The report Strengthening Freedom in Asia: A Twenty-First Century Agenda for the US-Taiwan Partnership, released by the American Enterprise Institute for Public Policy Research and Armitage International, makes a breakthrough on previous frames of thought on cross-strait policy and employs a new model for dealing with cross-strait and US-Taiwan relations.
The report has several key points. Taiwan is important in and of itself and not just in relation to the US-China conflict. Based on this foundation, parallel relations should be formed between the US and China and between the US and Taiwan, rather than making Taiwan subservient to US-China interaction; structural factors that hurt US-Taiwan relations should be overcome rather than have individual players take responsibility; and a positive agenda for developing possibilities in US-Taiwan relations should be generated.
The report considers Taiwan's contribution to the US from a global angle rather than adopting the traditional practice of "old China hands" comparing Taiwan with China. It therefore illuminates surprising facts, such as Taiwan having a bigger population than Australia, an economy significantly larger than Hong Kong and Singapore, and even that Kaohsiung port's annual volume exceeds any port in Japan or South Korea.
In addition, the report suggests that Taiwan is a "responsible stakeholder" in core US issues such as the war against terror, nonproliferation and humanitarian aid.
Hence, from the perspective of technology, trade, the economy, democratic values and the security of the Asian region, Taiwan's resources and power are sufficient proof of its importance to the US.
Support for the development of parallel relations reflects the ideology of Washington's pan-Asian faction, which espouses Asia policy as a strengthening of alliances. This is distinct from the contention of "old China hands" that Asia be dealt with through negotiation between the US and China. This report promotes the former: a mechanism inclusive of the US, Japan, China and Taiwan in coordinating US-Taiwan relations.
The report also specifically points to the effects of the US cooperating with China in resolving Asian problems over the last few years -- that is, applying pressure on Taipei to prevent any action that Beijing may consider provocative -- which resulted in treating Taiwan as a problem, or a provocateur, rather than as a partner.
This implies that although the US may see Taiwan as a problem, the fact may not be related to Taiwan's behavior so much as it is to the political framework of US-China ties.
Because Taiwan is seen as a negative rather than positive factor in US-China relations, the report suggests that Washington leans toward punishing and sanctioning Taipei when confronting the uncertainties of Taiwanese democracy.
However, it says, the US has rarely achieved the results it has hoped for. By shaming and isolating Taiwan, the US not only destroys stability in the Taiwan Strait but also reduces Washington's influence over Taipei.
It also suggests that this environment helps to propagate the myth in mainstream political discourse that a change in parties would make things better.
"Old China hands" in the US and Taiwan will attack the policy suggestions in this report.
But the report's groundbreaking approach is important because it can prevent US policymakers from falling into the same old rut.
Lai I-chung is deputy director of the Democratic Progressive Party's Department of International Affairs.
Translated by Angela Hong
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion