The adjournment of the legislative session last month, which culminated with angry recriminations and shoe throwing, was yet another reminder of how badly Taiwan has lost its way on the critical issue of national security.
The legislature broke up without allocating funds for key elements of Taiwan's defense modernization effort, leaving it to next month to again take up defense-related appropriations.
Yet again, the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP), the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the People First Party (PFP) were unable to set aside differences to move forward on at least part of the long-stalled package of defense articles originally approved by the administration of US President George W. Bush in the spring of 2001.
Now, nearly six years later and after innumerable promises, delays and excuses, the defense relationship between the US and Taiwan stands at a crossroads.
There has been the inevitable and predictable second guessing since this most recent setback -- the defense articles were too expensive because of greedy arms merchants, the KMT have given up on the defense of the nation and the expensive military toys mean relatively little in the larger scheme of things -- but there is reason to believe that this time, the potential consequences of a failure to act will be more far reaching.
There is, at times, an unspoken belief in Taiwan that the US will continue to support them.
Yet there are important changes underway in the larger international context that should worry supporters of peace and stability. And the lack of action on the defense agenda in Taiwan makes this larger context all the more problematic.
There are three larger worries for the nation to consider when it comes to the lack of success in coming together around a defense modernization effort.
The first issue is the matter of China, the giant that lurks just across the strait. China's diplomatic gains in Asia and elsewhere over the course of the better part of the last decade are now well understood, and the PRC's military strides accomplished over the same period are equally sensational, though not as well understood.
While Taiwan has essentially been content to tread water in defense terms over the last several years, China has charged ahead with a new generation of every conceivable form of combat, including naval ships, fighter aircraft and expeditionary capabilities with seemingly one task in mind: creating a capacity to seriously threaten Taiwan.
In many areas, Taiwan is now in a position of distinct disadvantage in strict military terms. While the situation across the Strait is currently essentially stable, it is impossible to make predictions about the future.
China's shadowy military strategists undoubtedly take a certain comfort from Taiwan's inability to shape a domestic consensus on what is necessary in terms of a prudent defense modernization.
The second factor that should concern Taiwan is the inevitable but unfortunate preoccupation of the US away from Asia towards the Middle East as the Iraq war continues to bog down and undermine the global influence of the last superpower.
This preoccupation of course coincides with China's historic rise and the US has not given nearly enough attention to the dramatic changes sweeping Asia in recent years.
In this sense, Taiwan has been more on its own than ever before. Given these circumstances, Washington now expects a certain self-sufficiency among its allies and friends in the region, and behind the diplomatic niceties there is a growing dissatisfaction and impatience in Washington about the lack of progress in the defense arena in Taiwan.
This alienation will likely grow as the defense effort continues to stall.
Finally, the US presidential sweepstakes is already in full swing and a new generation of candidates and their advisors must again be appraised of the importance of maintaining peace and stability in the western Pacific.
However, given pressing realities elsewhere and the changing power dynamics in the region, this tutorial in both Democratic and Republican circles is taking on new difficulties and complexities.
Asian advisors to aspiring politicos from both sides of the aisle now dread answering the inevitable question that crops up during preparatory sessions on the region, namely, "why should the US be so concerned about providing security to a place that seems ambivalent at best about its own defense?"
The recent failures to pass a defense budget in the legislature make it all the more difficult for even the most ardent friends and supporters of Taiwan's democracy and continued progress to respond in the affirmative.
Kurt Campbell is the CEO of the Center for a New American Security (CNAS) in Washington.
As the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA) reach the point of confidence that they can start and win a war to destroy the democratic culture on Taiwan, any future decision to do so may likely be directly affected by the CCP’s ability to promote wars on the Korean Peninsula, in Europe, or, as most recently, on the Indian subcontinent. It stands to reason that the Trump Administration’s success early on May 10 to convince India and Pakistan to deescalate their four-day conventional military conflict, assessed to be close to a nuclear weapons exchange, also served to
China on May 23, 1951, imposed the so-called “17-Point Agreement” to formally annex Tibet. In March, China in its 18th White Paper misleadingly said it laid “firm foundations for the region’s human rights cause.” The agreement is invalid in international law, because it was signed under threat. Ngapo Ngawang Jigme, head of the Tibetan delegation sent to China for peace negotiations, was not authorized to sign the agreement on behalf of the Tibetan government and the delegation was made to sign it under duress. After seven decades, Tibet remains intact and there is global outpouring of sympathy for Tibetans. This realization
After India’s punitive precision strikes targeting what New Delhi called nine terrorist sites inside Pakistan, reactions poured in from governments around the world. The Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MOFA) issued a statement on May 10, opposing terrorism and expressing concern about the growing tensions between India and Pakistan. The statement noticeably expressed support for the Indian government’s right to maintain its national security and act against terrorists. The ministry said that it “works closely with democratic partners worldwide in staunch opposition to international terrorism” and expressed “firm support for all legitimate and necessary actions taken by the government of India
The recent aerial clash between Pakistan and India offers a glimpse of how China is narrowing the gap in military airpower with the US. It is a warning not just for Washington, but for Taipei, too. Claims from both sides remain contested, but a broader picture is emerging among experts who track China’s air force and fighter jet development: Beijing’s defense systems are growing increasingly credible. Pakistan said its deployment of Chinese-manufactured J-10C fighters downed multiple Indian aircraft, although New Delhi denies this. There are caveats: Even if Islamabad’s claims are accurate, Beijing’s equipment does not offer a direct comparison
RSS