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
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
In an article published on this page on Tuesday, Kaohsiung-based journalist Julien Oeuillet wrote that “legions of people worldwide would care if a disaster occurred in South Korea or Japan, but the same people would not bat an eyelid if Taiwan disappeared.” That is quite a statement. We are constantly reading about the importance of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), hailed in Taiwan as the nation’s “silicon shield” protecting it from hostile foreign forces such as the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), and so crucial to the global supply chain for semiconductors that its loss would cost the global economy US$1
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
Sasha B. Chhabra’s column (“Michelle Yeoh should no longer be welcome,” March 26, page 8) lamented an Instagram post by renowned actress Michelle Yeoh (楊紫瓊) about her recent visit to “Taipei, China.” It is Chhabra’s opinion that, in response to parroting Beijing’s propaganda about the status of Taiwan, Yeoh should be banned from entering this nation and her films cut off from funding by government-backed agencies, as well as disqualified from competing in the Golden Horse Awards. She and other celebrities, he wrote, must be made to understand “that there are consequences for their actions if they become political pawns of
RSS