'Beehive' buzz irresponsible sound-biting: China Daily editorial

As Taiwan's Han Kuang military exercises began last week, the Chinese island's secessionist-minded leader Lai Ching-te stood aboard a fast-attack boat watching low-flying drones swarm over the sea off Kaohsiung. The scene offered a striking glimpse of the security vision now taking shape among the Democratic Progressive Party authorities — one in which drones, missiles, mines and ammunition stockpiles are woven into an increasingly militarized public policy.

The scene was hardly a coincidence. Raymond Greene, director of the so-called "American Institute in Taiwan" recently proposed that Taiwan should become a "beehive" of drones. The DPP authorities appear to be enthusiastically embracing this idea without considering whether it serves the interests of the island's residents.

For years, the DPP authorities have promoted the mistaken notion that asymmetric military capabilities can deter conflict by raising the cost. The latest "beehive" concept is merely an extension of the old "hedgehog" strategy, now applied to drones and other modern weapons, to create a dense network of attack and defense capabilities.

The New York Times has gone even further, describing a "hellscape" that involves drones, missiles and artillery. Such a scenario entails the DPP authorities' full adoption of the combat concept. And that is where the real concern lies.

The DPP authorities are extending military preparations deeper into everyday life. They are also strengthening de facto technological and defense cooperation with the United States and Ukraine under various guises, while burdening ordinary residents with increasing costs.

At a time when people on the island are already dealing with rising prices and stagnant wages in many sectors, channeling more resources into military preparations further undermines their economic well-being.

Taiwan is expected to propose a 16 percent annual increase in military ‌spending for 2027, surpassing NT$1 trillion ($31 billion) for the first time, and accounting for more than 3 percent of the island's GDP.

Voices questioning this direction are growing louder. Chou Hsi-wei, a former Taipei county magistrate, has criticized Greene's "beehive" proposal in a recent interview with local media, accusing him of exploiting war fears to promote US weapons sales. Groups, including the Taiwan Labor Party, have likewise warned that under the "beehive" concept, ordinary Taiwan people could end up becoming expendable "worker bees", while taxpayers would bear the costs of militarization.

Such criticism deserves serious consideration. When the DPP authorities repeatedly tell the public that Taiwan must "prepare for war", the immediate consequences are tangible: more public funds are diverted to the military, more civilian resources are integrated into military planning and more people are encouraged to view conflict as an unavoidable possibility. Yet those being asked to make these "sacrifices" are also the ones who would suffer the greatest human and economic costs should conflict erupt.

This is the basic contradiction in the DPP authorities' approach. It claims to be strengthening Taiwan's "security", but its policies risk making the island more deeply embedded in military confrontation. The more weapons, mines, drones and military facilities are concentrated on the island, the greater the danger that Taiwan could become a dangerous place for its residents.

A strategy centered on seeking "independence" through force relying on external support is not a solution for Taiwan's development difficulties. On the contrary, it risks pushing the island toward a more unpredictable future.

Beijing has repeatedly warned against this trajectory. Zhu Fenglian, spokeswoman for the State Council Taiwan Affairs Office, recently said that the DPP authorities' attempt to seek "Taiwan independence" by force and escalate cross-Strait confrontation makes them the root cause of tensions and instability across the Taiwan Strait.

Does making Taiwan heavily armed necessarily make it safer? The answer is no, so doubling down on military buildup is by no means a rational choice.

The DPP authorities should promote economic development, social stability and cross-Strait exchanges rather than expose them to mounting geopolitical risks. Taiwan's future should not be defined by metaphors such as "hedgehog", "beehive" or "hellscape", but by the well-being of its people and peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.