Beijing could soon elaborate Anti-Secession Law for ‘non-peaceful’ Taiwan reunification
Cautionary remarks by former US envoy, Taipei lawmaker come after PLA unleashes blockade drills over speech by island’s ‘separatist’ leader
Next year Beijing could use the 20th anniversary of its Anti-Secession Law to clarify how “non-peaceful means” may be taken against Taiwan, according to Taipei City councillor Vincent Chao.
Chao delivered his cautionary remarks at the launch of a report assessing the legal implications of the law by the Centre for Strategic and International Studies, a Washington think tank, on Tuesday.
Enacted in 2005, the law states that Taiwan is a part of China and allows non-peaceful means to be taken if “peaceful unification” is no longer achievable.
In May, Beijing’s top legal and law-enforcement bodies issued guidelines detailing legal consequences for “separatists” who could face punishment by death for taking up extreme secessionist acts that “severely endangered the state and the people”.
In his October 10 speech commemorating the founding of the Republic of China – the official name used by Taiwan – Lai asserted that Taiwan and mainland China were “not subordinate to each other” and that the island’s “national sovereignty cannot be violated”.
In recent years, Beijing has ramped up its simulation of how it would blockade the island, prompting greater concern of a conflict flaring across the Taiwan Strait.
Chao said Beijing had shown increasing capability and a clear “desire” to “annex Taiwan”.
The Taiwanese official called for a global response to the possible strengthening of Beijing’s legal tools against the island, which he said “destabilised” cross-strait relations.
“In terms of what the United States and international community can do, I think it’s to call the [Anti-Secession Law] out for what it is,” Chao said. “It is a fundamentally destabilising piece of legislation.”
“If, for example, we have hopes that cross-strait relations can be returned to the status quo, that China can continue to play a responsible role in the region, then [the Anti-Secession Law] is fundamentally in contravention.”
Separately, Moriarty told the Post he agreed with Chao’s assessment that Beijing could revise the Anti-Secession Law to explore ways to seek unification with Taiwan.
“They don’t want to put a [timeline] on it, but I think there’s a possibility that there’s going to be more pressure in terms of coming up with a formula that implies the need for more progress towards unification,” the former envoy said.
Moriarty believed additional “deterrence” from American partners and allies was needed to push back on Beijing yet described the task as “difficult”.
Beijing sees Taiwan as part of China to be reunited by force if necessary.
Most countries, including the US, do not recognise Taiwan as an independent state, but Washington is opposed to any attempt to take the self-governed island by force and is committed to supplying it with weapons.
“Deterrence means everything,” Moriarty continued, saying it spanned “diplomacy, information, military [and] economic” matters. Yet he said it did not necessarily mean basing American troops in Taiwan, which he described as “a great way to cause war”.
Schriver agreed that the US needed to respond with more deterrence, especially by strengthening its own legal tools or working with “concerned” nations using international law.
“Our willingness to engage more and more in this legal space, if only to articulate the interpretation of our own laws … will help with that international piece too,” Schriver told attendees.
“Because if something happens in the near term … most countries will want some assessment of the international standing of the actions they’re going to take.”
