Just before Christmas, US President Donald Trump’s administration released its first National Security Strategy (NSS), a congressionally mandated document required under the 1986 Goldwater-Nichols Act — that outlines the US government’s appraisal of its national security interests, the global security environment, challenges to US interests and policies and tools for securing such interests.
For Taiwan, three aspects are important: First, the specific mention of Taiwan in the document and the reference to the specific commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA). Second, the characterization of China as a challenge to US power, which is forcing the US to rethink the policies of the past two decades. Third, the outline of the new Indo-Pacific policy as the new framework for US policies toward the region.
On the first point: The NSS for the first time specifically refers to Taiwan and states: “We will maintain our strong ties with Taiwan in accordance with our ‘one China’ policy, including our commitments under the Taiwan Relations Act to provide for Taiwan’s legitimate defense needs and deter coercion.”
The reference to “our ‘one China’” policy is a clear statement that the US does not accept the “one China” principle touted by Beijing, while the emphasis on the US commitments under the TRA (to provide for Taiwan’s defense needs and deter coercion) are an unambiguous signal that the US would come to Taiwan’s defense if China decides to attack or coerce Taiwan.
On the second point: The NSS describes China as “challenging American power, influence and interests, attempting to erode American security and prosperity.”
According to the report, this strategic competition would “require the United States to rethink the policies of the past two decades — policies based on the assumption that engagement with rivals and their inclusion in international institutions and global commerce would turn them into benign actors and trustworthy partners. For the most part, this premise turned out to be false.”
Thus, while previous US administrations emphasized engagement and cooperation, the Trump administration is emphasizing that China’s expansionist moves and mercantilism are proving a threat not only to US interests, but also to peace and stability in the region.
Based on this, one could thus expect a firmer US pushback against China’s expansionism
On the third point: The NSS is the first attempt by the US administration to give substance to the concept of the Indo-Pacific strategy, first mentioned by Trump in a speech to the APEC Forum in Da Nang, Vietnam, in November last year.
The Indo-Pacific strategy has been referred to as a diamond-shaped strategy, encompassing Japan in the north, the US in the east, India in the west and Australia in the south.
The NSS specifically states that: “We will seek to increase quadrilateral cooperation with Japan, Australia and India,” but also mentions ASEAN and APEC as “centerpieces of the Indo-Pacific’s regional architecture and platforms for promoting an order based on freedom.”
For Taiwan, it is important to realize that it is at the heart of this Indo-Pacific diamond and is therefore of strategic importance.
It remains to be seen how the Trump administration will implement its NSS and its new Indo-Pacific strategy.
However, it is clear that for Taiwan it creates opportunities to strengthen its international position and opens the door for fresh thinking, new policies and for the nation to build alliances that help induce China to accommodate a free and democratic Taiwan.
Gerrit van der Wees is a former Dutch diplomat and the former editor of Taiwan Communique. He teaches “History of Taiwan” at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia
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