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
As Taiwan’s domestic political crisis deepens, the opposition Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and Taiwan People’s Party (TPP) have proposed gutting the country’s national spending, with steep cuts to the critical foreign and defense ministries. While the blue-white coalition alleges that it is merely responding to voters’ concerns about corruption and mismanagement, of which there certainly has been plenty under Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) and KMT-led governments, the rationales for their proposed spending cuts lay bare the incoherent foreign policy of the KMT-led coalition. Introduced on the eve of US President Donald Trump’s inauguration, the KMT’s proposed budget is a terrible opening
The Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) caucus in the Legislative Yuan has made an internal decision to freeze NT$1.8 billion (US$54.7 million) of the indigenous submarine project’s NT$2 billion budget. This means that up to 90 percent of the budget cannot be utilized. It would only be accessible if the legislature agrees to lift the freeze sometime in the future. However, for Taiwan to construct its own submarines, it must rely on foreign support for several key pieces of equipment and technology. These foreign supporters would also be forced to endure significant pressure, infiltration and influence from Beijing. In other words,
“I compare the Communist Party to my mother,” sings a student at a boarding school in a Tibetan region of China’s Qinghai province. “If faith has a color,” others at a different school sing, “it would surely be Chinese red.” In a major story for the New York Times this month, Chris Buckley wrote about the forced placement of hundreds of thousands of Tibetan children in boarding schools, where many suffer physical and psychological abuse. Separating these children from their families, the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) aims to substitute itself for their parents and for their religion. Buckley’s reporting is
Last week, the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) and the Taiwan People’s Party (TPP), together holding more than half of the legislative seats, cut about NT$94 billion (US$2.85 billion) from the yearly budget. The cuts include 60 percent of the government’s advertising budget, 10 percent of administrative expenses, 3 percent of the military budget, and 60 percent of the international travel, overseas education and training allowances. In addition, the two parties have proposed freezing the budgets of many ministries and departments, including NT$1.8 billion from the Ministry of National Defense’s Indigenous Defense Submarine program — 90 percent of the program’s proposed
RSS