|
Does Taiwan need nuclear weapons?
Tuesday, Sep 14, 2010, Page 8
The recent publication of a memoir by former US negotiator
Jeremy Stone re-ignited a controversy last week over alleged plans under former
president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) to launch a nuclear weapons program.
Stone’s allegations, which ostensibly were sourced from and corroborated post
facto by former National Security Council secretary-general Su Chi (蘇起) — who at
the time the controversy emerged was a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)
legislator — are hard to substantiate. That the Chen administration, for all its
faults, would have engaged in nuclear adventurism stretches credulity. Though it
has the technical know-how to do so (and inside sources say a turnaround could
take as little as one year), Taiwan could hardly have launched a nuclear weapons
program without the US, let alone China, becoming aware of it.
One does not have to read Stone’s book too closely to realize that the views of
the former president of the Federation of American
Scientists-turned-cross-strait-troubleshooter are wildly skewed in Beijing’s
favor. Nothing makes this more evident than the many variations he uses to
portray the Chen administration as a “troublemaker,” which may account for
Stone’s credulity on the alleged nuclear program.
Unbeknownst to Stone, this very bias against Taipei — not his alone, but that of
the international community — lies at the very heart of Taiwan’s defense
malaise. In fact, the inherent imbalance was the main reason behind this
newspaper’s decision, in August 2004, to publish an editorial that put the
nuclear option on the table (despite what Su and Stone may believe, however, the
Taipei Times did not and does not have a direct line to the Presidential Office
or Democratic Progressive Party headquarters).
More than six years have elapsed and the balance of power in the Taiwan Strait
has only continued to shift in Beijing’s favor. Furthermore, nuclear-armed China
continues to threaten Taiwan, the would-be “troublemaker” who at no point under
Chen adopted anything that could have been interpreted as a belligerent posture.
Given that this situation appears to be a comfortable “status quo” for the likes
of Stone, is it not conceivable that Taiwanese would ponder various means to
oppose China militarily and present it with a credible deterrent? In and of
themselves, peace and democracy will be of little help against an opponent who
plays by different rules, as highlighted by Beijing’s refusal to renounce the
use of force against Taiwan amid supposedly warming ties. While nuclear weapons
may be an extreme recourse — and an unadvisable one at that — Taiwan cannot
afford the gullibility that has marked the course adopted by President Ma Ying-jeou’s
(馬英九) administration in cross-strait rapprochement.
While his Cabinet has rightly stuck to less problematic, though by no means
inconsequential, matters like economics in its dialogue with Beijing, there is
no doubt that in the months ahead — especially as we get closer to Chinese
President Hu Jintao’s (胡錦濤) stepping down as head of state — talks will touch on
more controversial issues such as identity and sovereignty. Once those topics
are tackled, friction is bound to emerge, which could quickly escalate and spin
out of control. Any outcome to the 2012 presidential poll in Taiwan that isn’t
to China’s taste could also serve as a catalyst for a military option.
In such a situation, Beijing, seeing a weakened opponent, could calculate that
it can get away with the use of force at little cost, making military action
more likely.
That is why, even amid untested signs of rapprochement, Taiwan must continue to
acquire and develop not only the means to protect itself, but solid deterrent
capabilities so that any military adventurism on Beijing’s part to fulfill its
irredentist dreams would come at great cost. A strong Taiwan means less risk of
war, not the other way around.
Does Taiwan need nuclear weapons for this? Probably not, but it certainly needs
more than naivety and Ma sloganeering, and more than the dishonest diplomacy
exercised by the likes of Stone.
|
