US-China relations have taken a sharp dive after Washington’s decision to sell a range of weapons to Taiwan to defend itself against Chinese attack.
The proposed sale has been submitted to Congress for approval, which is expected to follow.
The weapons are said to include advanced capability Patriot missiles, known as PAC-3 missiles, 60 Black Hawk helicopters and two minesweepers.
Beijing has predictably hit the roof, warning the US of a “serious negative impact” on ties between the two countries.
More enigmatic, if not ominous, are remarks made by Chinese Vice Foreign Minister He Yafei (何亞非), who said the proposed arms deal would lead to an “aftermath both sides would not prefer,” and asked the US to reverse its “erroneous” decision.
However, looking at it rationally, there is nothing new in the US’ decision to sell defensive weapons to Taiwan.
OBLIGED
It is a continuation of US policy under the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) of 1979, under which the US is legally obliged to help Taiwan defend itself.
And, according to a US State Department spokesperson: “Such sales contribute to maintaining security and stability across the Taiwan Strait.”
Which seems to be an accurate assessment, as even under a China-friendly Taiwanese government led by President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九), Beijing has not removed its estimated 1,000-plus missiles targeted at Taiwan.
Indeed, when he was running for the presidency, Ma had pledged to bring about a security agreement with China to deal with Beijing’s military threat.
However, nothing has happened in this regard, despite the Ma government’s initiatives to expand relations with China.
The US has sold defensive weapons to Taiwan in the past, and it will continue to do so under the TRA. China has always objected to arms sales to Taiwan, but this time its objections are somewhat ominous in their rhetoric.
Why is Beijing acting like this?
Because it has begun to overestimate its global power.
EQUAL BILLING
Ever since US President Barack Obama took power last year, the US gave China equal billing in managing crucial global issues like the financial crisis, climate change and nuclear proliferation in Iran and North Korea.
This gave rise to talk of the US and China as the “G2” powers.
During her China visit, US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton thanked China for continuing to buy US treasury notes and bonds in spite of the economic crisis.
Around the same time, Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao (溫家寶) expressed concern about the security of China’s investments in US currency.
Seemingly emphasizing a new era in US-China relations, Clinton said in Beijing that China’s human rights issues would not derail progress in other areas of their bilateral relations.
It is not surprising, therefore, that China started to overestimate its global power and behave as though the US were a client state, and that when the proposed US arms sale to Taiwan was announced, Beijing hit the roof with all kinds of retaliatory threats.
The Chinese wolf will keep huffing and puffing and threatening to blow the house down for quite some time to come, but eventually it should settle down.
There is always a danger of things getting out of control, however, in this game of brinkmanship.
Sushil Seth is a writer based in Australia.
It’s not every month that the US Department of State sends two deputy assistant secretary-level officials to Taiwan, together. Its rarer still that such senior State Department policy officers, once on the ground in Taipei, make a point of huddling with fellow diplomats from “like-minded” NATO, ANZUS and Japanese governments to coordinate their multilateral Taiwan policies. The State Department issued a press release on June 22 admitting that the two American “representatives” had “hosted consultations in Taipei” with their counterparts from the “Taiwan Ministry of Foreign Affairs.” The consultations were blandly dubbed the “US-Taiwan Working Group on International Organizations.” The State
The Rim of the Pacific (RIMPAC) exercises, the largest naval exercise in the region, are aimed at deepening international collaboration and interaction while strengthening tactical capabilities and flexibility in tackling maritime crises. China was invited to participate in RIMPAC in 2014 and 2016, but it was excluded this year. The underlying reason is that Beijing’s ambitions of regional expansion and challenging the international order have raised global concern. The world has made clear its suspicions of China, and its exclusion from RIMPAC this year will bring about a sea change in years to come. The purpose of excluding China is primarily
The Chinese Supreme People’s Court and other government agencies released new legal guidelines criminalizing “Taiwan independence diehard separatists.” While mostly symbolic — the People’s Republic of China (PRC) has never had jurisdiction over Taiwan — Tamkang University Graduate Institute of China Studies associate professor Chang Wu-ueh (張五岳), an expert on cross-strait relations, said: “They aim to explain domestically how they are countering ‘Taiwan independence,’ they aim to declare internationally their claimed jurisdiction over Taiwan and they aim to deter Taiwanese.” Analysts do not know for sure why Beijing is propagating these guidelines now. Under Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), deciphering the
Delegation-level visits between the two countries have become an integral part of transformed relations between India and the US. Therefore, the visit by a bipartisan group of seven US lawmakers, led by US House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Affairs Chairman Michael McCaul to India from June 16 to Thursday last week would have largely gone unnoticed in India and abroad. However, the US delegation’s four-day visit to India assumed huge importance this time, because of the meeting between the US lawmakers and the Dalai Lama. This in turn brings us to the focal question: How and to what extent