The media recently reported that the US Pacific Command is to station a military team at Taiwan's Hengshan Military Command Center, under the Ministry of National Defense (MND), to participate in this year's Hankuang No. 19 exercise. How should we look upon this move by the US military?
Perhaps we can look at it from two perspectives. First, from a political perspective, the military provides the means of accomplishing certain political purposes. Washington's effort to strengthen military relations with Taipei sends a clear message to Beijing that US determination to ensure that cross-strait relations develop peacefully is resolute. The move enables the US to demonstrate its resolve more effectively than just by sending aircraft carrier groups to the Taiwan Strait once a crisis occurs. It also prevents China from misjudging the situation, minimizing the chances of a repeat of the 1996 missile crisis.
Moreover, the US can effectively solve its difficulties in deterring China by strengthening Taiwan's military forces. The goal of US deterrence against China is limited to the hope that China will handle the cross-strait issue in a peaceful way. Besides, from the point of view of the overall interests of the US, the cross-strait issue is irrelevant. China's goals in respect of the issue, by contrast, would seem to be both unlimited and sacred. They include the unification of the nation and the prevention of foreign interference, based on nationalism.
Although China would gain nothing from a Sino-US conflict, it would be a significant victory if it could somehow establish itself in an unassailable position vis-a-vis Taiwan. US decision-makers therefore have to take contingency measures to guard against the possible risks inherent in any attempt to deter China. From this perspective, the stronger the nation's military power, the greater its independence once a war breaks out. And the lower the risk of the US intervening in a cross-strait conflict.
Second, from a strategic perspective, the massive involvement that is planned for the US implies to a certain degree that there is much to be improved in Taiwan's military. In other words, Taiwan's military power has declined ever since it severed diplomatic relations with the US, a situation that can be reversed only by special measures. There are certain arenas in which this is especially obvious. The Taiwanese military's capacity to carry out joint warfare is perhaps the category that needs to be improved the most.
From another perspective, the US plan also reflects Washington's deep concern for the increase in Beijing's military strength. As everyone knows, Taiwan has been the target of China's large-scale military modernization ever since the 1996 missile crisis. The training and warfare capacities of the Chinese military are especially worrisome. By taking the exceptional measure of sending its own personnel to the Hengshan Military Command Center to participate in Taiwan's military exercise, the US hopes to bolster the country's military strength quickly.
Generally speaking, the current situation shows that military relations between Taipei and Washington have become closer. We should seize the opportunity to reform and modernize Taiwan's national defense system, and we should carefully handle Taiwan-US relations. In turn, we shold be careful to avoid giving the US the impression that we are abusing the close relations between our two countries, so that we don't undermine US confidence in Taiwan.
Arthur Ding is director of Research Division III at the Institute of International Relations, National Chengchi University.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS