The US’ Taiwan policy act on Sept. 14 was approved by the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee by a vote of 17 to 5. The administration of US President Joe Biden has kept a close eye on its progress before it enters the US Congress for a vote.
The act was approved with slight modifications, reflecting a compromise between the US legislative and executive branches, and the final version released by the committee likely adheres to the stance of the Biden administration, as well as Democratic and Republican Party positions.
The smooth completion of its lawmaking process is just a matter of time.
When the act was made public, pro-unification voices in Taiwan came out to smear and slander it. Some tried to deceive fellow Taiwanese with intentional mistranslations, some misinterpreted the US’ intention to defend Taiwan, while others tried to imply that the act reflects only the will of the US Senate rather than the US government.
However, as deceptive as these fallacies might be, they cannot change an established US strategy that has long been determined.
If passed, the act would require the US Department of Defense to submit an annual Taiwan defense report on the premise of a “denial strategy.”
There is a fundamental difference between “denial” and “deterrence.” The US’ strategy to prevent China from attacking Taiwan has shifted from deterrence to denial, and the Taiwan policy act would only formalize what is already an implicit strategy.
Deterrence is to use strength and power to prevent an adversary from taking a desired action. Under a denial strategy, the US would continue to assist Taiwan in improving its self-defense capabilities.
The act says that the US would provide military assistance at no cost to help Taiwan develop asymmetric combat capabilities and enhance Taiwan’s international status.
The intention is to make it increasingly difficult for China to threaten Taiwan so that it will cease trying. This is also the reason Biden has said four times that the US would defend Taiwan if attacked.
During his visit to Japan in May, Biden said that he would be willing to use force to defend Taiwan, which many interpreted as a gaffe.
However, as he has continued to state the same point, it is obvious that what he said in Japan was no slip of the tongue. Biden intends to make the denial strategy clear.
The latest example came during an interview on the 60 Minutes television program aired on Sept. 15.
When asked if US forces would defend Taiwan against an attack, Biden firmly replied: “Yes.”
The US has learned from Russia’s invasion of Ukraine that making it clear that aggression is not tolerated is the best way to avoid war and maintain peace. Facing China’s intention to attack Taiwan, the US has come to realize that the vague strategy of the past could no longer work. It must clearly make China understand that if it makes reckless moves against Taiwan, the US would send troops to defend it.
Taiwan should certainly be self-reliant as well. With the help of the US military, Taiwan should more actively strengthen its combat capabilities and strive to improve its international status.
Some Taiwanese interpreted Biden’s remarks on 60 Minutes as not supporting Taiwanese independence.
“Taiwan makes their own judgements about their independence,” Biden said.
Based on the principle of national self-determination, Taiwan’s independence requires Taiwanese to express their will, which is not for the US to do.
“That’s their decision,” Biden said, showing respect for Taiwanese.
Now, Taiwanese should consider that it is time to show the will to assert self-determination.
Tommy Lin is director of Wu Fu Eye Clinic and president of the Formosa Republican Association.
Translated by Lin Lee-kai
Why is Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) not a “happy camper” these days regarding Taiwan? Taiwanese have not become more “CCP friendly” in response to the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) use of spies and graft by the United Front Work Department, intimidation conducted by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) and the Armed Police/Coast Guard, and endless subversive political warfare measures, including cyber-attacks, economic coercion, and diplomatic isolation. The percentage of Taiwanese that prefer the status quo or prefer moving towards independence continues to rise — 76 percent as of December last year. According to National Chengchi University (NCCU) polling, the Taiwanese
It would be absurd to claim to see a silver lining behind every US President Donald Trump cloud. Those clouds are too many, too dark and too dangerous. All the same, viewed from a domestic political perspective, there is a clear emerging UK upside to Trump’s efforts at crashing the post-Cold War order. It might even get a boost from Thursday’s Washington visit by British Prime Minister Keir Starmer. In July last year, when Starmer became prime minister, the Labour Party was rigidly on the defensive about Europe. Brexit was seen as an electorally unstable issue for a party whose priority
US President Donald Trump’s return to the White House has brought renewed scrutiny to the Taiwan-US semiconductor relationship with his claim that Taiwan “stole” the US chip business and threats of 100 percent tariffs on foreign-made processors. For Taiwanese and industry leaders, understanding those developments in their full context is crucial while maintaining a clear vision of Taiwan’s role in the global technology ecosystem. The assertion that Taiwan “stole” the US’ semiconductor industry fundamentally misunderstands the evolution of global technology manufacturing. Over the past four decades, Taiwan’s semiconductor industry, led by Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC), has grown through legitimate means
Today is Feb. 28, a day that Taiwan associates with two tragic historical memories. The 228 Incident, which started on Feb. 28, 1947, began from protests sparked by a cigarette seizure that took place the day before in front of the Tianma Tea House in Taipei’s Datong District (大同). It turned into a mass movement that spread across Taiwan. Local gentry asked then-governor general Chen Yi (陳儀) to intervene, but he received contradictory orders. In early March, after Chiang Kai-shek (蔣介石) dispatched troops to Keelung, a nationwide massacre took place and lasted until May 16, during which many important intellectuals