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.
Two weeks ago, Malaysian actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) raised hackles in Taiwan by posting to her 2.6 million Instagram followers that she was visiting “Taipei, China.” Yeoh’s post continues a long-standing trend of Chinese propaganda that spreads disinformation about Taiwan’s political status and geography, aimed at deceiving the world into supporting its illegitimate claims to Taiwan, which is not and has never been part of China. Taiwan must respond to this blatant act of cognitive warfare. Failure to respond merely cedes ground to China to continue its efforts to conquer Taiwan in the global consciousness to justify an invasion. Taiwan’s government
This month’s news that Taiwan ranks as Asia’s happiest place according to this year’s World Happiness Report deserves both celebration and reflection. Moving up from 31st to 27th globally and surpassing Singapore as Asia’s happiness leader is gratifying, but the true significance lies deeper than these statistics. As a society at the crossroads of Eastern tradition and Western influence, Taiwan embodies a distinctive approach to happiness worth examining more closely. The report highlights Taiwan’s exceptional habit of sharing meals — 10.1 shared meals out of 14 weekly opportunities, ranking eighth globally. This practice is not merely about food, but represents something more
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
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
RSS