The Sino-US relationship has undergone a change recently. Although US President Barack Obama adopted a low-key approach during his visit to China last November, he was humiliated by Beijing at the UN Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen in December. This has forced Washington to take a tougher stance, and it has used the spat between Google and China as a point of departure. Both President Ma Ying-jeou’s (馬英九) transit stopovers in the US on his way to and from Latin America and the US announcement of the arms sales package to Taiwan involve what Beijing calls its core interests, and as a result, tension between China and the US has intensified.
It is obvious that the main reason the US gave Ma such a warm reception this time was Washington’s concern that his incompetence and isolation would accelerate his surrendering to China. Washington wanted to show its support for Ma. If China did not protest, the same kind of reception would probably be given to other presidents from Taiwan in the future. If it did protest, then the Taiwanese would understand that China would be unlikely to respect Taiwan regardless of how Ma played up to Beijing.
As for the US arms sales package, Washington is simply granting a request submitted by the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) during its years in power — a package that the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT), as the then-opposition, vetoed.
However, the arms deal is a watered down version that the US discussed first with Beijing, a move that diminishes the Taiwan Relations Act.
Sadly, Ma appears so pleased with himself that it is no wonder DPP Chairwoman Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) is frustrated by his shallowness.
Although the US is making concessions to leave some leeway for Sino-US relations, Beijing’s series of reactions and retaliatory measures do not leave much room for maneuver. The sign that there may be some leeway is the fact that the top leadership has maintained its silence.
The Chinese retaliation has taken four forms: First, planned visits by military officials between China and the US have been suspended. Second, other Sino-US military exchanges have been postponed. Third, the next round of annual defense consultations at the deputy minister level on strategic security, multilateral arms control and non-proliferation have been postponed. Fourth, US companies participating in the arms sale to Taiwan face sanctions.
The first two measures are relatively insignificant. In light of Beijing’s hostility to the US, as well as the US’ military advantage, China would benefit more from such visits and exchanges.
The third measure means an end to China’s cooperation with the US on the issue of North Korea’s and Iran’s nuclear weapons development and terrorism. But Beijing is already supporting these two countries, so Washington should not have high expectations. Perhaps it is a good thing that Beijing shows its true colors.
As to the fourth point, China purchases certain military products from US companies because it cannot produce them itself. It would be good for both national security and world peace if the US stops selling these items to Beijing. Ideally, other Western nations should not sell such products to China either. Unfortunately, profit concerns make that difficult for US and other Western enterprises. Will China retaliate economically? Chaos would ensue if it lost the US market.
For the Sino-US confrontation, whoever backs off first will be considered a “paper tiger.” The US usually does not pursue defeated enemies, but give China an inch, and its rogue nature ensures that it will take a foot. This has been evident in the development of Sino-US relations over half a century. As Washington constantly backs down, Beijing has elevated the Taiwan issue to a core interest in recent years, and this can come to affect other US spheres of influence in the future. Why doesn’t the US claim its founding ideals — freedom, democracy, human rights and rule of law — as its core interests? The US used to offer protection to the KMT dictatorship in decades past, but today, Taiwan has transformed into a democracy. What kind of country would the US be if it sold out Taiwan to China now?
Chinese Rear Admiral Yang Yi (楊毅) said in an interview with China News Service on Jan. 6 that it was time for China to lay down the rules for the US. Yang also recently criticized Ma. By allowing a low-level official like Yang to insult Ma, Beijing is behaving like a bully. Does Ma still believe that “blood is thicker than water”?
Nevertheless, Taiwan should not pin all its hopes on the US. To build a complete independent state, we have to rely on ourselves. In the face of authoritarian China, we must all be determined to risk our lives. To achieve this, we must consolidate domestic unity, including both the pan-green camp and the mid and lower levels of the pan-blue camp. Otherwise, there will be no hope for Taiwan.
Paul Lin is a political commentator.
TRANSLATED BY EDDY CHANG
Concerns that the US might abandon Taiwan are often overstated. While US President Donald Trump’s handling of Ukraine raised unease in Taiwan, it is crucial to recognize that Taiwan is not Ukraine. Under Trump, the US views Ukraine largely as a European problem, whereas the Indo-Pacific region remains its primary geopolitical focus. Taipei holds immense strategic value for Washington and is unlikely to be treated as a bargaining chip in US-China relations. Trump’s vision of “making America great again” would be directly undermined by any move to abandon Taiwan. Despite the rhetoric of “America First,” the Trump administration understands the necessity of
US President Donald Trump’s challenge to domestic American economic-political priorities, and abroad to the global balance of power, are not a threat to the security of Taiwan. Trump’s success can go far to contain the real threat — the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) surge to hegemony — while offering expanded defensive opportunities for Taiwan. In a stunning affirmation of the CCP policy of “forceful reunification,” an obscene euphemism for the invasion of Taiwan and the destruction of its democracy, on March 13, 2024, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) used Chinese social media platforms to show the first-time linkage of three new
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
The military is conducting its annual Han Kuang exercises in phases. The minister of national defense recently said that this year’s scenarios would simulate defending the nation against possible actions the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) might take in an invasion of Taiwan, making the threat of a speculated Chinese invasion in 2027 a heated agenda item again. That year, also referred to as the “Davidson window,” is named after then-US Indo-Pacific Command Admiral Philip Davidson, who in 2021 warned that Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) had instructed the PLA to be ready to invade Taiwan by 2027. Xi in 2017
RSS