When former Japanese prime minister Shinzo Abe in 2021 said that a contingency in Taiwan would also be an emergency for Japan, it was taken as a warning that Tokyo would have to get involved if conflict erupted in the Taiwan Strait — if not to defend its national security, then certainly to address a transformed security environment if the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) were to annex Taiwan.
What seemed to be an insightful comment then is now — less than three years later — generally regarded to be the case. This is just one measure of how much the regional dynamic has changed. The CCP and its fellow travelers put the blame squarely on the US and its foreign policy, while others say it is the CCP’s behavior that has changed the landscape.
This is not a chicken-and-egg scenario. It is not difficult to see which party is responsible for increasing regional tensions.
These tensions were behind Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida’s decision to extend changes in Tokyo’s national security posture that started with Abe’s constitutional reinterpretation to allow the exercise of the right of collective self-defense.
Following Abe’s assassination in 2022, Kishida introduced further changes to enhance Japan’s defense, including significantly increasing defense spending, lifting the ban on exports of lethal defense equipment to third countries and, more recently, introducing changes that would augment the interoperability of US and Japanese forces.
Japan is not doing this to attack other countries: It is to protect itself from the CCP’s ambition.
As if to confirm Tokyo’s concerns, the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Air Force on Monday sent a Y-9 reconnaissance plane into Japanese airspace near the Danjo Islands in the East China Sea. Japanese Minister of Defense Minoru Kihara called it a “grave violation of Japan’s sovereignty.”
Clearly, the PLA is expanding its aggressive, destabilizing posture in the region, and talk about tensions in the Taiwan Strait has become less meaningful as the Taiwan Strait and the South China Sea merge into one extensive and continuous region in which the CCP is asserting itself.
Some believe this is simply a historical inevitability, as a resurgent regional hegemon reclaims dominance after a “century of humiliation.” Former Singaporean permanent representative to the UN Kishore Mahbubani believes that the West and countries in the region should just allow China to resume its former hegemonic position, and that Taiwan must bow to the whims of destiny.
Former Singaporean minister for foreign affairs George Yeo (楊榮文) is of the same opinion, saying that China and Taiwan forming “one China” is the only sure way to peace. He should make clear that he understands the CCP will not allow Taiwan to have any real say in what form that “one China” would take.
In May, former Malaysian prime minister Mahathir Mohamad argued that China should just be allowed to make its claims unchallenged in the interests of regional peace.
Is this how Taipei should play it? Should Tokyo just throw up its hands and allow the CCP to have its way? Should Manila stop pushing its maritime rights in the West Philippine Sea like a latter-day, Asian King Canute commanding the tide to retreat?
The answer is no. Kishida will be standing down as Japanese prime minister and as leader of the ruling Liberal Democratic Party next month. Taipei should work to maintain close ties with his successor and further security cooperation.
On Wednesday, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs said that Taiwan might collaborate with Manila against China’s aggressive actions in the South China Sea. This would be a welcome development.
The right way is to stand up, not lie down and be walked over.
Trying to force a partnership between Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) and Intel Corp would be a wildly complex ordeal. Already, the reported request from the Trump administration for TSMC to take a controlling stake in Intel’s US factories is facing valid questions about feasibility from all sides. Washington would likely not support a foreign company operating Intel’s domestic factories, Reuters reported — just look at how that is going over in the steel sector. Meanwhile, many in Taiwan are concerned about the company being forced to transfer its bleeding-edge tech capabilities and give up its strategic advantage. This is especially
US President Donald Trump’s second administration has gotten off to a fast start with a blizzard of initiatives focused on domestic commitments made during his campaign. His tariff-based approach to re-ordering global trade in a manner more favorable to the United States appears to be in its infancy, but the significant scale and scope are undeniable. That said, while China looms largest on the list of national security challenges, to date we have heard little from the administration, bar the 10 percent tariffs directed at China, on specific priorities vis-a-vis China. The Congressional hearings for President Trump’s cabinet have, so far,
The US Department of State has removed the phrase “we do not support Taiwan independence” in its updated Taiwan-US relations fact sheet, which instead iterates that “we expect cross-strait differences to be resolved by peaceful means, free from coercion, in a manner acceptable to the people on both sides of the Strait.” This shows a tougher stance rejecting China’s false claims of sovereignty over Taiwan. Since switching formal diplomatic recognition from the Republic of China to the People’s Republic of China in 1979, the US government has continually indicated that it “does not support Taiwan independence.” The phrase was removed in 2022
US President Donald Trump, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and US Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth have each given their thoughts on Russia’s war with Ukraine. There are a few proponents of US skepticism in Taiwan taking advantage of developments to write articles claiming that the US would arbitrarily abandon Ukraine. The reality is that when one understands Trump’s negotiating habits, one sees that he brings up all variables of a situation prior to discussion, using broad negotiations to take charge. As for his ultimate goals and the aces up his sleeve, he wants to keep things vague for
RSS