Since President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) was re-elected, the Chinese government has escalated threats to use force against Taiwan. The People's Liberation Army has also staged mock invasion exercises against the nation.
Employing political and economic leverage, Beijing has pressured other countries such as Singapore and Australia not to side with Taiwan if China attacks.
It is no wonder that the Taiwan Strait has emerged, in the opinion of some analysts, as Asia's most dangerous flashpoint. Taking advantage of the US preoccupation with Iraq, the emboldened Beijing government has warned the US that it will pay a high price if it were to assist Taiwan militarily when China attacks the island.
The brazen threat appears to have succeeded in weakening the will of some US leaders in their support for Taiwan.
The most telling sign of such a change of heart is the Democratic Party's failure to reaffirm its 2000 party platform pledge to support Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act during its recent convention in Boston.
Since its adoption in 1979, the Taiwan Relations Act has been instrumental in preserving peace and stability in the Strait.
The law's important security provisions have been reiterated and reaffirmed by the US congressional resolutions on many occasions.
The executive branch has also faithfully abided by the law.
For example, former US president Bill Clinton dispatched two aircraft carrier battle groups to local waters shortly after China launched missiles over the country in the early spring of 2000.
And, in his effort to make crystal clear the US position, President George W. Bush publicly pledged "to do whatever
it takes to help Taiwan defend itself" in April 2001 and approved the sale of major defensive weapons to Taiwan.
The US has paid dearly for occasional ambiguity in its post-WWII foreign policy.
It was the US' uncommitted position on the defense of South Korea in the late 1940s that emboldened Communist North Korea to invade South Korea in June1950.
And again it was the same ambiguity that emboldened former president Saddam Hussein's Iraq to attack Kuwait in August 1990.
To insure peace and stability in the Strait, the US therefore cannot afford to be ambiguous.
A bellicose China is a threat to peace and stability in East Asia as well as to democratic Taiwan.
Alarmed by China's military build-up, Russia and Japan, for example, have joined the US in opposing the EU's proposed lifting of their arms sales ban on China, a sanction imposed on Beijing after China's use of force to crush pro-democracy protests in Tiananmen Square in June 1989.
Japan's steady move to upgrade its self-defense forces and strengthen its military ties with the US is also a logical response to the rising military power of its increasingly nationalistic and major Asian rival.
In short, China can only be dissuaded from attacking Taiwan when it knows for sure that the US is unambiguous on the issue of aiding Taiwan.
With the planned US redeployment of ground troops in Asia and Europe, the Beijing decision-makers might be inclined to misjudge US determination in protecting its national interest overseas, particularly in Asia.
It is thus essential that the US is not ambiguous in its stand to defend Taiwan.
It is consequently reassuring to learn that the Republican Party adopted on Aug. 30 a
party platform in which it made unmistakably clear that the US will aid Taiwan in accordance with the Taiwan Relations Act if it is attacked by China.
Chen Ching-chih is professor emeritus of history at Southern Illinois University at Edwardsville.
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅?萁) has caused havoc with his attempts to overturn the democratic and constitutional order in the legislature. If we look at this devolution from the context of a transition to democracy from authoritarianism in a culturally Chinese sense — that of zhonghua (中華) — then we are playing witness to a servile spirit from a millennia-old form of totalitarianism that is intent on damaging the nation’s hard-won democracy. This servile spirit is ingrained in Chinese culture. About a century ago, Chinese satirist and author Lu Xun (魯迅) saw through the servile nature of
In their New York Times bestseller How Democracies Die, Harvard political scientists Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt said that democracies today “may die at the hands not of generals but of elected leaders. Many government efforts to subvert democracy are ‘legal,’ in the sense that they are approved by the legislature or accepted by the courts. They may even be portrayed as efforts to improve democracy — making the judiciary more efficient, combating corruption, or cleaning up the electoral process.” Moreover, the two authors observe that those who denounce such legal threats to democracy are often “dismissed as exaggerating or
Monday was the 37th anniversary of former president Chiang Ching-kuo’s (蔣經國) death. Chiang — a son of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), who had implemented party-state rule and martial law in Taiwan — has a complicated legacy. Whether one looks at his time in power in a positive or negative light depends very much on who they are, and what their relationship with the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) is. Although toward the end of his life Chiang Ching-kuo lifted martial law and steered Taiwan onto the path of democratization, these changes were forced upon him by internal and external pressures,
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
RSS