During the past weeks, the tensions surrounding the Senkaku Islands [Diaoyutai Islands (釣魚台)] have risen significantly. China has continued to send patrol ships into the area, often getting close to, or crossing over, the 12 nautical mile (22km) line marking the territorial waters surrounding the islands. Last month, China also sent a surveillance aircraft into the area, prompting Japan — which also claims the islands, and calls them the Senkakus — to scramble F-15s.
The escalation comes right after both Japan and China have gone through a leadership transition: Chinese Vice President Xi Jinping (習近平) was appointed general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in November last year, while Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s Liberal Democratic Party won elections in December.
It is disheartening that in his first major foreign policy speech, given earlier this week to the CCP’s politburo, Xi was highly assertive on China’s claims, saying: “No foreign country should ever nurse hopes that we will bargain over our core national interests.”
The way the term “core interests” has been used by Beijing reflects a rigid position: It has covered the harsh crackdowns in Tibet and East Turkestan as well as its inflexibility on Taiwan. While gradually pushing Taiwan into its unwelcome economic embrace, it has refused to take down and dismantle the 1,600 missiles aimed at Taiwan, thus maintaining the means to coerce the nation into submission.
China’s increasing belligerence on the Senkaku issue has led the administration of US President Barack Obama to lean heavily on China and Japan. In mid-January, US Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs Kurt Campbell led a heavyweight delegation to Tokyo and Beijing, urging cooler heads to prevail. A few days later, US Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton — with Japanese Foreign Minister Fumio Kishida standing beside her — stated that the Obama administration opposed “any unilateral actions that would seek to undermine Japanese administration” of the islands — a clear reference to China.
As the US clearly has its hands full trying to keep the situation under control, it would behoove Taiwan [which also claims the Diaoyutais] to try to calm the waters and not rock the boat. That is why it was so utterly incomprehensible that on Jan. 24, Taiwan allowed a fishing boat with activists to sail to the islands.
According to press reports, this fishing boat was accompanied by four Taiwanese coast guard vessels, resulting in a standoff with Japan Coast Guard vessels, which then led to a replay of the water cannon fight that occurred at the end of September last year.
It must be emphasized that this is not responsible policy. These kinds of provocative actions are not helpful, and damage Taiwan’s interests in the region and its relations with the US. It estranges Taiwan from its democratic neighbors and undermines the nation’s image in Washington: It needs to be seen as playing a constructive role, not stirring up trouble.
As I have stated before, it is essential that Taiwan remains on good terms with the democracies in the region, the US, Japan and South Korea. That in itself will help safeguard its existence as a free and democratic nation. China is not democratic, and thus, appearing to move in line with Beijing’s position and against Japan’s will undermine freedom and democracy in Taiwan.
Nat Bellocchi served as chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan from 1990 through 1995. The views expressed in this article are his own.
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