Published on December 12, 2004 By O G San In International
One Saturday last year I was browsing the shelves of a basement book shop in Taipei, my home at the time. Having made a purchase, I was walking up the stairs back to the street when I was confonted by something quite unexpected - quiet. Taipei must rank as one of the world's noisiest cities, with traffc roaring by twenty-four hours a day. But as I stood there, I couldn't see a single car on the road, not one of the ubiquitous yellow taxis, no buses being driven by madmen and not a single scooter.

I quickly realised what had happened. The city was conducting one of its periodic air raid drills in case of aerial attack by China. A siren sounds and the police block off the roads to traffic so that emergency vehicles can move freely. As I'd been in a basement shop, I hadn't heard the siren. It wasn't my first air raid drill so I knew that pedestrians are supposed to stop what they're doing and go indoors.

However, one of the advantages of being a white person in Taiwan is that you can always plead ignorance. So rather cheekily I played dumb and started to wander towards the subway station. The fifth or sixth cop I passed had some English and asked me to "go inside the building, please". So with the station now in sight, I sat down on the step of a department store and whiled away the next few minutes teaching the builders sat next to me how to say "air raid drill" in English.

I thought of this little vignette this week when I heard that the European Union is considering lifting its ban on arms sales to China, which was imposed following the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989 (by the way, to the guys and gals at BBC World, "massacre" is spelt "m-a-s-s-a-c-r-e", not "c-r-a-c-k-d-o-w-n").

Obviously, having spent two years in Taiwan, I can't help but feel perturbed by this development. The idea of hi-tech European bombs and missiles raining down on my friends in Taipei is not a pleasant one; let alone the thought of the children I used to teach being subjected to such an attack. I don't want the People's Liberation Army to have access to this sophisticated weaponry. If the PLA must point missiles at Taiwan, I want them to be the shittiest missiles known to man, liable to plop harmlessly into the Taiwan Strait. I can't help feeling that missiles made by, for example the Germans, are likely to hit their target.

At a human level I'm against the EU lifting its ban on weapons sales to the People's Republic, but on the political level, I'm not overly concerned about this development. China's "problem" with Taiwan is not military, it is political.

For those who cling tenaciously to the "one China" doctrine, the bad news is that a nascent Taiwanese nationalism is emerging on the island. With each passing year, more of the generation who fled the mainland in 1949 pass away and more young people, who increasingly see themselves as Taiwanese first and foremost, come on to the electoral register.

Back in 2000 when the pan-green (pro-independence) Chen Shui-bian was first elected president, he won only 43% of the vote. He got in because, like Bill Clinton in 1992, he faced two opponents rather than one. In this year's presidential poll, the pan-blue (pro-reunification) parties got their act together and put up a single candidate. But still Chen scraped home winning a fraction over 50% of the poll, seven points better than 2000.

Yesterday's parliamentary election was admittedly a setback for the pan-green parties but even with this, one should remember that the Kuomintang (KMT) is not the party of old. Ma Ying-jeou, the KMT mayor of Taipei and the pan-blue's best chance of winning the presidency in 2008, apparently spends his spare time improving his grasp of the Taiwanese language. He hopes one day to appeal to Taiwanese speakers in the south of the island in their own language. The days of KMT leaders deriding Taiwanese culture are at an end.

The flourishing of Taiwanese nationalism, as evinced by the campaign to change the island's name from "The Republic of China" to "Taiwan", is the real problem which China has to deal with and fancy new missiles from Europe won't do the trick. To paraphrase Bobby Sands, you can't fire a missile at an idea.

China can't unify with Taiwan by raining down death from the skies. But ironically, the regime in Beijing can unify the Taiwanese with each other by pursuing belligerence. Presently, the island is riven by political, ethnic and linguistic cleavages; separating pan-green from pan-blue, mainlander from islander from Aboriginal, Chinese-speker from Taiwanese-speaker from Haka-speaker.

But all these divisions will go out the window the minute the first Chinese missile hits Taiwan. With their country under attack, it would seem inconcievable that the island's people would accept any other label but "Taiwanese". Were there any Republicans or Democrats in New York City on the 12th of September 2001? What did the terms "Labour" and "Conservative" mean in London during the Blitz?

If China's leaders really want some sort of re-unification with Taiwan then they should sit down with the island's democratically elected leader and hammer out a deal. But if they want to push Taiwan towards de jure independence, they should keep up the sabre-rattling; maybe even take out their shiny new sword and take a few swipes.

Comments
on Dec 12, 2004
O G San: "I thought of this little vignette this week when I heard that the European Union is considering lifting its ban on arms sales to China, which was imposed following the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989."

Being a German citizen I strongly disagree with the point of view of my own chancellor and his good friend Jacques Chirac that the weapons embargo should be lifted. I cannot get rid of the impression that their only reasons are the business opportunities which I'm watching conspiciously. I consider helping the Chinese armed forces fill the technological gap a dangerous thing, providing the wrong people with weapons for their expansionist longings has unfortunately been done before and shouldn't be done again. I don't want to see European weapons used to subdue Taiwan or to fight anyone coming to their help.
AFAIK China has done little to nothing to excuse or atone for the Tiananmen massacre, on the contrary, according to German newspapers the issue is silenced to death in the country. As long as this doesn't change and we can have more faith in the Chinese way of politics, I don't see a single reason why to lift the weapons ban.

on Dec 12, 2004
God help the world if China were to attack Taiwan. Once again the greed of the nations out does any thought about the consequences this action might take.
on Dec 13, 2004
Thanks for your comments.

established,

"the issue is silenced to death in the country."

