US President Joe Biden and former US president Donald Trump did not touch on the issue of security in the Taiwan Strait during their presidential debate on Thursday last week, and they only mentioned China-related issues briefly.
That these issues were not the main focus of the debate does not mean they do not believe it is important to protect Taiwan and resist China. Rather, it shows that there is a consensus between the two major US parties on China and Taiwan, so there is no need to waste time on topics already agreed upon.
On the eve of the debate, the Washington Post invited 21 columnists to raise “21 questions for the next president that have no easy answers,” covering domestic and foreign affairs, and trade — including whether to dispatch troops in the event of a Chinese invasion of Taiwan.
Biden has said five times that he would assist in the defense of Taiwan, while Trump also said in May that the US would “bomb Beijing” if China invades Taiwan by force. In terms of resisting China, there is not much difference between the two sides, but only a difference in the degree of toughness.
The debate over the policy response to Russia’s war in Ukraine reflects the two candidates’ governance styles. Trump said that he was the only US president in decades who “didn’t have any wars” during his presidency, and that Russia’s aggression against Ukraine was due to Biden’s weakness.
However, Trump repeatedly boasted that he wants to end the war within a day, while holding unrealistic fantasies about Russia. He might pressure Kiev to make concessions and insist that NATO allies pay more — like a gang that tries to extort protection money — thus casting uncertainties on the US’ transatlantic partnerships.
On the other hand, Biden said that Russian President Vladimir Putin is responsible for war crimes and that other European countries were the next target of Putin’s ambition to restore the Soviet empire. Even under the constraints of the Republican-dominated US Congress, the Biden administration has insisted on providing Ukraine with US arms and financial assistance, which is relatively reassuring in terms of policy consistency.
Apart from the presidential campaign, the post-election personnel changes and policy changes are another major concern for countries worldwide, and the appointment of the president-elect’s top national security team would influence the direction of his policy.
In March last year, former US national security adviser Robert O’Brien of the Trump administration led a delegation to Taiwan to accept a special honorary medal from then-president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文). O’Brien is regarded as one of the strongest candidates to be the US secretary of state if Trump returns to the White House. Not long ago in the authoritative Foreign Affairs magazine, O’Brien published an article titled “The Return of Peace Through Strength: Making the Case for Trump’s Foreign Policy,” which is regarded as a preview of a second Trump administration’s foreign policy.
As O’Brien wrote in the article, if you want peace, you must prepare for war. He made a series of specific proposals that have never been seen before, such as complete decoupling from China’s economy, reinforcing the US military’s deployment of the elite Marine Corps in Asia, resuming underground nuclear testing and inviting Taiwan to participate in the Rim of the Pacific Exercises.
O’Brien’s harder stance makes it clear that no matter who is the next US president, the Washington consensus of resisting China would only grow stronger.
Chen Yung-chang is a manager.
Translated by Eddy Chang
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
During the “426 rally” organized by the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party under the slogan “fight green communism, resist dictatorship,” leaders from the two opposition parties framed it as a battle against an allegedly authoritarian administration led by President William Lai (賴清德). While criticism of the government can be a healthy expression of a vibrant, pluralistic society, and protests are quite common in Taiwan, the discourse of the 426 rally nonetheless betrayed troubling signs of collective amnesia. Specifically, the KMT, which imposed 38 years of martial law in Taiwan from 1949 to 1987, has never fully faced its
RSS