During US President Barack Obama’s seven-day visit to Japan, South Korea, Malaysia and Philippines, the issue of security cooperation was at the fore. As other East Asian countries are worried about China copying what Russia is doing in Ukraine, Obama’s trip through the “first island chain” sent a message to US allies in the Asia-Pacific region that restored some faith in Washington’s rebalancing policy.
Although Obama only passed over the nation’s airspace, it is safe to say that unless Taiwan plans to surrender to China and resist Washington, the US’ regional strengthening of military cooperation is a positive thing for stability and security in the Taiwan Strait.
Obama sent signals that Taiwan must attend to, although considering the actions of President Ma Ying-jeou (馬英九) and his government, these signals might have a negative impact on the nation. They include Obama’s support for Japan strengthening its right to self-defense and US support for the Philippines’ filing for international arbitration to handle territorial disputes in the South China Sea.
While Obama disapproved of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe sending a ritual offering to the Yasukuni Shrine, the US does not associate that with militarism. The US believes that Japan is a peaceful country and it is central to Washington developing bilateral alliances in a multipolar Asia-Pacific region.
However, the Ma administration is in accord with China’s anti-Japanese sentiment, which interprets Japan’s normalization as a move toward restoring militarism. This is not only out of touch with reality, but also contrary to the US’ policy of encouraging allies to upgrade their military strength and is unhelpful to national interests or the improvement of Taipei-Tokyo relations.
Another potential problem is linked to US support for the Philippines filing for international arbitration. In late March, the Philippines requested that the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea, review whether China’s “nine-dash line” — which China uses for its territorial claims in the South China Sea — is in line with international law. The request has been accepted and Obama applauded the move for being in sync with Washington’s desire that territorial disputes in the area be handled in a peaceful manner and in line with international law.
Developments suggest it is possible that China’s nine-dash line will be ruled a violation of international law. Because the Ma administration has proposed a “U-shaped line” — which is extremely similar to the nine-dash line — for dealing with territorial disputes in the area, the US has said that Taiwan should form a claim different to China’s. However, the Ma administration, insisting that cross-strait relations be conducted under the concept of “one country, two areas” (一國兩區), has rejected this suggestion.
If the nine-dash line is ruled a violation of international law, then the U-shaped line will also be negated. Since Taiwan is unable to take part in negotiations on territorial disputes in the South China Sea, if the nation’s claim is judged to be illegal and it is unable to come up with a ( claim) that is in line with international law, then the entire basis for the claim to Itu Aba Island (Taiping Island, 太平島) the largest of the disputed Spratly Islands, also known as the Nansha Islands (南沙群島), will cease to exist.
Taiwan should capitalize on the US government’s rebalancing policy and propose a stance on territorial disputes in the South China Sea different to that of China’s nine-dash line. It is fine to disputes claims to Itu Aba Island, but if the nation loses the island, national interests will be severely hurt.
Lai I-chung is an executive committee member of the Taiwan Thinktank.
Translated by Drew Cameron
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