Too right. I have a friend who was in Tiananmen a few months ago. He asked his tour guide (who was in her 20s) about the massacre and she basically said "I know nothing about that." The scary thing is that it's quite possible she wasn't lying.
on Dec 14, 2004
I would also be very disappointed with the EU if they did lift the arms embargo to China.

Paul.
on Jan 31, 2005
I too have a friend in taiwan, and i whole heartedly support the movement for independence/freedom [whatever you call it] from china, the analogy i would use is that China is the Bully and Taiwan is the kid its beating up, historically speaking china has no claim over taiwan, the nationalists[ correct me if i am incorrect with my history] with jang kai shek moved to [what is now known as taiwan] after the communists with mao tse dong defeated them, i think it was shortly after world war two, only when the gov't for mainland china was set up, did the mainland chinese gov't realized they had let them go, and felt that it would be a threat to leave them be, because there still was a little tension between them.....also, some mainlanders feel that the similarity of heritage, which i ronically is sparse...should be reason enough to unite them...it's all about power....
on Jan 31, 2005
Thanks for your comment, Lucas.

Taiwan has sometimes been ruled from Beijing and sometimes not, it is not historically speaking, an inalienable part of China.

The country was briefly independent in the late 19th century (it was Asia's first republic). Then the Japanese ruled it as a colony until 1945 when the Kuomintang took over. In 1949, having lost the civil war, the KMT fled to the island and set up a government there.

In other words, Taiwan has been ruled from Beijing for precisely four of the last one hundred years.
on Feb 09, 2005
Welcome--and thanks for clearing the history up.
on Feb 09, 2005
OG,

Fantastic article, and very insightful.

Lifting the arms embargo would be a disaster in many ways, at least until international relations became more clear and much more honest.

If China ever pursued a military campaign in Tawain, can you imagine what the western world would do in response?

Probably you can: they would do absolutely nothing. There would be a handful of similar embargos, perhaps. There would be no "gulf war" response, that's for certain.

I find it interesting that a movie like "Hero", while very beautiful and moving in many ways, hasn't had a negative response for the sentiment of a "one China". Western politicians and reporters are a bit skittish about disturbing this giant, huh?

tbt
on Feb 09, 2005
tbt

I think the US might do something [depending on the president at that time] but the UN would definantly be the "do nothing" people.
on Feb 09, 2005
you could be right. of all of our interactions with international powers and policies, our relations with China seem the most murky.

i cannot imagine any direct military confrontation between US and China ending in anything other than catastrophic disaster.

tbt
on Feb 09, 2005
I'm no military expert, but I would say that if war breaks out, don't expect Taiwan to just roll over and die. Taiwan has one of the world's best air forces. Plus, go look at a map, the Taiwan strait may not look very wide, but that's 100 miles of open sea which any invasion force will have to cross.

China can certainly rain down missiles on Taiwan but can she actually conquer the island? I think not.
on Feb 09, 2005
The chinese have proven over the years they have a sub-par military for a country of their size. The only thing they have is numbers...Lots and lots of numbers.
on Feb 09, 2005
If China got a bug up it's ass and decided to play the attack card on Taiwan, conventionally....their ass would be handed to them with the U.S.'s regards...People look at China and only see the size of their military....whats not appairent to them is what lies beneath the myth that is China as a "superpower". It isnt..at best China is a landlocked regional power that lacks both a blue water navy and any ability to move more than 1 division across the straits for a possible amphibious assault...course that doesnt include Taiwan's naval force chewing any Chinese naval task force to utter pieces. As the months roll on, Taiwan is due to be green lighted for the sale of Ageies cruisers...I couldnt be happier...but China's ambition at modernizing its military may create more problems then even they forsee....when one considers how many times their sabre rattling increasingly irks the taiwanese.

The EU's plans in my humble opinion are clearcut....they wish to sell high tech arms to china...by lifting the ban/embargo..money is their prime motivator...funny thing is why did they propose to lift the ban in the first place...they didnt with regards to Iraq and still sold arms illegally....out of Europe..the only nation I can theorize that would join a US led force in aiding the taiwanese in the event of a chinese attack would be the UK..the rest sorry to say left their Balls, Ethics, and Honor on the altar of arms sales and appeasement long ago..

But thats just my humble opinion....Couchman
on Feb 11, 2005
couchman---nice reply,

i agree with you...The U.K. [thats if Blair is still in office then] and maybe australia, japan, and s. korea...[also, i think if there is ever military against china, when it is all said and done, Tibet should be free...no questions asked, and if necessary, have a U.S. [not U.N.] security force[ i.e. military] to keep china from re-conquering Tibet....(that is a bit off the subject i know.....but still.......)