After the end of World War II, countries around the world set about building collective security structures for joint defense, and this was the main purpose of the establishment of the UN.
Military alliances, defense partnerships and other platforms for cooperation between nations were very important during the Cold War to prevent and resist aggression from third countries. They cannot be neglected in the post-Cold War period, either.
An indication of the continued need for such alliances is a statement by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton at the Informal Meeting of NATO foreign ministers in the Estonian capital, Tallinn, on April 23, emphasizing that the US had no intention of withdrawing tactical nuclear weapons deployed at its Air Force bases in Europe. European opinions about the US’ global strategic deployment may vary considerably, but, in consideration of collective security, no European nation would go to the extent of demanding that the US pull out of joint defense structures.
The Asia-Pacific region has no fewer potential flashpoints of instability than Europe and the threats to its security are no less complex. Even though nobody knows how regional balances of power in Northeast and Southeast Asia will be maintained in the future, or for how long, the only leader in the world who would say that he flat-out refuses US defense assistance is President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) — and he made his point using a very decisive word: “Never.”
It must be borne in mind that Taiwan is not a member of the UN, so it is not qualified to join any international joint defense agreements. As things stand, it can only attach itself to the periphery of existing collective security mechanisms. That means that the only guarantee of Taiwan’s security is its unspoken military agreement with the US. Besides, at present the only country that poses a direct threat to Taiwan’s security is China.
That means that there can only be one explanation for Ma’s outright refusal of US military assistance: He has decided to bind Taiwan and China together in an unbreakably close relationship and to use his term in office to speed up the process of eventual unification.
In other words, when Ma said during an interview with CNN that he would never ask the US to fight for Taiwan, his true face was revealed for all to see. Ma’s interpretation of Taiwan’s status is clear.
While he is president, his strategy is not just to actively lean in China’s direction, but to bring forward the day when Taiwan will be a part of China. In Ma’s mind, what belongs to China belongs to China, and the US can mind its own business.
Although Ma has said time and again that he will never sell out Taiwan, his use of the word “never” in the CNN interview really gave the game away. No longer can one merely suspect that Taiwan’s sovereignty is in peril — it has now been proven beyond doubt that Ma is hell-bent on selling Taiwan down the river.
Steve Wang is an advisory committee member of Taiwan Thinktank.
TRANSLATED BY JULIAN CLEGG
US$18.278 billion is a simple dollar figure; one that’s illustrative of the first Trump administration’s defense commitment to Taiwan. But what does Donald Trump care for money? During President Trump’s first term, the US defense department approved gross sales of “defense articles and services” to Taiwan of over US$18 billion. In September, the US-Taiwan Business Council compared Trump’s figure to the other four presidential administrations since 1993: President Clinton approved a total of US$8.702 billion from 1993 through 2000. President George W. Bush approved US$15.614 billion in eight years. This total would have been significantly greater had Taiwan’s Kuomintang-controlled Legislative Yuan been cooperative. During
Former president Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) in recent days was the focus of the media due to his role in arranging a Chinese “student” group to visit Taiwan. While his team defends the visit as friendly, civilized and apolitical, the general impression is that it was a political stunt orchestrated as part of Chinese Communist Party (CCP) propaganda, as its members were mainly young communists or university graduates who speak of a future of a unified country. While Ma lived in Taiwan almost his entire life — except during his early childhood in Hong Kong and student years in the US —
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers on Monday unilaterally passed a preliminary review of proposed amendments to the Public Officers Election and Recall Act (公職人員選罷法) in just one minute, while Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) legislators, government officials and the media were locked out. The hasty and discourteous move — the doors of the Internal Administration Committee chamber were locked and sealed with plastic wrap before the preliminary review meeting began — was a great setback for Taiwan’s democracy. Without any legislative discussion or public witnesses, KMT Legislator Hsu Hsin-ying (徐欣瑩), the committee’s convener, began the meeting at 9am and announced passage of the
In response to a failure to understand the “good intentions” behind the use of the term “motherland,” a professor from China’s Fudan University recklessly claimed that Taiwan used to be a colony, so all it needs is a “good beating.” Such logic is risible. The Central Plains people in China were once colonized by the Mongolians, the Manchus and other foreign peoples — does that mean they also deserve a “good beating?” According to the professor, having been ruled by the Cheng Dynasty — named after its founder, Ming-loyalist Cheng Cheng-kung (鄭成功, also known as Koxinga) — as the Kingdom of Tungning,
RSS