Today marks the 30th anniversary of the US government’s enactment of the Taiwan Relations Act (TRA).
The TRA came into being in 1979 with the purpose of protecting the interests of the people of Taiwan following the decision to switch diplomatic relations from Taipei to Beijing.
For the three decades since its inception, the TRA has performed that mandate admirably, protecting Taiwan while allowing it to complete a transformation from police state to economic powerhouse and the democratic culture that we see today.
Taiwanese of all shades should be proud of this achievement and grateful for the security that this vital piece of legislation has provided. Without the TRA, the arms sales provisions enshrined in the legislation and the staunch support offered by the US over the decades, it is doubtful that Taiwan would be the success story it is today.
But 30 years on, and with regional circumstances changing rapidly, some have begun to question whether the TRA is still relevant.
The TRA was penned at a time when China was emerging from years of self-imposed international exile, before Beijing started its period of “reform and opening” and before it accumulated the massive wealth and military might it possesses today.
China’s growing clout on the global stage, both economically and diplomatically, and the enthusiasm with which it is adopting the role of challenger to the supremacy of the US have drastically increased the threat to Taiwan’s democracy.
Despite this, the TRA is a document that covers all issues pertinent to Taiwan today and is well equipped to deal with these and future challenges.
Taiwan’s future status, its security, progress in human rights and participation in international organizations are all listed as issues of concern for the US.
The TRA also says that any settlement between Taiwan and China should be reached by peaceful means, and that the US will not consider the use of force against Taiwan to be an internal affair of the People’s Republic of China.
However, there is more to the US-Taiwan security relationship than the TRA can provide.
As the late Harvey Feldman, one of the architects of the TRA, told a forum in November 1998, the effectiveness of the legislation depends on whether the US “acts in accordance with the spirit and the letter of the TRA.”
If it were to do so, Feldman said, “it should return to its former policy of taking no position on Taiwan’s final status … and reiterate the US can accept any solution arrived at peacefully, without coercion, so long as it is acceptable to the people of Taiwan.”
The TRA may not be perfect, but it is an important piece of legislation that has stood the test of time.
Sticking to it will ensure a safe, prosperous and peaceful future for the people of Taiwan. Those in Taiwan who cherish freedom and democracy can only hope that the US will do so for many more years to come.
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
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
If you had a vision of the future where China did not dominate the global car industry, you can kiss those dreams goodbye. That is because US President Donald Trump’s promised 25 percent tariff on auto imports takes an ax to the only bits of the emerging electric vehicle (EV) supply chain that are not already dominated by Beijing. The biggest losers when the levies take effect this week would be Japan and South Korea. They account for one-third of the cars imported into the US, and as much as two-thirds of those imported from outside North America. (Mexico and Canada, while
I have heard people equate the government’s stance on resisting forced unification with China or the conditional reinstatement of the military court system with the rise of the Nazis before World War II. The comparison is absurd. There is no meaningful parallel between the government and Nazi Germany, nor does such a mindset exist within the general public in Taiwan. It is important to remember that the German public bore some responsibility for the horrors of the Holocaust. Post-World War II Germany’s transitional justice efforts were rooted in a national reckoning and introspection. Many Jews were sent to concentration camps not
RSS