Just after Admiral Timothy Keating retired from the US Navy as head of the Pacific Command, the largest of the US’ combatant forces, he climbed into a civilian airplane and flew to Taiwan, where he had been forbidden to visit while on active duty.
The admiral and his wife, Wanda Lee, who were guests of the government, did a bit of sightseeing during their visit last month. Then he embarked on a three-day round of meetings with President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), other senior officials and top officers of the armed forces.
As serving officers, Keating and other US admirals and generals have been prohibited by successive administrations in Washington from traveling to Taiwan out of deference to the political sensitivities of Chinese leaders. The reaction in Beijing to any hint of US support for Taiwan has ranged from indignant to belligerent.
Those restrictions, plus the absence of diplomatic relations between Taipei and Washington and the lack of robust military relations that US armed forces experience in many other nations, makes first-hand observations of officers like Keating all the more useful. He has reported them to Pacific Command and the Pentagon.
“The leaders I met in Taipei repeatedly expressed a desire to see senior US active duty military officers and high level diplomats come visit Taiwan to see for themselves,” Keating said by telephone from his home in Virginia.
The centerpiece of his visit was the meeting with Ma, who spoke with him in English.
“President Ma ‘gets it,’” Keating said, “with a longer range and wider view of the opportunities for statesmanship across the [Taiwan] Strait.”
“I was surprised at the lack of rancor in discussions about China and Taiwan,” he said.
When Ma took office in May 2008, he set policy on China as “no unification, no independence and no use of force.” The first of those “three noes” meant Taiwan would continue its self-governing status quo. The second meant Taiwan would not provoke China by declaring independence while the third called on Beijing to renounce its military threat to Taiwan.
Keating said he came home convinced that “there has to be a way to resolve this dispute. We should continue to seek a solution.” He suggested, however, that he did not have a proposal.
Ma told Keating that he saw a need for four parties to resolve the 60-year-old dispute, according to US officers. The first two are the governments in Beijing and Washington because the Taiwan Relations Act requires the US to help the people of Taiwan to determine their own future.
The third party was, obviously, the government in Taiwan. The fourth, Ma said, would be the opposition parties that must have a say if a lasting solution is to be found. That was seen as a political reality in Taiwan’s evolving democracy.
Meantime, however, Keating said the government and the people of Taiwan “are acutely aware of the armaments 80 to 120 miles [129km to 193km] away,” across the Strait. China has been reported as having 1,500 missiles aimed at targets all over Taiwan.
“It’s a mismatch,” Keating said, with the Taiwanese lacking a similar force. “But they are hardly shaking in their boots.”
Keating seemed impressed with Taiwan’s forces.
“I went aboard a submarine they had acquired from the US after World War II. She was immaculate. I was taken aboard a frigate of which any US commanding officer would have been immensely proud,” he said.
But he expressed mild dissatisfaction with US diplomatic delegation in Taipei.
“The American Institute in Taiwan is like an embassy except our people there don’t fly the American flag. That’s something that should be reconsidered,” he said.
Richard Halloran is a writer base in Hawaii.
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
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS