The anticipated election in Taiwan has taken place... Journalist Göçmen: The cost of a conflict in the Taiwan Strait would be immense

Ercan KÜÇÜK - 12punto.com.tr

The elections in Taiwan, which have been awaited for days, have concluded. The election was won by Lai Ching-te, the presidential candidate of the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), which is in a sovereignty dispute with China. The results of the election have extended far beyond the island of Taiwan. Evaluating the election results and their implications for 12punto, journalist Gökhun Göçmen emphasized that the effects of a conflict between China and the US, two countries that closely monitor Taiwan, would be immense.

Journalist Gökhun Göçmen, who has been working on China for years, evaluated the election results in Taiwan. Göçmen drew attention to the impact of the divided opposition on the election results and the debates during the election process. Emphasizing that despite winning the election, the Democratic Progressive Party is behind in parliament, Göçmen stated the following:

THE OPPOSITION WAS DIVIDED, LAI CHING-TE WON

“I think that in order to understand why the Democratic Progressive Party emerged victorious in the elections on the island of Taiwan, one must look at the final election results comparatively. In the elections, the candidate of the pro-US Democratic Progressive Party, Lai Ching-te (also known as William Lai), received 5 million 586 thousand votes. In contrast, his closest rival, Kuomintang candidate Hou Yu-ih, received 4 million 671 thousand votes, while the candidate of another opposition party, the Taiwan People's Party, Ko Wen-je, was preferred by 3 million 690 thousand people. Therefore, the Democratic Progressive Party's victory was created by the divided opposition itself. It should not be forgotten that this division took place during a live broadcast and created a traumatic effect on opposition voters. In the 2000 elections, the Democratic Progressive Party also took advantage of the divided opposition to declare victory and won the presidential elections for the first time.

The 8 million votes (57 percent) received by the Democratic Progressive Party in the 2020 elections have fallen to 5 and a half million (40 percent) today. Moreover, it is clear that they took advantage of various suspicious events to get this vote against a divided opposition. For example, during the election campaign, a satellite launched by China was presented to the world as a “Chinese missile” and an alarm was raised across the country. Again, CNN International had claimed that a famous Taiwanese music group was pressured by China to make statements of loyalty to the mainland. The Kuomintang announced that this was a lie by the Democratic Progressive Party and that no such event had occurred.

Although the Democratic Progressive Party declared victory by taking advantage of the divided opposition and a number of dubious events, it lost its majority in parliament (Legislative Yuan). In parliament, the Kuomintang has 52 seats, the Democratic Progressive Party has 51, and the People's Party has 8. It is certain that such a picture will make Lai Ching-te's job difficult.”

CHINA IS VERY CLEAR ON THE TAIWAN ISSUE

Göçmen expressed the effects of the election results on Taiwan's relations with China and the ‘One China Policy’ with these words:

“Although the elections in Taiwan are being tried to be portrayed as an “independence referendum,” for China, this is very clear: It will not be the ballot boxes, candidates, or presidential elections that determine the relationship of Taiwan, that is, the island, with the Chinese mainland.

In its statement following the elections, China reiterated that the island of Taiwan is an inseparable part of China. From Chinese President Xi Jinping to other state officials, they emphasize that Taiwan will eventually unite with China, or in their own words, “join the motherland.” Whether this unification will be peaceful or through force depends not on the Democratic Progressive Party, but in a sense on the relations to be established with the US, which has taken on the role of its protector.”

THEY WANT TO MAKE TAIWAN A SECOND UKRAINE

Göçmen opposed the China-Taiwan and Russia-Ukraine comparisons. Reminding that Ukraine is recognized as an independent state in the world, while Taiwan is not even recognized by the US, Göçmen said the following regarding the possibility of China using force against Taiwan:

“It is impossible to compare the relationship between China and Taiwan to the relationship between Russia and Ukraine. Because while Ukraine and Russia are two sovereign independent states, the number of countries in the world that recognize Taiwan as a state does not exceed the fingers of two hands. Furthermore, the fact that countries like the Marshall Islands, Nauru, and Palau recognize Taiwan as a state reveals the international lack of seriousness of the issue. Even the US, which is the architect of the problem today, does not recognize Taiwan as a country. Therefore, it would not be correct to compare Taiwan, which does not have a seat at the United Nations, with Ukraine.

