US President George W. Bush made a speech at 9am on Tuesday, during which he gave Iraqi President Saddam Hussein an ultimatum to leave Baghdad within 48 hours. Upon Hussein's failure to comply and having exhausted all diplomatic measures, the US finally launched its war against Iraq on Thursday.
It is hard to predict how long this invasion will last. But this much is known: With its superior military strength and state-of-the-art weapons, the coalition is bound to win the war. No less predictable than the likely length of the invasion are the implications of the certain emergence of a "new world order" and new regional orders. Potential future developments include: The US gaining control of the Middle East, making the Muslim world succumb to the will of the US-led Western democracies; the redistribution of oil resources; the substantial elimination of Muslim terrorism; maximum effort on the part of the US to mediate in the Israel-Palestinian question.
But the biggest difference between the current war and the Gulf War of more than a decade ago was the failure of the US to secure he backing of the UN this time. A huge chasm opened between the US-led coalition and other major powers, including France, Russia, Germany and China. Plus, US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld satirized France and Germany as the "old Europe," which, he said, had created some of the most serious divisions between the US and European allies since the end of World War II and the end of the Cold War. It is conceivable that the NATO countries may now find it very difficult to continue their past cooperation. The rise of the EU, both militarily and economically, will likely make Europe more inclined to assert its independence from US policy.
Of course, the impact on the US-Sino relationship, the diplomatic wrangling in Northeast Asia, and a host of subsequent effects on Taiwan are of even greater concern for the nation. Before the US struck Iraq last week, the chilling within the UN Security Council could be characterized as a match between the US and Britain, on one side, and Germany and France, on the other, while China observed the turn of events in an unpredictable manner. China may indeed have insisted that the Iraqi question be handled by the Security Council, but it also never mentioned whether it intended to exercise its veto power. Countries such as France and Russia probably wondered whether there was some kind of secret deal between the US and China.
The truth of the matter is that ever since former president Jiang Zemin (
The US, therefore, is still one of the countries to which China must snuggle up. Besides, from the perspective of the distribution of world power, China is content to see the US wage war on Iraq. On one hand, this consumes US strength, and on the other hand it keeps the US preoccupied. It will, moreover, give China the opportunity to bargain with the US for strategic or economic interests, some of which may include US concessions on the Taiwan issue.
The US of course knows only too well what kind of tricks China has up its sleeve. But, while at war, it has to put up with China. It can always deal with China after defeating Baghdad. So, at this time, the US is unlikely to make any concessions that might compromise Taiwan.
US Secretary of State Colin Powell's talk in open support of Taiwan was the equivalent of an official warning to China to refrain from playing any tricks at a time when US hands are tied. At the same time, the US also dispatched an aircraft carrier to the waters around the Korean Peninsula, declaring its preparedness to fight on both fronts if necessary. But there is cause for concern as to whether, once the US-Iraq war ends, the above-described developments in the US and Europe might lead to changes in East Asia.
If the US and western Europe go their separate ways, will Beijing seize the opportunity to ally with Europe to oppose the US and provoke further splits between the US and Europe, Japan and even South Korea? If so, it may be able to disrupt the world order and dominate East Asia, winning bargaining chips to negotiate with the US on the Taiwan issue.
At a time of so much uncertainty, when all the great powers have their own secret agendas, and a new modus operandi is emerging with a new world order, what should Taiwan do? It must have the courage and steadfastness to face any potential crisis. The leadership of the country must stay calm and firm, so as to avoid mistakes. Besides ensuring adequate oil reserves and aviation and shipping safety precautions, the government must also make accurate and honest policy declarations, such as explaining why this country must firmly stand by the US and aid the US in fighting against terrorism. It must make clear that only the US has the power and the will to effectively safeguard the future of the Taiwan Strait.
Taiwan had no other choice than to support the US in pursuing total victory in the war against terror. The government must rebut the anti-war talk of certain individuals and persuade them of the predicament facing Taiwan and of international realities. People must understand that while world peace may be the common ideal of all our countrymen, it can only exist in an environment capable of upholding the international order. Otherwise, it won't last and all talk of it is just empty talk.
Besides, after the American war on terror in Afghanistan ended, organizations from Taiwan's private sector such as the Tzu Chi Buddhist Relief Foundation, World Vision Taiwan, Eden Social Welfare Foundation, as well as certain government agencies all went to Afghanistan to provide relief for homeless war refugees, garnering much recognition from the international community.
Irrespective of when the war ends, the government should also declare to the world that while Taiwan may oppose terrorism, it is also peace-loving and kind-hearted. Once the war ends, people of all political persuasions will provide both monetary and other forms of aid, and organize medics to lend assistance in Iraq, to help the wounded and sick of a post-war Iraq. China's ambitions toward Taiwan must also be disclosed to the world.
Let China's intentions of occupying Taiwan be known to the world. Let it be known that Taiwan will always be on the side of the US in the rivalry between the US and China. If Taiwan's interests are compromised, US strength will also be compromised.
This is a critical moment. At a time when international relations are at a historic turning point, the destiny of Taiwan will test the wisdom of the nation's leaders.
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS