Dear Mr. Kofi A. Annan,
Mr. Trent Lott,
Mr. Denny Hastert,
A new book is aimed at warning both Taiwan and the United States
against the mainland Chinese military threat, the book's authors
said Willian Triplett, counsel to U.S. Senator Robert Bennett (Republican
Utah), and Edward Timperlake, a former Department of Defense official,
said they wrote the book titled Red Dragon Rising, in the hope that
widespread debate on the book will make Taiwan a campaign issue
for the year 2000 U.S. President elections.
... According to the Taiwan Relations Act, if Taiwan is attacked,
the U.S. will defend it. Beijing, therefore, is concerned with how
to keep the U.S. at home. The answer, according to the authors;
could be the Russian Soveremenny-class destroyer. The
Soveremenny and its nuclear tipped SS-N-22 subburn anti-ship missiles
were designed to attack American aircraft carries and Aegis-class
cruisers.
In the hands of the PLA navy, the Soveremenny is designed to be
a high-stakes deterrent. As retired Rear Admiral Eric McVadon put
it; "it's enough to make the U.S. 7th
(Pacific) Fleet think twice." The authors put
forward a scenario for Taiwan which they claimed might look like
this. The mainland Chinese surprise attack would come
at the Chinese Lunar New Year, when the U.S. Congress
is in its February recess and many of Taiwan's military would be
on leave Beijing, having stationed their Soveremenny destroyers
around Taiwan, would inform the U.S. to stay out of the conflict.
The PLA's precision-guided ballistic and cruise missiles would
hit Taiwan's navy and air forces as well as selected ground targets.
The PLA would then launch a massive information war far assault
on Taiwan.
Taiwan is the first and most important challenge to China's territorial
integrity and sovereignty, and holds the key to whether China can
sustain long-term economic development, a Hong Kong academic said
yesterday (Nov. 6, 1999).
"In China's perception of the security situation
throughout East Asia, Taiwan on doubt occupies the most crucial
position," said Wu Guoguang, professor at the
Chinese University of Hong Kong. Wu was attending a two-day conference
on China issues held by the Democratic Progressive Party at National
Taiwan University in Taipei.
Wu, who was presenting his interpretation of mainland Chinese strategy
at the International Conference on China in the 21st Century, added
that the problem does not stop there. Taiwan also determines whether
China can be a powerful counterweight to other major powers in East
Asia, and whether China's goal to be a major power can be realized,
he said.
The professor gave four reasons why Beijing has come to the conclusion
that Taiwan is key to mainland China's rise:
--- If Taiwan becomes independent, it will encourage
restive ethnic movements in China's border regions;
--- An independent Taiwan may well have closer relations with Japan
than with mainland China. This would greatly benefit Japan and disturb
the present security balance in East Asia;
--- Disputes between Taiwan and mainland China would further legitimize
American involvement in security matters in the region;
--- Taiwan's independence would restrict mainland China's passage
in the South and East China seas, thus constricting its long-term
development.
Stephen Yates, senior policy analyst at the conservative Washington-based
Heritage Foundation, said the recent developments in cross-strait
relations have inevitably called into question U.S. President Bill
Clinton Administration's policy towards China and Taiwan.
"Cross-strait relations today are tense, and perhaps
unstable, not because Taiwan has changed its policy, but precisely
because the United States and China have failed to adjust theirs
in the face of major strategic changes in Asia and the world."
The United States has failed to adjust to the end of the Cold War,
and China has not even adjusted to the end of World War II, he said.
When the United States began to see the Soviet Union as a greater
strategic threat than the communist movement of the past, the
U.S. switched diplomatic relations from Taipei to Beijing, and that
kind of policy towards Taiwan was subjugated to "larger"
interests in relations with the mainland, according
to Yates.
Clinton's engagement policy towards China, announced around three
years ago, contained too much impractical expectation about the
mainland, remarked Arthur Ding, a research fellow at the National
Chengchi University's Institute of International Relations. "Now,
the hopes are fading."
The policy emerged out of acute awareness in the United States
of China's rising power, but over the past few years, Wu noted,
the United States has been greatly disappointed with China's stagnant
political reforms.
After all, sincere and balanced negotiations are underpinning to
resolve the cross-strait stalemate, Yates said, but added: "I
don't oppose dialogues as it deepens mutual understanding. But dialogues
by themselves do not necessarily lead to agreements or solutions."
"Continued dialogues, the administration believes,
promise to narrow differences over time and avoid similar mistakes
in the future," said Yates, who recently voiced
support in an article for the contentious Taiwan Security Enhancement
Act, which he said would better address Taiwan's military needs
via a closer military ties between both sides.
To put cross-strait relations on the right track, the three parties
need to modify their approach to cross-strait relations and dialogue,
and in particular, to focus on the more practical issues, he said.
The East Timor case suggests that "humanitarian security"
is a new and important dimension that will pressure ASEAN to be
flexible in its non-international principle if it wants to resume
the leading role in regional security.
ASEAN must be prepared to take more responsibility for peacekeeping
operations, because in southeast Asia the economic crisis
has highlighted and human security as reflected in the case of East
Timore.
It is a good sign non-international doctrine was revise.
By that troops from Thailand, the Philippines, Malaysia and Singapore
have joined the peacekeeping mission in East Timor, but deep divisions
in the 10-nation ASEAN over whether soldiers and how to send soldiers
gave Australia the mission leadership by default.
South East countries need to put aside traditional refusal to interfere
in each other's affairs, if they want to be ready for the next East
Timor-style crisis.
It must review its non-international principle or lose its leading
role in maintaining peace and security in the region.
The doctrine of global village has greatly changed the traditional
security outlook, are likely to be asked to perform more humanitarian
and peacekeeping duties in the future.
In our views, the report on the Taiwan Relations Act
in 1979 carried that the U.S. government only "acknowledged"
the fact that Taiwan is part of China, but did not "agree"
with this position.
The administration's "acceptance" of mainland
China's version of the so-called "one China" policy is
confusing international countries with the truth.
Mainland Chinese have no rights to democratic Taiwan
with military force, it should cut-off non-intervention principle.
