Boeing executives last week seemed worried that a US arms sale to Taiwan — and Beijing’s subsequent threat of sanctions against manufacturers involved in the deal — would cost it billions of dollars in commercial aircraft sales. Even worse, if China followed through with its threat to deny the US aviation giant access to its lucrative market, it could quickly translate into a windfall for Boeing’s main competitor, Airbus.
Then Eurocopter, a European company, announced it was selling Taiwan three EC225 helicopters — the latest model in the Super Puma family — for US$111 million, with an option for 17 more. While a representative from Eurocopter in Paris said in correspondence with the Taipei Times that the EC225 was a civilian helicopter used for search and rescue operations, and although it is believed that the firm had previously sold helicopters to the National Police Agency’s Civil Defense Headquarters, there is no hiding the fact that the latest sale was made to the Air Force, which makes this an arms sale.
Now, the copter sale is relatively small compared with the US$6.4 billion package proposed by Washington, but symbolically its impact could be just as important, given that it is the first military sale from a European company to Taiwan in almost two decades — an indirect embargo that has lasted almost as long as Europe’s embargo on arms sales to Beijing imposed after the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989.
In retaliation, and given Beijing’s propensity for lashing out at anyone who dares treat Taiwan as a sovereign country, one would expect that threats of sanctions against Eurocopter and its parent, the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Co (EADS), would soon follow. But here’s the catch — EADS also happens to own Airbus. And one thing is certain: If China is to meet its civilian aviation needs in the next decade, it will have little choice but to purchase its aircraft from either Boeing or Airbus. No other aircraft manufacturer has the means and economy of scale to produce the types and quantities of aircraft that China will need. China, a relative newcomer in the production of civilian aircraft, is years, if not decades, away from developing the domestic capabilities to produce aircraft in large quantities.
Beijing, therefore, finds itself in a bind, wanting to punish the two giants over sales to Taiwan, but unable to do so. This could explain why it has yet to made any public expression of anger at Eurocopter.
In recent years, the world has treated China as if it were indispensable. Over the weekend, George Gilder argued in the Wall Street Journal that it was folly for the US to “antagonize” China (as if it were not “antagonizing” the US).
What Boeing and Airbus could soon show us, however, is that when a concerted effort is made by the giants of this world, and when Beijing is denied the opportunity to play one against the other, it is possible to act according to our moral — and even economic — predispositions without first having to consult Chinese emperor Hu Jintao (胡錦濤) and his court. In fact, it is even possible to do so and to survive to tell the story.
What is Beijing going to do — not buy aircraft? Maybe, for once, its rulers will just shut up and let the world be.
US aerospace company Boeing Co has in recent years been involved in numerous safety incidents, including crashes of its 737 Max airliners, which have caused widespread concern about the company’s safety record. It has recently come to light that titanium jet engine parts used by Boeing and its European competitor Airbus SE were sold with falsified documentation. The source of the titanium used in these parts has been traced back to an unknown Chinese company. It is clear that China is trying to sneak questionable titanium materials into the supply chain and use any ensuing problems as an opportunity to
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 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