Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) Chairperson Tsai Ing-Wen (蔡英文), the party’s presidential nominee, is reportedly planning a visit to Washington next month.
At this juncture, the Middle East and north Africa are in turmoil. Russia and China are becoming more belligerent, taking advantage of the inability of the administration of US President Barack Obama to manage numerous global hot spots.
Against this backdrop, Taiwan might not register a blip on Washington’s radar.
Swimming upstream and competing for attention, Tsai would be well advised to present a convincing case.
It must first be made unequivocally clear that the “Republic of China in Taiwan” is a farce; since Sept. 2, 1945, the year “the Japanese Instrument of Surrender” was signed on the USS Missouri, the nation has been a US Military Government-protected territory, as it remains today.
The state Taiwan is in is not of its own making; the US broke it and the US owns it.
Facing threats from a vengeful China, Taiwan’s strategic role to the US, Japan, South Korea and many Southeast Asian countries is no less important than what Israel’s is to the US and the EU.
The US has no intention of relinquishing its responsibility and power over Taiwan, as demonstrated by the landing, which was intentional, of two McDonnell Douglas F/A-18 Hornets in Tainan on April 1. Washington plans to derive maximum interest from its position.
Taiwan, with limited cards to play, fully understands the US’ desire and will not spoil the game plan. However, as last year’s Sunflower movement demonstrated, Taiwan will never submit itself to Chinese trickery, even when Beijing seeks to exert subtle, indirect pressure.
Taiwan respects China’s view that there is only “one China.” To be more specific, Taiwan has no interest in the issue of “multiple Chinas,” long considered a linguistic fight between Beijing’s oligarchy and the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) taking refuge in Taipei. The discussion over areas that use “China” in their titles is of no interest to Taiwan, which cares about one issue: There is but one Taiwan.
The notion that the DPP has the capability to provide people in Taiwan with more scope for choice belongs in the garbage can. The nation’s position is not that of choosing from a restaurant menu. It has a single agenda: Never be a part of China.
Some academic circles in Taiwan floated the idea of “Taiwanese neutrality.” It is naive to entertain such a foolish caprice. Neutrality requires a robust national defense that can deter an invader at its first thought of crossing the border. Such a defense demands that every adult be willing and able to use a weapon. Taiwanese are nowhere near fulfilling that requirement.
Taiwan, whose shape is somewhat like an aircraft carrier, has been guarding the western Pacific for the past 70 years and it will remain in the position for a long time to come.
What this implies has not gone unnoticed. A day prior to his speech on April 29 to a joint session of the US Congress, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe announced, with Obama, a renewed set of joint military defense guidelines that put Taiwan and its surrounding waters squarely in the crosshairs.
Meanwhile, China is muddying the water in the South China Sea, with dredging around the Spratly Islands (Nansha Islands, 南沙群島), which Taiwan also claims, and building a landing strip. The actions are intimidatory to all nearby countries and openly challenges freedom of movement in busy sea lanes.
Given escalating temperatures in the region, the existence of Taiwan on the side of freedom accentuates its role to serve the interests of many parties.
On behalf of Taiwanese, Tsai must hold her head high while in Washington.
Kengchi Goah is a senior research fellow at the US Taiwan Public Policy Council.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS