In March 1996, when Taiwan's first democratic presidential election was held, Beijing tried to threaten the Taiwanese electorate by firing missiles into territorial waters near Keelung and Kaohsiung. Two US aircraft carriers were dispatched, the first of which, the USS Independence, arrived off Keelung from its home base in Yokosuka, Japan.
On Oct. 28th, the US and Japanese governments announced in Tokyo that the successor to the USS Independence, the USS Kitty Hawk will be replaced in 2008 with a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier. The following day, in Washington, the US secretaries of state and defense and the Japanese ministers of foreign affairs and defense announced new roles and missions for US and Japanese forces and a realignment of US bases in Japan. Both of these announcements are very positive factors in support of Taiwan's self-determination.
The threat of North Korea's 200 plus intermediate-range Nodong missiles directly threaten Japan in the way that Chinese missiles threaten Taiwan. China helped to create North Korea's nuclear weapons program and now desires to force Taiwan from a path of self-determination to one of repression in a similar fashion to that of former president Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石).
If China succeeds, not only will Taiwan lose the freedom it has enjoyed since the end of martial law and the advent of free national elections, but US and Japanese security in the Western Pacific will be compromised. China also wants to replace the US as the chief source of influence in East Asia by driving a wedge between Japan and the US and by convincing Taiwan, Southeast Asian countries and even Australia that they would be better off following Beijing rather than Washington.
Despite its economic rise China cannot succeed unless Taiwan, Japan and the other Asian countries agree to live under Chinese hegemony. The Oct. 29 joint statement reflects Washington's determination to remain meaningfully engaged and Japan's commitment to stand by its alliance partner of more than half a century.
This is not only a step which benefits Taiwan, but it clearly benefits the US, Japan and other democracies in Asia. It will be criticized by the Chinese government, as was the deployment of the two carriers in 1996, but I dare say it is even good for China whose government will respect the combined determination of Washington and Tokyo -- whose economies and militaries dwarf those of China and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
The heart of the US-Japan alliance is the US Seventh Fleet which is often characterized as the "spear" of the alliance, while Japan's Self-Defense Forces are the "shield." The tip of the spear is the aircraft-carrier battle group, of which the US has 11, all of which will soon be nuclear powered and which can therefore travel faster, even in heavy seas, and can sustain themselves at sea without refueling for significant periods of time.
Only one US carrier has ever been based outside the US, in Yokosuka, where the USS Midway was sent in 1973. Its arrival strengthened the credibility of the US commitment to East Asian security immeasurably at a time when, as Beijing is saying now, Moscow was saying that it was the wave of the future in Pacific Asia.
On Feb. 19 the same four US and Japanese officials who met in Washington on Oct. 29, met in Tokyo and promulgated some "Common Strategic Objectives," one of which was maintaining peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
What this means is that, unless the Taiwanese people choose to become a province of China, the US and Japan will act to maintain Taiwan's choice to determine their livelihood independently of Chinese coercion. The Oct. 28 statement about the nuclear carrier and the Oct. 29 joint statement means that Washington and Tokyo will have a far more efficient means of achieving those Common Strategic Objectives.
As reported in an interview with the Taipei Times published on Oct. 31, retired Japanese Admiral Sumihiko Kawamura, a former anti-submarine air force commander, stated that China's submarines are mostly conventional and even its Kilo class submarines are easy to detect. He said that in conflict with the US and Japan, China's submarines were likely to last less than a week.
Asked if he thought that Taiwan needed to have new submarines as a top defense priority, Kawamura said P-3C maritime-patrol aircraft and better command, communications, coordination, computers, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (C4ISR) should take precedence.
A few Taiwanese submarines which are unable to communicate with US and Japanese aircraft carriers, surface ships, maritime-patrol aircraft and submarines might not survive a Chinese onslaught, and the US and Japan would be handicapped to come to the support of a Taiwanese navy and air force with which it cannot communicate on a real time basis.
The Feb. 19 statement of US-Japan common strategic objectives was an important signal to Taiwan and to China.
The Oct. 28 aircraft carrier decision and the Oct. 29 statement of the US and Japanese governments are evidence that by linking Taiwan to the US-Japan alliance, today's young Taiwanese and their children may continue to decide their own futures, a hard fought legacy achieved by their parents and grandparents after much suffering.
Washington and Tokyo are acting in their own national interests, but their decisions of Feb. 19 and of Oct. 28 and 29 have presented Taiwan a golden opportunity for freedom in the 21st century.
James Auer is a research professor at the Vanderbilt School of Engineering. He served as a special assistant for Japan in the Office of the Secretary of Defense for 10 years.
The 75th anniversary summit of NATO was held in Washington from Tuesday to Thursday last week. Its main focus was the reinvigoration and revitalization of NATO, along with its expansion. The shadow of domestic electoral politics could not be avoided. The focus was on whether US President Biden would deliver his speech at the NATO summit cogently. Biden’s fitness to run in the next US presidential election in November was under assessment. NATO is acquiring more coherence and teeth. These were perhaps more evident than Biden’s future. The link to the Biden candidacy is critical for NATO. If Biden loses
Shortly after Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) stepped down as general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in 2012, his successor, Xi Jinping (習近平), articulated the “Chinese Dream,” which aims to rejuvenate the nation and restore its historical glory. While defense analysts and media often focus on China’s potential conflict with Taiwan, achieving “rejuvenation” would require Beijing to engage in at least six different conflicts with at least eight countries. These include territories ranging from the South China Sea and East China Sea to Inner Asia, the Himalayas and lands lost to Russia. Conflicts would involve Taiwan, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia,
The Sino-Indian border dispute remains one of the most complex and enduring border issues in the world. Unlike China’s borders with Russia and Vietnam, which have seen conflicts, but eventually led to settled agreements, the border with India, particularly the region of Arunachal Pradesh, remains a point of contention. This op-ed explores the historical and geopolitical nuances that contribute to this unresolved border dispute. The crux of the Sino-Indian border dispute lies in the differing interpretations of historical boundaries. The McMahon Line, established by the 1914 Simla Convention, was accepted by British India and Tibet, but never recognized by China, which
In a recent interview with the Malaysian Chinese-language newspaper Sin Chew Daily, former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) called President William Lai (賴清德) “naive.” As always with Ma, one must first deconstruct what he is saying to fully understand the parallel universe he insists on defending. Who is being “naive,” Lai or Ma? The quickest way is to confront Ma with a series of pointed questions that force him to take clear stands on the complex issues involved and prevent him from his usual ramblings. Regarding China and Taiwan, the media should first begin with questions like these: “Did the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT)