The Ministry of National Defense has run its first ever wargame for President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and other political leaders here to test their ability to respond to a military assault from China.
For a week in April, Chen, Premier Su Tseng-chang(
Among the findings: Taiwan could fend off China for two weeks, despite Beijing's continuing military buildup, before Taipei would need help from the US. Under the Taiwan Relations Act, often cited by the Bush administration as the basis for the US posture on Taiwan, the US would be obliged in most circumstances to come to Taiwan's aid.
"We could defend our country by ourselves for at least two weeks if we were attacked by the PRC [the People's Republic of China]," said Abe Lin (
Bush administration officials have been in what one called "a grumpy mood" toward Taipei for what they have seen as Chen's provocative posture toward China and Taipei's failure to complete an US$18 billion arms purchase from the US.
Moreover, Bush officials have suggested that Taiwanese are unwilling to defend themselves and rely too much on the US to prevent Taiwan from being seized by China.
When an American visitor brought up these perceptions, Lin protested: "That's not fair. It is not fair to say that we are not willing to defend ourselves."
Civilian officials and military officers in the meeting vigorously agreed with Lin.
Moreover, Lin asserted, "We have never thought that we would get a free ride from the US. We have never planned to rely only on US forces in our defense."
Lin and his colleagues pointed to the lessons learned from the wargame; to Taiwan's first comprehensive national security strategy report, issued last month; to increases planned for defense spending; to forthcoming cuts in military personnel to free funds for investment in weapons; and to a national mobilization law adopted in 2004.
They said, however, Taiwan needed to "harden" more of its communications apparatus. The security report called for setting up a hotline between Taipei and Beijing to preclude miscalculation.
The legislature must approve increases in defense spending from 2.4 percent of GDP next year to 3 percent in 2009. (US defense spending is about 4 percent of GDP.) The armed forces will be reduced to 275,000 from 295,000 by 2008.
If China attacked, Lin said, "We would need to sustain ourselves politically, militarily, economically, and psychologically. The psychological may be the weakest part. I wonder how much our people could suffer."
Polls suggest that Taiwanese are eager, maybe even desperate to avoid war with China. A survey by the Mainland Affairs Council found that 88.6 percent of Taiwanese wanted the status quo to continue. Only a few chose either independence, which would provoke China into an attack, or unification with China.
Against this backdrop, the US Pacific Command in Hawaii has quietly strengthened US military ties with Taiwan. At the same time, Admiral William Fallon, the command's leader, has been executing the Bush administration's policy of engaging China by having Chinese officers visit US forces and US officers travel to China.
Retired Admiral Dennis Blair, a former Pacific commander, has come to Taiwan once a year for the last several years to offer advice during a large Taiwanese military exercise. Defense attaches at the American Institute in Taiwan are serving officers now rather than retired officers on contract. Pacific Command officers regularly visit to confer with counterparts.
Even so, military officers and defense officials in Hawaii expressed misgivings about the US engagement with China, saying they feared the US might succumb to Chinese pressure or cajolery.
"We support Admiral Fallon's policy of engagement," said an admiral, "so long as it is not at our expense."
The chief spokesman for Fallon, Navy Captain W. Jeffrey Alderson, addressed that issue. In response to a query, he said: "No one loses here. Our efforts at engagement and transparency are intended to avoid miscalculations and thus maintain peace and stability in the region."
Richard Halloran is a writer based in Hawaii.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS