It is concerning that Taiwanese do not seem to be paying much attention to what is happening in Ukraine, as the Russian military’s build-up brings the region to the brink of war, and the US and Russian governments continue to probe each other.
In a way, this is understandable, as Ukraine is a long way from Taiwan and far from the preoccupations of ordinary Taiwanese.
As a former diplomat, I feel it is my responsibility to help Taiwanese understand the importance of paying attention to the crisis.
During a segment on CNN’s State of the Union, host Jake Tapper asked US Representative to the UN Linda Thomas-Greenfield: “Do you think [Chinese] President Xi [Jinping, 習近平] is watching the US and NATO response to Russia’s aggression towards Ukraine to determine whether or not China should move even more aggressively on Taiwan?”
“We saw in the [UN] Security Council China side with Russia in the efforts to block the Security Council from having a meeting to discuss the situation in Ukraine, but as it relates to Taiwan and China, we are committed to protecting the security and supporting the security of the people of Taiwan, while at the same time our policy has always been to recognize the ‘one China’ policy,” Thomas-Greenfield said. “So, if China is making efforts toward Taiwan because of what they see happening in Ukraine, these are two different types of situations.”
Essentially, the UN representative was telling China that no matter what happens in Ukraine, the US sides with Taiwan and would protect Taiwanese, warning the Chinese Communist Party not to misjudge the situation.
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Xi put on a show of unity prior to the Beijing Winter Olympics, issuing a joint statement in which they opposed the further expansion of NATO. Putin also expressed his opposition to independence for Taiwan.
The explicit mention of the Taiwan issue in the joint declaration is clearly dangerous for Taiwan, which is why Thomas-Greenfield said that the meeting between Putin and Xi “reinforced our resolve that we have to continue to fight for democratic values.”
The issue regarding NATO expansion is a complex one, and Taiwan is not a northern European country, so its issues and policies are not likely to have a direct bearing on situations in that region.
There are many opinions on whether it is right to support Ukraine joining NATO, even within the US.
US Senator Josh Hawley, for example, is clear about his anti-China stance. He sent a letter to US Secretary of State Antony Blinken stating his opposition to the US supporting Ukraine’s NATO membership and his belief that China is the US’ greatest enemy, not Russia.
Taiwan has yet to have any meaningful debate about an international “collective security” mechanism. It is only because of the tensions in Ukraine that there has been more discussion on Article 5 — “Collective defense means that an attack against one ally is considered as an attack against all allies” — and Article 10 — “the parties may, by unanimous agreement, invite any other European state in a position to further the principles of this treaty and to contribute to the security of the North Atlantic area to accede to this treaty” — of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty.
The collective security concept entails obligations and responsibilities, not just unidirectional security guarantees.
Taiwanese need to increase their awareness of the Ukraine crisis and understand the practical implications of the concept of collective security described in the North Atlantic Treaty.
The Ukraine crisis has already sounded the alarm for the Taiwan Strait issue. In US-Russia-China relations, Taiwan represents a more significant strategic role than it has up to now.
Jerry Liu is the director of the New Power Party’s international affairs department and a former diplomat.
Translated by Paul Cooper
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