US President Joe Biden’s historic decision on July 21 to take his name out of the running for a second term has upended expectations for this year’s presidential election in the US.
A listlessness regarding a rematch of the same two candidates from four years ago has transformed into an explosion of excitement around US Vice President Kamala Harris as the presumptive Democratic nominee. Within days and even hours, record-breaking donations flowed into the Harris campaign’s coffers, while memes about coconuts and Harris being “brat” flooded social media. What seemed to be an uphill battle for Democrats less than two weeks ago now feels like a win might be within grasp.
However, many uncertainties remain about what a Harris presidency might look like. Crucially for Taiwan, one of the biggest question marks is about her foreign policy.
Most of Harris’ career was spent as an attorney in California, followed by four years in the US Senate before being sworn in as vice president in 2021. In the Senate, she served on committees on the budget, homeland security, intelligence and the judiciary, focused primarily on domestic issues. As vice president, her biggest portfolios have been on the southern border and abortion. While she has attended international events, her remarks have toed the line of the Biden administration, offering little insight into her personal views.
Yet the little she has said about Taiwan and China has been clear. In Japan on Sept. 28, 2022, Harris said that the US would “continue to support Taiwan’s self-defense consistent with our long-standing policy” and continue to deepen unofficial ties. She praised Taiwan as a “vibrant democracy that contributes to the global good.” Considering the consistency of Democratic messaging on Taiwan, there is little to suggest that she would stray from this boilerplate rhetoric and would likely continue the steady push for closer ties of the past two administrations.
One thing she has been relatively vocal about is human rights. In 2019, she cosponsored the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act in support of protesters and has condemned China’s treatment of Uighurs. Harris said in response to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington last week that she “will not be silent” in response to the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. These, in addition to her background as a prosecutor and impassioned advocacy for abortion rights, seem to suggest that human rights will be a major priority in her foreign policy. If this is the case, then supporting Taiwan and its international participation is a good way to demonstrate these credentials.
On the other hand, it is not clear what a second term for former US president Donald Trump would mean for Taiwan. He won many friends for taking a telephone call from then-president Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) in 2016 and for forceful rhetoric on China, and his administration was staffed with staunch China hawks. Yet he seems to have had a change of heart, saying in a Bloomberg Businessweek interview this month that Taiwan should pay the US for its security and accusing it of stealing the US’ semiconductor industry. His economic proposal to impose 10 percent tariffs on imports across the board would also deal a huge blow to Taiwan’s export-centered economy, not to mention the shockwaves it would send across the global system.
Whatever happens in the US election in November, it is sure to have significant implications for Taipei. If the past two weeks have shown anything, it is that things can change fast. Policymakers in Taiwan and their friends in Washington should stay sharp and be nimble to respond to any possibility, including the chance of a Harris presidency.
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