Historical comparison can be a risky game, but it would be quite reasonable for Taiwanese to consider the plight of another island nation that successfully overcame one of history’s definitive existential challenges 70 years ago this summer.
By Aug. 20, 1940, former British prime minister Winston Churchill intoned: “Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few.”
Churchill’s words signaled victory, though many more of the “few” would die in the coming air battles — the British Royal Air Force had succeeded not just in denying air superiority to Germany’s Luftwaffe, it had survived commander Hermann Goering’s initial onslaught to remain a viable fighting force. It was this fact that forced Nazi leader Adolf Hitler to abandon plans for invading England. While the Battle of Britain would move into other violent phases like the bombing of London in September 1940, this battle was largely decided before it began.
Since the mid-1930s, a few military leaders, like British Air Chief Marshall Sir Hugh Dowding, had perceived the coming storm and pressed the British leadership to fund an integrated air defense system that embraced an unproven information technology: radar. They were willing to press their aircraft engineers to push the state-of-the-art by investing in the Hawker Hurricane and Supermarine Spitfire fighters, while remaining well-informed about Germany’s advancing aircraft technology. Britain also benefited from luck and timing: The Battle of France ended just in time to stem a hemorrhage of pilots and its effort to expand aircraft production and pilot training bore fruit just in time to make a decisive difference.
By June 1940, Hitler was widely perceived as unstoppable, having both united and rearmed Germany and committed it to vengeance and racial domination.
Germany’s unprecedented large-scale combination of armor, mechanized infantry and airpower laid waste to Poland, the Low Countries, Norway and France. However, since the beginning of his political career, Hitler had an affinity for England and when his forces arrived on the English Channel, he was half-expecting not to have to fight, a factor that resulted in a lack of focus leading to an air battle that played to Britain’s strengths. Hitler’s initial hesitancy was also well-justified. Britain’s political leadership was not unified in the desire for war with Germany, with plenty of politicians quietly urging negotiations. What Hitler could not anticipate was that Churchill would emerge from political obscurity to rally his nation and then use the Battle of Britain to help former US president Franklin Roosevelt end US neutrality.
Fast forward to this year on the Taiwan Strait, and there is much to remind Taiwanese of Britain’s plight. From China, Taiwan faces a still-growing military threat to its existence as a democracy despite its recent efforts to reach out and improve political and economic relations. Perhaps before 2005, a “Battle of Taiwan” would have turned on the contest of air forces, but since then, the People’s Liberation Army’s (PLA) massive missile, electronic, submarine and mine warfare capabilities might also prove decisive. However, by this year, it is also possible to see the PLA’s increased preparations for an actual invasion of Taiwan. What this means is that unlike Britain in 1940, Taiwan cannot afford to invest in a largely “defensive” war; a realistic future threat of invasion means it may not be able to favor its air force and navy over its army, or deny itself new “offensive” weapons, especially the missiles that could attack invasion forces.
Also, Taiwan cannot assume that China’s preparations for war against Taiwan will fall victim to internal contradictions. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) has never wavered in its commitment to “recover” Taiwan and the PLA has had 60 years to consider this battle. Taiwan’s transition to full democracy makes it an even greater threat to the CCP’s monopoly of power and its preparations for war date back to the early-1990s. China’s economic and cultural offensives are intended to lull Taiwan, while hiding China’s growing preparations for war. China perceives these to have been successful enough to justify pressing Taiwan to move toward a peace treaty.
While President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) has denied such is under consideration, a treaty might be welcome if China would accept a free Taiwan. However, the CCP’s abhorrence of the Democratic Progressive Party only highlights its hostility toward democracy, especially in Taiwan.
As with Britain in 1940, Taiwan’s future as a free nation rests on the ability of its “few” not only to resist an initial PLA attack, but to defeat its invasion forces. Only by ensuring China’s fear of failure can Taiwan deter war and thus ensure its continued survival. Here is where the US remains decisive. When Washington wavers in its willingness to sell adequate arms, as is now the case with new F-16 fighters and submarines, it undermines Taiwan’s security and emboldens China. Appeasing China will work no better for Washington than did former British prime minister Neville Chamberlain’s attempts to appease Hitler. Before the military balance shifts decisively in the Taiwan Strait, it is necessary for the US to reassess Taiwan’s long-term requirements to deter Chinese attack.
Richard Fisher, Jr is a senior fellow with the International Assessment and Strategy Center.
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
As an American living in Taiwan, I have to confess how impressed I have been over the years by the Chinese Communist Party’s wholehearted embrace of high-speed rail and electric vehicles, and this at a time when my own democratic country has chosen a leader openly committed to doing everything in his power to put obstacles in the way of sustainable energy across the board — and democracy to boot. It really does make me wonder: “Are those of us right who hold that democracy is the right way to go?” Has Taiwan made the wrong choice? Many in China obviously
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
Last week, 24 Republican representatives in the US Congress proposed a resolution calling for US President Donald Trump’s administration to abandon the US’ “one China” policy, calling it outdated, counterproductive and not reflective of reality, and to restore official diplomatic relations with Taiwan, enter bilateral free-trade agreement negotiations and support its entry into international organizations. That is an exciting and inspiring development. To help the US government and other nations further understand that Taiwan is not a part of China, that those “one China” policies are contrary to the fact that the two countries across the Taiwan Strait are independent and
RSS