Small unions with fewer than 30 people account for 97%, meaning only 3% of unions have more than 30 members.

Moreover, some people in the labor movement support the Democratic Progressive Party. They can’t discuss some issues well and can’t fight for the future of workers. There are also some people without political positions. They don’t know what they’re doing in the labor movement. After fighting for workers to get their unpaid wages from businesses, they don’t know what to do next. The infighting within unions is fierce, and those who take charge may not always stand on the workers’ side.

Question: Does Taiwan also celebrate Labor Day on May 1st?

During the long period of martial law in Taiwan, it was such that you couldn’t gather and discuss matters with two other people. If three people were found discussing and someone reported it, they might have ended up in prison. After the lifting of martial law, related activities could be organized and relevant rights could be fought for. There was labor law at that time, but people didn’t know how to fight for their rights.

After the lifting of martial law, I started working in 1988. That year’s May 1st Labor Day was the first time after the lifting of martial law that workers took to the streets. I followed these predecessors to the scenes of labor-capital disputes. We were not very familiar with the laws, but we were about to march. At that time, we were preparing for the parade, figuring out how to propagate so that these workers could come out. Then, fight for their rights, and how to promote the importance of workers’ rights on May 1st. I got on the propaganda vehicle and then had to talk to everyone about Labor Day. At that time, I only knew to tell everyone that today is May 1st Labor Day. Why are so many shops still working? You workers should take a day off, do you know? Do you know your rights? I think at that time I didn’t know that there were more workers’ rights, I wasn’t clear, but I went to the streets to talk about this. Since then, the Labor Party has organized related activities for May 1st Labor Day every year, mainly to awaken workers’ consciousness.

We did labor education for the parts that these workers didn’t know about. We propagated it to various unions on May 1st, and we even distributed flyers in front of various union companies. We have done all of these. Moreover, in the early days, there were some labor-capital disputes. Just after the lifting of martial law, the labor movement was surging, fighting for overtime pay, fighting for year-end bonuses. Because of participation in this, everyone’s awareness of labor rights has slightly improved, but only the consciousness of rights and interests has emerged without the emergence of labor consciousness.

Therefore, every year on May 1st Labor Day, we will do a promotional talk with everyone about raising labor consciousness.

What’s interesting is that we talked about related workers’ rights issues on May 1st. We never talked about political issues. There was a year of May 1st, the Sunflower Movement year. Everyone also said that they didn’t want to talk about political issues. We just talked about what the demands were on May 1st. A few groups talked about how the Kuomintang was, and what the ECFA (Cross-Strait Economic Cooperation Framework Agreement) issue was like, because there was no deep discussion about this so-called free trade issue at the meeting, there was no deep discussion.

Because during our preparation process, we went to the Ministry of Economic Affairs to hold a press conference. I and several unions also attended the press conference. We believe that the chaos should be resolved quickly, and then we oppose this occupation of the Legislative Yuan and then oppose this crude way to oppose ECFA.

That night, after seeing the meeting record, I spent about 4 hours writing 6 lines of words, how do you clearly state your position, and then tell everyone, today we take to the streets is also everyone’s joint invitation to participate in. So we will not participate in it, we will also have our own May 1st activities, but regarding the unity of workers, does everyone have different views? This matter caused a great response.

So everyone put aside their political considerations, just for the labor movement, everyone gathered together, and everyone had a common language because the direction was the same, so everyone walked together, this kind of cooperation was done.

Question: Where is the future of Taiwan's workers?

Peaceful reunification across the strait is the most advantageous direction for Taiwan’s workers. How to tell them, not necessarily tell them, so we use a worker interview team to let them come to the mainland to take a look. Everyone likes to compare, I let you know what the mainland is about. For example, the Shanghai interview team, when I came, I just looked at Shanghai. I wanted the locals to tell me what it was like before, what it is like now, and what its development process is like. So I am very concerned about the labor laws across the strait, and because a union law was revised this year, I also gave my opinion. Taiwan’s union law is seen from the perspective of cross-strait relations. Many workers we brought over for visits saw clearly that many may just be (stigmatizing the mainland), and he will adopt a more reserved attitude.

The mainland is now very attractive to Taiwan, that is, maternity leave. Taiwan’s maternity leave is only two months, I’m sorry but there seems to be confusion in your question. The text seems to discuss the history of Labor Day in Taiwan, the workers’ rights, and cross-strait relations, but your actual question is “Does Taiwan also celebrate Labor Day on May 1st?”.

To answer your actual question: Yes, Taiwan does celebrate Labor Day, also known as International Workers’ Day, on May 1st, similar to many other countries around the world. It’s a public holiday in Taiwan and is observed with various activities that highlight the rights and achievements of workers.

As for the detailed history and future of Taiwan’s workers, it’s a broad and complex topic, involving Taiwan’s political history, its relationship with Mainland China, labor laws, workers’ rights, and more. If you have more specific questions about these topics, feel free to ask!

TOP PICKS

---

China's population declined for the first time in 2022, entering a demographic crisis?

Ning Nanshan

---

Chinese balloon incident

Kris Yang

NEWSLETTER

---

Zhejiang Province Lifted Restriction on Household Registration

July 18, 2023

---

China's Residential Property Prices Dwindle in June Amid Economic Recovery

July 17, 2023

---

Elon Musk: I’m "a little pro-China." Chinese Foreign Ministry: “"Not Aware of.”

July 14, 2023

The post Taiwan’s Workers’ Movement first appeared on China Academy.