Taiwan’s peaceful transfer of political power offers further evidence that the regime in Beijing is wrong when it suggests democracy is not possible in China.
Taiwan remains an embarrassment to Beijing’s aging leadership who condescendingly assert that market-based democratic traditions are inconsistent with Chinese culture. In the blogosphere Chinese are increasingly asking: “If Taiwan can democratically elect a president, why can’t we?”
Beijing is undergoing an increasingly uneasy leadership change, where not one member of the Chinese power structure is directly elected by the people. A corrupt Chinese Communist Party (CCP) looks increasingly entitled, repressive and cut-off from the Chinese people.
US policymakers need to understand Taiwan’s political and social significance to China’s transition now underway. Failure to do so only serves to re-enforce attitudes among ultra-nationalists in Beijing who would gladly snuff out Taipei’s experiment in freedom. Based on their statements, a growing number of People’s Liberation Army (PLA) hardliners seem to feel that former Chinese chairman Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) famous statement to then-US secretary of state Henry Kissinger four decades ago, that: “We can wait 100 years for Taiwan,” is now outdated.
Rather than engage Taiwan as a partner, whose political and social history offers a useful roadmap to greater democracy at home, Beijing sees Taiwan’s emerging democracy as a threat. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, the PLA has pivoted much of its military assets away from China’s northern border and to its east coast instead. We know from experts’ analysis of PLA military planning that a large part of the US$100 billion in annual military expenditures now undertaken is directed at Taiwan-related contingencies.
The loss of Taiwan to Chinese domination would have far-reaching repercussions. From Seoul in the north to Canberra in the south, such a policy retreat would likely raise questions among our Asia-Pacific allies about the US’ Pacific staying power. Some of our old friends might even decide that the time has come to cut their losses and seek an accommodation with Beijing before it is too late.
With control of Taiwan, Beijing would be able to dictate terms of engagement with both Tokyo and Seoul. The PLA Navy would dominate the crucial sea lanes around Taiwan and its seizure would also break the current freedom of navigation in the first island chain off the Asian coast, allowing Beijing to pursue its strategy of denying access to the US Navy.
As China’s air and sea power rapidly expands, it is key that the US approve Taiwan’s request for next generation F-16 jets to replace an aging fleet provided at the end of the Cold War. Taiwan also needs diesel submarines to counter Beijing’s rapidly expanding submarine fleet.
Leaving Taiwan exposed to Beijing’s incessant bullying and potential aggression is not the answer. Inaction on provision of defensive weapons as mandated by the US Congress in the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA) is a prescription for disaster. I have put forward legislation, known as the Taiwan Policy Act, to enhance the TRA and to strengthen our ties with Taiwan.
Beijing seeks to marginalize US strategic and commercial interests in the world’s most economically vibrant region. Any success would have a direct impact on lives of US citizens. Without access to Asian markets, the US economy would decline.
If the 21st century is the “Asian century,” then a democratic Taiwan free of mainland domination remains a lynchpin for curtailing Chinese hegemony over the Asian continent. Thus, the US must stand by Taiwan to ensure our shared strategic and economic interests are protected.
US Representative Ileana Ros-Lehtinen chairs the US House of Representatives’ Foreign Affairs Committee.
I came to Taiwan to pursue my degree thinking that Taiwanese are “friendly,” but I was welcomed by Taiwanese classmates laughing at my friend’s name, Maria (瑪莉亞). At the time, I could not understand why they were mocking the name of Jesus’ mother. Later, I learned that “Maria” had become a stereotype — a shorthand for Filipino migrant workers. That was because many Filipino women in Taiwan, especially those who became house helpers, happen to have that name. With the rapidly increasing number of foreigners coming to Taiwan to work or study, more Taiwanese are interacting, socializing and forming relationships with
Whether in terms of market commonality or resource similarity, South Korea’s Samsung Electronics Co is the biggest competitor of Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC). The two companies have agreed to set up factories in the US and are also recipients of subsidies from the US CHIPS and Science Act, which was signed into law by former US president Joe Biden. However, changes in the market competitiveness of the two companies clearly reveal the context behind TSMC’s investments in the US. As US semiconductor giant Intel Corp has faced continuous delays developing its advanced processes, the world’s two major wafer foundries, TSMC and
The recent termination of Tibetan-language broadcasts by Voice of America (VOA) and Radio Free Asia (RFA) is a significant setback for Tibetans both in Tibet and across the global diaspora. The broadcasts have long served as a vital lifeline, providing uncensored news, cultural preservation and a sense of connection for a community often isolated by geopolitical realities. For Tibetans living under Chinese rule, access to independent information is severely restricted. The Chinese government tightly controls media and censors content that challenges its narrative. VOA and RFA broadcasts have been among the few sources of uncensored news available to Tibetans, offering insights
We are witnessing a sea change in the government’s approach to China, from one of reasonable, low-key reluctance at rocking the boat to a collapse of pretense over and patience in Beijing’s willful intransigence. Finally, we are seeing a more common sense approach in the face of active shows of hostility from a foreign power. According to Article 2 of the 2020 Anti-Infiltration Act (反滲透法), a “foreign hostile force” is defined as “countries, political entities or groups that are at war with or are engaged in a military standoff with the Republic of China [ROC]. The same stipulation applies to
RSS