Philippine President Ferdinand Marcos Jr and Vietnamese President Vo Van Thuong on Tuesday met in Hanoi to sign two memorandums of understanding on security cooperation in the South China Sea, establishing a comprehensive partnership between their countries’ coast guards.
The two countries are among claimants to disputed islands, reefs, banks and other features in the region, and both have had run-ins with the Chinese Coast Guard.
“We are firm in defending our sovereignty, sovereign rights and jurisdiction against any provocations,” Marcos said before the meeting. “At the same time, we are also seeking to address these issues with China through peaceful dialogue and consultations as two equal sovereign states.”
China claims most of the South China Sea, and it has attempted to exercise control over an area that overlaps the exclusive economic zones of Taiwan, Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam. To assert its claims, Beijing has increasingly harassed the navies of the Philippines, Vietnam, the US, Australia and other countries in the international waters.
It is exceedingly important for all countries with interests in the region to cooperate and combat Chinese aggression.
It is promising to see Vietnam and the Philippines cooperating despite their competing claims, and they should work with other countries in the region as well. In an opinion piece published by Foreign Policy on Sept. 6 last year, former US National Security Council senior director for Asian affairs Michael Green said that an “Asian NATO” could eventually emerge.
US allies in Asia “could very well move in the direction of collective security ... if concerns about deterring and stopping a destructive and dangerous regional war surpass concerns about trade, regional cohesion, or retaining strategic autonomy,” he wrote.
Beijing’s coercive behavior against its neighbors could encourage such an alliance “even without any overt Chinese use of force,” he wrote.
Taipei would be an important strategic partner in a regional security pact given its proximity to China, the importance of the Bashi Channel and the Taiwan Strait to shipping and naval strategy, and Taiwan’s experience in countering Chinese aggression.
Ideally, Taiwan would upgrade its maritime ports to accommodate larger vessels, allow regional partners to access its territory and engage in joint military training with neighbors. The US holds regular joint drills with Japan, South Korea, the Philippines, Indonesia, India and Australia. Taiwan should be invited to those drills, and there should be efforts to hold drills on a larger scale to incorporate more countries into simultaneous exercises.
In the South China Sea in particular, countries that agree to cooperate could share access to the islands, reefs and features they control, allowing each other’s vessels and aircraft to dock and land. This would be helpful in improving the efficacy of coast guard operations and helping secure the safe passage of commercial vessels.
Asia-Pacific countries have shied away from taking actions that could be interpreted as antagonistic toward China. However, if there were a coordinated response, China would be powerless to use economic coercion against those cooperating, without risking its own economic interests. China’s biggest export partners last year were the US (US$43.8 billion), Japan (US$13.3 billion) and South Korea (US$12.5 billion), while its biggest import partners were Taiwan (US$18.4 billion), South Korea (US$15 billion) and Japan (US$14.1 billion).
China might voice threats, but it is time that regional partners show Beijing that it has more to lose than gain through antagonism, and Taiwan can play a key role in containing its aggression.
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