The government is asking the public not to“overinterpret” its negligent handling of the disaster relief effort in southern Taiwan and its initial rejection of foreign aid before accepting US assistance.
President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), however, insists that US assistance is a sign of restored trust between Taiwan and the US.
The unspoken implication, of course, is that if former president Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) and his administration had still been in power, the US would have stood by and watched Taiwanese die.
Such farfetched conclusions only prove that it is part of Ma’s character to take credit for other people’s achievements while shirking responsibility for his mistakes. “They” don’t want the rest of us to interpret the significance of the US’ disaster relief assistance, because that could put the spotlight on government negligence and incompetence, separate Taiwan’s friends from its enemies and make China lose face.
The US’ actions and a number of phrases used by its officials, such as “humanitarian assistance” and assisting “the Taiwanese people,” as well as a statement that there is “no need to inform China,” highlight the significance of this assistance.
The Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) stipulates that the US shall “resist any resort to force or other forms of coercion that would jeopardize the security, or the social or economic system, of the people on Taiwan,” making it a matter of legal implementation. The US does not recognize Taiwan as part of the People’s Republic of China, so it does not have to inform China of its actions.
The US’ disaster aid gives a clear response to the question of who Taiwan’s friends and enemies really are.
The US makes no territorial claims on Taiwan, and the TRA provides unilateral protection for Taiwan’s security and well-being, while China wishes to annex Taiwan, with its “Anti-Secession” Law threatening the use of force.
The government’s negligence included waiting until Aug. 13 before it asked for US assistance.
The next day, US aircraft landed in Taiwan in a display of the US’ organizational capabilities and highlighting the Taiwanese government’s incompetence and inability to understand that US helicopters could not fly from Guam or Japan to Taiwan.
By making this preposterous suggestion, Minister of National Defense Chen Chao-min (陳肇敏) showed he has no grasp of how the US carries out disaster relief in the region.
The US’ display was also a show of strength as far as China’s military was concerned. If the US could mobilize so quickly for disaster relief efforts, then of course it could do the same in the event of conflict.
Ma relies heavily on the legacy of Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石), but doesn’t understand that it was the US’ military capabilities that saved Chiang’s skin in August 1958.
The Nationalist army on Kinmen could not compete with China’s firepower, so the US sent in eight-inch guns, which arrived on Sept. 19, finally giving the army the firepower to respond to the bombardment.
The significance of the US’ disaster aid does not lie in mutual trust.
Instead, it proves the folly of the government’s policy to move closer to China and distance itself from the US.
The TRA allows the US to assist Taiwan, and the US is the friend that will help to protect Taiwanese freedom and democracy.
James Wang is a media commentator.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON
Labubu, an elf-like plush toy with pointy ears and nine serrated teeth, has become a global sensation, worn by celebrities including Rihanna and Dua Lipa. These dolls are sold out in stores from Singapore to London; a human-sized version recently fetched a whopping US$150,000 at an auction in Beijing. With all the social media buzz, it is worth asking if we are witnessing the rise of a new-age collectible, or whether Labubu is a mere fad destined to fade. Investors certainly want to know. Pop Mart International Group Ltd, the Chinese manufacturer behind this trendy toy, has rallied 178 percent
My youngest son attends a university in Taipei. Throughout the past two years, whenever I have brought him his luggage or picked him up for the end of a semester or the start of a break, I have stayed at a hotel near his campus. In doing so, I have noticed a strange phenomenon: The hotel’s TV contained an unusual number of Chinese channels, filled with accents that would make a person feel as if they are in China. It is quite exhausting. A few days ago, while staying in the hotel, I found that of the 50 available TV channels,
Kinmen County’s political geography is provocative in and of itself. A pair of islets running up abreast the Chinese mainland, just 20 minutes by ferry from the Chinese city of Xiamen, Kinmen remains under the Taiwanese government’s control, after China’s failed invasion attempt in 1949. The provocative nature of Kinmen’s existence, along with the Matsu Islands off the coast of China’s Fuzhou City, has led to no shortage of outrageous takes and analyses in foreign media either fearmongering of a Chinese invasion or using these accidents of history to somehow understand Taiwan. Every few months a foreign reporter goes to
There is no such thing as a “silicon shield.” This trope has gained traction in the world of Taiwanese news, likely with the best intentions. Anything that breaks the China-controlled narrative that Taiwan is doomed to be conquered is welcome, but after observing its rise in recent months, I now believe that the “silicon shield” is a myth — one that is ultimately working against Taiwan. The basic silicon shield idea is that the world, particularly the US, would rush to defend Taiwan against a Chinese invasion because they do not want Beijing to seize the nation’s vital and unique chip industry. However,
RSS