I agree with the ideas that the US is trying to make Taiwan, which is 130 kilometers away from the Chinese mainland, a second Ukraine. Just as the US did not hesitate to throw Ukraine into the fire to suppress Russia and include the Western world in alliances it designed in line with its own interests, it is designing Taiwan as an “unsinkable aircraft carrier,” in their own words, to encircle China. Whether the fact that the support given to Ukraine is gradually decreasing, the discussions of war fatigue are increasing, and the possibility of the Kiev administration being forced to sit at the negotiating table in a way that it cannot take back the lost territories is being voiced loudly will be a lesson for the Democratic Progressive Party, time will tell. Moreover, Taiwan is not geographically in a point where the West can easily reach out like Ukraine, and it is admitted by US authorities themselves that China would win in all armed conflict scenarios around the island. To this picture, it should be added that US presidents have not given a definitive guarantee that they would step into the field in the event of a possible Chinese operation directly targeting Taiwan.

As I mentioned, the US policy will determine the possibility of China using force against Taiwan.”

RISK OF CONFLICT IN THE STRAIT INCREASES

The Taiwan Strait also has critical importance as nearly 90 percent of global container fleets pass through it. Göçmen stated that Lai Ching-te, who follows pro-US policies, will not be able to put his harsh rhetoric during the election process into practice after being elected:

“We know that Lai Ching-te will continue the pro-US policies like his predecessor Tsai-Ing Wen. In fact, the fact that his vice president, Hsiao Bi-khim, has served as the Taiwan representative in the US can be read as a sign that the needle will shift even more towards pro-Washington policies. On the other hand, I do not think that Lai Ching-te can put his harsh rhetoric from the past into action with the title of president. Otherwise, it would increase the risk of conflict in the strait.

A conflict in the Taiwan Strait, through which nearly 90 percent of global container fleets pass, would not only have humanitarian and political costs. At the same time, world trade would be paralyzed. Therefore, it would not be a surprise if the status quo between the straits continues in the short and medium term during Lai Ching-te's presidency.”

THE US INSTRUMENT TO SUPPRESS CHINA

Göçmen explained the history of the US interest in Taiwan and the scenarios that will take place before the US Presidential elections in November as follows:

“Relations between China and the US are actually a kind of history of relations established with Taiwan. To understand this, one needs to look briefly at history. It should be kept in mind that every revolution is also a civil war. When the Chinese Communist Party founded the People's Republic of China in 1949, Nationalist Party supporters in the country fled to the island of Taiwan and claimed that the government they established there represented the “real China.” For a long time, the US saw the defeated and fleeing island entity of 16 million people as the representative of China against the 800 million-strong Chinese mainland. Although this situation was seen as “strange,” it was consistent with the US anti-communism strategy. The US, which acted to suffocate the largest country in Asia for a long time, took steps to normalize relations in 1971 with the claim of isolating its other enemy, the Soviet Union, and transforming China by including it in the system. After the encounter of the Chinese and US teams, known in history as Ping-Pong diplomacy, then-National Security Advisor Kissinger visited China, and in the same year, China was recognized by the UN.

The precondition for China to normalize its relations with the US was for the Washington administration to show commitment to the One China principle. In other words, for the US, there should not be two Chinas (island and mainland), but one China. The US did accept the One China policy in 1979, but in April of the same year, it decided to continue its relations with the island through Congress, even though it did not recognize Taiwan as a sovereign country. This ambivalent attitude, which some US experts call “strategic ambiguity,” has continued with different aspects until today. Taiwan has become the most important but most costly instrument for the US to suppress, encircle, and occupy China.

It is likely that a US delegation will visit the island after the recent elections. However, I do not think that the names in the visiting delegation will be active officials like in the visit of former Speaker of the House Pelosi. After a long break, the US managed to communicate with China at a high level again as a result of the Xi-Biden meeting in November. In the first two weeks of the new year, many Chinese officials visited the US and warned about the sensitivity of relations with Taiwan. If Washington “crosses the line,” the future of diplomatic, commercial, and military communication mechanisms and working groups will be in jeopardy.

I predict that the US will want to keep the tension under control at least until a month or two before the elections in November, but when weeks are left for the election period, it may engage in dangerous rhetoric and actions to mobilize voters at home.”