Within less than 24 hours, the topic of peace in the Taiwan Strait came up in two speeches made in the Australian parliament late last week. The first speech was made Thursday by US President George W. Bush, the second was made on Friday by Chinese President Hu Jintao (
In his address, Bush characterized the US and Australia as working with other Asian Pacific nations -- including Japan, Philippines, Thailand, Indonesia, and Singapore, to "keep peace [in the] the Taiwan Straits."
Interestingly, Bush failed to include China on the list of nations -- suggesting that China is implicitly understood as the "reason" that efforts must be made to maintain peace in the Taiwan Strait. While Taiwan is not mentioned either, it is hard to believe anyone honestly believes that Taiwan is a threat, especially when it needs the assistance of countries such as the US to fend off Chinese threats. As a matter of fact, it is common knowledge that China's refusal to renounce the use of force against Taiwan is a ticking time bomb that poses the biggest threat to regional peace.
Bush's remarks are consistent with the reiteration of support for Taiwan he expressed to Lee Yuan-tseh (
"By serving our ideals, we also serve our interests," Bush said earlier in the same speech to the Australian parliament when talking about the "liberation" of Iraqis and Afghanis from "tyranny."
The "ideals" to which Bush referred would, of course, be democracy and freedom. "Interests" would be the containment of violence and chaos in the world. Other countries in the region, indeed the world, must be made to realize that the same is true about upholding peace in Taiwan Strait.
The difference, of course, is that Taiwan is a thriving democracy. To allow or condone Chinese military aggression against this country and the stripping away of our precious freedoms would be an affront to the very democratic ideals the US and Australia espouse.
But the murmur over Bush's appearance had barely quieted when Hu made his appearance in the Australian parliament. Far from talking about democratic ideals and liberation, Hu said that Beijing expected Canberra to play a "constructive role in China's peaceful unification."
This puts Australia in the middle of two different views and positions about the Taiwan issue. Under the circumstances, one must ask: Have the US and China both decided to open up participation in the long-standing triangular deadlock between US, China, and Taiwan?
What will other countries do if they are faced with potential Chinese aggression toward Taiwan and are asked to take sides?
Most countries want to dodge the question, since they do not see -- or do not wish to see -- the long-term implications of the rising power of a totalitarian regime such as China. And if they do see, it is not enough to make them want to do something about it.
Under the circumstances, it is sincerely hoped that more governments and countries will have the courage and the conscience shown by the European parliament, which last week again passed a resolution asking China to withdraw the missiles it has aimed at Taiwan.
Sadly, the indifference shown by most countries -- even important trading partners -- gives us little reason to feel hopeful.
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